the proper use of technology
Wrong:
Robot Guitar
Right:
Moog guitar
categories: gear, music
tags: Moog guitar, Robo-guitar, technology
posted by boolz at 05:32 pm
June 16th, 2008
Right on. I haven’t liked the idea of the self-tuning guitar from the start. It seems possible that some of what we love about individual performers could be intertwined with their perception of when their instrument is in tune. But the piano has had sustain capability for centuries, why not the guitar? It will be interesting to see what comes of it.
It’s an interesting (and age-old) question, when does an innovation advance an art and when is it a cheat that negatively effects the music? No hard and fast answer. Every change (chin rests? end pins?) probably had it’s yin and yang. Think about frets, eg. A cheat for people who can’t find a pitch, or way to enable particular, fret-dependent expressive techniques? And if you swallow this fret business, then why make them permanent? Weren’t hand-tied ones better? Why buy into the tyranny of equal temperament just to save some time and gut?
I look at the moog guitar like a big-headed tennis rackets or those free-heel speed skates (or frets): it let’s you do things that couldn’t be done before. It adds to the musical language.
I look at the robo-guitar like training wheels: it might encourage some people to get started who otherwise would be afraid, but, as far as I can see, it doesn’t make an over all contribution to what music can say.
middle C will always be middle C for all time. there’s something special about the precise science but to tune something to an individual’s ear, that slight variance of perfect imperfection is what makes something jam.