[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

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  

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/>