|
>I.e., most music has counterpoint, melody, rhythm, dynamics,
> harmony, articulartion, etc. What can we discard and still have music?
>
Given that music is so driven by perception (some can interpret as music
what others would call noise) I would think it is possible to discard
all of those attributes.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Mossey [mailto:mpm@alumni.caltech.edu]
> Sent: Monday, 13 February 2006 11:30 a.m.
> To: csound@lists.bath.ac.uk
> Subject: Re: [Csnd] Algorithmic composition - the simplest model
>
>
>
> > I do not think there is a "simplest" model for algorithmic
> composition
> > that will actually produce satisfying music. Composing music is a
> > complex operation, where a great many factors are considered, some
> > more clearly and intellectually than others.
>
> Hi Oeyvind,
>
> Thanks for the response. Let me point out that I wasn't
> really talking about the simplest algorithm, but rather the
> simplest model for music itself.
>
> I.e., most music has counterpoint, melody, rhythm, dynamics,
> harmony, articulartion, etc. What can we discard and still have music?
>
> Personally, I need rhythm that is "alive" (not purely
> metronomic) and dynamics. But that's it! Just beating on a drum.
>
> I enjoy pieces that are single melodies. But they need
> articulation, lively rhythm, and dynamics for me to actually
> enjoy them. So IOW a melody has eveything beating on a drum
> has, with the addition of pitch. So it is more complicated.
>
> >
> > But, in response to the "beating of a drum" idea Michael (Mossey)
> > mentioned, I would like to point to a simple method for generating
> > complex rhythms. If you use a sine waveform, letting a
> trigger go off
> > every time the wave goes from positive to negative (on zero
> crossing),
> > you would get a metronomic rhythm trigger.
> > One nice thing about this is that it (at least
> conceptually) takes into
> > account the "motion required to hit the drum", e.g. the
> wave has to go
> > back to positive to be able to do another zero crossing.
> This resembles a
> > simple model of a hand hitting a drum.
> > I you use FM on this sine wave, you will get more and more
> complex rhythms
> > the more modulation index you use. If using phase
> modulation instead of
> > FM, you can keep the basic tempo steady while modulating.
> > Futher on, you might use the same concept to make rhythms
> out of sound
> > segments (played very slowly). This will make very chaotic
> rhythms from
> > noisy sounds, and regular beats out of harmonic sounds. For
> bass drum
> > beats that have a noisy attack and a clear pitch following
> the attack, you
> > get a chaotic to steady evolution in the output.
> > Still, this is a simple idea, and without connecting it to
> some system
> > with a musical knowledge of "what is this piece going to
> sound like, and
> > what are the other simultaneous voices doing", I think the
> output will be
> > interesting but rudimentary.
>
> Interesting idea.
>
> >
> > I am working on a system now, where I will try to build in
> som sort of
> > musical knowledge. I do not propose that my new system will be the
> > answers to anyone's prayers but my own. I might have mentioned this
> > setup before on this list. My basic thought is to use a "pool-rule"
> > setup, where one algorithm generates a set of beleivable
> candidates (a
> > pool) for the next value, then these candidates are filtered and
> > weighted by applying rules. The rules might simply be "prefer
> > ascending pitches", or in more complex cases they might say"try to
> > keep all simultaneous voices withing the notes of a certain chord,
> > while maintaining smooth voice leading, prefer fast rhythms, and
> > prefer rhythm attacks that are not time-simultaneous with the other
> > simultaneoulsy sounding voices" or something like that. The
> previous
> > sentence will of course be split into separate rules, and the rules
> > can be weighted agains each other. Sometimes rules will
> conflict, but
> > that does not matter (in real life they do so too...), the
> weighting
> > of the rules and the pool of beleviable candidates will
> take care that
> > there is always at least one ok candidate for the next
> value. The pool
> > of beleviable candidates might be generated by means for a markov
> > process, with a dynamic order, so that one can use e.g. 3rd
> order for
> > a fairly "tight" markov pool, but still fall back to 2nd,
> 1st or even
> > zeroeth order if the system finds that the criteria is too
> tightly set
> > to find viable candidates for the next value.
> >
> > Oeyvind
> >
>
> Sounds like a fascinating idea. I've noticed that some
> algorithms for creating music are imitative of what a human
> composer would do (would you say this describes yours?) and
> some are purely mathematical (I think M. Gogins is more
> interested in this type).
>
> Best,
> Mike
>
> --
> Send bugs reports to this list.
> To unsubscribe, send email to csound-unsubscribe@lists.bath.ac.uk
>
######################################################################
Attention:
If you have received this message in error, please notify the sender.
This email may contain privileged or confidential information intended
only for the named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient,
any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this information
by you is prohibited. Any views expressed by the sender of this message
do not necessarily reflect the views of TNS New Zealand.
###################################################################### |