Why would I? While I use computers to play music all the time, I don't think using computers to write music is a good idea in the first place.
---
@jgalloway___: I'm not sure if I'd call it an “expectation”. I just dislike it when people throw random shit at the wall and see what sticks. When you write music, you should first think how it's going to sound, convince yourself that it's plausibly good-sounding, and only then actually play it just to make sure it sounds good. If you do it the other way around (first play random stuff, then filter out what doesn't sounds good), you're a wanker.
---
@ohitsdom: I'm totally fine with improvisation driven by ideas, not random computation. Coming up with ideas on the fly is good. Passing noise as genuine ideas is not good.
That's fine that it's not your style, but experimentation is a huge source of new music and reinvented ideas. Dismissing any music that wasn't strictly planned seems a little silly.
Look, it couldn't even follow a basic tempo when I was playing. That's not even close to being a "duet" as described. Maybe whoever wrote it has a limited grasp of English, because that experiment is a far, far, far, far, far, far, far cry from a "Duet" experience.
Well, one where you don't look over at your partner and wonder if the have any clue how music works before pushing them off the piano bench.
---
@jgalloway___: I'm not sure if I'd call it an “expectation”. I just dislike it when people throw random shit at the wall and see what sticks. When you write music, you should first think how it's going to sound, convince yourself that it's plausibly good-sounding, and only then actually play it just to make sure it sounds good. If you do it the other way around (first play random stuff, then filter out what doesn't sounds good), you're a wanker.
---
@ohitsdom: I'm totally fine with improvisation driven by ideas, not random computation. Coming up with ideas on the fly is good. Passing noise as genuine ideas is not good.