Re: No Synths Involved--Unless You Include Processing

[sine@zerocrossing.net]

I agree, though they're using the term Grandular synthesis a lot these days
(OK, well maybe not a lot) and I think it's a missleading term.  Audio
Grandulation sure, but synthesis?

Marklar

Neil Goldstein wrote:

> > The more I think about it, modern processing of audio is synthesis of a
> > sort.  Isn't it?
> > Gary
>
> Another semantic thread. I think in the vernacular, synthesis would be
> considered 'instruments that provide their own (synthetic) oscillator or
> wave source'. In the case of a guitar, drum, pot, pan or other 'real'
> instrument the sound source is provided by the player's own body 
>interacting
> with a physical artifact (in "meatspace"), and thus would not be 
>considered
> synthesis, but processed audio. this said in the spirit of Kim's comment 
>a
> month or two ago about upholding the distinctions of words, a notion 
>which I
> support.
>
> Neil