Ableton co-founder and general visionary Robert Henke (also known as Monolake) gave a full-length workshop in New Zealand recently. If you’re up for 90 minutes of discussion of musical and sonic techniques in Live, plus a look at his unique Monodeck controller, the whole video is there. But that’s not the main reason the video is making its way around the Interwebs. It’s because there’s a bit of a bombshell right at the beginning of the footage:

He says, outright, you don’t need 64-bit sound to get “audio quality.” You don’t even need 16-bit all the time.

Okay, maybe that’s not such a radical thought in and of itself. Oh, yeah, except for one thing — the 64-bit summing engine he’s talking about happens to be the one in Ableton Live 7.

Video by Tom Cosm, via AudioLemon

Some people are already assuming this means Ableton has somehow betrayed them (well, in fairness, Robert does say the summing engine is just a marketing gimmick). And what about Cakewalk? Robert doesn’t mention them by name, but the only DAW that’s been trumpeting 64-bit mixing and signal processing is SONAR.

In fact, far from conflicting with Robert’s vision of sound, Ableton Live 7 really embodies it. And as for the Cakewalk thing — well, that’s complicated, because the term “64-bit” applies to a number of basically unrelated topics dealing with sound and computing. But none of that matters as much as one thing: if it sounds good, it is good.

Advertising, having devoted decades to building elaborate fantasies, now has a new problem: making things seem real and believable. But that’s nothing new to people doing sound design: tiny details of sync, spatialization, and content can trick the mind into different perceptions of what they’re seeing and hearing. The release of a TV ad showing a music ensemble made from Ford parts triggered waves of skepticism online, partly because the ad’s producers and director wanted the composer and instrument builders to make a car part ensemble that sounded quasi-Classical — rather than pushing its “car-partiness.” Singapore-based blog fanatic fandom has some great musings on the irony of the whole situation, with various coverage around the Web (including CDM’s). Note that composer Craig Richey was even concerned about subtle issues of sync impacting the perceived reality of the ad. It’s a great lesson in editing and design.

Of course, the ensemble is real, and we’ve talked a bit to sound designer Bill Milbrodt about the details. Now, it seems Ford and the ad makers have finally released a video interview with Bill. There’s something about talking to people on camera that helps — and Bill has great stuff to say.

Personally, I think the confusion about what people were watching may be more interesting than the car itself. It shows just how much editing and design choices can impact perception — something to keep in mind whether your aspirations tend toward Madison Avenue or the underground.

Previously:

Interview: Building a Musical Ensemble Out of Ford Focus Car Parts

Yes, Virginia, There Really is a Ford Car Part Musical Ensemble

As a follow-up to my controversial defense of the keytar attempt to get people to stop complaining in comments that they can’t buy a keytar and excuse to needle Roland again.

This is CDM reader Billy Hunt. The bright spot in the upper right hand of the screen is fire — a fireball launched from his keytar. Billy modded his Roland AX-7 for wireless MIDI control (okay, logical, practical choice there) and added a “gun that shoots flash paper” (not so typical).

Billy writes:

It is the best instrument ever. Shooting flames out of your keytar while you use the infared beam to make it squeal like a pig makes the girls want you, and the men want to be you.

Billy is in the band Straight Punch to the Crotch with Buddy — the dummy you see on the right, which itself is MIDI-enabled. Billy describes Buddy as “a midi dummy with drum triggers in his head, shoulders, and (of course) crotch.” I’m hoping Billy will someday present an academic paper at the NIME conference on “Musical Applications of Tactile Sensitive Anatomy Sensing: Dummy Crotch Punching.”

CDM doesn’t very often print retractions, but I think it’s time for one. As a number of you pointed out in hilariously frank fashion, keytars are indeed not cool. So, here’s my Official Correction: flame-shooting keytars are cool — provided they’re in the right hands.

We’ve learned many things through this week’s Keytar Controversy:

1. Keytar aficionados don’t like the term “keytar,” preferring the more-dignified term “strap-on.” This is analogous to the Star Trek fan deciding neither “Trekkie” nor “Trekker” accurately describes their devotion, suggesting instead “penis.”

2. Normal, non-strappable keyboards and pianos actually are cool. Really. You can play keyboards just like that. (Who knew? I thought my piano teachers were trying to tell me something.)

3. In the Chinese and Japanese markets, keytars are preferred by girls. I will extrapolate from this that while I would look really dorky playing a keytar (I don’t own one, despite allegations from readers and bloggers), many girls look super cute with them.

4. Readers here are split between loving and hating the keyta– uh, strap-on. No one has neutral feelings about them. I think that tells you the real reason why they can’t be made any more.

The best part of the debate comes in the blog post Keytars Are Still Lame, with this visual aid:

There’s just one problem. Ray Charles is a great reason to learn the piano. But hand Ray Charles a keytar, and suddenly the keytar is cool. And that’s the point, isn’t it?

It’s always fascinating to me how people hear, what they thing of as “real” or “authentic,” and what meaning they find in the things they listen to.

Yesterday, we got a glimpse of a new car advertisement for Ford in the UK featuring instruments constructed from automobile components:

Interview: Building a Musical Ensemble Out of Ford Focus Car Parts

What you see on the screen, of course, is not literally what you hear — the TV ad and soundtrack are edited together, and this is a car ad, not a documentary. But quite a few readers (and even blogs elsewhere) wondered if they were actually hearing instruments constructed from the Ford Focus — or if there was some audio fakery going on, as well.

Following up on our interview (which was evidently an exclusive for CDM, whatever that’s worth), sound designer Bill Milbrodt actually called me last night and we got to have a long chat about the whole process.

Here’s the short answer:

Yes, the instruments are really made from a Ford Focus. (The strings are conventional strings, which has a huge impact on timbre, but until Ford starts putting something that can substitute for strings into their cars, you’ll have to live with that.) Yes, musicians really did play them. Yes, you really do hear that recording (edited) in the ad. Bill points out that they could have saved a lot of money by just creating props. This is, indeed, the real thing.

And yes, the musical effect is awfully close to classical music played on conventional instruments. That was apparently the requirement of the agency and director. The sound of the Car Music Project is very different — and I suspect a little closer to the tastes of the readers here. Here’s what the ensemble sounds like live, at least until we get live footage of the Ford Focus ensemble (got my fingers crossed for that):

I just find it really interesting that people reacted the way they did — and to the whole issue of authenticity and recordings. We’re both immediately suspicious of anything recorded, yet cling to the idea of a recording as a “factual record” — despite the fact that sound depends entirely on your point of view. Even with live sound, you might experience a different concert in a different part of the hall. With recordings, mic choice, mic placement, and other factors impact the sound even before someone’s had a shot at digital “manipulation.” You know that, I know that — but still, we have some sort of deeply-ingrained expectations about what a recording is, or what we want it to be, that go beyond even the technical knowledge of a group of practictioners.

Of course, it’s curiosity about how things are actually done that drives some of this site, so I say, keep asking questions and questioning your ears.

But, for the record, this ensemble is, for all practicality, real. And there’s really not a cello on that recording, I swear.

Here are the full technical details from Bill, with links to still more information — and this answer actually winds up going into more of the nuts and bolts (sorry) of how these instruments were used musically:

So, you thought only Americans would be the target of anti-piracy crackdowns? Think again. Shortly after the raid of popular music torrent swap site oink.cd, British authorities now say they’re looking for a legislative anti-piracy remedy. They’ve got the backing, not surprisingly, of the British record industry, and it seems continental European nations might follow. Blogger and controversy-magnet Cory Doctorow is even getting to the debate, along with angry UK Internet Service Providers, as reported by BBC News. The apparent solution seems worse than the problem, as British officials propose monitoring individual data packets. (I’m not usually one to agree with Cory Doctorow, but surveillance of all data moving over the Internet seems impractical and wrong.)

Meanwhile, oink.cd’s homepage has been replaced with an ominous warning:

This site has been closed as a result of a criminal investigation by IFPI, BPI,
Cleveland Police and the Fiscal Investigation Unit of the Dutch Police (FIOD ECD) into
suspected illegal music distribution.

A criminal investigation continues into the identities and activities of the site’s
users.

[Emphasis mine]

So, will the UK really come after oink’s users, or is that just an idle threat?

Meanwhile, a number of you have written in with what I think is a good criticism of the oink raid, one worth considering even for those of us who oppose piracy. Why did these agencies go after oink first, a torrent tracker that was hosting at least some torrents uploaded legitimately by indie labels, and one far smaller and less focused on pre-release albums than bigger trackers like mininova? Was it because the site’s popularity among some of the music fan elite made it a more obvious target — or simply that the really dangerous and popular torrents are harder to squash? (Or both?) See Veqtor’s comment for a good summary. Some are also putting forward various conspiracy theories, but I personally suspect laziness on the part of the industry and UK/Europe authorities. Software developer and label owner Chris Randall has a well-argued rant against piracy in the same comment thread. But separate from that argument, the failing of the authorities in this case, and some of the potential oink demonstrates for non-pirate, legitimate sites, are well worth considering. See comments on the previous post.

Several readers have written in to say that Oink, a music torrent server, has been busted. British and Dutch police raided the servers (via several properties in Amsterdam) and the 24-year-old IT worker (and his father) alleged to have operated the site.

The news:
IFPI press release
Huge pirate music site shut down [BBC News, in a story Releasedog, without explanation, claims contains "lies." Anyone know what they're talking about?]

Expressive technologies, like any other media, will say whatever their creators want them to say and do what their creators want them to do. Surveillance? Entertainment? Worship? Porn? You can count on all of the above, and everything in between.

Usually, when you talk about interactive multimedia software Max/MSP and real-world sensor inputs, you expect live music performance. Multimedia artists Matt Ganucheau, Kyle Machulis, and Kelly Moore took their project in a different direction, building a mannequin that would respond interactively to simulate female pleasure.

Donald Bell (aka electronic musician Chachi Jones) describes this among other projects recently shown at the adult-only tech fair Arse Elektronika (a reference to the artsier European new media show Ars Electronica).

It may sound like Weird Science, but Matt promises that Lisa’s technology is nothing mystical. A cutaway in Lisa’s back reveals a Make controller board that works as a hardware router for all the touch-sensitive sensors mounted on the mannequin’s more sensitive areas. A USB plug found on Lisa’s ankle connects to a nearby computer that handles the software end of things. Matt developed Moaning Lisa’s unique software using a visual programming language called Max/MSP. The program uses a neural networking algorithm to monitor all of Lisa’s sensors and determine her state of excitement, which in turn modulates both her volume and number of moans.

More on Donald’s new blog for CNET, MP3 Insider (which I think will be far cooler than that blog name implies):
Weird science: Lisa the foreplay robot [CNET MP3 insider]
Making the ‘Moaning Lisa’ [CNET crave]

Donald also shot a video, but its adult subject matter and mannequin nipples were deemed too hot for CNET. As I said, technology clearly has a full range of possible applications, so I’ll leave it to you to decide. I’m not necessarily building a Lisa, but I assume you can determine on your own whether you find this offensive and choose whether nor not to watch. Not-safe-for-work / those who don’t like nude mannequins and iPod-powered sex toys: