Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxr.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mfs
From: mfs@mhuxr.UUCP (SIMON)
Newsgroups: net.music,net.music.synth
Subject: Re: Drum Machines - A Flame
Message-ID: <335@mhuxr.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 4-Jun-85 18:50:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: mhuxr.335
Posted: Tue Jun  4 18:50:07 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 6-Jun-85 02:52:45 EDT
References: <317@mhuxr.UUCP> <979@pyuxd.UUCP> <320@mhuxr.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.music:7780 net.music.synth:300

Re: article 1950@dcarl.UUCP

> a drum machine need not by definition be "followed"...
> Preprogrammed parts could follow live performers, or interact with them
> in more interesting ways. Such improvisational algorithms fascinate 
> me, and I see that such tools designed properly could actually open up
> new possibilities for interaction between human performers because some`
> of the actual sounds can become "shared resources".
> 
An intriguing idea. Is the technology able to handle that? I have not
heard anything that remotely approaches the framework you cite.
If the technology [ever] reaches a point where a player can interact
in real time with a drum computer, the machine wil in essence become
just another part in the percussionist's kit. I have no problem with
that. The point here is that the machine is under control of the
human, not replacing him/her, and thus reacting to the musical environment.

Marcel Simon