General Music Chat

Craig,

You hit it on the head! What if every individual had their own soundtrack for their lives. Im not as articulate as some of you guys are with this stuff. Think of a computer program that tapped into an individuals brain and produced the music that is there. They say everyone has a novel in them, only most people never take the time to write it. Wouldnt everyone including non-musicians have music in them that could be mined out and tapped into. This wouldnt be for the masses or top forty.

I think music is fragmented in little pieces. With the internet I can on a whim check out any type of music I want to hear. Lately Ive been checking out old Yes, ELP, Zep etc... concerts from the 70s that I missed. The big music festivals of the 60-70s would have a true mix of music. Think about Woodstock (Havens, The Who, Sly And The Family Stone) there was a diverse group of artist that really had nothing to do with each other musically but the crowd dug all of it. Now days a festival would have all the same type of groups. Think Warped Tour, Ozz Fest they all are of the same genre. Thats what I mean by fragmented. As Craig said we all have our little niche and we all seem to dwell there.

Back to my other thought. We have Karoake where non-singers can sing in front of paying audiences, we have guitar hero where non-players can entertain and perform sometimes for money, I could even extend this and say we pay to have DJs spin records for us. I have a brother who is the most non-musical person I know but he will hum or whistle melodys all the time. I ask him what are you humming "Duh, I dont know". What happens when we get technology that allows people like my brother to capture thier melodys and make music out of them. 30 years ago I never thought I would have the equipment to make studio quality recordings at home, now I do.

What happens to us as musicians when non-musicians no longer need us to perform music for them?

100 years from now is a long time, amplification is only around 100 years old, where will we be in another 100 years.

JW

I toyed with creating a music generator as a project for an AI class I had in college. There were a lot of complexities that I couldn't overcome but it's an interesting exercise. Technology is a major component of music today, and I believe this trend will increase in the future.

What if every individual had their own soundtrack for their lives.

I think we do. And that's an interesting thought you had. Music brings out emotions in people. Like you suggested, what if people who were not necessarily musically inclined, could turn their feelings into music. That would be interesting, to say the least, to see how someone's feelings were translated, almost like, a soundtrack of their lives.

btw...

Microsoft's Bill Gates has a technological dream home. Without getting into all the amazing stuff it does, the part relevant to this idea of "niche music" is that a computer holds info on all the likes and dislikes of people that Bill knows and would visit him. The "paintings" on the wall are high-def monitors, and the sound system is connected as well. When a guest walks through the house, the pictures change to the artist he likes most (Van Gogh, for example) as well as the music playing. So his guest would see and hear the artists he likes most, no matter what room he goes into. Don't know how it would work with multiple guests in the same room, but the technology is really cool.

LOL what a bunch of nonsense. But hey, without nonsense, what would the internet be!

How is it nonsense? I mean, it's certainly not going to create a compositional masterpiece. It seems like just a fun and interesting experiment using mathematical formulas and algorithms to produce music.

How is it nonsense? I mean, it's certainly not going to create a compositional masterpiece. It seems like just a fun and interesting experiment using mathematical formulas and algorithms to produce music.

Oh sure, its a fun plaything. But lacking the "anima", it won't produce a piece of music. At most, some random tones may inspire someone to take that sequence and flesh it out into something else, which at that point takes it out of the realm of the machine.

Oh sure, its a fun plaything. But lacking the "anima", it won't produce a piece of music. At most, some random tones may inspire someone to take that sequence and flesh it out into something else, which at that point takes it out of the realm of the machine.

Well, because something is produced through a program, does that mean it is completely devoid of anima?

This is something I have contemplated since Big Blue first beat Kasporav at chess, more than a decade ago. The computer beat a man. But the computer's data was input by humans, and it's programming was input by humans, and so on. It is basically doing what it was told to do, even if it "learns" it is programmed to learn, to alter it's decisions based on what it learns. Every criteria is ultimately predetermined by it's creator.

So, if someone programs a computer to produce music, but it gives it the rules and criteria for how that should be accomplished, isn't there, through the instruction, a part, or at least a fingerprint, of the anima of it's creator within?

I agree that there is something inherently unique about, the anima, or soul/life, which drives us and which responds to things in our own unique way, which is why I find the holy grail of many computer theorists unlikely, that computers can one day think independently of their programmers, to the degree of feeling emotion, having desires, etc..

btw...

By anima, I assume you are referring to the loose definition of the "soul/life" and not the Jungian theory of unconscious masculine qualities found in women?

Well, because something is produced through a program, does that mean it is completely devoid of anima?

If it comes solely from the machine, yes.

Well, because something is produced through a program, does that mean it is completely devoid of anima?

If it comes solely from the machine, yes.

But it is not completely coming only from the machine, when it has followed the programmer's idea of what music is. When the parameters are determined by the programmer, it contains a little piece of him. The machine is only doing what he programmed it to do.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. Of course I agree with you, that there is something distinct in our souls that brings forth creativity, and in a way, my hypothesis here, is only proving that. Whatever a machine creates, whether music or fractal art, it is based upon the input of a person. The human has the desire and inputs the instructions, the machine is a tool, only doing what it is commanded to do.

But it is not completely coming only from the machine, when it has followed the programmer's idea of what music is. When the parameters are determined by the programmer, it contains a little piece of him. The machine is only doing what he programmed it to do.

I'm just playing devil's advocate here. Of course I agree with you, that there is something distinct in our souls that brings forth creativity, and in a way, my hypothesis here, is only proving that. Whatever a machine creates, whether music or fractal art, it is based upon the input of a person. The human has the desire and inputs the instructions, the machine is a tool, only doing what it is commanded to do.

Mmmhmmm, but it's still not the same as weaving a piece of music. Computer music generators are basically the equivalent of making a bunch of pretty marbles, jostling them in a bag and then dumping them out on the floor to see if a pretty pattern comes out.

there was a show on bionics due to the bionic women, they showed a man being wired all over on his head and plugged into the internet and could turn on or change the site by focusing and thinking on it, its just basic breakthru but in the scriptures when the tower of bable was being built, God confused them in their communication because he said there would be nothing man couldnt do, now our tower of babel is Nasa, we've reached the heavens, what other crazy things might men do?

The short answer is no, music will continue to evolve (or devolve in many cases) just as it has for centuries. As has always been the case, everything that was old will become new again with a modern twist. The fate of popular music however is another story. The advent of the digital age in many ways is creating uninspired and tiring music that plays to the lowest common denominator in society. Combine that with unparalleled ease in accessing it, most popular music today is nothing but shades of dingy gray. Top 40 gone very very wrong. The shorter attention span of the average listener began to decline with the generation x crowd that came of age in the 80's and early 90's. Because of this, simple single idea music is now the norm. But just as the renaissance did for popular music of the time, there will always be room for true musicianship, genius and creativity. Swing came along when Dixieland was getting stale, Jazz pushed the envelope and allowed us to think outside the box. When early rock and roll became dominated by strings and doowop, guitar bands hit the scene. And just when the New Wave trend had peaked with nobody that really learned to play an instrument, Grunge came along and woke everybody up again. Every generation and genre has a handful of gifted artists that standout and stand the test of time regardless of what musical instrument is the featured voice. Even though they may not be the most popular, they are influential to the next generation. These are not the formula bands that the popular media pushes as genius or talent. These are the people that find a way to evoke true emotion with music.

Well said. Great examples too! As I said previously, everything is cyclical. Eventually, people return to real, or maybe, more substantial music, when they get bored of bubblegum. I think you put it well, when you suggested that music both evolves, and devolves.

The short answer is no, music will continue to evolve (or devolve in many cases) just as it has for centuries. As has always been the case, everything that was old will become new again with a modern twist. The fate of popular music however is another story. The advent of the digital age in many ways is creating uninspired and tiring music that plays to the lowest common denominator in society. Combine that with unparalleled ease in accessing it, most popular music today is nothing but shades of dingy gray. Top 40 gone very very wrong. The shorter attention span of the average listener began to decline with the generation x crowd that came of age in the 80's and early 90's. Because of this, simple single idea music is now the norm. But just as the renaissance did for popular music of the time, there will always be room for true musicianship, genius and creativity. Swing came along when Dixieland was getting stale, Jazz pushed the envelope and allowed us to think outside the box. When early rock and roll became dominated by strings and doowop, guitar bands hit the scene. And just when the New Wave trend had peaked with nobody that really learned to play an instrument, Grunge came along and woke everybody up again. Every generation and genre has a handful of gifted artists that standout and stand the test of time regardless of what musical instrument is the featured voice. Even though they may not be the most popular, they are influential to the next generation. These are not the formula bands that the popular media pushes as genius or talent. These are the people that find a way to evoke true emotion with music.