Casio CZ/ VZ/ FZ - Pro Series

Huzzah! Ezra B.!

I know lots of people who have ethical beliefs which are more
restrictive than the mere law (and especially considering the limited
enforceability of current hi-tech law).

But I want to know more about your "3-D phase distortion wave terrain
synthesizer".  I've been studying musical waveforms for many years,
with an eye toward re-synthesizing "natural" sounds, especially using
phase distortion, iPD, FM, plus additive.  I love CZs, VZs, Yamaha
DXII, TX816 and FS1R, and Synergy DKII (hence, my moniker).  I've
worked (mostly using Mathematica) to find algorithms with associated
_ranges_ of parameters to synthesize "natural" instruments that don't
exist.  I could describe my _ranges_ of parameters as a third
dimension of the sound.  But, what do _you_ mean?

What is your goal with your "3-D phase distortion wave terrain
synthesizer" and how are you approaching it?

- synergeezer

--- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "ezra buchla" <ezra.buchla@...> wrote:
>
> i really don't want to talk about this here anymore. people don't want
> to hear it. of course they don't. (everyone else, i'm sorry, i'm not
> good at ignoring bait but i'm really done after this.)
> 
> i only have one question, i've asked it a few different ways,
> everything else is tangential, and i don't believe you've come close
> to answering it:
> 
> do you think it's ok for people who listen to a lot of music to do so
> exclusively through illegal downloads?
> 
> (that was what you seemed to be saying in the first place (not just to
> me). if it's a straw man, i'm sorry: i just want to hear you say yes
> or no.)
> 
> this question applies to a lot of people, whatever you might imagine
> and whatever justifications you might make for your personal behavior
> (which, by the way, i'm not even calling into question).
> 
> i live in an underground music scene. i believe what i believe (sorry,
> never did join the debate team, not interested). i'm not perfect or an
> epitome of righteousness but i think i've done more than my part to
> contribute to the art that i love, and i'm sick of seeing apathy all
> around me. i'm sick of people professing to be "fans" of music who
> refuse to buy anything or even put something in the donation jar
> (whether it's the guilt-plus-convenience market of the iTunes store or
> a literal jar in the punk house basement). i think obtaining ALL your
> music through filesharing is a symptom of apathy and moral weakness,
> and hurts art forms (like the album) which i will be sad to see the
> last of.
> 
> somehow the kids in europe fileshare AND pay money for music, and the
> kids in the US don't. i believe this really is an issue of ethics and
> the relative value placed on arts and artists. fans of strange music
> in europe have made the decision that their enlightened self-interest
> will be best served by supporting the people that make the art that
> they consume. the details of the system that enable this are
> unimportant as long as it works somehow (capitalism, utopianism...
> whatever).
> 
> if you sincerely want to answer to this, fine. if all you want to do
> is keep telling me how naive i am, or that my community doesn't
> matter, please refrain.
> 
> i admit to being very confused by a lot of what i see out there; i'm
> still trying to figure things out; i doubt that anyone has all the
> answers. i know that there are ways to make things work for all kinds
> of practitioners of music, i'm just afraid that the potential
> solutions are not coming fast enough or gaining wide enough
> acceptance.
> 
> i Do insist that my perspective is valid: i've spent my whole life
> surrounded by professional musicians, i've played literally Thousands
> of shows myself, i've helped run venues and labels (which, btw, are
> not unsuccessful to this day), and i think things have gotten very
> noticeably worse just in the last 8 years or so.
> 
> mybe you disagree on that, maybe it's just my little bubble-world that
> is suffering (though it really can't be THAT little). i respect that,
> i'll admit to the limited big-picture relevance of myself, my friends,
> my art, my taste, and my stylistic community, and i want to drop it.
> 
> i'm really, really done now. there are better things to do.
> 
> i'm working on a 3-D phase distortion wave terrain synthesizer
> (cz-inspired !) and you probably won't hear from me until that's done.
> 
> thanks, apologies, be peaceful and prosper.
> 
> - ezra b.
> 
> 
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2008 at 6:04 AM, zoinky420 <zoinky420@...> wrote:
> > --- In CZsynth@yahoogroups.com, "ezra buchla" <ezra.buchla@> wrote:
> >>
> >> the problem is that the underlying technology has a built-in bias
> >> towards letting music be copied. i agree that legalities are pretty
> >> worthless in this situation.
> >>
> >> ethics as self-interest seems to work
> >
> > No, they don't. If ethics 'worked', if 'karma' existed, we would not
> > need a legal system. We have a legal system in order to mitigate,
> > albeit as much as possible, which is never as much as we'd like, the
> > unjust nature of the world. But when that system is so inapplicable
> > to a particular case that it fails wholesale, as it does in the case
> > we are discussing, then we must seek an alternative.
> >
> >> ethics and economics seem pretty intimately related, to me...
> >
> > Well as PT Barnum put it, a sucker is born every day. Ethics are
> > related to economics as hope is related to fact. You cannot expect
> > your competitor to act ethically in abscense of punative law if he
> > doesn't. You're living a self-righteous pipe dream if you don't
> > think that even YOU would leverage whatever advantage you could in a
> > society devoid of punative law. You'd run slipshod over everyone
> > while simultaneously deluding yourself into thinking your actions are
> > the epitome of ethical behavior, just like the robber barons did at
> > the turn of the 19th century.
> >
> > i think "least" might actually represent
> >> a bigger chunk than i want to accept. maybe the answer is that no-
> > one
> >> needs labels, including musicians. but i suspect it will be harder
> > to
> >> coalesce people around a style, hard to keep the the stylistic
> >> momentum that drives innovation and creates new imitation-worthy
> >> stuff, when every artist is struggling tooth-and-nail against each
> >> other for the attention of a few marketing behemoths, without the
> >> small-group support network that "the label" used to provide.
> >>
> >
> > Ok, well obviously you are very concerned about this subject, and are
> > motivated to put considerable energy into thinking about it. But, I
> > think you are having so much trouble with it because you are scared
> > of its implications. I think that if you were more confident, you'd
> > be more optimistic. The people telling us to stop talking about this
> > here certainly aren't the ones who are going to come up with any
> > ingenius solutions, but someone like you certainly could, if you
> > manage to get your priorities straight.
> >
> >> really? yuck. i kind of do think that that time on the train might
> > be
> >> worth something, though.
> >
> > Well today I had to take my mother to the eye clinic and while I was
> > waiting in the car for her outside and all the people were arriving
> > to work at the hospital across the street, almost all of them had
> > Ipods on. I was surprised they were that ubiquitous, I had no idea.
> > Just goes to show what sheep most people are. There are lots of mp3
> > players on the market, most just as flashy as the Ipod these days,
> > but everyone and his yuppy cousin has to have an Ipod. At least we
> > know they're listening to mainstream crap artists who can't even make
> > a spurious claim about being impoverished by mp3 downloading. Of
> > course my original statement stands, they are only listening to Ipods
> > the way to and from work, not all day long, but I am still surprised
> > by how many Ipods are actually in use these days during the rushhour
> > commutes.
> >
> >> > And why do you assume I deserve more? You know nothing about my
> >> > music. Perhaps it is only worth a pittance...
> >>
> >> ok, but let's assume that at least some music is worth something
> >> significant. or maybe we can't agree on that, in which case i give
> > up.
> >
> > I'm the one who could be exasperated enough to give up, since you're
> > clearly working hard to misunderstand, misrepresent, or completely
> > ignore things I've repeatedly said in this thread. I'm now going to
> > spell it out for you one last time, and if you continue to pretend
> > you didn't read it, I will copy and paste it every time you do so:
> >
> > Bands obtain the value of the worth of their output, period. If the
> > value of the worth of the output of mediocre bands drops to that of
> > the value of the worth of lousy bands, I don't have a problem with
> > that. I strive for excellency, not mediocrity. I will be pleased
> > when those mediocre bands can no longer make a living at music so
> > they have to get real jobs. I've got four words to say to
> > them: "Move over, comin' thru!" Besides, they don't have to get day
> > jobs necessarily, they can simply let the medicore band break up,
> > then form another band with other guys who have the desire to strive
> > for excellence. Besides, I'm a huge advocate for a livable welfare
> > income for the unemployed.
> >
> > The day excellence stops being worth the highest value is the day the
> > world will go to hell in a handbasket, and not a moment sooner. It
> > is the responsibility of the excellent to provide for the incapable,
> > not the mediocre. Because the mediocre are not incapable, they are
> > capable of excellence but do not try to excell, for whatever reason
> > (such as laziness, delusion, ignorance, and various other reasons the
> > mediocre remain the mediocre).
> >
> >>
> >> i wish small bands (the kind that play instruments in groups)
> > weren't
> >> having such a hard time surviving, no matter how critically
> > acclaimed
> >> they get. no one can stand to do it for more than a couple years any
> >> more.
> >
> > There has always been critically acclaimed art that does not
> > translate into commercial success. That's not mp3 downloading's
> > fault, that's bad taste's fault. But you're not rallying for better
> > taste in consumers, because your priorities in this subject are mixed
> > up.
> >
> >> there's no chance to grow and become something worth imitating
> >> in future generations (going back to the sonic youth example).
> >>
> >
> > Your Sonic Youth example is weak, mine's solid. Did you even stop to
> > think about what you were writing when you said that Sonic Youth's
> > early messy noise would not have propelled them onto better things if
> > people had been able to obtain high-quality recordings of that messy
> > noise? If you had, it might have dawned on you that 'messy noise'
> > and 'hi fidelity' are somewhat diametrically opposed. Sonic Youth,
> > like all indie band in the 80s, thrived on tape-trading among die-
> > hard music fans. Then, in order to gain commercial success, they
> > thrived on albums being purchased by less-than-die-hard-fans. Now,
> > how many times are you going to prompt me to repeat that? Will you
> > ever simply accept that you haven't come up with any arguments I
> > haven't already heard plenty of times, and so you aren't going to be
> > bringing me around to agreeing with me, no matter how many times you
> > repeat yourself or I repeat myself.
> >
> >> it's a very different prospect to render out some techno and get a
> > few
> >> dollars a month from ads.
> >>
> >
> > So now you're saying only techno can thrive from mp3 downloads?
> > Nonsense. Look, a techno artist generally only has to pay himself.
> > A band has three or four members. And lo and behold, the latest
> > trend is massive ensembles like Polyphonic Spree and Arcade Fire. If
> > these 'hot new' band are afraid of not making enough money to survive
> > due to mp3 downloading, and they can't afford to tour, why the hell
> > do they have so many friggin members on the payroll???
> >
> > Look, every time you come up with a hypothetical point I completely
> > trash it with facts. You're going to have to do a lot better than
> > that if you want to win this argument with something other than
> > browbeating.
> >
> >> >> but there are
> >> >> exceptions. deerhunter comes to mind. no age come to mind.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Never heard of them. Maybe because I don't do MySpace.
> >>
> >> oh well. these are people who started self-releasing and on myspace,
> >> and are now on kranky and sub pop. deerhunter might be best known as
> >> the current NIN opener slot, succeeding peaches and bauhaus.
> >>
> >
> > Well it was a good movie, but not exactly an inspired band name! Why
> > do so many band names suck these days, anyway?
> >
> >> You said you get a thrill out of some punk
> >> listening to your tunes off MySpace.
> >>
> >> no,
> >
> > "if some teenager halfway across the world downloads my record and is
> > stoked enough on it to share it with 500 of his online friends, many
> > of whom are also stoked, how could i not be happy" - you.
> >
> > i could give half a crap about myspace. what i appreciate is being
> >> able to go to portugal and play to a large sold-out crowd of stoked
> >> kids; i suspect that "the internet" has something to do with this.
> >> this is the most awesome aspect of digitally distributed music, to
> > me:
> >> reaching a lot more people in different places than you could with
> >> mail-order catalogues. the less awesome aspect is not being able to
> > do
> >> it full-time because there's no money in it. i can survive on tour
> > but
> >> i don't want to have to tour 10 months a year, like the kids in my
> >> band's "touring lineup" do...
> >
> > As usual, I'm having trouble finding a point in that paragraph. If
> > you want to tour, then tour, and do it for as long or as short of a
> > period as you want. If you manage it well, you'll probably make more
> > money than if you didn't tour, but you don't necessarily have to tour
> > into order to survive. XTC stopped touring in the mid 80s after Andy
> > Partridge's nervous breakdown and they survived till 2005, and I
> > really doubt they split up over mp3 downloading.
> >
> >> > Well I can't comment on experience, but I'm reluctant to take your
> >> > experience at face value simply because you've been wrong about so
> >> > many other aspects of this conversation.
> >>
> >> oh, sure... so WRONG...
> >
> > Yes, and unfortunately, like most people, you tie your desire to not
> > be wrong to your ego. But at least you're smart enough to know the
> > topic is worth discussing, unlike many in the peanut gallery here,
> > and you're self-confident enough to think you are doing a good enough
> > job of arguing this topic when you're not, to keep arguing it, which
> > is both good and bad (that is, it's good to stick to your guns, but
> > not after all your limbs have been chopped off and you still want to
> > fight, like the knight from the Monty Python movie)... The only
> > thing better than being wrong is being right. Being wrong gives you
> > the chance to find out what's right, but most people who, upon
> > discovering they're wrong about something, aren't glad to find that
> > out, and refuse to accept the information that is right. And there's
> > not much those of us on a higher frequency can do about that other
> > than point it out and hope that nobody accuses us of being insulting.
> >
> >>
> >> It seems to me that if fans
> >> > don't have to pay for the music, that's money they can use to buy
> >> > stickers, or t-shirts, or other 'merch', including tickets to the
> >> > show itself...
> >>
> >> i addressed this somewhere else. the show used to function as a
> > portal
> >> to get people to buy recordings. now it doesn't.
> >
> > That's ridiculous. Nobody (or at least, VERY few) people buy tickets
> > to concerts of bands who they've never heard before. People go to
> > concerts after they've listened to the bands recordings (previously,
> > from radio, friends, and records bought after hearing them on radio
> > or from friends - and now, from mp3s, friends, and records bought
> > after hearing mp3s or from friends).
> >
> >> i think it's retarded
> >> to have to be a popular clothing designer as well as a popular
> >> musician in order to make money off your music.
> >
> > And I think it's ignorant to make that claim. The artists who start
> > up clothing lines do so because they want to make $20 million this
> > year instead of $5 million like last year.
> >
> >>it also sucks to have
> >> to charge $10 or $15 a head to get into a punk rock show; really
> >> limits the audience. if you could expect 30% of those people to buy
> > a
> >> record, you could charge less or even make the shows free (because
> > so
> >> many more potential record customers would show up).
> >>
> >
> > There are festivals of every size happening all the time all over the
> > place, hundreds if not thousands of them all over north america this
> > summer, and they all need crappy little nobody bands to play, and
> > they all pay well from corporate sponsors or govt. entertainment
> > funds. A few years ago my exgirlfriend dragged me to her gay karaoke
> > friend's regular gig in a cover-band at a dive bar out in the
> > sticks. They were paid $700 a night and played every night, and this
> > is too patrons whose only income is their welfare cheques. There is
> > absolutely no shortage of work for musicians who want to work. But I
> > suppose you'll say you don't want to play in a crappy cover bar band
> > to welfare cases. You want Chad Kroeger to sign you to 604 so you
> > can be a rock star. Yeah, well I've heard it all before, long before
> > the term 'mp3' existed. Very little has changed, and certainly not
> > nearly as much as you keep squaking about, Chicken Little!
> >
> >
> >> plus the profit margin for records sold at shows is WAAAY higher
> > than
> >> through any distributor, digital or otherwise.
> >>
> >
> > Of course there's the fact that unless you're already popular enough
> > to be making a living as a recording artist, nobody will be able to
> > find your mp3s to download for free anywhere online because nobody
> > will bother encoding them and passing them around, because nobody
> > wants them because nobody's heard of you. So if they go to your
> > show, and want to hear your recorded output, they have no choice but
> > to buy your CD at the show, that is, until you become successful
> > enough that people are encoding and uploading your mp3s to pass
> > around. But you don't want to hear that, no, you'd rather pretend
> > there is a crisis that doesn't exist.
> >
> >> my point there was that even though people have less disposable
> > income
> >> in, say, spain or slovenia, even though they are way more cost-
> > minded
> >> with their technology (which means linux and filesharing are huge),
> > i
> >> STILL get paid more as a musician in slovenia than i do in america.
> >
> > Great, thanks for proving my point. They download more illicit mp3s
> > in europe and you make more money from europe. Hence, more illicit
> > downloading of mp3s equals more money for artists. Case closed.
> >
> >> these kids already
> >> have the mp3's but they still buy records! it's amazing!!!
> >
> > And yet, encouraging americans to adopt a more cosmopolitan,
> > international viewpoint like the europeans isn't part of your non-
> > existent strategy of solution.
> >
> >>
> >> maybe bands that know how to play live music will just disappear
> > from
> >> america. i don't really think that's cool, but whatever...
> >>
> >
> > Right, and peak oil will bring Mad Max out of the desert and into the
> > city, and y2k bug will send airplanes falling out of the sky. 9/11
> > was an inside job. The jews orchestrated the holocaust themselves.
> > Any other outrageous nonsense or fearmongering you'd like to add?
> >
> >
>