Creative Computing – Major Project, Semester One, 2008
Program Note:
Forced Unity – an automated improvisation piece that morphs between two source motifs.David J Dowling
5 ‘ 42
This piece is the result of a computer program that plays through sequences of a pre programmed starting pattern (musical phrase) consisting of note values, rhythm values and dynamic values, and slowly mutates the pattern until it becomes a designated target pattern (also pre programmed). The aim was to have the morphing process sound similar to an improvising jazz duo of drums and electric piano. Upon reaching the target pattern, the piano will play through it four times unaccompanied after which the process reverses and begins to morph back to the starting pattern.
Musical consistency has been achieved by including banks of pitch information (relevant to the current pattern being played and morphed) and rhythmically stable note duration combinations, either of which can be called upon at any time as an alternative to the relevant current patterns. The choices of these are weighted and controlled, avoiding too many clunky stops or crazy fast breaks when the piece is really grooving.
The fact that the program controls both main instruments simultaneously allows for some complex and interesting ‘break’ or ‘fill’ sequences that would be very difficult (if not impossible) for an improvising human duo to anticipate. The consistent drum loop that is present throughout provides a solid foundation for the piano to play over, ensuring that no matter how obscure its timing becomes, it will usually be heard to make sense in the context of the tempo.
A bank of musical and obscure samples is also drawn upon at the start of most sequences to break up the timbre of the instruments a little. There is also a combination saw wave and pink noise synthesiser playing sweeping tones from the key to provide a subtle bed of ambience. These are fed through varying delay and reverb lines to avoid repetition.
Click here to link to online folder containing SC Code files, MP3 audio of the performance and all documentation.
References:
Haines, Christian. "Creative Computing - Major Project." Project undertaken and supervised at the Electronic Music Unit, University of Adelaide, May 1st to the 25th of June, 2008.
Audio Arts – Major Project Semester One, 2008
Part 1 – The Shaolin AfroNaughts:
It needs more CowBell...The first of my recordings went relatively smoothly. I was a little rusty and hadn’t given myself sufficient time to set up, but it caused no major loss to our recording period. The first issue to arise was a ring in the snare, which sent alarm bells off for me immediately, as I remember how I struggled (and largely failed) to remove such a ring from last year’s effort. A couple of sheets over the snare fixed that, and set me up for a long session of equalising to breathe life into its newfound dullness that would stop just short of killing me. Nevertheless, all other instruments captured very well, the band sounds great and I’m sure they’ll appreciate my efforts.
Click here to link to online folder containing pre/post production and recording documentation, extra photos for this session and MP3’s of the mastered tracks.
Part 2 – Jazz Wind Quintet:
Just remember, if you vote Liberal...or Labor (even by accident through preferences) you're dead!This was an incredibly different recording experience. The way I set up the group (in a long line of isolated booths, kind of like election day) did compromise their performance somewhat. However, the separation did achieve its desired end, and many of the rhythmic discrepancies it caused due to instrumentalists not being able to see the current conductor have been repaired as a result. The cost to me was a considerable amount of time.
I feel I have done a reasonable job of capturing the character of each instrument present from the brass family. I would have loved a few more U-87 mics though (the NT5’s on the trumpets sound a bit thin by comparison). Either way, managing a session like this was a steep learning curve (the dynamic range of these instruments is huge), and I’m glad to have reached the other side relatively unscathed.
Click here to link to online folder containing pre/post production and recording documentation, extra photos for this session and MP3’s of the mastered tracks.
Reference:Grice, David. 2008. “Audio Arts Major Project.” Project undertaken and supervised at the Electronic Music Unit (EMU), University of Adelaide, 12th of May to the 26th of June 2008.
Forum – Week 12 – Scratching (2)
Hi Grandma..
Writing an entry about today’s session feels unusually repetitive. There was certainly some overlap of content due to its improvised nature. Stephen is hardly to blame but I wonder how much incentive there is for postgraduate students to make presentations to our forums. Nevertheless the second instalment of scratching study was entertaining. I’m not sure if scratch notation serves more purpose than writing traditional rhythm slashes on the correct record line would. It sounded open to interpretation – not that there’s anything wrong with that, but rhythm slashes may provide the same guide in this circumstance and if so, why come up with a new system?
Looking at Chris Cunningham’s work was refreshing, even if it was the second time. I feel that much of this music and media would better serve components of Elder's music theory/history subjects that explore post classical/romantic styles. The way these subjects stubbornly cling to a period between 1940 and 1960 for most of their content in presenting ‘new music’, a period dominated by pompous, tediously methodical, and musically uninspiring composers is absurd. Much interesting music has been made since those awful years and we must seek ways to incorporate it into academic study.
Reference:
Whittington, Stephen. “Forum – Week 12 – Scratching (2).” Workshop presented at EMU space, level 5, Schultz building, University of Adelaide, 5th of June 2008.
