 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 387 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614242 Today 11 Topics 127550 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think this is the main logical characteristic of the group of music named "idm". I mean that it has the highest amount of DPI (dots per inch) so to speak. There are all sorts of various artistic possibilities, but this is the main characteristic. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you mean over produced? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
what aspect of "intelligent dance music" is measured in "dots per music" it seems you're trying to measure a scalar of the audio spectrum with an area measurement. high resolution of "idm" would depend on the sampling frequency, if i'm not mistaken. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
if that isn't clear, i've competely misinterpreted the theorem. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
First, I just think of "idm" as an arbitrary name, like "paflanfiduff". I was more interested in looking at specific example of things that seem to be in this group than paying attention to the lexicon of "intelligent dance music" (which is generally accepted as a dumb name, but you can't stop memes from spreading and this is what everyone has agreed to call it.) What I basically mean is that there are more combinations possible with IDM. In tic tac toe, there are a few enough number of possible combinations of moves that every single possibility can be mapped out and instructed into a logical algorithm so that a computing machine can always know the best out of ALL possible moves. This is the metaphor for normal music I guess. But in chess there are so many combinations (there are still a specific amount but there are much more) that the best strategy for a computer is to use is a heuristic. This is like that dumb name, IDM. It comes down to what boundaries you think of to define the units you're thinking about. You can talk about the molecular vibrations, but you can also think about an individual drum hit or something. Thinking the latter way, idm taxonomy has a greater number of drum (etc) units that can thus be composed in an exponentially greater number of ways. This is just one way to think about it. You can argue that you can slow down the tempo of an idm song and get more space between the units or whatever. Well if idm isn't what I'm talking about then a "high resolution" genre sounds great to me. Things like crunch's 1, autechre's ep7, and otto's 8000bc would certainly fit in it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
improved dotquantity music? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
pardon my native extraterrestrial dialect. so, in the broadest scope, IDM is more complex than "normal" music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
... ...shyes... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i didn't mean to criticize you or anything. i was just trying to find out what you were getting at. =) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think there is much better music being made by modern jazz musicians, which I have only recently discovered since joining EMusic. Stuff by Nels Cline, Scott Amendola, Vandermark 5, Greg Bendian, etc. has a higher musical resolution even if electronic musicians may have a higher BPM. IDM is damned because most of the artists working the genre are technicians rather than musicians. It's like the difference between an artist who can draw well freehand, and a web artist who just happens to have high technical skills in Photoshop. The Photoshop artist may be more immediately appealing but he is limited by the tools at his disposal, whereas the artist who can work without a computer is limited only by his imagination. There is something to be said for the artist who can incorporate technical innovations into his craft - look at Robert Fripp and how he has elevated synth guitar, for example. But he is a jaw-droppingly good musician even if you handed him nothing but a kazoo, because he has a sense of phrasing and taste that is unparalleled. Similarly in writing, Burroughs could do some amazing things with cutups (the technical analogue being computerized text randomizers). But he could write a hell of a good story (Junky, Queer) before he undertook those techniques. IDM needs to be colonized by more musicians who can actually play instruments in realtime, like Squarepusher. Otherwise it's like the Photoshop artist who starts with a graphic and passes it through one filter after another until the source material is irrelevant. You end up with line noise. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I guess since I only make music on computers (and pretty much only listen to music made on computers) that I'm too hung up on the idea of a composition consisting of individual seperable units. After all each individual sound wav can be seen in it's exact location in relation to the rest of the pattern which is diced so precicely by the computer. I suppose live musicians compositions are limited to combinations of possibilities too, but now the combinations are so vast that it is analogue. I was thinking about the light we recieve from far away stars the other day and realized that even though they are sooooo far away, you can still see the light whether you are standing... here... or a smidge of a step to the right. So light is still analogue even at this distance. There's a guy who would disagree with your comment about imagination (he wrote great stuff about object oriented programming etc here: www.obsolete.com/dug/sorcery ) I agree that a lot of electronic music is stifled in imagination, but crunch, autechre and otto von schirach are some of the few that I'm interested in because their imagination doesn't seem limited at all by computers. More likely it's increased. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well the best electronic music is autechre and some bright wit once said it's good because it sounds like very element of the music is communicating with every other element which is exactly what you get with live jazz because that is exactly what's happening. The usicians are ideally paying attention to what the other musicians are doing and it creates a synergy that takes them to strange new places. The problem with electronic music, or one of the problems, is the limitation of vocabulary. They do simple diatonic melodies like aphex, or they stumble across an interesting synthetic scale, and they stick to it for the length of the track. I mean there's the opposite extreme where the musicians know they should play a mixolydian scale over a particular dominant seventh and it sounds cliched, but a good player can tease your expectations and then do something surprising. But he knows why he's defying your expectations because he knows what they are in the first place. I guess what I'm trying to say is that any programmer can pick up Visual Basic and write some pathetic little gui app, but it takes a tough man to make a tender chicken. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
diatonic= the white piano keys and chromatic= the black and white keys? Well I tried playing "to cure a weakling child's" melody and it sure enough only used white keys. Trying to get rid of the symmetric universal globalization of any one element in a track is one of the main things I'm interested in attempting to do. LIke sequence A can have some reverb effect, but if the whole track does then it gets boring. If every measured sequence of sound changes, then even the constant of change becomes universally symmetrical so you might add a long part that doesn't change just to throw out all constants. All well, music is pointless no matter how you make or understand it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
and pentatonic = black keys |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
No, diatonic = the natural notes of any given major scale, and chromatic = that plus accidentals. So Eb major (a very common scale in jazz tunes) has Bb, Eb, and Ab but it's just a major scale, and any note or chord that uses those notes is considered diatonic to that scale. There are chords that like to have symmetric scales like diminished or whole tone played over the top that have a marginal relationship to the key the piece is in. Sometimes you even modulate to a different key over particular chord degrees, and you can change into those keys using those chords as pivot points. developed an entire vocabulary of chord changes based on the ii-V-I cycle. Few if any electronic musicians know enough about music to do something like that. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i understand what you're saying. liccflii and left blank are perfect examples |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
liccfli is just a retread of acroyear2 but left blank is incredible... sinister tapdancing skeletons. ep7 is their masterpiece. I especially dig rpeg and squeller. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
plaid once said: "Intelligent dance music - in opposite to what?" OMG, the can?t have heard scooter... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
:O scooter! an all time classic!!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
wha? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
>the future scope of what is possible in electronic music will be truely unlimited. now the technology is limiting, like the sounds that can come from a saxophone or whatever. but the future will certainly not only produce richer and eventually a virtually infinite variety of electronic sounds, but imo the richest sounds of all time because physical instruments of course have limitations. to me it's exciting to think what someone like Bach could do with the technology of 50 or 100 or 500 years from now!! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
autechre is nothing like chess as chess has a fixed amount of possible moves and therefore all possible outcomes are computable given enough cpu time. i doubt seriously whether all the cpu time in the world could make music like autechre if left to it's own devices. autechre is more like go. chess is a lot more like tic tac toe than you realise... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I don't know about this stuff other than what I read other people write. In "the pattern on the stone" W. Daniel hillis said "In a typical midgame chess position, a player has about 36 potential legal moves, each of which leads to 36 possible responses by the opponent. Since the average chess game lasts for more than eighty moves, the computer would have to search something on the order of 10 to the 124th power possibilities. Such a search could not be accomplished by the fastest modern computers in hundreds of years. The problem is that the possible lines of play grow exponentially with the number of moves; it is thus impractical to look more than about 5 moves ahead- which is why computers use heuristics (instead of algorithms) in chess such as: 1.estimate the relative strength of each player's position by counting the number of pieces of each type remaining on the board 2. move so as to put yourself in the strongest possible position a few moves in the future. 3. expect your opponent to adopt a strategy similar to your own. This author does in fact mention "go" where humans still reign as champs because the 19 by 19 board affords far more possible moves. (this book was like the inspiration for this thread... :)) On the other hand, the author built a computer for the algorithm of tic tac toe out of tinker toys. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Where did you hear about the game "go" in relation to this topic though? It must be a popular example. Was it the book I'm reading (the pattern on the stone)? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Thread quality: 91.79% |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
=) there should be an automated counter at the top of the thread which does that |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
fleetmouse > i agree with you about the photoshop / handdrawing artist allusion! maybe when we have more tools (i.e. more software and hardware, always more sophisticated, for music) we tend to use more of them but don't get as "deep" with them individually as if we would if we had only one or a few... (sorry for the bad english -_-; ) though after reading your first comment i would have thought ep7 was a very good example of "photoshop"-music... maybe i just didn't get it : / maybe it's just, they limited themselves to the noisy ep7 @#&'s they used for that reason, to get more deep with them.. pomme de terre > 91.79%? wait... yahaaa! kyaaaa~ guzu! baka baka! pilili pilili, guzu!!! w00t!!! h4x0rl4m30fdsgfd8g4fd!!!! dot per idiocyyy!! liki-maki-doki, gyaaa~ mwhahahaaaaa!!! hiiiihiihihiihi haaaaa!! tee hee.... yakagamabake!!! ...there! how much % has it lost now? i'll be trying to make a round number ; ) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
If you play chess with the rule that says the game ends in a draw after 3 similar moves then there's a finite number of legal chess games. Basically a chess program will try all possible legal moves with a breadth first search algorithm for let's say 5 consecutive moves, quantitavely evalutate both sides and choose the move that will optimize this criterion ( it may look obscure but it's not very intelligent , no learning involved, no real long term strategy... ). For the game of go it's totally different and much more complex: first the number of games is infinite and there's no obvious way to evaluate the 'quality' of a move unless you consider different scales of topological patterns ( connections of the stones ). For the moment humans are better at dealing with those concepts than the silicon chips and that's why computers suck at playing go. Then I agree with G_Kaplan, autechre is more go than chess because of the different scales of patterns they put in their tracks. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Tap dancing skeletons! Awesome! Although you probably just ruined the track for me because that's all I'll be able to think about when I hear it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Because I am a neurotic fuck, I noticed that in the link "what is go" at that site, the picture of a go board has only an 18 by 18 grid, while it says at the top that it is 19 by 19... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i play it. the grid is based on the intersections of the lines not the squares. the lines indicate possible 'liberties' for the pieces (even though the pieces do not actually move around the board the game is based on freedom and territory.) you should check it, it takes about half an hour to learn how to play.. and it's much better to play than chess. you really get into each others heads in a way similar to deep conversation. try it. if u like board games like chess and backgammon you'll probably like it. there's a go association in america run by a company called samarkand who sell good books. boards and stones are expensive but easy to represent cheaply. its nicer playing it on a good board with good stones though. the sizes are pretty exact and the way you handle the stones (kind of between 2 fingers) gives it all a lush elegance. it's my board game of choice by about a million miles. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
thanks thats really well put :) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's some serious chat : ) have you seen the film Pie (as in the mathematical sign) is that the game you are discussing ? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
aw i fuckin hate that film. biggest load of wrongmath i've ever seen.. terrible.. maybe not bad if u dont realise what a load of bollocks the premise is.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
