Algorithmic composition - style mimic
-
- KVRAF
- 2310 posts since 13 Apr, 2008 from Germany
"As far as a "humanizer", I've never seen one that works, in this after-the-fact scenario. I think there are reasons for this. I think it's fascinating... "
How many humans have you seen doing better?
I think more and more "creativity" is a kind of illusion - one we like too much to give it up.
With music I always ask myself why people like certain types of music and why not. I guess no one really likes for instance Bach when he listens to it the very first time and without being told how great that is - without being socialized to it.
How many humans have you seen doing better?
I think more and more "creativity" is a kind of illusion - one we like too much to give it up.
With music I always ask myself why people like certain types of music and why not. I guess no one really likes for instance Bach when he listens to it the very first time and without being told how great that is - without being socialized to it.
Best regards, TiUser
...and keep on jamming...
...and keep on jamming...
-
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 350 posts since 11 May, 2008
I like very much the Finale 2009 Humanizer.
I insert my scores, I give them some touch here and there with the ornaments or glissandi, or other stuff, and then chose the play styles (baroque style, pop, contemporary, jazz, etc), and I feel the interpretation being pretty human. It doesn't sound square at all. I would say many of my scores played by humans wouldn't sound much better.
Also in Logic, the randomizer in tempo helps a lot. Making a swing within 120 for instance, that each quarter-second the tempo is fluctuating and putting the rallentandos in the right spot you can sound well. 116-123-119-121-118-122...
Am I demanding too little?
When I hear my own pieces they seem very realistic.
Http://myspace.com/tiagovideira
check out the Chemical Vodka. That version is all played by computer. And I can live happily with that.
I insert my scores, I give them some touch here and there with the ornaments or glissandi, or other stuff, and then chose the play styles (baroque style, pop, contemporary, jazz, etc), and I feel the interpretation being pretty human. It doesn't sound square at all. I would say many of my scores played by humans wouldn't sound much better.
Also in Logic, the randomizer in tempo helps a lot. Making a swing within 120 for instance, that each quarter-second the tempo is fluctuating and putting the rallentandos in the right spot you can sound well. 116-123-119-121-118-122...
Am I demanding too little?
When I hear my own pieces they seem very realistic.
Http://myspace.com/tiagovideira
check out the Chemical Vodka. That version is all played by computer. And I can live happily with that.
Play fair and square!
-
- KVRAF
- 2310 posts since 13 Apr, 2008 from Germany
Well, music is a lot about show too I believe. If it were just about more or less perfect music - maybe we soon need computers to listen to that too to find out what's worth listening to... 
The problem with all things in life is that if you try to make them too perfect you will not gain back most of the effort to get there. I know too well that's not satisfying - but probably the bitter truth.
The problem with all things in life is that if you try to make them too perfect you will not gain back most of the effort to get there. I know too well that's not satisfying - but probably the bitter truth.
Best regards, TiUser
...and keep on jamming...
...and keep on jamming...
-
- KVRist
- 441 posts since 30 Apr, 2007
Why would you guess that? Some people are genuinely fascinated by the polyphonic textures. Then again, some of us thought math class was fun.TiUser wrote:With music I always ask myself why people like certain types of music and why not. I guess no one really likes for instance Bach when he listens to it the very first time and without being told how great that is - without being socialized to it.
- KVRAF
- 26033 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I'm going to reply to that rhetorical question with my own rhetorical answer:TiUser wrote:"As far as a "humanizer", I've never seen one that works, in this after-the-fact scenario. I think there are reasons for this. I think it's fascinating... "
How many humans have you seen doing better?
I don't think we live on the same planet.
-
- KVRAF
- 2310 posts since 13 Apr, 2008 from Germany
I was just about the first time... appetite can grow while eating... but exceptions always prove the rule as well...Nystul wrote:Why would you guess that? Some people are genuinely fascinated by the polyphonic textures. Then again, some of us thought math class was fun.TiUser wrote:With music I always ask myself why people like certain types of music and why not. I guess no one really likes for instance Bach when he listens to it the very first time and without being told how great that is - without being socialized to it.
In addition I am fascinated by these things too (Bach & Math) but I would not necessarily say I like it or that fascination implies that one likes it...
Best regards, TiUser
...and keep on jamming...
...and keep on jamming...
-
- KVRAF
- 2310 posts since 13 Apr, 2008 from Germany
Physically we do, metaphorically probably not. Finally everyone lives somehow on it's own "planet", doesn't he? But that's ok, maybe even necessary...jancivil wrote:I don't think we live on the same planet.
Best regards, TiUser
...and keep on jamming...
...and keep on jamming...
- KVRAF
- 2249 posts since 10 Apr, 2002 from Saint Germain en Laye, France
