Re: [200e] Re: 261e or 259e capable of higher frequencies?
2008-09-29 by Damon Menne
milton babbitt worked with this relatively niche technique as well... I believe oliveros had a bit to say about it in an issue of the rensselaer polytechnic (there are gems in this publication, strange and fascinating institution as well) for me the most versatile implementation of the technique has been found working with a very large bank of resonators... i experimented with this on the 200e by leveraging a pair of 291e modules and an external mixer. it is fascinating stuff (heady, sure) but i've yet to see enough versatility and control available without tremendous amounts of work to keep it interesting enough for me! (even having implemented a nuanced control system for maintaining ratios in dynamics and pitch to the difference tones created and scripting events with these relationships as the focus). that being said i consider it critical to my own compositions to have enough control over my sources of timbre to allow me to create scales without (subjectively) 'significant' inconsistencies in the ratios of 'notes'. i think the nicest thing would be to have an allowance for us to use the analogue waveshaping section of the 261e with an external signal, without processing by the 261e's mpu.
Show quoted textHide quoted text
On Sunday, September 28, 2008, at 09:05PM, "Thomas Buckler" <thomas.buckler@gmail.com> wrote: >Indeed she did. Mnemonics I-V being her first compositions >with ultra high frequency. She would set her oscillators beyond the hearing >range and >then use line amplifiers to amplify the difference tones of >those oscillators. > > >On Sun, Sep 28, 2008 at 10:56 PM, don hassler <dlh30039@yahoo.com> wrote: > >> >> Pauline Oliveros made great use of super high frequencies: >> http://www.pogus.com/21012.html >> >> >> As for the high-frequency discussion: This could come quite handy when >> your target audience are Rin-Tin-Tin, Lassie, Benjie, Snoopy, Spuds >> McEnzie and the Taco Bell chihuahua... . >> >> ;-P >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >> >> >> > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > >