Initial Assumptions

Before beginning this project, I found it was necessary to explore some of the basic assumptions that I was taking for granted regarding:

1) A structured system for sample processing and performance that is suited to the particulars of this project

2) A clearly communicable and reproducible process for carrying out this work

First Assumption:

My first basic assumption was that I have an established method of sampling that would suit this project. Upon exploring this I realized two obvious but unconscious factors:

First Factor:

The majority of music I have created in the past has relied on samples from commercial recordings – thus the amount of sample processing required was minimal (as samples were already polished to a professional standard). Thus I have had no structured process for gleaning samples from my own recordings

Solution:

To create a workflow for processing long studio recordings, which is efficient but flexible. After some experimentation with various pieces of software I have chosen to use Adobe Audition as the main tool for this purpose, as it seems to have a superior sound quality to other pieces of software, and the interface design suits my needs well

Second Factor:

The structure of my produced music has previously been entirely dependent on interface paradigms of whatever software I was using at the time (Modplug Tracker from 2000 – 2008 and Ableton Live from 2008 to the present), neither of which suit the production and improvisational flexibility needed for this project

Solution:

I will use my own software instruments for all aspects (other than the initial sample editing in Audition) of effects processing and improvised laptop performance as I know their sound intimately and they provide a finer grain of spontaneous effects control and playback manipulation. It also allows me to customize and alter them as needs arise.

Second Assumption:

My Second basic assumption was that my production and performance methods would be self-evident to the reader, towards my intended aesthetic goal, and thus not need to be explained. Another two factors are thus revealed for clarification:

First Factor:

By beginning to document the technical aspects of this process so far, I’ve realized how many discrete steps are involved -- encompassing a broad spectrum of audio production techniques.

This workflow from studio to laptop performance is thus not necessarily self-evident, even to a professional, as it could be approached in many different ways.

Solution:

In the interests of clarity and achieving a degree of reproducibility, the process will be documented step by step in this blog:

This may also help to delineate what methods are intuitive for me and what are grounded/researched practices – for example microphone placement in the studio is, for me, intuitive rather than precise, whereas sample editing is careful and meticulous.

Second Factor:

My intended aesthetic outcome is not easily communicable to others. I have a clear intuition about it, and can easily cite influences, but there is no specific musical performance or audio production techniques that I can ground the work in. However, I’m not working towards free improvisation either – rhythmic structure and tonality will not be completely subsumed by timbrel and temporal manipulations.

Solution:

Through the process of practicing my laptop improvisations, I envisage that this methodology will become clearer – I will discover with increasing specificity what works and what doesn’t in terms of sample combinations, control methods (MIDI and OSC mappings), sample manipulation, and my own performative limitations. I can only speculate on this now, but the process will also be carefully documented in this blog.