Taking inspiration from a joke from some time ago, I decided to try something out. I will try to be concise (given the subject matter ;-)). First of all, this is an attempt that I am proposing to you in order to verify its common sense. I thought about basing this "type" of music on some principles that could make it identifiable in some way. For example: -a zm must always derive from an existing track, which represents its expanded version (uzm) -a zm must represent what the author considers to be the essential musical ideas of the uzm -it must not necessarily be possible to deduce a zm's uzm through a procedure -a zm must avoid redundancies (although this does not necessarily mean eliminating repetitions) -a zm must be a musical object and not a mathematical or other type of object...
For now, I would stop here. If this interests you, there is certainly material for debate :-).
well, first of all thanks as usual for the attention
Frank, what do you mean/propose (because this is obviously a point of interest)?
Faria, yes, the piece results in being shorter (in this case by about 4 times) even if it might not be the length itself that is the discriminant (part of compression algorithms, for example, do not "reduce" in the true sense, but as a first step they "transform")
Apropos of the starting piece: it is a good thing that you didn't recognize it, since it is an unpublished piece of mine
Regarding the starting track: it's a good thing your father didn't recognize it, since it is an unpublished track of mine
I imagine you proposed to us the compression of an existing track; it would be nice to hear the starting one for the necessary considerations. For now, what I have listened to is the track; if it is the compression of another (the purpose of the topic), then I would also like to hear the decompressed one... to be blunt, either you pass me the original or you put me in a position to unzip it
I imagine you have proposed the compression of an existing track to us; it would be nice to hear the starting one for the necessary considerations. For now, what I have listened to is the track, if it is the compression of another (the purpose of the topic), then I would also like to hear the uncompressed one... to be clear, either you pass me the original or you put me in a position to perform the unzip
obviously it's just that the original is the track for the next workshop due shortly, so as soon as possible I will upload it.
what could be interesting is the creation of a zip starting from well-known tracks. I started with mine for convenience and also because having done it recently, I knew the structure without having to start analyzing it....
If someone feels up to it, a workshop of this type could also be proposed, obviously after having shared the basic principles and rules
only that the original is the piece for the next workshop due shortly
You know, I don't know why, but didn't I have this feeling? I am curious to follow the workshop and see how you managed the thematic material; just wait and see, because in the zip version some traces remained
Frank, what do you mean/propose (because the matter is obviously a point of interest)?
For now I am not proposing anything, but I would like to understand how you related to the pauses (more or less long). I ask you this because they have the same value as notes; therefore, while a "synthesis" (meant as compression) of sound might be more intuitive, a synthesis of silence might be less so. I wouldn't want, for example, the spacing/structuring of a Webern piece to become a "melody" for me, I don't know if I made the idea clear.
You know, I don't know why, but did I have this feeling? I am curious to follow the workshop and see how you handled the thematic material; watch out because in the zip version some traces remained.
in effect, in the zip version, I start from the end of the original piece, which in turn is a reworking of the initial theme (which in turn is an elaboration of the given theme - but this time much more "standard" than those I am used to). Therefore, I believe that somehow the brain, even unconsciously, "recovers" it.
Frank wrote:
For now I am not proposing anything, but I would like to understand how you related to the pauses (more or less long). I ask you this because they have the same value as notes, so while a "synthesis" (meant as compression) of sound might be more intuitive, a synthesis of silence might be less so. I wouldn't want, for example, the puncturing of a Webern piece to become a "melody" for me; I don't know if I made my point.
I imagined you meant something like that. In the first instance, I consider pauses on equal footing with notes, so for example, if there is an augmentation of a phrase, these are altered in the same way. The problem can arise during reordering: if I reorder the notes, they still maintain their own identity; by reordering the pauses, they do not. This is one of the reasons why, as you may have noticed, I made extensive use of percussion
X
Xenakis
Member
Reply 11 by Xenakis
Posts
287
It seems to me that Frank has put his finger on one of the wounds; I don't want to be wrong, but I have the impression that the tempo is an acceleration of the original, technically I think it's obvious: "size" (of the starting file in a digital context) towards length (of the starting piece in a musical context)... But music is an art that unfolds in time; altering the tempo factor has strong impacts from a perceptual point of view. For me, the product of this operation is a new piece in the sense that, having to preserve (the result) a musical sense (and hopefully artistic content), the final result will be on one hand a processing but on the other hand it will be so invasive as to classify its result not so much as a transition or arrangement... but precisely (perhaps) as a standalone piece.
It seems to me that Frank has put his finger on one of the wounds; I don't want to be wrong, but I have the impression that the tempo is an acceleration of the original, technically I think it's obvious: "size" (of the starting file in a digital context) towards length (of the starting piece in a musical context)... But music is an art that unfolds in time; altering the tempo factor has strong impacts from the standpoint of perception. For me, the product of this operation is a new piece in the sense that, having to preserve (the result) a musical sense (and hopefully artistic content), the final result will be on one hand a processing but on the other hand it will be so invasive as to classify the result not so much as a transition or arrangement... but precisely (perhaps) as a standalone piece.
exactly! what I meant in the previously stated principles is precisely that a zm must somehow preserve its own identity and must not simply be a surrogate for something else (not that it is required to be unzippable :-))
But as I was also saying previously, it is not strictly necessary for it to be shorter. And brevity is not anyway attributable to temporal compression, understood as acceleration: in the zipwaltz, the tempo is in fact even slower than the original, even if perhaps overall it gives you the opposite impression; furthermore, in the zipwaltz there are notes that extend over several measures (hence the need to use wind instruments).
I find it very important that you highlighted the aspect of identity and autonomy; I would add it among the basic criteria
I'll give you another idea Bianca, in case there is some text, have you already given it some thought?
PS
Since the piece you proposed serves only as a starting point for the discussion, if you want, the thread can be moved to the Composition section. Let me know. Maybe I can "dare" (I've never done it) a link
I'll give you another idea Bianca, in case there is some text, have you already given it some thought?
PS
Since the piece you proposed serves only as a starting point for the discussion, if desired, the thread can be moved to the Composition section. Let me know. Maybe I can "dare" (I've never done it) a link
a proposito del testo non ho ancora in mente nulla, ma sarebbe interessante trovare qualche soluzione.
Per me va benissimo spostare la discussione, magari si può fare più interessante... infatti il mio è solo uno spunto...
