Kinect - Has Microsoft actualy got a new winning technoloy at last

[wodin]

___________

[kjk]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Yes, it works exactly as advertised.
And yes, it can track individual finger joints. Violin? Maybe. Xylophone, drums, and piano; definitely.

Well, the video has fine print that says "Depictions are Visionary", so I'm not sure if it actually works *exactly* as advertised in that video. But it isn't meant to be an ad for the current product; rather, a look at what can come in the future. Can't wait to see how it develops.

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by vishcompany

Maybe there will be new concepts of creating sounds (eg. the beforementioned Teremin), but creating the sound reqired today on today's instruments, we will have to stick to the good old blood, sweat and tears of the days of yore.

We seem to be talking two different things.
Just because I postulate that advanced user interface technologies *can* be used to control music-production systems does not mean those interfaces need to be grafted onto today's music-production systems nor that those avanced systems need to displace today's instruments to be viable. Technology is not a zero sum game where something has to be elliminated before something else can be used. Technology development is about adding to the human experience, not replacing.

Bear in mind that sound generation does no require any musical instrument of any kind and that current technology allows for the generation of any arbitrary sound wave solely through electronic means with zero tactile feedback. We've long (60+ years, commercially) moved past the limitations of physical systems and can use mathematics and electronics to directly generate and/or modify waveforms. Whether we do so or not is just a personal choice.

Musical instruments were "obsoleted" ages ago; today we use them because we choose to, not because we have to. If Kinect-tech leads to new ways to control sound, new ways for artists to express themselves it will only be used if the artists choose to use them; nobody will be forced to do so. Conversely, just because *some* choose not to use them does not mean *nobody* will.

That much, at least, 10 million Kinect sales have proven: There's room for everybody's preferences.

[vishcompany]

So we basically agree.
Are there actually any studies showing the percentage of purely synthetically created music and - let's call it analogue music in the market?

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by 5thWiggle

That will certainly change the office cubicle as we know it!

Quiz:
What's this man doing?
a) exercising
b) editing a Word document
c) waiting for Jackie Chan to break through the window and end his Evil Empire

Very funny B.

Microsoft bought the Kinect after Apple did not buy it. I read this before. Very good thinking of the future.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

We seem to be talking two different things.
Just because I postulate that advanced user interface technologies *can* be used to control music-production systems does not mean those interfaces need to be grafted onto today's music-production systems nor that those avanced systems need to displace today's instruments to be viable. Technology is not a zero sum game where something has to be elliminated before something else can be used. Technology development is about adding to the human experience, not replacing.

Bear in mind that sound generation does no require any musical instrument of any kind and that current technology allows for the generation of any arbitrary sound wave solely through electronic means with zero tactile feedback. We've long (60+ years, commercially) moved past the limitations of physical systems and can use mathematics and electronics to directly generate and/or modify waveforms. Whether we do so or not is just a personal choice.

Musical instruments were "obsoleted" ages ago; today we use them because we choose to, not because we have to. If Kinect-tech leads to new ways to control sound, new ways for artists to express themselves it will only be used if the artists choose to use them; nobody will be forced to do so. Conversely, just because *some* choose not to use them does not mean *nobody* will.

That much, at least, 10 million Kinect sales have proven: There's room for everybody's preferences.

No! Horror!

Musical instruments, real, not digital, can not be replaced by electric copies. Not close at all.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

Musical instruments, real, not digital, can not be replaced by electric copies. Not close at all.

At least not until someone has figured out how to exactly replicate the sound, or replace it with something better. Wood has a sound ability that electronic components have difficulties copying. Until then, music written for today's instruments, or for the instruments of the past, won't sound the same when reproduced electronically.

There's a reason harpsichords are still around.

[ScotiaBurrell]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

At least not until someone has figured out how to exactly replicate the sound, or replace it with something better. Wood has a sound ability that electronic components have difficulties copying.

There remains human emotion that cannot be replaced on string instruments by digital instrumnents. It is not copyable. You feel it while you play and your listeners can too.

[vishcompany]

He was talking about different concepts of creating sounds and music, not even wanting to replace musical instruments, if i understood correctly.

[wodin]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

No! Horror!

Musical instruments, real, not digital, can not be replaced by electric copies. Not close at all.

Correct, but it’s a two edged sword, Neither can a Steinway grand piano replace a synth.

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by ScotiaBurrell

There remains human emotion that cannot be replaced on string instruments by digital instrumnents. It is not copyable. You feel it while you play and your listeners can too.

I know. I used to play one of these, as a part of an orchestra. They sing... hum, vibrate, purr. They live.

Originally Posted by wodin

Correct, but it’s a two edged sword, Neither can a Steinway grand piano replace a synth.

Spoken by someone who has never tried to pull off Metallica's Enter Sandman on a cello.

But yes, you're right. If it is written for an electronic instrument it can still be played on wood one (and vice versa) but it will never sound the way the composer heard and intended it.

[RainingLemur]

Originally Posted by ScalyFreak

Spoken by someone who has never tried to pull off Metallica's Enter Sandman on a cello. .

Not everyone can be Apocalyptica...

[ScalyFreak]

Originally Posted by RainingLemur

Not everyone can be Apocalyptica...

They wouldn't be nearly as good if they weren't so unusual.

[xg4bx]

i wouldnt worry about electronics replacing instruments, digital music still doesnt even sound as good as a vinyl record.

[carpetmojo]

Originally Posted by Jellby

I think that playing an instrument (other than a theremin) without touching it is ridiculous. Not that it looks ridiculous, which shouldn't be a problem anyway, but it's nothing like the real thing, you need some kind of tactile feedback and reference for that. Besides, is the device really able to detect the subtle movements of the fingers while playing violin?

Bit late catching this thread, sorry - but to see a theramin played for max effect, catch (if you can get a ticket! ) a Joe Bonamassa gig

Quite apart from the glory of the whole show, and the stunning guitar work of JB, his "interaction" for want of a better word, with the magic box, is brilliant.

But I do find them a little creepy when someone's playing one alone - I mean, who is playing...well, who ?