PDA

View Full Version : Choir experiment 1


lgrohn
06-25-2005, 04:11 AM
I got my Choir on last Thursday. I have studied the WordBuilder manual but not done any experiments with WordBuilder. This experiment was done with Choir's "component programs", Full Choir, Boy solo and Effects. I used for this an over 2 years old midi file (generated in 5 seconds from picture number 23 on my page). Of course the pitch ranges didn't match properly but this is my way of learning...

http://www.synestesia.com/x05/usa_ch_2506.mp3

wilx
06-25-2005, 05:21 AM
I really don't know what you were trying to achieve here - but it isn't very good!
Sorry to be critical, but it's musically awful. No structure, no melodic/harmonic frameweork - no sense of rhythm, tonality or direction.

Good luck with other stuff though...

exstreme
06-25-2005, 06:02 AM
it's a shame to use such nice libery,to use lijke this!!! :D

and why do you let a picture create you music and not your self :rolleyes:

i totaly agree with wilx

svk

drew
06-25-2005, 07:07 AM
wilx and exstreme - I couldn't disagree more with both of you.

Obviously, you define music based on 19th century constructs of harmony, structure, rhythm etc - but we are in the 21st century and we should try to be more open to new and creative sounds and techniques of making music.

I found the piece very enjoyable and not at all difficult to listen to or follow. There is harmony, structure and rhythm to the piece. Actually, it is quite simple. You should be careful not to criticize what you don't understand.

Pi_314
06-25-2005, 07:07 AM
it's a shame to use such nice libery,to use lijke this!!! :D

and why do you let a picture create you music and not your self :rolleyes:

i totaly agree with wilx

svk

Hey - It's not bad for a computer. Are we to say that there are rules of engagement if you are to purchase these chiors? Perhaps we should have people sign a release form before they buy these chiors?
One thing is for sure. His program will pump out as many variations as there are in pictures. I'm curious as to what would happen if he took the same picture for two instances, and altered one of them only slightly, like like change just one pixels color.
Just to make sure - Will his program make the same tune with the exact same picture over two instances? :D

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 07:42 AM
Let's agree that it is not so good. These new software instruments are great, but they set very narrow limits for pitch ranges of instruments (my old Roland JV1010 was not so precice of that). And new instruments have also reduce the "standard" midi pitch ranges. Just look at violin e.g. So in that piece above the boy solo is trying to sing the flute part of the original midi file but is missing quite a lot of notes. It would have been quite nice to reorchestrate my old pieces but most often it doesn't work. That't not a problem with totally new piece where I can (or my SW can) manage the pitch ranges during the generation.

PS. Now have started to think about what does it mean in practice when the WorldBuilder is reserving the midi channels 1-5 for its own use. Why not using the 5 last one?

PS2. My software is deterministic. Having the same picture and parameters you will always get an identical midi file.

amo
06-25-2005, 07:58 AM
Hi Igrohn,

I found your work quite interesting and unusual.
I'd like to know a little better what you've put in your software, in terms of probabilites, aleatory chances, series..... Are your works based on any of the contemporary research, are you in a totally new research with that ?
Last question: Are you only interested in having your results played by sample libraries or to you plan to get some "score" out of your software to have it perform by humans ?

Thanks for posting,

amo

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 08:00 AM
I'm curious as to what would happen if he took the same picture for two instances, and altered one of them only slightly, like like change just one pixels color.
Just to make sure Actually there is no difference when using color picture or the corresponding gray picture. The reason is that the generation should work for all kinds of pictures. There is no general answer for changing just color of one pixel. In theory it could be possible that in some cases it could cause a chain effect for one instrument part or even for the whole piece. But I doubt that in practice. Perhaps for same very simple picture where most of the picture is "background" that is filtered away.

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 08:11 AM
I'd like to know a little better what you've put in your software, in terms of probabilites, aleatory chances, series..... Are your works based on any of the contemporary research, are you in a totally new research with that ?
Last question: Are you only interested in having your results played by sample libraries or to you plan to get some "score" out of your software to have it perform by humans ?
No probabilities is used. Only simple artihmetics. You will find one score here:
http://www.synestesia.com/scores/timeisup.pdf

It is actually the original score of the piece above, with a lot of missing notes because of the pitch range inconsistences between this and the original orchestrations.

Yes. I will be working on June 4-10 at a workshop here

http://www.timeofmusic.org/2005/index.php?page=courses

with an artist and 1-2 instrumentalists and the final piece will be
presented in the final concert. The musician(s) will play his part
from the screen of G5 and the G5 will play the rest.

Pi_314
06-25-2005, 08:24 AM
Actually there is no difference when using color picture or the corresponding gray picture. The reason is that the generation should work for all kinds of pictures. There is no general answer for changing just color of one pixel. In theory it could be possible that in some cases it could cause a chain effect for one instrument part or even for the whole piece. But I doubt that in practice. Perhaps for same very simple picture where most of the picture is "background" thap isdFilteredaway. eRe ymu 7Cyije y+W doL't`Inow? LeTs find$Mut`qhalN we

wilx
06-25-2005, 12:13 PM
In response to the people who liked the piece - I copmletely respect your right to appreciate stuff like this. I'm hardly gonna go slagging a load of you off having posted about 4 posts and one piece myself!
Personally, I think the fact that music has developed over thousands of years to the point it is at now demonstrates that there are aurally pleasant and effective methods of doing things. I'm always sceptical of anything which puports to be 'modern' or 'innovative' with music as a lot of experimental stuff tends to take these personal and universally successful elements of music away - and it's much easier to compose!

I think it's an interesting way of doing things, but I personally prefer the 'established' routes of composition.

:)

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 12:24 PM
I'm hardly gonna go slagging a load of you off having posted about 4 posts and one piece myself! OK. How much time you used for composing that piece? My original piece (midi file) was composed in 5 seconds. Here is the result from March 2003:

http://www.synestesia.com/cd21/usa.mp3

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 12:51 PM
Personally, I think the fact that music has developed over thousands of years to the point it is at now demonstrates that there are aurally pleasant and effective methods of doing things. I'm always sceptical of anything which puports to be 'modern' or 'innovative' with music as a lot of experimental stuff tends to take these personal and universally successful elements of music away - and it's much easier to compose!Here you will find some excerpts of modern art music:

Finnish modern music exerpts (http://www.fimic.fi/fimic/fimic.nsf/mainframe?readform&582621E863AAC7ACC2256E9200402DE5)

Please select e.g. Magnus Lindberg's "Aura".

ToddK
06-25-2005, 01:08 PM
I would describe the whole "music from pictures" process, as completely
nonsensical and unneccesary.
Not to mention, annoying.

I could let my Cat walk up and down my keyboard controller for
a few seconds, and call it exp music, but, that would be extremely
stupid. Random notes are Random. This is commonly known
as "Noise".... Music doesnt come from machines, or random calculations.
It comes from people's souls.

There is no heart or soul in what you are making.
You're just spitting out a bunch numbers. There's no emotion behind it.
Its completely innanimate. Another word for it is, "dead"..

For those that believe this IS music, thats fine with me of course.
This is just my opinion. I have a perfect right to dislike something,
as you have a perfect right to enjoy noise by numbers. :)

I sincerely hope you someday intend to actually learn how to compose
and sequence music.
The world is always in need of more good music. I would rather hear what's
in your heart, not some code that some picture spewed out.


TK

DPK
06-25-2005, 01:11 PM
We post our demos here for feedback right ? So here’s my response.

Just my opinion of course but..

I personally do not think art of any form requires “justification” or “explanations”.

If this piece were just to be presented with a link and a “here is my piece, what do you think?” kind of message, the responses would be more interesting.

For some reason, most all “modern” art must always be explained to stupid people like me by it’s creator so that I can “get it”.

Sorry, but I really do not get it... I felt no emotion whatsoever after listening to it twice. Maybe the purpose was to evoke a non-emotional response and that my higher brain functions are just to feeble too make any tangible intellectual connection to it. ;)

Dan-

ChrisE
06-25-2005, 02:18 PM
lgrohn's music is always going to be controversial. From an aesthetics point of the view this piece is awful. There are no discernible melodies, the harmony becomes stale after just a few seconds, and the rhythm reminds me of the click function from cubase.

The creativity from this generated music comes from the programming of the generation software, the choice of picture, and then the choice of instruments (articulations).

I find programming works best with interaction. For instance, I once made a program that created music from movement. The user would put on bending sensors and the data from these sensors would then go to a computer to be instantly turned into sound. I found the experience from this fascinating, and changed my views on this kind of music.

So I never dismiss music that breaks with convention. You very rarely get success first time with something new. Try, try again as they say, and who knows one picture may hold the key to a beautiful piece :D

ToddK
06-25-2005, 02:35 PM
Why is it "expeiremental" artists are protected by the word "Contraversial".

"its not bad, its contraversial"" :rolleyes:

But a main stream composer writes something bad, and its just,,, bad...

Awfully convienient.

Doesnt sound contraversial to me, just sounds sour. :p

TK

Liam
06-25-2005, 04:56 PM
Music doesnt come from machines, or random calculations.
It comes from people's souls.
TK

I have to agree with Todd on this one. In my opinion music is emotion and feelings expressed through sound. Computers have niether of those things, and it shows in a piece like this. Your "technical" accomplishment is writing software that will do this, but thats as far as it goes. I noticed in many of your posts you have said things like "This piece was generated in 5 seconds" as if that was superior to someone taking weeks to compose a complete original piece of music. Is your only goal to generate random sounds in a few seconds? I think the key difference here is that yours is "generated" music is "composed"

Just my 2 cents

Liam

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 09:26 PM
I would describe the whole "music from pictures" process, as completely
nonsensical and unneccesary.
Not to mention, annoying.

I could let my Cat walk up and down my keyboard controller for
a few seconds, and call it exp music, but, that would be extremely
stupid. Random notes are Random. This is commonly known
as "Noise".... Music doesnt come from machines, or random calculations.
It comes from people's souls.It's OK if you don't like that music BUT there is no randomness in it. You can't get you cat walk a photo. What IS random is what comes out of head of a composer. That's is called CREATIVITY. By the way, Mozart composed some of his pieces by using a dice. Many other composers have used algorithms to "generate" their pieces. When a composer has his STYLE he is actually using a kind of a algorithm. One can say that in some way so called serialism was based on an algorithm + some kind of randomness.

You know, some people like when one doesn't know what comes next. Perhaps that is what you mean by "randomness".

lgrohn
06-25-2005, 09:33 PM
I find programming works best with interaction. For instance, I once made a program that created music from movement. The user would put on bending sensors and the data from these sensors would then go to a computer to be instantly turned into sound. I found the experience from this fascinating, and changed my views on this kind of music.
There has been a huge effort on that area. And there is still no breakthroughs. It is like improvising with an instrument you can't play. Anyway, it's improvisation not composing. It can be fun as such.

Evan
06-25-2005, 10:33 PM
I would describe the whole "music from pictures" process, as completely
nonsensical and unneccesary.
Not to mention, annoying.

I could let my Cat walk up and down my keyboard controller for
a few seconds, and call it exp music, but, that would be extremely
stupid. Random notes are Random. This is commonly known
as "Noise".... Music doesnt come from machines, or random calculations.
It comes from people's souls.

There is no heart or soul in what you are making.
You're just spitting out a bunch numbers. There's no emotion behind it.
Its completely innanimate. Another word for it is, "dead"..

For those that believe this IS music, thats fine with me of course.
This is just my opinion. I have a perfect right to dislike something,
as you have a perfect right to enjoy noise by numbers. :)

I sincerely hope you someday intend to actually learn how to compose
and sequence music.
The world is always in need of more good music. I would rather hear what's
in your heart, not some code that some picture spewed out.


TK

I completely agree, and this is coming from someone who likes miles davis's "bitches Brew". I respect that you took the time to try and analyze the mathematical sense of music and developed this program that determined the various variables that music consists of. But now that youve done it, poating "experiment" after experiment is pretty annoying to me. Im not saying you should stop because of what i think though.

And the thing is I dont even feel bad about saying that I hate this music because you didnt even compose it. I dont even know if youve had any musical training..if youve had, then I KNOW you can do better..if not..I STILL know you can do better.

So i hope the next piece you compose will come from your mind and not 01000100101001110100100011001010011010100100101010 00000000001011110101011110100000000000001101010101 00100100000101001101011010100100100010101010100101 1
10010101010010110101011011010101101011011010101010 1001011010101101011010101010101010(this one right here is a sweet beat!)

00000000000001111111111111111111100000000000000011 11111111111111(minimalist)

001000100010001000100010101101(jazz swing rythem)

001012001001012(how the F@ck did a two get in there?)

by the way this composition was generated in about 35 seconds, sorry i wasnt faster

Mills2k
06-26-2005, 12:16 AM
Ok, that's obnoxious. Just because you don't appreciate someone's music means that you have the right to say it's not music. How original is your music, eh? The fact is, most of the music being made right now is extremely derivative, and we need something new. Igrohn's music is interesting, at least intellectually, to me. That's not to say I'd prefer it to any of the great pieces, but at least it's trying to be something different.

And yes, it is music. You might argue otherwise, but it certainly is. There is something musical in choosing what instruments should play what, for instance. I'm not sure how much Igrohn focuses on orchestral color and such, but if he does, I'm sure he pays a great deal of attention to that--more, I bet, than most of us.

Igrohn, I do think you're causing trouble for yourself, however, by continuing to say it was generated in 5 seconds. Sure, that's how long it took to generate the notes. How long does it take you then to produce the final rendered product?

I may not like it, but I certainly appreciate it, and I appreciate what it's trying to do. The same goes for so much modern music. Some of it I think is stupid, like Stockhausen's piece that is to be performed in two helicopters and mixed down on the ground. But even the now not-so-modern 12 tone I have problems liking. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate its innovation though. Music is as much intellectual as it is emotional. If anyone convinces me that Bach's music is more emotional than cerebral, I think I'll lobotomize myself.

Music is not just emotion. It's a whole range of things. What Igrohn has is music. You may not like it, maybe even just for the reason that it was written by a computer. But human elements are interspersed in the process everywhere.

And lastly, I would like to remind you about a bunch of monkeys at type writers...

Evan
06-26-2005, 12:29 AM
i guess there will always be those mathematician Republican musicains ;) (joke)

Mills2k
06-26-2005, 12:45 AM
Well, technically speaking, you're the conservative in this argument...

Evan
06-26-2005, 12:51 AM
haha yeah i guess your right..kinda

well I dont understand how something that has no emotional value could be called music :confused:

Mills2k
06-26-2005, 01:12 AM
Oh man, not an argument for 4:03 AM. Hah! I'm gonna divide the viewpoint on emotion into the two polar ends, though there's certainly a grey area in between. Either music contains emotion, or the emotion is brought by the listener and applied to the music. Famous composers of the past have also been split on this question as well. I'm not sure which I believe myself, but I know I'm on the fence. I believe that music is often composed with emotion. But I also believe that that emotion is not communicated to the listener, and the emotion the listener feels is one that he or she has superimposed onto the piece of music. And sure, you can always say, "But minor universally means sad!" Not true, but even if you believe that, that's your own supposition based upon being told that minor should mean sad. You go to someone who hasn't heard western tonal music and play them a "sad" song in minor? Who knows what they're going to think of it.

Aaaaanyways, to make a long story short: yes and no. He might not compose with emotion, but that's not necessary for music, technically speaking. How much emotion do you feel in a piece with only unpitched percussion? And how much do you think went into it? Both rhetorical, and up to you as an individual to answer, because there will be a lot of different answers. But the cynical part of me wants to make a snide remark about wanting to hit things and make loud noises.

Evan
06-26-2005, 01:16 AM
Ill agree with you on that one..the communication of emtion is relative, though I think as humans for the most part we can agree on certain things..

But one of them is not that minor is sad..Ive heard many happy minors before(and no this isnt a coal minner joke ;) )

exstreme
06-26-2005, 04:06 AM
is the war still going on!!! :D

svk

ChrisE
06-26-2005, 04:22 AM
Why is it "expeiremental" artists are protected by the word "Contraversial".

"its not bad, its contraversial"" :rolleyes:

But a main stream composer writes something bad, and its just,,, bad...

Awfully convienient.

Doesnt sound contraversial to me, just sounds sour. :p

TK

Experimental artists are controversial because it gets the same reaction as this!! Look what happened with Stravinsky's Rite of Spring. There was a riot on the opening performence. Now, before you say 'This isn't Stravinsky! Stravinsky was a genius!', I will say that this is a bad piece. I said it before, and I'll say it again. But the arguement here isnt over whether this is a bad piece, its over how the piece was made.

And that is whats controversial here. The method rather than the outcome. People are outraged that a computer could write music. But music has a deep relationship with mathematics. And a computer is the biggest number cruncher of them all. So it was bound to happen sooner or later.

At the moment the pieces are bad. But do you think he should stop just because he is getting bad pieces? I am wondering also if the reverse can be used with this program. Could for instance, a mozart symphony be converted into midi, and then into a picture. That would be interesting. And if someone understood the programming of the software, they could paint not a nice painting, but nice music. That would be extremely interesting.

There are many things that could be done with a program such as this. The program could also be changed so it adheres to tonality. That would obviously be a complicated program but not completely out of the question.

Now what would happen then? Would it still get the same responce if it was tonal?

Perhaps ToddK should take a photo of his cat walking along the piano, and send it off to lghron so we can see which is the best ;)

David_Lucas
06-28-2005, 07:48 PM
More reverb!



...Sorry. I listen to 'noise' quite regularly, and enjoy it, but I do wish the compiler (composer) would have taken a few minutes with some audio editing software and added a different reverb to each voice so that it didn't sound quite so spare. Perhaps a bit of channel seperation, too.

Of course, music from pictures is hardly experimental anymore, anyway.

lgrohn
06-28-2005, 11:01 PM
Of course, music from pictures is hardly experimental anymore, anyway.Have you found any acceptable system generating midi files from pictures? I have not...

Evan
06-29-2005, 12:16 AM
Have you found any acceptable system generating midi files from pictures? I have not...

No..but he has found a human that can interpret the emotion that the picture evokes and express it musically

chocothrax
06-29-2005, 03:43 PM
I'll take extremely derivitive good stuff over some random mess of noise anyday. :) Theres a reason experimental music isnt popular and that is because it sucks.

David_Lucas
06-29-2005, 04:05 PM
Have you found any acceptable system generating midi files from pictures? I have not...

Doesn't Finale have the ability to scan sheet music and convert it into MIDI files?
That's not what you're talking about, though.

I do commend you on writing an interesting program for converting digital images to digital sound information. I'm not a programmer, myself, hardly even a sequencer.

Anyway, science is art and art is science. Perhaps your music is unappealing simply because it is not common enough- who knows? I wouldn't let the criticism bother me if I was you; you're not in it for the money.