Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hmm...interesting idea. It would be cool to jam instantly with anyone around the globe, but this will never happen in exact real time because of the laws of physics, as they say. Even if the signal was travelling along the surface at the speed of light (which it is not even close to doing), there would be a 64 ms one-way trip time for people on opposite sides of the earth. I've wondered what ways there are around this. I read somewhere about people jamming, but intentionally playing 1 bar off from each other! I like this longer recording idea, maybe it could be applied to near-real-time. You could do it like looping. You record an entire loop then send the whole thing to the other musician a few seconds later, like a faster version of what you describe. There is some way to do this....sounds like fun Mark Smart http://www.marksmart.net/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Per Boysen" <perboysen@gmail.com> To: <Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com> Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2007 3:07 AM Subject: Virutal E-jamming (was: Re: ejamming) > Related: Another approach. > > Given the invincible latency on the net I think that Virtual E- > jamming is as good, or even in some ways a better way of > collaborating. It works as this: Musician A records something while > visualizing musician B jamming along. In his playing A needs to > respond to his vision of B, even though B isn't there. Then A sends > this recording with snail mail to B. Musician B listens, not so much > to the actual sound recorded as to the sound NOT recorded - the stuff > left out by A. Then B records his response to A's recording and "the > stuff left out" (i.e. A's vision of his absent jamming partner > responding). > > I've tried this and it works marvelously! It may even be easier than > jamming in the same time, because B's response doesn't have to be the > same as A originally envisioned B to do. If B later comes up with > playing something differently it is probable that A's mimicked, > recorded, response to that will still be musically fitting. > > For group improvisation I have always been interested in playing > "compositions" that do not deal with traditional ways of describing > music, as in "notes", "chords" etc. You could in fact write a tune > where you use different kinds of vegetables, or whatever, as "notes" > are used in a normal charts. Anyway, the fascinating thing here is > that interesting music comes out of it as long as everyone involved > truly tries to musically interpret whatever he is given. And of > course as long as the relations and movements of the symbols used has > some sort of meaning. It's not the symbols themselves but the > relations between used symbols that makes music when interpreted by > humans. I think the instincts at work here are the answer to why > Virtual E-jamming actually works so well. > > Greetings from Sweden > > Per Boysen > www.boysen.se (Swedish) > www.looproom.com (international) > http://tinyurl.com/2kek7h (latest music release) > > > > > On 1 feb 2007, at 00.47, Daryl Shawn wrote: > > > Speaking as a very frequent Ninjam user, this is certainly > > interesting but I'm somewhat skeptical of the article/marketing. > > They put down Ninjam for its delay, yet this app also adds a delay. > > And it says peer-to-peer, yet you need to buy a ($15/month) > > subscription, so you're not avoiding their servers altogether. I > > think Ninjam, with no need for cash to change hands and open source > > code, has a more promising life (Os, for example, created a plug-in > > on his own from the code making it much more useful for laptop peeps). > > > > I myself love this: > > > > *"In Sync. In Real Time.* Or in as close to real time as the laws > > of physics allow." > > > > those pesky laws of physics... > > > > Daryl Shawn > > www.swanwelder.com > > > >> wired story:<http://www.wired.com/news/technology/software/ > >> 0,72612-0.html?tw=rss.technology> > >> site:<http://www.ejamming.com/> > > >