Look out Jenn
ScottW
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_writethru
ScottW
MiNe 109
<80397619-fee5-4da4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> A replacement is in development.
>
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_writethru
If that's the Honda featured alongside Leonard Slatkin in Detroit on CBS
this morning, she has nothing to worry about.
Stephen
Clyde Slick
>
> ScottW
Next step, 110 robots comprising the orchestra
After that, a 3,000 robot audience.
The restroom attendants will still remain human.
Jenn
Nah, he has no legato...
ScottW
> In article
> <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,> >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr...
>
> > ScottW
>
> Nah, he has no legato...
Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
ScottW
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
You and GOIA should hook up. You apparently both belief that music
requires no human interface and no emotion... LOL!
ScottW
Human interface, like a GUI?
Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
And it won't be long before machines will be able to emulate
emotion till you can't tell the difference.
George is so predictable an Atari can emulate him.
ScottW
Jenn
<9bdebaa0-b82d-49ea...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Well, enjoy that music.
Jenn
<baf40b03-046d-42a5...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 15, 9:50 am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> <artygu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 15, 11:35 am, ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 15, 12:06 am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > In article
> > > > <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > A replacement is in development.
> >
> > > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr..
> > > > >.
> >
> > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > Nah, he has no legato...
> >
> > > Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
> >
> > You and GOIA should hook up. You apparently both belief that music
> > requires no human interface and no emotion... LOL!
>
> Human interface, like a GUI?
> Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
lol
Clyde Slick
Scott:
> > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> lol-
there is ONLY ONE correct version of Beethoven's 7th
]You can throw the rest away!
Clyde Slick
> In article
Scott:
> > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> lol-
ACCURACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
>
>
>
>
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 15, 9:50 am, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > <artygu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 15, 11:35 am, ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On May 15, 12:06 am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > A replacement is in development.
>
> > > > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr..
> > > > > >.
>
> > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > Nah, he has no legato...
>
> > > > Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
>
> > > You and GOIA should hook up. You apparently both belief that music
> > > requires no human interface and no emotion... LOL!
>
> > Human interface, like a GUI?
> > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> lol
;-)
Jenn
<54e5b881-31c0-4cf7...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Clyde Slick <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Cool. Let me know which one that is and why.
Jenn
<9700f51b-b977-4b7c...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
Clyde Slick <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
How so?
ScottW
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 15, 12:06 am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > A replacement is in development.
>
> > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr...
>
> > > > ScottW
>
> > > Nah, he has no legato...
>
> > Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
>
> Well, enjoy that music.
Millions do every day.
So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
ScottW
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
There is more to conducting than the performance. The rehearsals play
into it as well. I recall hearing an LP that had the conductor
(Walter? Furtwangler?) leading the orchestra during a rehearsal and
explaining how he wanted it done. Jenn can surely talk about this with
more expertise than I can, but to think that an orchestra performance
could be replicated by a robot is purely imbecilic.
Next up from 2pid: how robots can produce great works of literature.
Lol LoL lOl LOL!
Clyde Slick
> Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 15 Mai, 17:06, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <baf40b03-046d-42a5-8bd0-d4723ad09...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Scott:
> > > > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > > > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> > > lol-
>
> > there is ONLY ONE correct version of Beethoven's 7th
> > ]You can throw the rest away!
>
> Cool. Let me know which one that is and why.
I can't
The bots haven't got to that one yet
Clyde Slick
"Mimic" is the operative word.
Clyde Slick
>
> - Afişare text în citat -
We cn always elect a robot president, given that
the robot is at least 35 years old and manufactured in the U.S.
Clyde Slick
> Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 15 Mai, 17:06, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
>
> > Scott:
> > > > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > > > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> > > lol-
>
> > ACCURACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> How so?
Simple!!!!
Build a machine to input the orchestra sound
and convert it to output in formn of a score, then compare that score
to the original.
We can call the machine a RHC, a robot to human converter.
I'm gonna feel very, very guilty if someone actually tries this.
LOL!!!!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> We cn always elect a robot president, given that
> the robot is at least 35 years old and manufactured in the U.S.
LOL!
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
GOIA has tried something similar to this. His "trumpets" sound like
"kazoos" though.
Jenn
<2b28731c-7c2b-4ef7...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Clyde Slick <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I see.
Jenn
<d3944363-370e-40e8...@t54g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 15, 2:05 pm, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <9bdebaa0-b82d-49ea-81f2-e87c20faa...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 15, 12:06 am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > A replacement is in development.
> >
> > > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr..
> > > > >.
> >
> > > > > ScottW
> >
> > > > Nah, he has no legato...
> >
> > > Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
> >
> > Well, enjoy that music.
>
> Millions do every day.
How so?
> So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
Matter of opinion. There's one of your problems.
> If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
Clyde Slick
> Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 15 Mai, 17:06, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
>
> > Scott:
> > > > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > > > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> > > lol-
>
> > ACCURACY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> How so?
Thick as a brick
Clyde Slick
> Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15 Mai, 20:08, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <54e5b881-31c0-4cf7-9aae-900657693...@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
> > > Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On 15 Mai, 17:06, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <baf40b03-046d-42a5-8bd0-d4723ad09...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > Scott:
> > > > > > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > > > > > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> > > > > lol-
>
> > > > there is ONLY ONE correct version of Beethoven's 7th
> > > > ]You can throw the rest away!
>
> > > Cool. Let me know which one that is and why.
>
> > I can't
> > The bots haven't got to that one yet
>
>
Thiock as a brick
Clyde Slick
> Clyde Slick <Mr.clydesl...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On 15 Mai, 17:06, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <baf40b03-046d-42a5-8bd0-d4723ad09...@b9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > Scott:
> > > > Anyway, you're stupid comments aside it does not require
> > > > and human emotion to replicate music, only to create.
>
> > > lol-
>
> > there is ONLY ONE correct version of Beethoven's 7th
> > ]You can throw the rest away!
>
> Cool. Let me know which one that is and why.
Thick as a brick
ScottW
That would be reproduce, once again your inability to comprehend the
topic is limited. Robotic reproduction of literature happens every
day.
ScottW
ScottW
>
>
>
>
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 15, 2:05 pm, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <9bdebaa0-b82d-49ea-81f2-e87c20faa...@v26g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On May 15, 12:06 am, Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <80397619-fee5-4da4-81fd-79b74627b...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > A replacement is in development.
>
> > > > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_en_mu/robot_conductor1st_ld_wr..
> > > > > >.
>
> > > > > > ScottW
>
> > > > > Nah, he has no legato...
>
> > > > Simple subroutine. This is just a matter of time.
>
> > > Well, enjoy that music.
>
> > Millions do every day.
>
> How so?
How many drum tracks in pop music don't have a drummer
but a programmer?
>
> > So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
>
> Matter of opinion. There's one of your problems.
Not important, pick one, never mind we'll have the robot
mimic you.
>
> > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
>
> I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
ScottW
MiNe 109
<0a3e166c-236c-44e3...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
It's not about the arm-waving.
> > > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> > > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
> >
> > I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
>
> Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
>
> We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
> as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
We don't need robot conductors, but in the interest of providing an
actually interesting topic let's take a look here:
http://web.media.mit.edu/~joep/SpectrumWeb/SpectrumX.html
The page is called, "Electronic Music Interfaces." Check out "4) Batons"
and "9) Noncontact Gesture Sensing"
More on the "Sensor Chair":
http://web.media.mit.edu/~joep/SpectrumWeb/captions/Chair.html
These control devices, not humans, but that's one of the points against
a robot conductor.
I searched for an electronic wand that could control tempo and intensity
in performance of a pre-existing synthesizer piece I had seen in a
concert a decade or so ago, but no luck.
This looks cool:
http://bampfa.berkeley.edu/events/education/bigbang/EN0169
"...Professor Edmund Campion will demonstrate real-time interactive
musical applications of computers featuring the CNMAT Max/MSP/Jitter
Depot and the eight channel surround system in the CNMAT Sound
Spatialization Theater."
Stephen
Jenn
<0a3e166c-236c-44e3...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I thought we were talking about conductors.
>
> >
> > > So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
> >
> > Matter of opinion. There's one of your problems.
>
> Not important, pick one, never mind we'll have the robot
> mimic you.
Nope. Posture, subtle muscle movement, eyes, moment to moment
adjustments, facial gestures, human interaction, spontenious expression
based on human experience, etc. You have too narrow a view of what
conductors do in performance.
>
> >
> > > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> > > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
> >
> > I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
>
> Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
>
> We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
> as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
It won't replicate anything except some of the movement involved. See
above.
ScottW
Conductors who are programmed to mimic
other conductors.
>
>
>
> > > > So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
>
> > > Matter of opinion. There's one of your problems.
>
> > Not important, pick one, never mind we'll have the robot
> > mimic you.
>
> Nope. Posture, subtle muscle movement, eyes, moment to moment
> adjustments, facial gestures, human interaction, spontenious expression
> based on human experience, etc. You have too narrow a view of what
> conductors do in performance.
That is what the do in creating a live performance which leads to all
performances being different.
This effort is more in trying to recreate a specific live performance
with live instrumentation. I guess for this to work we need
robot players too. Quite possible.
>
>
>
> > > > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> > > > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
>
> > > I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
>
> > Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
>
> > We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
> > as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> > perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
>
> It won't replicate anything except some of the movement involved. See
> above.
And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
orchestra, that is sufficient.
ScottW
MiNe 109
<808e0e9c-0742-490c...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> orchestra, that is sufficient.
Anyone will do, depending on how generously one defines 'sufficient':
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/05/13/bush-conducts-orchestra/
Stephen
ScottW
> In article
> <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > orchestra, that is sufficient.
>
> Anyone will do,
Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
ScottW
Arny Krueger
news:0a3e166c-236c-44e3...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com
> Do any two performances, even by the same conductor,
> sound the same?
Chances of something as long and complex as an orchestral work sounding the
same = 0.
Even short solo pieces are easy to ABX from performance to performance.
> We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't
> sound the same as the original.
Depends on how you define the origional. If you define the original as
being the electrical signal going into the recorder than the possibilities
of "sounds the same" are good. However the action of microphones and mixing
are easy to pick out in a close listening test.
ScottW
> "ScottW" <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:0a3e166c-236c-44e3...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com
>
> > Do any two performances, even by the same conductor,
> > sound the same?
>
> Chances of something as long and complex as an orchestral work sounding the
> same = 0.
>
> Even short solo pieces are easy to ABX from performance to performance.
>
> > We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't
> > sound the same as the original.
>
> Depends on how you define the origional. If you define the original as
> being the electrical signal going into the recorder than the possibilities
> of "sounds the same" are good.
The original sound.
> However the action of microphones and mixing
> are easy to pick out in a close listening test.
Exactly. So it seems that to recreate the original sound, the best
way is to use the original instruments. The players and conductor
(not really required) appear to be technically replaceable with
automatons.
ScottW
MiNe 109
<b2b9f434-adba-4b57...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
Stephen
ScottW
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
>
> > > Anyone will do,
>
> > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
>
> She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
After a lifetime she still needs training, ouch.
Of course I could say the same for my grandkids.
But with their life being ahead of them it isn't the condemnation
of your thoughtless comment.
ScottW
Jenn
<smcelroy2-ACA89...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
As you know, it's even more than that. The moment to moment things that
conductors (actually, any live performer) do make profound differences
in how the music sounds.
Clyde Slick
. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
>
> ScottW-
Perfection =ACCURACY!!!!
I want accuracy in my Prokofiev
Clyde Slick
In other words====\
COMMUNICATION!!!!
he just doesn't get it
>
> > > > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be opposed
> > > > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
>
> > > I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the same.
>
> > Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
>
> > We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
> > as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> > perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
>
> It won't replicate anything except some of the movement involved. See
> above.- Ascunde citatul -
>
>
at any rate, one wouldn't be hearing the robot,
one would hear the orchestra!!
Clyde Slick
Just like your magazine with ABX tests, it will
have an audience of 1.
"At least" you won't have to put up with an audience coughing!
Clyde Slick
First of all, je meant trraining the orchestra
2nd, there is always something new one can learn.
George M. Middius
Jenn said:
> As you know, it's even more than that. The moment to moment things that
> conductors (actually, any live performer) do make profound differences
> in how the music sounds.
Typical subjectivismistical jabber. No such results, are-supported by
properly-impacted DBt"s, at all Jennn. Thank's Jenn for admitting you hate
scicicncccne Jen.
George M. Middius
Clyde Slick said:
> Perfection =ACCURACY!!!!
> I want accuracy in my Prokofiev
We already know how lax your standards really are.
George M. Middius
Clyde Slick said:
> > It won't replicate anything except some of the movement involved. See
> > above.- Ascunde citatul -
> at any rate, one wouldn't be hearing the robot,
> one would hear the orchestra!!
One can have the best of both if one is willing to undergo certain
procedures.
http://www.whona.com/mm5/graphics/00000001/CYBERMENposter.jpg
Jenn
Which are we talking about: drum synth tracks or conductors?
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > So who is the greatest conductor ever who is passed?
> >
> > > > Matter of opinion. There's one of your problems.
> >
> > > Not important, pick one, never mind we'll have the robot
> > > mimic you.
> >
> > Nope. Posture, subtle muscle movement, eyes, moment to moment
> > adjustments, facial gestures, human interaction, spontenious expression
> > based on human experience, etc. You have too narrow a view of what
> > conductors do in performance.
>
> That is what the do in creating a live performance which leads to all
> performances being different.
Correct...
> This effort is more in trying to recreate a specific live performance
> with live instrumentation. I guess for this to work we need
> robot players too. Quite possible.
See below.
>
>
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > If there was a video of his greatest performance, would you be
> > > > > opposed
> > > > > to a robot mimicking that performance leading a fine orchestra?
> >
> > > > I wouldn't be "opposed" but I guarantee that it wouldn't sound the
> > > > same.
> >
> > > Do any two performances, even by the same conductor, sound the same?
> >
> > > We're talking about replicating. Even a recording won't sound the same
> > > as the original. But if one doesn't accept something short of
> > > perfection and strive to improve, you'll never have anything.
> >
> > It won't replicate anything except some of the movement involved. See
> > above.
>
> And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> orchestra, that is sufficient.
No, it hasn't shown anything of the sort. Scott, this is difficult to
explain in this sort of forum without using A LOT of words, but I'll
give it a try, and hope that it will be of some interest to some people.
The magic of live performance is that it's different every time. Part
of the reason to go to your umpteenth concert of a conductor or pianist
or singer-songwriter doing the same work you've heard them do before is
the hope that the next performance catches the "lightening in a bottle";
an evening that will transcend, that will be life changing. And it's
different every time because of a zillion decisions (conscience and
unconscience) that the performer(s) makes. And those decisions are made
based on so many things, ranging from that's day's activity, to the
performer's love live, to what she ate for breakfast, to the energy of
the audience (or lack thereof), and most importantly, the totality of
that performer's life experience. Further, in the case of conductors,
there are SO many moment to moment reactions that take place between
her/him and the players/singers. Is the 2nd trumpet too loud? too
soft? Dragging or rushing slightly? Is his sound too cool? too hot?
Is the articulation wrong? Too legato? too marcato? too staccato? And
these are examples of ONE player among many in just ONE spot in ONE work.
I had a concert Wednesday evening with my college wind ensemble. The
last two works were illustrative of conductors' influence in the music
making. They were both by the fine living composer Frank Ticheli. The
first of the two was his beautiful setting of the folk tune Shenendoah.
There is a lot of bending and flexing of the pulse in this kind of work,
a technique called "rubato". In this case, I was really feeling a sense
of melancholy and longing at that moment, and my conducting of the work
that evening reflected that. I stretched it more than I ever had at
rehearsal. To make this happen, I had to get the attention of the
players in certain ways. One particular place of stretching, I knew
that it would all depend on the 3 second clarinets, due to a harmonic
situation that only they have (Stephen: a beautiful passing tone from a
dom 7 chord to a maj.9). I had to know exactly what to do physically to
get those 3 players to follow what I was doing... not just any 3
players, but THOSE 3 player with THEIR skills, THEIR way of watching and
reacting, etc. The result of all of this rubato, skillfully carried out
by the players, was a very, very special performance that left people
with tears in their eyes. It was possible because I brought my
humanness that I was feeling at that moment to the music. Those moments
can't be rehearsed.
The other Ticheli work was his "Vesuvius". It's wickedly fast, with 24
time changes in the piece; a real workout. My job in this case is all
about keeping it together. Could a robot mimic me in how and when to
conduct 9/8 as 3+3+3 vs. 2+3+2+2, or 7/8 as 3+4 vs. 4+3? Sure. Would it
know when to trust my trumpet section to do certain things in those
situations and when to pay more careful attention to them, based on my
experience with those players, their response during the worm-up, etc?
I think not.
The HUMAN factor in music making is what makes it art.
Jenn
<64725d88-5df1-4f0b...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>,
Clyde Slick <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
;-)
Jenn
<3f67b17d-03cd-4fc0...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 16, 1:37 pm, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <b2b9f434-adba-4b57-bdef-bdd91d496...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
> >
> > > > Anyone will do,
> >
> > > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
> >
> > She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
>
> After a lifetime she still needs training, ouch.
Good God... 1. He meant my training of the players, I'm sure. 2. OF
COURSE I still train! It's a lifelong quest to get better. I work on
my eartraining every day, for example. I attend workshops every year.
Do you not "train" to keep up with technology in your field?
Jenn
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
> "ScottW" <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0a3e166c-236c-44e3...@l17g2000pri.googlegroups.com
>
> > Do any two performances, even by the same conductor,
> > sound the same?
>
> Chances of something as long and complex as an orchestral work sounding the
> same = 0.
>
> Even short solo pieces are easy to ABX from performance to performance.
So true, but I would take it further. In my teaching of conducting, I
see this all the time: two conductors can give a simple downbeat for
ONE chord, and the two can try to give it exactly the same way, and yet
the sound will be different.
Jenn
<c23d7f22-8699-4a11...@q1g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
ScottW
>
>
>
>
>
> ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On May 16, 1:37 pm, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <b2b9f434-adba-4b57-bdef-bdd91d496...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > > In article
> > > > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
>
> > > > > Anyone will do,
>
> > > > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
>
> > > She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
>
> > After a lifetime she still needs training, ouch.
>
> Good God... 1. He meant my training of the players, I'm sure. 2. OF
> COURSE I still train! It's a lifelong quest to get better.
an athlete at your age would be training to sustain....
> I work on
> my eartraining every day, for example. I attend workshops every year.
> Do you not "train" to keep up with technology in your field?
No, training and studying are very different.
ScottW
Clyde Slick
> In article <3PWdnS_KfrjUd7DVnZ2dnUVZ_r3in...@comcast.com>,
> "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
> > "ScottW" <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
the written language of music is very vague, and open to
interpretation.
meter for any particular designation falls within a range.
for pudness you have, f,ff,fff,ffff, those are the gradations.
the time of a crescendo is interpretative, and so on, and so on, and
so on.
Now , let's talk about 'original intent'
of the composers.
they kneww all this.
It was written with the intent that it would be interpreted by others.
Let's look at early onducting.
Back then, up to maybe 1800 or aq litle late, conducting
duties wer split between maybe 2 or 3 different
people with different roles.
Often, their biases and intents were at odds with each other.
Playing a piece was a raucous affair in itself.
the musicians weren't all too good,
and they had a mind to play it their own way.
Many early calsical msuicians were a bunchg of drunks, anyway.
So, as far as conductors trying to
'control this mess, you would have one guy with a big wooden pole
pounding the meter, and the conductor cueing in the players
and trying to control dynamics
Its a wonder it worked at all.
But the guys writing the music knew it would
be played back this way. they expected liberal interpretation.
It was NOT written with an expectation f being
exactly one way in each detail.
The written language of music does not even allow for that.
Jenn
<00bd7044-caab-46da...@w34g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
Sorry, I'm not going down this Arnyesque road.
Arny Krueger
So it would seem. Some instruments are fairly well replicated by wavetable
synthesis.
Arny Krueger
news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
> As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
How is it any less like traditional live music than listening to a stereo?
Jenn
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
That's not the point, but "at least" most recordings of music of the
type we're writing about have human performers.
Arny Krueger
news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
> In article <x_-dnXr517r7uLPV...@comcast.com>,
> "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
>> "Jenn" <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote in message
>> news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
>>
>>> As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
>>
>> How is it any less like traditional live music than
>> listening to a stereo?
> That's not the point,
Really?
> but "at least" most recordings of
> music of the type we're writing about have human
> performers.
I don't think we are that far from software that can pass the Eliza test for
emotion in music.
Jenn
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
> "Jenn" <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote in message
> news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
> > In article <x_-dnXr517r7uLPV...@comcast.com>,
> > "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Jenn" <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote in message
> >> news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.
> >> net
> >>
> >>> As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
> >>
> >> How is it any less like traditional live music than
> >> listening to a stereo?
>
> > That's not the point,
>
> Really?
Yes. It's a given that listening to a stereo isn't like live music.
>
> > but "at least" most recordings of
> > music of the type we're writing about have human
> > performers.
>
> I don't think we are that far from software that can pass the Eliza test for
> emotion in music.
What's the Eliza test?
Harry Lavo
LOL! If he really knew anything about psychology, he wouldn't hold the Eliza
program up as a "test" for anything?
It was a sophomoric little computer program writen to ask open ended "how do
you feel about that" questions keying on certain response structures.
Nobody would mistake it for a real discussion with a psychiatrist, although
occassionally it would hit upon a sequence of two or three responses that
might pass for 'real".
So now we know Arny holds up random music as his model.....who knew?
MiNe 109
<3f67b17d-03cd-4fc0...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On May 16, 1:37 pm, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <b2b9f434-adba-4b57-bdef-bdd91d496...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
> >
> > > > Anyone will do,
> >
> > > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
> >
> > She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
>
> After a lifetime she still needs training, ouch.
Can you read? She's the one doing the training.
> Of course I could say the same for my grandkids.
> But with their life being ahead of them it isn't the condemnation
> of your thoughtless comment.
Another broken arrow from Scott's quiver.
Stephen
MiNe 109
<jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
et>,
Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article
> <smcelroy2-ACA89...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
> MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <b2b9f434-adba-4b57...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> > ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> > > >
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone will do,
> > >
> > > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
> >
> > She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
> As you know, it's even more than that. The moment to moment things that
> conductors (actually, any live performer) do make profound differences
> in how the music sounds.
Perhaps Scott would enjoy Karajan's late-in-life DVDs whose visual focus
is very much on the conductor.
Or, alternatively, the choral conducting instructional video "What They
See Is What You Get"
Stephen
MiNe 109
<jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
et>,
Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
> > ScottW
>
> As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
http://www.ubu.com/film/ligeti_metro.html
Stephen
MiNe 109
<jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
et>,
Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> What's the Eliza test?
She's Turing's daughter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
Stephen
Jenn
<smcelroy2-6713F...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
Oy! Second place for my worst musical nightmare! The first being
having to play snare in Bolero ;-)
Clyde Slick
>
too many city buses on that street
LOL!!
Clyde Slick
> So it would seem. Some instruments are fairly well replicated by wavetable
> synthesis.-
Can we hear the blare of trumpes right now?
Clyde Slick
>
> news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
>
> > As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
>
> How is it any less like traditional live music than listening to a stereo?
One is a the playback of a recording of human performers
and the other is a live concert by robots.
And I am sure the robots will appreciate the vociferous applause you
will be giving them.
Clyde Slick
> "Jenn" <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote in message
>
> news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <yKSdnQ3CtqP9tLPVnZ2dnUVZ_oWdn...@comcast.com>,
> > "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
> >> "Jenn" <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote in message
> >>news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.net
> >> > In article <x_-dnXr517r7uLPVnZ2dnUVZ_h_in...@comcast.com>,
> >> > "Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote:
>
> >> >> "Jenn" <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote in message
> >> >>news:jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.
> >> >> net
>
> >> >>> As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
>
> >> >> How is it any less like traditional live music than
> >> >> listening to a stereo?
>
> >> > That's not the point,
>
> >> Really?
>
> > Yes. It's a given that listening to a stereo isn't like live music.
>
> >> > but "at least" most recordings of
> >> > music of the type we're writing about have human
> >> > performers.
>
> >> I don't think we are that far from software that can pass the Eliza test
> >> for
> >> emotion in music.
>
> > What's the Eliza test?
>
> LOL! If he really knew anything about psychology, he wouldn't hold the Eliza
> program up as a "test" for anything?
>
> It was a sophomoric little computer program writen to ask open ended "how do
> you feel about that" questions keying on certain response structures.
> Nobody would mistake it for a real discussion with a psychiatrist, although
> occassionally it would hit upon a sequence of two or three responses that
> might pass for 'real".
>
Ah, finally the truth
very perceptive Harry,
Arny has been undergoing intense
psychotherpay for the past 6 years.
The therapist is a software program.
And it works!!!!!
Could hava fooled me!
LOL!!!!
Jenn
<5196c088-abac-4b49...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Clyde Slick <Mr.cly...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Nope, no trumpets there ;-)
MiNe 109
<jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
et>,
Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article
> <smcelroy2-6713F...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
> MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
> > et>,
> > Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > ScottW
> > >
> > > As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
> >
> > http://www.ubu.com/film/ligeti_metro.html
> >
> > Stephen
>
> Oy! Second place for my worst musical nightmare! The first being
> having to play snare in Bolero ;-)
More fun on the trombone, I hope.
For pianists, Vexations.
Stephen
Jenn
<smcelroy2-708FB...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> In article
> <jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
> et>,
> Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > In article
> > <smcelroy2-6713F...@johnf2.biosci.ohio-state.edu>,
> > MiNe 109 <smce...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > In article
> > > <jennconductsREMOVETHIS...@newsclstr03.news.prodigy.n
> > > et>,
> > > Jenn <jennconduct...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > ScottW
> > > >
> > > > As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
> > >
> > > http://www.ubu.com/film/ligeti_metro.html
> > >
> > > Stephen
> >
> > Oy! Second place for my worst musical nightmare! The first being
> > having to play snare in Bolero ;-)
>
> More fun on the trombone, I hope.
Fer sure. Nice solo. Often an audition piece.
>
> For pianists, Vexations.
lol yep
>
> Stephen
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> On May 15, 7:07 pm, "Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
> > Next up from 2pid: how robots can produce great works of literature.
>
> That would be reproduce, once again your inability to comprehend the
> topic is limited. Robotic reproduction of literature happens every
> day.
Is that all conductors do? I'll compromise with you, 2pid.
Next up from 2pid: how robots can interpret great works of literature.
Showing, once again, your inability to think.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> On May 16, 1:37 pm, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <b2b9f434-adba-4b57-bdef-bdd91d496...@q24g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > On May 16, 11:36 am, MiNe 109 <smcelr...@POPaustin.rr.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <808e0e9c-0742-490c-96de-c65f039e4...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > > ScottW <Scott...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > And this demo showed that with a properly rehearsed and trained
> > > > > orchestra, that is sufficient.
>
> > > > Anyone will do,
>
> > > Ouch, our resident conductor is feeling the pain.
>
> > She'll do fine properly rehearsing and training.
>
> After a lifetime she still needs training, ouch.
> But with their life being ahead of them it isn't the condemnation
> of your thoughtless comment.
LOL!
What an imbecile.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> > et>,
> > Jenn <jennconductsREMOVET...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > > > ScottW
>
> > > As I said before, I hope that you enjoy that "music".
>
> >http://www.ubu.com/film/ligeti_metro.html
> Oy! Second place for my worst musical nightmare! The first being
> having to play snare in Bolero ;-)
I couldn't listen to the whole thing. The rich harmonic overtones, the
raw human emotion...
I have tears in my eyes.
ScottW
Weak cop out.
Training is repetitive to develop and improve a skill.
Studying is to acquire knowledge.
I can study guitar without ever playing.
Can I play without training?
ScottW
Arny Krueger
news:q8GdnRsPA8Fbs7PV...@comcast.com
Actually, Eliza was a parody of a Rogerian psychotherapist, as any decent
reference on the topic says.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eliza_effect
Rogerian pyschotherapists responded largely by rephrasing the patient's
comments.
>Nobody would mistake it for a real discussion with a psychiatrist, although
>occassionally it would hit upon a sequence of two or three responses that
>might pass for 'real".
It is well known that the Eliza program was a flawed implementation of a
questionable approach to psychotherapy.
So. I wasn't holding the proposed software up to a very high standard.
A higher standard would be the Turing test.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turing_test
As usual, Harry is imposing his own lack of knowlege and inability to reason
properly on the discussion.
Jenn
<f04ee8fa-958c-4e54...@a9g2000prl.googlegroups.com>,
ScottW <Scot...@hotmail.com> wrote:
No, just a desire to not have a bunch of posts on a silly side "topic".
>
> Training is repetitive to develop and improve a skill.
> Studying is to acquire knowledge.
> I can study guitar without ever playing.
> Can I play without training?
Have you ever heard anyone say, "I'm training on guitar"?
Words have different meanings in different contexts.
And yes, in either context, I still train. And I still study. Every
good classical musician I know never stops doing either.
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
I presume that's precisely the "Arnyesque" road that Jenn referred to.
I know a concert pianist, 2pid. She's played with major orchestras,
recorded, etc. She's 76 years old. She still "trains" eight hours per
day. She also "studies" *and* "trains" at master classes with pianists
that probably even you have heard of. And when she plays with
orchestras, she looks forward to the training and study with various
conductors as well.
She must not be very good if she has to do this at her age, right?
Yes, comparing music to a defensive lineman on a pro football team is
appropriate. LOL!
What an imbecile.
As a side note, 2pid, you seem more bitter and angrier than your usual
angry self recently. Is everything OK?
Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
> >>> I don't think we are that far from software that can
> >>> pass the Eliza test for
> >>> emotion in music.
> As usual, Harry is imposing his own lack of knowlege and inability to reason
> properly on the discussion.
Yes, GOIA, I agree with you: Computers may someday be able to "parody"
human emotion randomly.
Harry was wrong to call you an idiot in this discussion concerning
replacing human musicians with robots. LOL!
George M. Middius
Jenn said:
> > Training is repetitive to develop and improve a skill.
> > Studying is to acquire knowledge.
> > I can study guitar without ever playing.
> > Can I play [guitar]?
The answer to that is, of course, No -- either with or without "training".
Jenn is too polite to comment on your ineptitude in all aspects of music.
> Have you ever heard anyone say, "I'm training on guitar"?
> Words have different meanings in different contexts.
> And yes, in either context, I still train. And I still study. Every
> good classical musician I know never stops doing either.
Scottie goed to skool. Scottie finished skool. Scottie got job. Scottie
have barbecues at house and bail delinquent son out of jail. Scottie not
need more trainings.
Harry Lavo
"Arny Krueger" <ar...@hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:v8KdnVj9nep9lrLV...@comcast.com...
Very funny, Arny. I properly identified the test...from memory...not from
your crutch, Wikopedia. Some of actually acquired knowledge as we went
along...we don't have to "research' every question, Arny. It's called a
"conversation". Eliza is Eliza, as I said a sophomoric little program
mimicing the open-ended questions of a psychiatrist. Without "Wikopedia",
Arny.
Any you think that shows a lack of knowledge, Arny? Obviously you don't
know the difference between real knowledge and "look up".
Arny Krueger
Keep grasping for imaginary forms of superiority Harry. Just because I post
the references doesn't mean that I didn't do it from memory. Also, it was I
that initated the topic, you're just following my lead.
> Some of actually acquired knowledge as we went along...we don't have to
> "research' every question, Arny. It's called a "conversation".
In your case Harry, its all about your wounded ego.
>Eliza is Eliza, as I said a sophomoric little program mimicing the
>open-ended questions of a psychiatrist. Without "Wikopedia", Arny.
As I said Harry, you're talking about an imaginary advantage.
> Any you think that shows a lack of knowledge, Arny? Obviously you don't
> know the difference between real knowledge and "look up".
Dream on, Harry.