Tradition:

Next to the seemingly monolithic tradition of "classical music", I think other traditions are often - though understandably - overlooked. Specifically relevant to this class is the tradition of electronic/experimental/etc music! There definitely is one and I think there is a lot to learn from it.

All PAT students take Prof. Gurv's PAT 101 class, which follows the birth of tape music in the 1920s (!!!) to today. An essential part of any successful artwork is context, and when it comes to collaborations of tech/art/music, PAT students tend to have a wealth of information to share! 

Basically, TED and youtube have a lot of "cutting edge" "music technology" videos - some are fresh and some use 10-40 year old ideas and technology (still can be fresh). I hope we don't let our work stop at "cutting edge", because the important thing is the piece itself, it's intention and such... An awareness of tradition / context can certainly help out the process!

Instrument:

There's something I really admire about attaching yourself to the mastery of a specific instrument - the depth of connection, extension of self, sole vehicle of artistic expression, etc. It seems super powerful.. 

I don't have the experience of the instrument, and neither do a lot of PAT people (generally speaking). This fosters a different musical worldview, almost at the base level. Maybe most immediately, we (again, generally) are most comfortable in different musical worlds (i.e. not "classical music").

Practically speaking, I often perform using guitars, my voice, keyboards, multi-instrument set-ups, electronics/computer, saxophone, misc., etc..... I'm more focused on context, musicianship, the "hole" that I'm filling. While I have general chops on some instruments, others are used only in specific occasions for a specific sound. I sort of think about my ears as my primary instrument (and the brain/soul that is attached to them). Much of my practice is critically listening to music, intentionally seeking out new ideas and trying to understand what is unfamiliar to me.

I'm also interested in developing my own instruments, but I have yet to build one that I can set up quickly enough to use in a "working environment"... lol.

Any sound you can imagine:

This is a phrase / idea that shows up a lot when people discuss technology in music. Basically every wave of new synthesis tech has made this claim, and it's an idea at the root of many new instrument designs. People are all about having total control. Personally, I'm more about have effective, expressive control! Or you know, maybe not even having that. Constraints are sometimes super helpful to me. 

Performing Arts and/with/without Technology

I tend to take issue with the technologist / performer dichotomy, or at least the way it is often presented. A lot of it comes down to the distinction of "what is my art?" and "what do I need to do to make my art possible?". For me, technology is a means to an end, not the end itself. 

In the same way we don't label performers, "practice room - ers", I don't call myself a technologist. While great performers are amazing practicers and great PAT performers are often very capable technologists, we must remember to make art with each other! I hope that collaborations in this class give each person an equitable role in art-making.