Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music

[David Santamauro]

Hi,

On Thu, 17 Mar 2011 11:02:59 -0400
Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> At first, I wasn't really interested in this thread… however, it's
> now gotten quite interesting.

Same here ...

> > This is intellectually interesting but the question is not "who
> > deserves to create good music?" but rather "who wants to listen to
> > music made by someone that does not practice?" and who wants to
> > listen to music played by a computer? [...] Are we one day going to
> > only listen to robots playing music?
> 
> This, I believe, cuts to the central problem of our time, at least
> with respect to "classical" or "concert" music: What is the correct
> (i.e., relevant and necessary) role of live music performance, and
> how should it be presented? In other words, why do we always use the
> word "listen", when -- at least in live performance -- we are almost
> necessarily WATCHING music being played?

exactly. Going to a concert to watch a loud speaker simply won't fly --
at least not with me.

> 
> > Art conveys emotions which are the one thing that make us human and
> > thus should be played by human.
> 
> 1. I don't believe that "emotions are the one thing that make us
> human". But that's fodder for another thread…  :) 2. I believe that
> one day "fairly soon" computers -- in forms robotic and otherwise --
> will be able to generate (i.e., "play") music which is either
> *actually* as emotionally rich as human performers, or at the very
> least the difference will be indistinguishable for the majority of
> audience members. But I also believe that it will be a great while
> longer before *watching* a robot (or audio speaker) will be as
> compelling as watching a human performer.

This day has more-or-less arrived. Whether we like it or not, most of
the music we hear in our daily lives, e.g., radio spots, commercials,
tv-shows and ever-increasingly, major motion pictures are filled with
music generated by computers, albeit mostly through samples generated
by humans, but nevertheless, they are rendered by a computer.

> 
> > One thing that comes to mind is that I don't want to arrive at a
> > point where musician will be teaching computers to play instead of
> > learning to play themselves.
> 
> I hate to break the news, but we're already at that point -- as
> evidenced by this thread.  =)

One thing a robot, or any type of computer generated music will never
replace is the simple gratification of actually playing -- from a
players perspective. Some may think having a bunch of people getting
together and pulling out their robots for a musical social hour fun,
but I don't and won't for the foreseeable future. This isn't because I
don't think it wouldn't sound nice -- it would, and to be honest with
my rusty skills (and usually too much wine before the music making
begins) it would probably sound better, but for me, physically making
music with other humans is an extremely powerful feeling.

... but that's me. As evidenced by computer gaming, the notion of
social interaction with a computer has long since been upon us.

I understand also from a composer/arranger/orchestrator perspective
that computers are an invaluable aspect of my every-day life. I
couldn't conceive of mastering all the instruments I write for besides
understanding fundamental technique, ranges and articulations (at the
least).

But we should always understand that these are tools. As
someone else in this thread mentioned, without humans, the computer (or
robot) would rust in the corner. 

David


-- 
"What is full of redundancy or formula is predictably boring. What is
free of all structure or discipline is randomly boring. In between lies
art." -- David Siu