vehicle.aec.at---www.firstfloor.org---www.enemy.org---ur.creditcard.nr.here

On Thu, 4 Jun 1998, Pit Schultz wrote:

> 
> > was that it might be more interesting to find a way to -use- the
> structure
> > of the internet in a more appropriate way, making use of the
> > "whatever-on-demand" possibilties.
> s carrier medium which comes after the record industry. the dj was
> already
> something, the sampler, cubase-midi, modules on amiga. it is not that
> "jimi hendrix is a effect of his electric guitar". but it is clear that
> the rock'n'roll-song has something to do with 45-singles and radio show
> formats, while the electronic music of the 90ies has something to
> do with the net. to take a famous old example, hendrix feedback
> technique
> -misused-  technology and -revolutionized- (at least) the sound of it.
> but maybe the gesture of revolution is not appropriate, maybe
> it is more about growing and shrinking. the mushroom model.

whatsup with the revolution everywhere? the revolutionary thingie has been
overstressed, just as the medium-is-the-message and
the-new-media-always-imitates-the-older-bla-bla. lets get on with it


> 
> > to my fuzzy mind, such a system would be more like machines
> distributing
> > and recieving content autonomously aswell as on request.
> replicating data-banks, with ftp-mirrors this is already quite standard.
> 
thats rite, standard is the key. lets do it.

> > that concept would allow for rather adventureous experiments in the
> realm of remixing
> > and programming....the various nodes in this kind of network would
> > permanently be mirroring and distributing content and possibly
> rearranging
> > or revamping their respective materials - and the "audience" could
> tune in
> > and at any given time  find something new and different...
> yes, there's a kick in it. the idea of affirmating the ambient mode
> of radio formats, is a feature, automatic and algoritmic "radio", and
> what
> does radio mean here, i think something intimate, private, an aural
> space, a generator of an acoustic atmosphere. and besides the channel
> format, there are many other ways, while in the end also radio on demand
> is more like having all your audio-cd's plus a lot more on your
> hard-disk.
> but mostly radio is public, it may be bad music but it's free. to have
> it
> 'on-demand' while integrating the 'knowledge
> of DJs' like finding the best routes through a given set of songs,
> taking play lists as material, goes away from what we know as radio
> but may be still some kind of ambient media.
> 
> > so what im trying to say is that in the world of permanent connections
> it
> > is not necessary to think in time slots.
> if you are lucky to have a leased line at home, sure before discussing
> net.radio
> one should maybe make sure that everone has one;)
point is, even if u have a modem and a server where u can put your stuff,
whats the problem of making a "desktop radio" show and ftping it to your
server?


> 
> > also it is not necessary to
> > "sync" activity - you can have your server do that for yu;-)
> right. if you have such a home server. which works like a music.box
> which picks up
even with applescript you can have your mac ftping the files of interest
onto your drive - obviuosly not in peaktimes;)


> it's stuff over night or so. but how to avoid the usual top 20 charts.
> you even
> have that with mp3. i think that the variety is the potential here.
> 
> > machines are alot better at that than humans are, and especially the
> dont
> > care what timezone they are in, another argument against the live
> stuff
> > from my side.

> truly an argument. at the moment, with deutsche telekom still controling
> the price structure over here,  i would prefer to get my little cdrom
> every
> week. it's cheaper then paying the telephone costs to hear
> livestreams...
> while the live thing has it's important sides, for performances,
> telepresence, backchannel and interactivity things. also just a
> nostalgic thing of broadcasting. sure, many tv and radio programs
> just look like 'live'...
> 
shure, live is kool. but not as self justification.

> 
> > needed to make all of our collective materials available - even after
> they
> > have been broad or narrowcast. maybe step one would be a coordination
> of
> > RealAudio mirror sites...
> that's something!
> 
well, lets get on with it:)

matt

> 
> 
>  |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
> (a) (c) (o) (u) (s) (t) (i) (c) ( ) (s) (p) (a) (c) (e)
>  |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
> information&comunication channel | for net.broadcasters
> http://xchange.re-lab.net  (Xchange)  net.audio network
> xchange search/webarchive: http://xchange.re-lab.net/a/
> 
> 


 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
(a) (c) (o) (u) (s) (t) (i) (c) ( ) (s) (p) (a) (c) (e)
 |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
information&comunication channel | for net.broadcasters
http://xchange.re-lab.net  (Xchange)  net.audio network
xchange search/webarchive: http://xchange.re-lab.net/a/