Different variations from the same material?

Ok!

Here are two short clips (around 2 minutes or less, each) of an idea I had:

www.nikolas-sideris.com/AGS/var1.mp3

www.nikolas-sideris.com/AGS/var2.mp3

The idea is that you listen and answer a few questions (not musically aimed really):

1. What is the key tonality of the piece? (ok kidding! scrap that!)

1. Do you feel these 2 tracks are different in some ways?

2. Do you feel that there is a change of dynamics and general tention?

3. Would you be interested in having a small software which would allow you to guide, somewhat the music you listen, real time, so as to be able to produce yourself such results as the above? Controls would be the easiest possible, and not aimed at musicians only.

4. Any comments are most welcome.

To explain a bit. These are messed up clips from a track that was posted a while back, called "intmusic1". The edits (the 2 variations that is, that are posted here), were done in literally 10 minutes, to try out this whole idea. In the program of course the edits will be of course, much more ellaborate.

Thank you for your time,

Nikolas

Taken as a whole, they don't seem all that distinct to me. They both have that "music school sound". You know what I mean? Granted there is different material in both but they're still the same color to my ears.

At last! Someone replied! :D Thanks

Yes, the idea is that they come from the same piece (which is posted in here, somewhere). The user, controlls some elements, so each time the result is different with some different things coming out more. With these edits, I didn't expect to create 2 completely different pieces, but 2 pieces, coming from the same material pretty much, that varry in dynamics, and tention. "mood" in the most general sense of the word, but certainly the piece has it's own mood on it's own.

Thanks for listening and for posting :)

1. Yes, although you can definately tell they're from the same material.

2. Yes, definately.

3. I think this is a cool idea

Are you thinking of making this program? If so, I think you would get more replies if you change the topic title...

Second one seemed a little more tragic, other than that nearly identical in feeling, degree of tension, etc. The first one was less .... tangent? If that's that word... The second was more .... adventurous, inquisitive, curious, mysterious. Doesn't really make sense, I know, but I think that's what I find. It's hard considering I thought they almost the same. It didn't hear a vast difference in tension, but I had this feeling.

By the way, it did have a tonality, it was ever-changing. It wasn't entirely atonal most of the time, but it had a firm basis in both tone- and atonality from what I felt.

Such a program would take a user's input and translate it to a musical picture? Sounds intriguing, but an idea that would burn out/lose interest shortly after becoming immensely popular. Just like my attempt at translating the English language into coherent, logical thematic material. Lost interest quickly eventhough is was a credible idea. Your idea, presuming I'm understanding you correct, would have a considerable, notable allure, like a novelty program. :P Would be cool. "Hey what do I sound like in music?" "Let's find out!"

I'm not exactly sure how this would work, though. You'd have to tell me a little more.

Just one person's take. ;)

If I'm understanding the purpose of this correctly, then you could hook it up to a bio-feedback machine and have the music respond to your unconcious mind!!

Thanks Musicman :).

Yes I didn't expect to get vastly different variations, but what you describe is pretty much spot on for me.

On what the program will do, I'm really really sorry, but can't say anything more. Certainly I won't be pluging cables to your brains. ;) As an idea I've no idea where it could lead, and if it would become amazingly popular (but hey! why not! :D) or whatever, but it is for my PhD, as part of a bit of research I'm doing (on my own for now, until I can prove a bit better that it does work), so... yeah. that's all!

Thanks for listening and posting :)

Question 1 and 2: I felt the second piece was more elaborated than the first piece. I like MusicMan's response. It is almost like you said one statement, then thought about it and then repeated it a second time with more explanation. Almost like you were afraid that you'll be misunderstood the first time and was compelled to make your case. There are parts very closely related of course, but I liked the second piece a tad more.

Question 3: No, I'm sorry, I wouldn't want a program like that. I have enough programs as it is and am able to write, make edits and produce the type of results needed. I understand you're being somewhat reserved about what your program can do, but it reminds me of a program one of my peers in the masters program was using. He would put in various variables (like what type of intervals can be used, what type of voicing and what type of meter) and the program would "assist" writing the music. He'd make changes and such and he loved this program. He tried to get me to use it, but it didn't feel like writing music to me. It felt like using "band in a box" for composition.

I'm not saying your program does this, but from the description it sounds like you can make edits to the music quickly and musical knowledge isn't even needed.

"...and not aimed at musicians only."

It is my opinion we already have enough programs out there that cater to the non-musicians so they can create music. I might be jumping on my soapbox here, but I feel that to be a good, unique and valued composer... you must know at least something about music. I guess a good barrometer would be this:

Take away all of the fancy tools and just leave a pencil and manuscript. Can the person still write music?

Why am I making such a fuss about this? Because it affects me professionally, along with all of my peers as professional composers. I've seen developers turn down qualified musicians because a buddy knows how to paint in cool sounding loops in Acid. The music being cranked out is often unoriginal and made up of components that are way overheard.

Again, I mean no offense and wish you the best of luck....I just don't like programs that "write" the music for you. If your program doesn't do this, I'm sorry to ramble on. If it does, then I suggest you change it. Just my two cents.

Nathan, your 2 cents are rather off.

I'm also a professional composer, aged 30, with a family to feed, etc. I'm finishing my PhD, so as you can realise, the last thing I want to do is see another band in a box program like the rubbish out there.

This program has nothing to do with composing music.

It's more like... adaptive or interactive music.

Now to your 1/2 replies: All the material are coming from a piece called "int music 1", which can be found here: http://www.youngcomposers.com/forum/int-music-string-quartet-7456.html

So, it was to be expected that the 2 variations would be rather close. I just picked certain parts for the 1st and other parts for the 2nd variation. That's all. In a very fast edit, to try it out and see if they are really different or not. I do find them different myself, but can't be the judge to that.

"not aimed at musicians": I've posted the exact same thread to other coding forums as well, so it's no surprise that I incluided that. The program will be aimed at the audience and that audience doesn't need to know music. So the questions are rather ellementary, but do cover what I want to hear/read/see.

Thanks for listening and for ranting to something we agree on! :D

Nikolas,

If I've misunderstood you, then I apologize. Your description of your program is vague, which I understand because you want to protect it until it is released. Your statement about not being aimed at musicians just made it seem like it *might* be one of those programs where no musical knowledge or talent is needed.

Please don't jump on my case because I clearly stated several times in the previous post that I don't know what your program does exactly and that if I'm off the mark I apologize. I admit, I probably went too far into my rant about software and such that claim to make it possible to "write musicial masterpieces with no musical knowledge!"

Back to your sample pieces- they are alike and different at the same time.

Hopefully this has cleared some things up and again, no offense was meant.

Thanks,

Nate

Just that I'm with you and agree completely that those programs are... rubbish. ;)

I'm fine man :) Take care (I have seen your trailers from SOL, btw. Will post at some point :D)

But rant wise, I agree! :D

And I hope no offense was sent to you as well, Nate. Nice to meet you

On ques. 1, yes, I hear a difference.

On Q2, it is hard to put in words what the difference is - I prefer the sound of the 2nd version as it seems more emotional and more satisfying.

On Q3, hmm, is this program something like Finale's HP (which I may eventually master :) ) ? Something that could enrich the sound of computer playback, which is often sterile compared to what real musicians can do with the same notes, might be useful.

Thank :)

On Q3: No it's a simple playback software that can alter somehow the outcome, with a few variables controled from the listener/user. It deals with prerecorded material (as in this case, which is a live recording actually)

I feel there is a difference. The second version seems less dissonant while (I think) preserving the musical idea. This is not necessarily good...No, I can't for the life of me think why someone would want such software--with all deference to those who might use or market it. It might be useful in certain contexts--music for a film, for example, where a slight change, even a random one, in the score might bring a fortuitous improvement in the impact of a scene?

by the way, i wonder if you would be so kind as to comment on the classical mp3 posts at beercanfort.com on the home and music pages?

my original thread was posted yesterday on the 'large orchestral' forum. thanks.