View Full Version : The Ghost in the Machine
This follows on from the making music on a PC thread, some things I've been thinking about as I experimented with various software.
The computer is a tool, like any other, man has been using tools to make music since he first hit a hollow rock with a stick or blew into a sea shell but at what point does it stop being the tool and become the musician? At what point does music become a science not an art? At what stage are you just painting by numbers?
Seems to me with the software available I could just take a musical score and type it into the computer, tell it what instruments to use, press enter, sit back and listen but is that music? Can sounds with no soul be called music? Distilled water is tasteless, it's the imperfections in music which give it the flavour but imperfections can be programmed in. You can program a computer with the rules of harmony and random selection and it will compose music but can music created by a machine ever be described as beautiful?
Fred, like painting by numbers as opposed to original drawings/paintings, which do you like to look at most? I think I can guess the answer.....
It's the same with music.
I can listen to the best of recorded quality music at any time but we still go to "see" live music as there is nothing like being a part of it, be it listening, watching the players as they create the sounds or even lightheartedly dancing and singing along!
Music created by computer has to be programmed so the user still has the satisfaction of being responsible for that music.
Me, I'm still waiting for the computer that will put my shopping away even though it has been ordered electronically and delivered to my door!
Fred, like painting by numbers as opposed to original drawings/paintings, which do you like to look at most? I think I can guess the answer.....
Yes but the question is at what point does it become painting by numbers? There is science in every work of art, every artist uses tricks even if it's just holding his thumb up to judge proportions.
A good instrument could always make a good musician sound better but they could never make a bad musician sound good before. At what point are we just working the pedals on a pianola?
I know what you mean Fred, but like a lot of things in life I don't think the answer is at all simple. The difference between hearing a good voice sing even with just a simple accompaniment and hearing a dodgy singer with either good musicians or machines that we can tweak is in the ear of the listener.
For example, I have listened to some of the X-factor on't telly and even just last week when they were nearing the final process there was a female who sang (don't know who, I was in the next room) and I was constantly flinching at the flatness of some of her notes but she was carried along with the excellent music and the buoyancy of the crowd cheering and maybe is still in the running, I don't know. My point is how could the others not hear what I was hearing. I don't have a particularly exact ear but it had me cringing.
Maybe it is the same with manufactured music; it is in the ear of the listener and unless you have a very keen ear I doubt if someone could tell the difference and I'm quite sure many people would prefer the machine music.
There are many things in life that are changing due to more knowledge, new technology; even our very language is changing. Some things we cannot stop but we still have a choice.
"A good instrument could always make a good musician sound better but they could never make a bad musician sound good before. At what point are we just working the pedals on a pianola?"
Maybe we should appreciate the fact that nowadays the production of music is changing and part of the art is in knowing how to programme or tweak the machines? To my mind, as in art, one can complement the other with some followers of good music staying faithfull to raw instrument playing and the more adventurous adapting to modern ways and producing new, exciting sounds. (I have to admit to using a capo as it is much easier than learning all the chords I may need but then I am lazy!)
I have no doubt that making music is now easier for those who maybe wouldn't have been able to master ordinary instruments but who can work machinery and lo and behold, they can produce a good commercial sound.
I would like to think there is room for it all even though, for some of us diehards, never the twain shall meet!
I still make music the old fashioned and best way. However to use a machine to produce as opposed to reproduce music is about musicality invention and musicianship.
You only need to hear stuff Isaac has recorded to hear a live feel when he and John have played everything, not at the same time. They have the technology to do everything to make music perfect but can do it without losing the enthusiasm, spontaneity and excitement that others can often only do live. That isn't exactly whats asked but its about using technology to do more than you can do in real time.
So can you programme music, no - you can programme a tune, some feeling and emotion is what makes it music. I do enjoy a lot of stuff that is remixed, Norman Cook sticks ecletic bits of stuff together to make songs that are at least the sum of some really good parts, I still feel its his musicianship that makes him master of the technology rather than the other way about.
If you ever hear someone play the right notes at the right time without involvement or enthusiasm, it is the most dismal way to waste your time.
P.S.
"At what point are we just working the pedals on a pianola?"
I simply don't know......:confused
Pushing the pedals - when we can't be bothered to be musicians any more.
"If you ever hear someone play the right notes at the right time without involvement or enthusiasm, it is the most dismal way to waste your time."
So true Davem; emotions and feelings make the music. This is why I like folk music; the technicality can be dubious but if it comes from the heart.....
rob murray
01-Nov-07, 16:03
I still make music the old fashioned and best way. However to use a machine to produce as opposed to reproduce music is about musicality invention and musicianship.
You only need to hear stuff Isaac has recorded to hear a live feel when he and John have played everything, not at the same time. They have the technology to do everything to make music perfect but can do it without losing the enthusiasm, spontaneity and excitement that others can often only do live. That isn't exactly whats asked but its about using technology to do more than you can do in real time.
So can you programme music, no - you can programme a tune, some feeling and emotion is what makes it music. I do enjoy a lot of stuff that is remixed, Norman Cook sticks ecletic bits of stuff together to make songs that are at least the sum of some really good parts, I still feel its his musicianship that makes him master of the technology rather than the other way about.
If you ever hear someone play the right notes at the right time without involvement or enthusiasm, it is the most dismal way to waste your time.
I think you possibly missed out the key ingrediant here..creative imagination, all the techy toys in the world amount to nothing unless the user is creative, thats the essence of it. ( this has been edited )
Hi Rob that was the invention bit
D
rob murray
01-Nov-07, 16:16
Hi Rob that was the invention bit
D
Aye thats it
The Pepsi Challenge
01-Nov-07, 16:17
Do you notice how some of the other, let's say younger and more regular posters on this board have, so far, refrained from commenting on a subject that genuinely provokes worthy debate? Me neither. Because I've got nothing to add to it. Keep up the good work :)
Chaps,
Here's my take of this well trodden debate.
I remember when I was much younger (with no mortgage, children etc!!!), spending, on an almost monthly basis, to acquire all the latest musical wonder-toys of the day (flashing lights, black mysterious boxes that looked from a science fiction movie . . . you get the picture).
I would haul great racks of kit out into the public domain to strut my stuff with whatever band I happened to be gigging with at the time. And, yes these machines could make very impressive noises. I thought we were bound to be the latest local hit of the moment (just look at the impressive gear, listen to all the impressive sounds, we must be good!!).
But more often than not, the punters just didn't seem to care about all that fancy stuff (at least, not in a way that I was) The odd musician might comment on a little aspect of it.
At the end of the day (finally I come to my point), the musical listener just does not care how music has been produced, be it a scripted, computer generated, super orchestration on a synclavier ("Frank Zappa - Jazz from Hell" anyone - truly repulsive!!) to an old blues delta song recorded in the 1940's.
Its all about personal taste and perception. If you like the sound, if it moves you in some way, all well and good. Who cares how its been created and by what method. Even the computer stuff needs someone to switch the machine on in the first place (is this counted as creativity?):eek:
Chobbersjnr
01-Nov-07, 22:06
I was swatting up on drum parts when I played with The Daintees & I listened to Long Hard Road (Salutation Road) & thought "how programmed does that sound" & then was listening to Boat To Bolivia (Boat To Bolivia) & thought "how well is the drummer playing that"
On discussion with Martin I discovered that LHR was played & BTB had been programmed.....................so there
it doesn't remove some of what's been said though in so far that virtual bass, guitar, keys, male & female vocals, orchestras & full kit set ups can be programmed to play parts even with "improvising" capabilities & some of this stuff is very real sounding & if it hadn't of been for the fact I knew I was listening to a demo of said technology I would've had no clue
I have a computer based system running protools but mentally I try to treat it (as much as possible) like a tape environment where trying to get things in a take & getting them to sound right in the 1st place is primary to try & cut down on "fixing in the mix". In the full knowledge that one is in a non destructive platform the pressure is off should one need to "splice" bits in & out, it does generate an extreme amount of respect for people like Phil Spector, Joe Meek, George Martin, Les Paul etc etc to name but 4 greats who pioneered production in the early days of technology re: studioland
I am constantly finding things out from old school sources that are making wondrous differences to my studio mindset & way of working
drawing the line is hard in the face of sooooooooooooooooooooo many different ways of doing one thing alone. After time on one system you get to know what works for what etc etc & cut the choices down for mixdown. At the end of the day as Deemac said the listener doesn't really know or 90% of the time care what went on behind the scenes of Joe Bloggs' platinum selling album & sometimes it's hard to tell whether it's human or machine
Not only has technology come on to a ludicrous extent but the world of music has gone technique crazy look at Terry Bozzio, Neil Peart & Billy Cobham to name but 3 drummers alone that can literally sound like a machine, the chops are that fast & precise. Neil Peart in particular I would put up against pretty much any drum machine
anyhoo I kind of lost the point. It all comes down to how you feel about a piece of music whether it's played or computer programmed you don't think about it if you don't know. Certainly some of it is obviously programmed & yes sounds soulless but soom of it is very good at fooling the learned lug into thinking the player is great on that track when in actual fact it's all zeros & ones
I'm off to my world of analog toys (valve compressor to be exact into a revox B77:cool:)
roblovesplastic
02-Nov-07, 00:52
.. would be to get reason and some audio recording hardware. Unless its just a recording you want then go to pro tools or a mac, or both.
More easy methods involve Reason/Cubase/Recycle/Acid/SF.
and some kick ass hardware.
Im running all my USB powered devices from this laptop, lol, and it works.
woohoo, improvise.
Phoebus_Apollo
02-Nov-07, 00:55
"Frank Zappa - Jazz from Hell" anyone - truly repulsive!!)
I disagree this album showcased some of Zappas most amazing compositional feats - "Night School" is still stunning...what musician can play constant 64th notes without his/her fingers wilting?
I disagree this album showcased some of Zappas most amazing compositional feats - "Night School" is still stunning...what musician can play constant 64th notes without his/her fingers wilting?
Phoebus, I'm glad you disagree with me. It just confirms my earlier points about personnal perception and taste variations.
Though . . . . . . Excuss me if I miss your point, (I will re-check my Zappa biography) but as far as I'm aware there were no musicians actually playing on "Jazz from Hell". (So there would have been no sore fingers involved). Its all done on a machine - (The afore mentioned super-machine of its day - The Synclavier, Steve Lipson also produced most of Frankie Goes to Hollywood's "Welcome to the Pleasure Dome" & Grace Jones's - Slave to the Rhythm albums etc. on this very same machine - superb!!).
Anyone for a "Fairlight"?:Razz
Phoebus, I'm glad you disagree with me. It just confirms my earlier points about personnal perception and taste variations.
Though . . . . . . Excuss me if I miss your point....
To quote yourself...
I assume you also have a faulty spellchecker!!:Razz
it doesn't remove some of what's been said though in so far that virtual bass, guitar, keys, male & female vocals, orchestras & full kit set ups can be programmed to play parts even with "improvising" capabilities & some of this stuff is very real sounding & if it hadn't of been for the fact I knew I was listening to a demo of said technology I would've had no clue
But don't you find it unnerving knowing the music is being played by a machine? The Japanese made a robot that looked human, artificial skin, human mannerisms and they had to change it, make it more robot like, it scared people.
Chobbersjnr
02-Nov-07, 16:21
But don't you find it unnerving knowing the music is being played by a machine? The Japanese made a robot that looked human, artificial skin, human mannerisms and they had to change it, make it more robot like, it scared people.
I only fynd it uunervving wen I know itsa masheen
back to normal---when I don't know what's involved, I don't think about what was employed to make the music. Although it does freak me out more & more as to just how obsolete the musician is becoming
Jeemag_USA
02-Nov-07, 17:30
Music combines both Science and Art. the processes of understanding timings, sequences and arrangements is mathematics and understanding how that all works together can be attributed to scientific methods or processes. Choosing which style of timing and how to arrange the music to make it sound best comes from creativity. The actual writing of melody and lyrics is artistic. if you just take a classical piece and input it into a program then its not being creative or artistic, its just copying. On the software I use to make my own melodies that I have written on the guitar or bass, I pull up a piano roll feature. I have to understand how the keyboard works and where the notes are before I use it, i can then recreate the melody on the software using an instrument of my choice, that part is kind of scientific but I am using it to display my own artistic creativity. So I don't consider who create good quality music on PC as non-artists, you have to know music before you can make good music, if you have never been taught the basics of music then its very hard to compose a good arrangement. Here is a track that I wrote the melody for on the guitar and bass and then recorded them into FL Studio then used synthesiser bass and other keyboard effects and wrote over my original. This is an example of artistic creativity combined with computer science, thats the way i see it anyway. :Razz
Click this link then press the play button, I made this track on FL Studio Pro XXL
http://www.bebo.com/MusicAlbum.jsp?MusicAlbumId=4957315261&MemberId=2865699387
Bobinovich
02-Nov-07, 17:36
Funky stuff there Jeemag! Influenced by a touch of Jean Michel Jarre if I'm not mistaken. Like it!
Click this link then press the play button, I made this track on FL Studio Pro XXL
http://www.bebo.com/MusicAlbum.jsp?MusicAlbumId=4957315261&MemberId=2865699387
All I get is a sign in page.
Here is a link that should work and bear in mind when listening, this tune has never been anywhere near a violin or a violinist, it was made on a computer.
http://www.graven-images.org.uk/temp/db.mp3
Jeemag_USA
02-Nov-07, 22:05
Funky stuff there Jeemag! Influenced by a touch of Jean Michel Jarre if I'm not mistaken. Like it!
Not really, more influenced by the baggy madchester era, Mondays, Charlatans and anything up to Stereo MC's which kind of influences a lot of my electronic stuff. The more ethereal sounds probably come from me listening to too much Tangerine Dream and Pink Floyd.
Jeemag_USA
02-Nov-07, 22:09
All I get is a sign in page.
Here is a link that should work and bear in mind when listening, this tune has never been anywhere near a violin or a violinist, it was made on a computer.
http://www.graven-images.org.uk/temp/db.mp3 (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://www.graven-images.org.uk/temp/db.mp3)
Sounds like a midi file. The melody sounds great but the drone or bass sounds sound like a computer.
I'll try and get a better link for mine Fred, you shoudln't have to sign in so I must have done something wrong.
Edit: I signed myself out from bebo and still can view the link Fred without signing in, so not sure what happened there, seems Bobinovich could see it. I'll try hosting it somewhere else.
Bobinovich
02-Nov-07, 23:02
I did have to sign into Bebo to listen Jeemag but have an account anyway.
It was more the fading ping-pong sounds bouncing back and forth which led me to think of JMJ - I can't remember a particular album name but I do remember that effect featuring quite a lot in his work.
Jeemag_USA
03-Nov-07, 00:59
Fred I put some up on a myspace account, the one i had listed is the one on the top of the list, a few more shoudl appear by tomorrow.
http://www.myspace.com/midnightmozes
one of you mentioned science and what not, i sort of agreed, but some facts;
i have mild attention disorder so its hard for me to concentrate, i also have a problem with numbers i cant do anything with them, my brain wont process them, hence massive failure in mathimatics. excuese spelling lol
im still a major guitarist at heart im not very good but i try, and i enjoy the music i make.
the past year or so i have gotten back into computer music, i did years ago, and leaened a wee bit in really crappy midi sequencing.
if machine music scares people i dont understand why.
an electric guitar is in essence a machine. as is an acoustic, its a tool. it cannot play without human creativity and input, just as computer music.
drums play right unless the creator programs his own style and beat in his or her mind.
the sequencer cant sequence its delicious eletronic blips and beeps unless the creator inputs them.
same as keybords its a machine, but needs input.
and dragging on, but music is a diverse and deep art, its emotion, its passion.
pulling personal prefernces aside and opinions of produced quality and audince reaction, music in the end is what it means to a sole individual.
i could take some samples (yes i said the dreaded word lol)
say 20 at least. i could make a song, then hand that twnety to the next guy, i can honestly say that the other person would create something equally dynamic and different. it depends on the creator and listener.
thats my honest opinion.
and i have have a habit of coming across aggressive on here so just to clarify i was being nice lol, just throwing my voice in the mix so to speak.
cheers.
The Pepsi Challenge
05-Nov-07, 02:05
Anyone know of any Synclaviers for sale?
Chobbersjnr
05-Nov-07, 02:43
Anyone know of any Synclaviers for sale?
there's a place just south of Halkirk called E' Bay. Try there
an electric guitar is in essence a machine. as is an acoustic, its a tool. it cannot play without human creativity and input, just as computer music.
I remember when telephones had bells in them, then they changed, they took the bell out and put a little tone generator and speaker in instead and when they changed suddenly anyone hearing the phone ring on their favourite soap opera started jumping up to answer their own telephone, they couldn't spot the imitation of a fake.
The other night I had the honour to have the folk poet Marcus Moon (available for weddings and bar mitzvahs) sitting in my kitchen and he kindly let me record one or two of his songs through the built in microphone on my laptop. I've been messing around putting backing tracks to them with the computer, here's one I loved the irony of, three quarters of the quartet is fake.
http://www.graven-images.org.uk/temp/enoch-hammer.mp3
Sell your synclavier Pepsi!!
I thought this was a rather interesting video showing an area of computer generated music editing at its best . . . . .
"Elastic time" anyone? - Enjoy!!:eek:
http://www.sonicstate.com/news/shownews.cfm?newsid=5402
The Pepsi Challenge
07-Nov-07, 11:49
I like it, and it's all very well, but I'd like my next recording to be done with Fatts' reel-to-reel and a couple of his old Sony mics.
I like it, and it's all very well, but I'd like my next recording to be done with Fatts' reel-to-reel and a couple of his old Sony mics.
Released, no doubt, on vinyl only I assume!! (or maybe cassette . . . . . )
Great for that authentic hiss, crakle & pop we all miss and love:Razz
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.