> I've been trying to pin down a good definition of West Coast vs.
> East Coast
> philosophies. As near as I can figure it the East Coast philosophy of
> synthesis is to treat the Synthesizer as an instrument capable of
> creating
> passable imitations of other instruments or to think of the modular
> as a
> kind of electronic pipe organ, capable of making loud powerful
> sounds but
> ultimately based on the standard chromatic scale and attached to a
> piano
> keyboard. Hence almost all the early Moog recordings are things
> like Carlos'
> "Switched on" series of albums.
It's my opinion that there is definitely a genuine kernel that forms
a basis of this notion but a lot of the idea surely stems from those
who associate themselves with the West Coast and their wish to defend
or differentiate their work from those they call "East Coast". In
retaliation I'm sure a small number but by no means a majority of
composers who are identified as East Coast might be somewhat
dismissive of "West Coast" style.
I for one should admit that I am based on the east coast, own Serge
and Buchla but not exclusively Serge and Buchla and I do think there
is a degree of people in degrees dismissing others or semi-directly
justifying themselves. I just don't think it's that productive thing
to get into except that why it's happening and has been around for a
long time is. Really it should come down to the music you make, your
ideas, your expression and your goals. Certainly the instruments you
use to achieve this play an important factor on how it comes out but
that can't be the whole picture. Some of this debate can make me feel
like it's a roundabout way to promote yourself or demote someone else.
There is often this need to sort and separate philosophies in art to
expound and defend and woe to anyone who can't be compartmentalized.
Certainly this doesn't pertain to most composers but for some
composers who feel they aren't where they feel they should be it's a
workable strategy to point out you can't be grouped with those more
established guys but then say that you are with a group that is doing
things.
I'd say the roots in music come before synths. You had more
established music academia based on the East Coast involved deeply in
Serialism and the modern European tradition while notable West Coast
composers were looking at Eastern (as in Asian) musical ideas and
looking away from Europe. Though I guess it messes up the theory when
you notice Schoenberg taught in California and people like John Cage
and Lamonte Young did their best known work in the East. Though I
guess one could counter that it was a reaction against Serialism and
a search for something else that founded things and that Cage and
Young to use my examples studied on the West Coast...
Anyway I believe the roots and some understanding of anything said
about synthesis are in modern music composition. Though interestingly
the commercial approach to music using Moog influenced gear was by
and large more tonal than atonal while acoustic composition was
frequently the reverse.
>
> The West Coast philosophy seems to be the school of thought that the
> synthesizer is an instrument of the future, something that wasn't
> ultimately
> intended to do impressions of other instruments but to generate
> sounds that
> had never been heard before and never occur in nature, As a result the
> control of the instrument became centred around sequencers and
> touchplate
> keyboards that don't fix the sound around a predetermined scale but
> allow
> the musician to determine the sound on his or her own terms.
I'll agree that that is more or less how it turned out. People sort
of put Moog down in order to forward their own differentness. Moog
was thinking about and actually building alternate controllers but he
primarily built what people directly asked him to build and thought
he could sell. Buchla did not initially offer a conventional keyboard
or ready to use even tempered tuning so I think it is fair to say in
that aspect he was more idealistic... but eventually did. The good or
bad thing that happened to Moog is that his equipment took off
commercially and because of that numerous companies copied him to
various extents. Serge of course was one of the very few synth
builders who knew Buchla.
I don't think there is any complete escaping from the fact that if
you give people features they are going to use them, it's common
sense, though lots of factors play a part in how much they use a
feature.
I don't think there is any way to escape either that most of what
followed copied Moog to varying extents... except of course not to
use whatever you have the way the majority is.
One so called "West Coast" aspect that you haven't touched is that
Moog based designs rely heavily on traditional subtractive synthesis
= filters. Buchla focused much less heavily on filters though
certainly incorporated them. Serge it seems initially didn't put much
focus on them but it seems that demand led him to add them... just
like adding a more Moog style envelope later
>
> The thing that's got me baffled though is why is it that
> instruments with
> mult strips are considered part of the East Coast camp while those
> with
> Banana plugs are West Coast? Is there more to it than the fact that
> Buchla
> and Moog found different solutions to the problem of signal
> distribution or
> do they represent different ways of thinking and working with the
> instrument
> that's somehow quantifiable?
I think it just comes from patchable test equipment using bananas
prior to synths existing. Though I think Serge was the first and one
fo the few who decided to only use Bananas. Buchla of course used
miniplugs for audio. Modcan borrowed Serge designs and uses Bananas
until they re-did their line for a second parallel format - so you
can't draw too much from them. Synton used Bananas but partnered with
Bob Moog, so that should confuse the theorists. Plan B and Wiard look
at Buchla for inspiration but not for Bananas
Really though, most of what's out there was influenced by Bob Moog
except Buchla who couldn't be, those few looking toward Buchla and a
few independents looking at neither
> Personally I can't tell you how many times I've
> wished my present rig was all banana plugs,
... unless you have a good design involving normalizing which can't
be done with stock Bananas
> it would make life a lot easier
> if I didn't have to go to a mult. I wonder why Moog, Doepfer, etc,
> stuck
> with standard instrument cables when the other option looks to me
> to make
> better sense.
For the most part, yes though there is an obviously familiarity and
availability of audio cables. Remember when selling a modular to
someone the builder often has to overcome some doubt
Nick