Nasty stuff about Smithy

After working with Fractal Tune Smithy a little bit, I am beginning
to question it.

In the first place, I am not certain that a "fractal" gestalt is
really helping me to learn the features of a scale.

Could some of our experts here PLEASE give me some background about
why hearing a scale in an almost RANDOM fractal manner is going to
lead to a true understanding of it??

How about just playing an ascending scale slowly?? Would that be not
a nice way to hear one??

That seems to be about the *ONLY* thing Fractal Tune Smithy *WON'T*
do easily. Always, one gets either fractal patterns or strange note
lengths that have to be edited out.

The whole package feels more like a "toy" to me than like a serious
tuning study tool.

Please explain to me why I am so wrong...
_________ ___ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson

>Could some of our experts here PLEASE give me some background about
>why hearing a scale in an almost RANDOM fractal manner is going to
>lead to a true understanding of it??

Why did you think it would? FYI, fractals are far from random, as
they can usually be described by very concise procedures.

>How about just playing an ascending scale slowly?? Would that be not
>a nice way to hear one??

I'd imagine so.

>That seems to be about the *ONLY* thing Fractal Tune Smithy *WON'T*
>do easily. Always, one gets either fractal patterns or strange note
>lengths that have to be edited out.

Why don't you try Graham Breed's MIDI Relay?

>The whole package feels more like a "toy" to me than like a serious
>tuning study tool.

Who said it was a tuning study tool? It's an algo comp tool.

>Please explain to me why I am so wrong...

C'mon, man! Pull yourself together!

-Carl

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Carl Lumma <CLUMMA@N...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13402

> >Could some of our experts here PLEASE give me some background
about why hearing a scale in an almost RANDOM fractal manner is
going to lead to a true understanding of it??
>
> Why did you think it would? FYI, fractals are far from random, as
> they can usually be described by very concise procedures.
>

Ok. Have you TRIED "Fractal Tune Smithy" or are you just talking??
Fractals may not be random, but the perception of these scales using
this method seems near to it, to me.

I would like to understand how to increase my perception so that this
is not the case, if there is a productive reason to do so!

> >How about just playing an ascending scale slowly?? Would that be
not a nice way to hear one??
>
> I'd imagine so.

I'm commenting here on the software, and on the fact that it is not
so easy to create such a simple effect. This is what I was talking
about...

>
> >That seems to be about the *ONLY* thing Fractal Tune Smithy *WON'T*
> >do easily. Always, one gets either fractal patterns or strange
note lengths that have to be edited out.
>
> Why don't you try Graham Breed's MIDI Relay?

Well, you could post a link. I know nothing about it. But, does it
really have much to do with "Smithy?" And does it play SCALA files
immediately in their GENERIC format... That's a crucial question for
me!

>
> >The whole package feels more like a "toy" to me than like a
serious tuning study tool.
>
> Who said it was a tuning study tool? It's an algo comp tool.
>

It really doesn't seem like a "compositional" tool, as much as a
"scale exploring" too to me. I guess you CAN save the files in a
MIDI sequence if you'd like to.

> >Please explain to me why I am so wrong...
>
> C'mon, man! Pull yourself together!
>
> -Carl

I think, Carl, you misunderstand me. I was trying to indicate my
SUPPORTIVENESS for the software, particularly since Manuel op de Coul
recommends it. However, I am not finding it as useful as I'd hoped.

I was hoping that somebody could show me the usefulness I was
missing. I think you read my comment (or intention) incorrectly...
_________ ___ __ _ _
Joseph Pehrson

>>>Could some of our experts here PLEASE give me some background
>>>about why hearing a scale in an almost RANDOM fractal manner is
>>>going to lead to a true understanding of it??
>>
>>Why did you think it would? FYI, fractals are far from random, as
>>they can usually be described by very concise procedures.
>
>Ok. Have you TRIED "Fractal Tune Smithy" or are you just talking??

I have TRIED, but am by no means experienced with the following
fractal music software:

o Fmusic 1.9
o Fractmus 2.5
o Gingerbread
o Chaos von Eschenbach 1.10f
o Fractal Tune Smithy 1.082

>Fractals may not be random, but the perception of these scales using
>this method seems near to it, to me.

I guess that depends on the scale, the fractal in question, and the
kind of musical information you're looking for.

>I would like to understand how to increase my perception so that this
>is not the case, if there is a productive reason to do so!

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish... software like Smithy
is intended to create music. Fractals are used because they aren't
random, but also don't sound boring and predictable. Try searching
the web for "algo comp".

>>>That seems to be about the *ONLY* thing Fractal Tune Smithy *WON'T*
>>>do easily. Always, one gets either fractal patterns or strange
>>>note lengths that have to be edited out.
>>
>>Why don't you try Graham Breed's MIDI Relay?
>
>Well, you could post a link. I know nothing about it. But, does it
>really have much to do with "Smithy?" And does it play SCALA files
>immediately in their GENERIC format... That's a crucial question for
>me!

Search the web for Graham Breed. You can't miss it. Yes, it opens
Scala files, and it also supports a really neat file type of Graham's
own invention, which you may find very useful.

>I was hoping that somebody could show me the usefulness I was
>missing. I think you read my comment (or intention) incorrectly...

I don't use algorithmic composition techniques, but I believe there
are people here that do. You may want to check out some of the other
packages I mention above. Sorry if I mis-read you, and I hope you
caught the shot of Dr. McCoy humor there. OTOH, you're not a newbie
anymore, and we've got to cut your apron strings!

-Carl

--- In tuning@egroups.com, Carl Lumma <CLUMMA@N...> wrote:

http://www.egroups.com/message/tuning/13439

> I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish... software like
Smithy is intended to create music. Fractals are used because they
aren't random, but also don't sound boring and predictable. Try
searching the web for "algo comp".
>

Hi Carl!

Actually, I'm not trying to accomplish ANYTHING! Whoopie!

But, seriously, I am not particularly a fan of algorithmic software.
I'm too much of a "control freak." The only advantage, as I
mentioned before, would be to let the computer compose all my music
while I'm busy working on the Tuning List!

[Oh, come on, gang... that's a JOKE, ok??]

You were right... I had the *WRONG* software for my purposes. Graham
Breed's MIDI RELAY really did the trick for me... it was a
REVELATION... and I'm going to be using it CONSTANTLY.

Thanks for pointing it out to me!

>Sorry if I mis-read you, and I hope you caught the shot of Dr.
McCoy humor there. OTOH, you're not a newbie anymore, and we've got
to cut your apron strings!
>
> -Carl

I take that as quite a compliment, Carl. Actually as a New Yaaaker
for over 20 years, my skin is a little on the thick side...
*I'm* not running off as soon as somebody disagrees with some
cherished idea.

I have to do a little more math review, though. Looks like algebra
is about all I need... but I saw a little calculus in Sethares.
That's a little scary for somebody who "just" went to music school!

I would like to make *ONE* statement though... ta, da, ta, da, de,
da:

I am a little suspicious of all these "dudes" who say that rigorous
theoretical analysis is interfering with their composing time. As
Arnold Schoenberg said (there he is again... the pre-eminent wacko
(for his time) composer-theorist of practically all time)... "There
are as many hours in the day as you care to put into it..."

My suspicion is that some people use "composing time" as an EXCUSE
for not wanting to use their heads in theoretical work...

MY contention is that rigorous theoretical and intellectual work is
the PREREQUISITE to intelligent composition... and is WELL WORTH time
invested in it.

There's my "soapbox." May I step down?? Fire away, "cretins."

[THAT'S JUST A JOKE AGAIN, OK... CAN'T WE JOKE ANYMORE??]
_____________ ____ __ __ _
Joseph Pehrson