What is the difference between music and noise? [years-dead slappyfight revived]
-
- KVRAF
- 16977 posts since 23 Jun, 2010 from north of London ON
Noise?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us_0EZrg ... re=related
To a car nut like me this is 'music' to my ears...to someone else this is just plain ol' noise...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Us_0EZrg ... re=related
To a car nut like me this is 'music' to my ears...to someone else this is just plain ol' noise...
Barry
If a billion people believe a stupid thing it is still a stupid thing
If a billion people believe a stupid thing it is still a stupid thing
-
fateamenabletochange fateamenabletochange https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=8029
- KVRAF
- 3059 posts since 13 Jul, 2003 from outer rim
vurt wrote:
I coined the term 'performer-noise-music' to describe my most radical approaches to generative composition. When planning my intellectual modules, I often find that informing a somewhat electroacoustic array of musical juxtapositions helps a great deal. In short, the rhythm must never contextualise the sound. My aim is simple - to juxtapose all structured electronic-riffs, whilst simultaneously (and ambiguously) premiering the idea of 'apparent-movement-hemiolas'. My work aims to seek actively-pre-recorded possibilities with technologically-ultra-Romantic resonances whilst exploring certain elements or rational ensembles. I spent the bulk of my composition degree contrastingly writing extended module-music, a most rewarding (if critical) pursuit.
my overall aesthetic is that of the 'dynamically-psycho-gestural' school of melodic tetrachords. One of my most atonal influences is the concept of modulating 12-tone tessituras, which recreates my non-linearity and causes my sound to become somewhat percussive. My piece is the only one of its kind, due in part to the inclusion of highly-literal orchestration-modulations, with a hint of so-called 'colour-challenges'. As a highly conceptual composer, I explore the connection between substances and counterpoints, and search for new ways to 'deconstruct the art'. Working heterophonically means that my focus is always additively-based, and never rhythmic. My aim is simple - to create all dramatic pro-discontinuous-synchronisations, whilst simultaneously (and pro-electronically) creating the idea of 'professional-polyphony-challenges'.
As a rather contrasting composer, I yearn to perceive, and compose improvisatorily-dramatic conflicts, an approach that features prominently in my recent radical works. My work is, in short, a re-imagining of the 'post-War-noises' school of contemporary 'modulation-notion' composition. My work aims to allow radically-post-Webern synergies with similarly-octatonic linearities whilst composing certain awarenesses or ultra-resonant solos. To influence is a natural desire, but my current compositional activity seeks to cultivate all tessituras. It also challenges and rejects intellectually-random continuity-pitches. To put it concisely, the poly-cognitive forms of any given oscillation must never clash with the ultimately literal endeavour of developing frameworks wherever possible. Combining improvisations, semitones and reactions (as well as solitarily allowing), my overall aesthetic is that of the 'choreographically-transformative' school of sub-heterophonic gestures.
To put it concisely, the modernistic forms of any given riff must never clash with the ultimately tonal endeavour of dismissing themes wherever possible. I have found that diametric systems, in combination with musical perceptions enable me to similarly dominate brand-new procedures in a highly resonant and extremely resonant way. My goal, in essence, is to abandon musical passages. As a rather diametric composer, I yearn to perform, and interpret acoustically-virtuosic meanings, an approach that features prominently in my recent 12-tone works. When planning my sub-creative performances, I often find that visualising a somewhat pro-orchestral array of musical challenges helps a great deal. I never generate phrases, despite the fact that any performer or tetrachord can be, and has been interpreted as a rather pro-fragmentarily-pseudo-resonant set of 'tritone-fundamentals'.
i hope that helps
Absolutely brilliant vurt, you have surpassed yourself.
I think the technical term for this is 'driviling'. Tis a rare skill to be able to do it 'on demand'.
yes, I'm sure it helps
wonder what your speil would do in google translator...you could try translating it back and forth and see if you can bring the internet down
-
- KVRer
- 10 posts since 14 Sep, 2014
Music is noise with a purpose.
- Beware the Quoth
- 33175 posts since 4 Sep, 2001 from R'lyeh Oceanic Amusement Park and Funfair
That's not how you spell 'porpoise'. And anyway dolphins have more analog heat shimmer.
my other modular synth is a bugbrand
-
- Banned
- 2033 posts since 19 Jun, 2011 from a world of Black Thunder chocs
What is the difference between music and noise?
m/n; u/o; c/e
Plus, music is this (and noise isn't):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdwdd4h1NYo
m/n; u/o; c/e
Plus, music is this (and noise isn't):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vdwdd4h1NYo
-
thecontrolcentre thecontrolcentre https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=76240
- KVRAF
- 35171 posts since 27 Jul, 2005 from the wilds of wanny
- KVRAF
- 10255 posts since 7 Sep, 2006 from Roseville, CA
The difference is that "The Art of Music" would be a stupid name for a band.
Logic Pro | PolyBrute | MatrixBrute | MiniFreak | Prophet 6 | Trigon 6 | OB-6 | Rev2 | Pro 3 | SE-1X | Polar TI2 | Blofeld | RYTMmk2 | Digitone | Syntakt | Digitakt | Integra-7
- KVRAF
- 12555 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
BTW, the difference between music and noise is officially the amount of data encoded that can be extracted by the listener.
The key difference is that music has very little data encoded within it, while some forms of noise are packed with near the maximum concentration of data.
Key to this is the fact that most listeners are capable of decoding the data contained in music, whilst incapable of extracting any meaning from noise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KaOrSuWZeM
The key difference is that music has very little data encoded within it, while some forms of noise are packed with near the maximum concentration of data.
Key to this is the fact that most listeners are capable of decoding the data contained in music, whilst incapable of extracting any meaning from noise.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KaOrSuWZeM
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
-
- Banned
- 454 posts since 30 Apr, 2013
Except that there is no 'data' in noise, it's just random, thus contains no information, no meaningful structure, Which is what 'data' is, and what music is - rhythm, harmonies, melodies, etc. - that's meaning, that's information. It can be more complicated and less complicated, more or less organized (according to rules) - that's what they're studying in music academies, you know.aciddose wrote:BTW, the difference between music and noise is officially the amount of data encoded that can be extracted by the listener.
The key difference is that music has very little data encoded within it, while some forms of noise are packed with near the maximum concentration of data.
Key to this is the fact that most listeners are capable of decoding the data contained in music, whilst incapable of extracting any meaning from noise.
While in noise there is no organized complexity, no structure, no meaning. And if there is any, it's not musical meaning.
I.e., you guys are talking if there's any difference between order and chaos, and aciddose is saying that chaos is more ordered than order, while order itself is just... meh.
- KVRAF
- 12555 posts since 7 Dec, 2004
Incorrect. Noise is not random at all, but the result of something you didn't know happened having happened and therefore producing that result. That's called determinism. Unless you want to go all the way down to quantum physics, you can't escape it. Even then hidden variables are the best answer to these issues.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole ... on_paradox
You need to understand that your mind is simply incapable of resolving the information encoded in this signal. This proves nothing however and it is critical that you accept the fact without capability to decode the data you lack the ability to make any statement about the signal whatsoever, apart from statistical observations.
If you had any experience in cryptography and signal processing you might understand as I do, in a sort of intuitive way, that all signals carry data. A system in a state of maximum entropy carries the maximum amount of data. Low entropy systems carry less data.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole ... on_paradox
You need to understand that your mind is simply incapable of resolving the information encoded in this signal. This proves nothing however and it is critical that you accept the fact without capability to decode the data you lack the ability to make any statement about the signal whatsoever, apart from statistical observations.
If you had any experience in cryptography and signal processing you might understand as I do, in a sort of intuitive way, that all signals carry data. A system in a state of maximum entropy carries the maximum amount of data. Low entropy systems carry less data.
Free plug-ins for Windows, MacOS and Linux. Xhip Synthesizer v8.0 and Xhip Effects Bundle v6.7.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.
The coder's credo: We believe our work is neither clever nor difficult; it is done because we thought it would be easy.
Work less; get more done.