computer composition

McLaren's discussion of ways that a computer can be used to compose music
brings out many useful distinctions. He acknowledges the blurriness of the
distinctions as well. There are yet other dimensions to the question that may
be useful to expose.

Many algorithms that generate complex data, e.g. a musical composition, have
many "knobs" that can be adjusted. If the user is actually the programmer,
then the whole program can be adjusted. The final product is generally the
result of many loops through the process - generated a trial output, see how
it is unsatisfactory, adjust knobs/program, try again. It's not easy to say
what fraction of the result is due to human effort and what fraction due to
computer effort.

Also: some parameter settings might be quite simple, such as a probability
threshold. But other parameters might be more complex, for example a program
might use a library of simple melodic figures to build up more complex
melodies. When a program gets such musical input from the user, it isn't easy
to assign a proportion of effort.

In the electronic design business these issues also come up. There's no way
to design a leading-edge microprocessor chip without an awful lot of help
from computers. But there's an awful lot of human effort too. Just how best
to take advantage of the different abilities of humans and
computers... I don't think there's an easy answer, but a lot of the progress
in the electronics industry comes from finding new and better answers.

Certainly music making is one of the oldest and richest fields of
human/machine co-creation. Certainly the electronics revolution has already
had vast impact on music. How profoundly musical this impact has been, versus
simply lining the pockets of producers of hit recordings, far be it from me
to judge. I doubt though that the potential has been fully explored.

On another subject: popular non-12TET music. Isn't it true that music from
non-European cultures use very different scales? I've heard that, for
example, Indian ragas, sitar music, etc. use scales very different than
12TET. Wouldn't these qualify as examples of non-12TET with substantial
popularity, emotional impact, etc.?

Our European culture, now reinforced by mass media and that same electronic
revolution that pays my rent, seems to do a good job of keeping expression
channelled in some pretty narrow ruts. The possible forms of human
expression, lifestyles, etc. are quite vast, but if you're outside the
European mainstream, it seems to be harder and harder to survive. I'm not
sure the tuning business is much different in this regard than, say,
languages like English vs. Spanish. I hear the Supreme Court is looking into
that matter right about now.

Personally I think we'd be wise to keep working to resist the narrow
social channelling forces. The more kinds of music the better!

Jim





Received: from ns.ezh.nl [137.174.112.59] by vbv40.ezh.nl
with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 23:16 +0100
Received: by ns.ezh.nl; (5.65v3.2/1.3/10May95) id AA22113; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 17:37:58 +0100
Received: from eartha.mills.edu by ns (smtpxd); id XA22194
Received: from by eartha.mills.edu via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI)
for id IAA22891; Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:37:55 -0800
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 1996 08:37:55 -0800
Message-Id:
Errors-To: madole@ella.mills.edu
Reply-To: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Originator: tuning@eartha.mills.edu
Sender: tuning@eartha.mills.edu