Subject: | |
From: | |
Date: | Fri, 12 May 2000 14:22:45 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Bill Pirkle wrote:
>What does the list think of MIDI technology? Two of the 127 MIDI voices are
>choir oohs and choir aahs. This means that who could hear a Bach two part
>invention without injury to the choir. But beyond that, most classical
>music is now available in MIDI format at websites on the Internet. This
>means one can get a classical music collection for free. It is at least
>worth hearing if for no other reason than to see what is wrong with it.
>We learn from the bad as well as from the good.
I think in general, that it's better than nothing, but much worse than the
real thing. I haven't been able to get any clear idea of texture when I
hear the midi arrangements of pieces.
>The question is, for example, how well does a Beethoven sonata sound in
>MIDI format to music experts?
Feh. It's fun for the person DOING it, but not for the listener. I
wouldn't (for example) BUY a midi performance of anything, or go across
the street to hear one, unless that were the only way I could hear that
particular composition ... and even then I'd have my reservations. I
would not be able to tolerate hearing Beethoven.
>I have heard the Beethoven violin concerto in MIDI and is sounds OK.
>(MIDI allows putting many nuances into to music for fidelity).
UGH. I am prejudiced, of course. I used to be a fiddle player.
>Any comments.
See above. Fun for the programmer, perhaps. Hell on wheels for the music
lover. NUANCES? You gotta be kidding.
Mimi Ezust, arch musical conservative.
|
|
|