bradr@bartok.Eng.Sun.COM (Brad Rubenstein) (06/08/90)
Music-Research Digest Fri, 1 Jun 90 Volume 5 : Issue 55
Today's Topics:
defending Otto Laske
distribution problems on Music Research Digest
Fruitful Res. areas - jazz & computers
IRCAM in Paris
Mira Balaban (was: Re: Workshop on Artificial inteligence and Music)
Music Editor for X?
Music typsetter for IBM
ravel rides again
The Net, academic world and a mollah
*** Send contributions to Music-Research@uk.ac.oxford.prg
*** Send administrative requests to Music-Research-Request
*** Overseas users should reverse UK addresses and give gateway if necessary
*** e.g. Music-Research@prg.oxford.ac.uk
*** or Music-Research%prg.oxford.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
*** Back issues, index, etc.: send "help" in a message to archive-server
*** @uk.ac.oxford.prg (in the UK) or @bartok.sun.com (elsewhere)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 May 90 18:22:31 PDT
From: Stephen Smoliar <smoliar@edu.isi.vaxa>
Subject: defending Otto Laske
To: Music-Research@prg
Message-ID: <9005300122.AA14557@vaxa.isi.edu>
Ray Lauzzana has decided to speak out against those of us who have had some
rather negative things to say about Otto Laske. Unfortunately, he really did
not say very much; and I, for one, would appreciate it if he would elaborate
on his remarks. He calls Laske's contributions "outstanding" but neglects to
say what is so outstanding about them. They could, of course, be outstanding
simply by virtue of the QUANTITY of his output; but since Ray describes
himself as an "artist" (among other things), I am sure he knows better than
to confuse quantity with quality. He talks about Laske's work being "clearly
valuable" and a "clear contribution" to our field. Well, Ray, if it's all so
clear to you, why have we been doing so much arguing about the matter? If you
are implying that anyone who does NOT see the clarity in what Laske has to say
is too stupid to be part of this field, then I, for one, am insulted.
Believe me, I am not "dazzled" by mere artifacts on the computer age. I feel
very strongly about both making and listening to music, and I do not think that
ANY aspect of computer technology is going to provide an instant solution to
the problems associated with understanding such forms of behavior. I am
certainly willing to confess that my concerns are psychological in nature;
but I think psychology has not served our curiosity very well, which is why
I hope that cognitive science will do better. Nevertheless, I feel that
Laske's grasp of both the theory and practice of cognitive science leaves
much to be desired.
I think Ray will find that those of us who have been on Otto's case are not
averse to any insights offered by your friends Barthes, Eco, and Derrida.
On the other hand, there is no substitute for getting down and dirty with
some LISP code. Otto may talk a good game with computers, but he should
know that he is not putting anything over on anyone who has programmed one.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 29 May 90 13:04:05 PDT
From: Brad Rubenstein <bradr@com.sun.eng>
Subject: distribution problems on Music Research Digest
To: tmp_mus_fwd@com.sun.eng.bartok
Message-ID: <9005292004.AA09761@bartok.Eng.Sun.COM>
There is a mail loop somewhere in my distribution list for Music
Research Digest, which caused many folks to receive multiple copies.
This loop may be quite difficult to find, so please be patient. Additional
digests are being held back until we find the loop.
If you are a postmaster and receive "multiple hops" error mail, please
feel free to send me a copy.
Brad Rubenstein
[ This does not affect Digests being mailed directly from Oxford to readers
in the UK. - S. ]
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 12:19:43 SET
From: Francesco Giomi <CONSERVA@IT.CNR.FI.IFIIDG>
Subject: Fruitful Res. areas - jazz & computers
To: Music Digest Bulletin <MUSIC-RESEARCH@prg>
About Computer Generated Jazz:
Since 1986 we have started the development of a software package
for generation and study of jazz music (be-bop style) at the Musicological
Department of CNUCE, Conservatory of Music in Florence.
Some references are available in the proceedings of ICMC 88 (Koln)
and ICMC 86.
However a complete article entitled
Francesco Giomi, Marco Ligabue
"Computational Generation and Study of Jazz Music"
concerning the project is forthcoming in INTERFACE.
(The issue would be wholly devoted to this topic).
Some sound examples realized with the program are included
in the record "Computer Music" edited by Edipan (PAN PRC S20-54).
For information contact:
Francesco Giomi
Divisione Musicologica CNUCE/C.N.R.
Conservatorio di Musica
P.zza belle Arti, 2
I-50122 Firenze
e-mail: CONSERVA@IFIIDG.bitnet
Acknowledge-To: <CONSERVA@IFIIDG.FI.CNR.IT>
------------------------------
Date: 30 May 90 16:33:51 GMT
From: Richard Friedman <rchrd%well@com.apple>
Subject: IRCAM in Paris
To: music-research@prg
Message-ID: <18228@well.sf.ca.us>
Does anyone know the email path to IRCAM in Paris?
[ I have addressed mail in the past to ircam@uucp - which leads me to
believe that they can be reached through one of the standard uucp
gateways, e.g. mcsun (European gateway). - S ]
------------------------------
Date: 31 May 90 02:09:38 GMT
From: fai to leung <gaia%portia.stanford.edu%shelby@gov.nasa.arc.eos>
Subject: Mira Balaban (was: Re: Workshop on Artificial inteligence and Music)
To: music-research@prg
Message-ID: <1990May31.020938.13816@portia.Stanford.EDU>
In article <843@artsnet.UUCP> mgresham@artsnet.UUCP (Mark Gresham) writes:
>I would say it is more likely that the existence of this community
>entails the *assumption* of the existence of musical semantics.
>(like a Flat-Earth Society assuming the that the earth is flat).
>The myth, then, is more persuasive it seems, and any other
>possibility hasn't been under close examination for very long; the
>assumption of semantics has been around much longer than the
>contrary notion.
Regarding the existence of musical semantics (ie yes/no question),
I will truely appreciate reasoning beyond claims from the perspectives
of Round-Earth Society's satellites. On the other hand, I admit
that the details of meaning assignments, or associations, are much
more difficult and really a branch of study. (Katharine Ellis's translation
of Nattiez in last year's Music Analysis seems to be a good summary.)
>Then, by golly, we'll
>have to do a double-take and look at language itself again, too. It
>may not be what we thought it was.
The marriage with language study might not be a bad idea. There have been
fine computing ideas and models on parsing (Earley, Kay, Tomita, Blank);
grammar (Woods, Pereira & Warren); or memory (Schank, Minsky, Sowa)...
ie, good shoulders to stand on. No? Suggestions?
------------------------------
Date: 28 May 90 12:48:42 GMT
From: "timothy.j.thompson" <tjt%cbnewsh%att@edu.berkeley.ucbvax>
Subject: Music Editor for X?
To: music-research@prg
Message-ID: <1990May28.124842.27109@cbnewsh.att.com>
>From article <1042@cluster.cs.su.oz>, by danny@minnie.cs.su.OZ.AU (Daniel James Yee):
>
> Does anyone know of a visual music editor running under X?
If you're satisfied with a piano-roll representation of music, Keynote
is such an editor. It includes an integrated awk-like music language
that allows anyone to extend the operations of the editor (in fact, the
entire user interface of the editor is written in Keynote). Send me your
postal address and I'll send a complete description.
...Tim Thompson...tjt@twitch.att.com...
------------------------------
Date: 30 May 90 06:30:32 GMT
From: Darwin Roberts <darwinr%jacobs.cs.orst.edu@edu.orst.cs>
Subject: Music typsetter for IBM
To: music-research@prg
Message-ID: <18598@orstcs.CS.ORST.EDU>
I know this subject has probably been discussed much here before, but I'm
looking for a music typesetting program for an PC clone. It's for a
friend, and he does not have MIDI, and getting it's probably not feasible
right now. Being able to integrate text and music is a requirement;
I don't know if this means a TEX-like program, or if there are any
graphical ones available, they might be easier (he's pretty stupid with
computers :-). VGA graphics, mouse, PS/2 model 70 (?), non-PostScript
printer (DeskJet). A program running under Unix might be possible also,
if there is nothing for MS-DOS.
Thanks for any help; please e-mail responses because I'm sure this is
a much-hashed upon subject.
Darwin
------------------------------
Date: 29 May 90 20:56:55 GMT
From: James Binkley <jrb%shamu%orca.wv.tek.com%zephyr.ens.tek.com%ogicse%uwm.edu%zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu%usc@edu.ucsd>
Subject: ravel rides again
To: music-research@prg
Message-ID: <6159@shamu.WV.TEK.COM>
A number of years ago, I decided to try and create a jazz
based improvisation system. As a result I ended up first
creating a music programming language that runs on the IBM-pc(mpu 401)
called Ravel. Ravel is a C-like interpreted programming language
that supports MIDI actions in the language. The
main thing is that it is concurrent. It is also modular and supports
an import/export mechanism for encapsulation.
There is a jazz guitarist and jazz teacher named Jerry Hahn.
He has a set of books out now (Mel Bay no less) that contain
a rule-based system for jazz improvisation that he came up
with over many years of teaching. I felt that it was extremely
close to being totally algorithmic (but not quite naturally)
and decided to use his rule base and my model.
The current jazz improv program basically has that rule set coded up.
The structure of the program is that there is a user i/f that
has some runtime parameters that can be changed by the user. Basically
there are four players (a quartet),
drummer
bassist
lead
piano
The drummer is fairly primitive and is not using anything I can
be proud of in terms of algorithms. The piano player basically
plays the chords on the beat (and can jam using a different ruleset
that is based on various harmonization principles, but I wouldn't
rate it too high, poor to bad). The bass player and the
lead both use the Jerry Hahn rule set. The base player uses it to
a lesser extent. One of the user i/f parameters you can change is
a percent of various time durations for notes; e.g, half, quarter,
jazz eighths, that sort of thing. The lead player is a much
better improviser than I am, but that may not be saying a whole
lot. It could be better; it's not bad though.
There is a set of known chords and known scales. It can be added to.
It's just kept in arrays as symbolic constants at the moment.
A piece is an intro + a chord sequence which is looped on forever.
The main thing about the system is that it is useful to me as
a vehicle for studying improvisation. I can jam with it. The bass
and piano alone are enough to improvise with. The bass player doesn't
suffer from lack of variety.
On the down side: It could stand much work in the area of theme and
variation. The drummer arena could stand some real work. (I need more
cpu too...). The piano player is a hack but...
It's fun.
Ravel as a programming language system is now in the public domain
as of May 15, 1990. If you want more information, please send U.S. mail to:
Jim Binkley
5814 SW Taylor
Portland, Oregon 97221.
It's free but free with a catch. There is about 370 pages of documentation
at this point + 3 disks of tools + music source. It costs $22.30
to get the manual xeroxed (latest round at Kinko's).
I am asking slightly more to cover the rest of the materials.
If you get a copy, you can distribute it locally. Again
write me for details.
Jim Binkley
jrb@jove.cs.pdx.edu
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 31 May 90 12:12:11 GMT
From: Bernard Bel <BEL@EARN.FRMOP11>
Subject: The Net, academic world and a mollah
To: music-research@prg
Response to a few of Handelman's statements dated 22 May on MRD
by Bernard Bel
ANARCHISTIC FIRING:
Since I have become (once again) the target of Handelman's paranoia I
feel compelled to respond to a few points that have implications
beyond his comments of the attitudes he is projecting on people. I am
not a well-educated upper-lip-stiff gentleman, mainly because I was
born on the wrong side of the English Channel. My blood starts
boiling when I read or hear nonsense. Mind you, I am nevertheless
still reading the MRD. I am glad the editor managed to sort it into
different files, one of which is bound to contain literature
(including the present message) for which we have special networks
like the "Minitel" here -- an improvement on traditional graffiti.
Now let me play Handleman's game of "anarchistic firing" for a while.
I am really sorry to assault a person seeking "the real
discussion" just because of my poor understanding of American English.
I bought an extended dictionary since then. Also because of my
language difficulty I did not see a trace of music-theoretical
discussion in his (cynical) comment of an excerpt of the draft which I
had given to Otto Laske during his visit in Marseille. I don't think
there was anything worth discussing in my paper, which I consider a
(poor) attempt to summarize various opinions. Still I answered E.H's
remarks and attempted to supply some of the missing information.
Never mind, I have a paper soon appearing in Interface (Vol.19, No 2-
3), which I am sure Handleman will enjoy cutting into pieces.
I am impressed to read that some people "make a living on throwing
conferences". I have no doubt that all University teachers/lecturers
in North America are filling their swimming pools with green notes,
while free thinkers may need to survive by selling peanuts on the
Princeton campus. In spite of this I can state that belonging to the
academic world in the UK or in France is hardly better a job than
being a primary school teacher, and certainly less than being, say, a
policeman. Europe has another particularity: if you are part of the
blessed elite it is wise not to attract jealous attention with too
many publications, and not to disturb the establishment itself
pretending to organize conferences that cost a lot of money for which
you spend a hell of time looking for grants and various supports. My
own institution (which has no particular interest in music research)
only kindly tolerates that I work with the MAI organisers -- using my
home computer and E-mail box.
By the way, Handleman's sudden loss of interest in conferences
deserves a brief comment. In 1988 he was invited to read a paper in
Marseille. The conference was not yet MY conference, I was just
peeping through the door, yet long enough to notice that the man in
search for "real" and "music-theoretical" discussions did not show up
except the day he gave his lecture and another day he was invited to
drink champagne (plus presumably the day he was supposed to cash the
money these fools paid to speakers and composers). (Footnote:
Handleman's enlighting contribution to music theory in the 1988 MAI is
available to French readers in the Acts published by MY colleagues.)
Now, the last blow: Handleman's anti-establishment discourse, and
the tone of most of his statements ("I don't want...I want...I
want..." etc.) reminds me altogether of the TV shows of French
extreme-right wing leader Jean Marie Le Pen, and of the speach of a
fundamentalist mollah I heard in India last Winter. Not that I
presume any of these two men might share E.H's ideas. But their
technique is the same: open your big mouth, and all kinds of petty-
minded frustrated bastards will applause and follow you in a crusade
against dullards, boobies (thanks for extending my vocabulary!), and
intellectuals with hypocrit smiles and manners. When I see Le Pen I
generally zap to the next channel, and for the same reason I walked
out of the Imambara. Yet, whether E.H. likes it or not, I do not wish
to unsuscribe from HIS (pardon, the MRD) net.
NOW, RESEARCH-RELATED TOPICS:
I am interested in many discussions on the MRD, even though, like many
subscribers, I do not have the time (and inspiration, experience,
etc.) to write contributions that might be useful to the discussion.
For example, the argumentation between Laske and Smoliar, regarding
rule-based versus model-based composition, seems important to me
because I have had the opportunity to investigate (and, to some
extent, implement) some concepts of (model-based) composition (in the
field of Indian musicology) and those of a group of Western composers
who deliberately operate from rules and abstract models. Even though
I believe (from my musician colleagues' experience) that there is more
scope in rule-based composition, e.g. for the design of "mind-blowing"
music software, I see no reason for discarding or cutting down
Smoliar's argumentation. << Firing at Steve: ... not even that he is
part of the "decaying academic society", still attending conferences,
being polite and old-fashioned to the extent of writing a (very well
argumented) paper for the MAI (pardon, MY) conference, etc.>>
Any serious researcher in computer science (not a hacker fooling
around with Lisp music programs, score editors, Bol Processors, etc.)
would strongly advocate a discussion of systems before they are
implemented. This is an essential step in any project, often the
longest and hardest one. In my lab we usually pass on implementation
jobs (to students) only once the assumptions of models and the
limitations of their computer implementation have been fully
understood. In the same time I agree with E.H, Charles Ames and
others, that a final evaluation must be based on non-trivial results
achieved by working programs. Laske himself supported this view in
his comment of Ames' presentation in the first AI & music workshop.
Clearly, the person formalizing a model, the person doing the
implementation work, and the one using it (for composing real music)
need not be the same. Ames is doing well in the three tasks, that's
exceptional. Yet for instance his credo that "backtracking is one of
the most powerful of AI techniques" reveals to me that he is less
aware that part of the research work in AI programming languages is
mainly focussing on unification -- see for instance advanced versions
of Prolog (II and III in Colmerauer's team).
One thing I find disappointing on this net is that there are many
individual contributions but teams are rarely mentioned. This leads
me to question how many teams are involving musicians, specialists of
theoretical computer science, programmers, and humanists. (May be
these have been introduced before I suscribed.) If ideas were
discussed by interdisciplinary teams we would not waste almost 10
pages of print-outs on an issue confusing semantics and semiotics...
------------------------------
"... that knowledge may not be used as a courtesan, for pleasure and
vanity only, or as a bond-woman, to acquire and gain to her master's
use; but as a spouse, for generation, fruit, and comfort." (F. Bacon
in 'Of the Advancement of Learning', The First Book, V.11.)
------------------------------
End of Music-Research Digest
--
---Brad Rubenstein-----Sun Microsystems Inc.-----bradr@sun.com---