Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I've been designing a computer program that largely automates the process of composition for me, and its output has reached a high enough level of quality that I'm going to start sharing some things it has helped me compose. Here's the first significant work I've made with it:

 

Posted

Thank you. : )

To answer your question, I used a graphical programming language designed especially for sound-related programs. It's called Puredata, and it can be quite powerful if used correctly. My program is actually not very complex at all, even though it yields good results if given enough time to generate a song (the more time it has, the better the music it produces generally gets). As far as my background in computer science goes, I have none outside of what I've learned by browsing various websites. I'm self-taught.

Here's another piece. If allowed to carry on running through the cogs and gears of the program, it would get clearer-sounding, no doubt:

 

Posted

Things like this interest me a lot.  Thanks for the reference to Puredata, it almost reminds me of vhdl or pspice simulation programs for electrical engineers.  Does this program output a midi or an mp3?

Posted

You're welcome.

The program outputs WAV files. They're a bit hefty in terms of file size, but they're of higher quality and are recognized by Puredata, unlike MP3s. I would never dream of working with MIDI, because it doesn't give me anything approaching full control over the timbre. Timbre is hugely important.

Posted

Yes, there is a way to make the pieces end on a more conclusive note, but doing it is a little tedious. It basically requires a lot of trial and error. The program generates an elaboration on the current piece, and then you decide whether you like the way it ends. If not, then you reject the elaboration and wait for it to generate a new one. Up until now, I've been giving the program largely free reign, which produces results much faster.

  • Like 1
Posted
On 10/25/2020 at 5:13 PM, Polaris said:

You're welcome.

The program outputs WAV files. They're a bit hefty in terms of file size, but they're of higher quality and are recognized by Puredata, unlike MP3s. I would never dream of working with MIDI, because it doesn't give me anything approaching full control over the timbre. Timbre is hugely important.

 

Interesting. 

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Quinn said:

Interesting. 

 

There are two ways of looking at music: one is analytical, and separates a sound into its components. Taken to its extreme, this viewpoint would consider music as consisting of sine waves without timbre. The other approach is synthetic, and considers the overall impression created by the collection of sine waves sounding at any given moment. This approach taken to its extreme would consider music as consisting of nothing more or less than a succession of timbres. This perspective on music is just as important to the musical quality as the analytical one. In terms of music theory, the usual approach is to look at things from a viewpoint somewhere in between the two. A C with a timbre is simply called a C, even though there are other notes present as overtones. And if I press three notes on the piano, this will be considered as three seperate pitches. The distinction between a seperate pitch and a timbre is largely arbitrary.

Anyway, here's another piece that I made using my program (it's a bit high in pitch, but it sounded best this way): (fixed version in post below)

 

Edited by Polaris
Posted (edited)

My program outputs a value that is meant to indicate the quality of the music. Judging by this piece and a few others, driving the value down tends to create a horrifying (and to my weird sensibilities, funny) effect:

 

Edited by Polaris
Posted

This is an incomplete piece. It consists of three semi-random sections of three different sound files layered over each other more or less at the program's whim. It is very good at finding nice combinations. The only problem is that I haven't yet found a good way to subtract frequencies from the mix; the more it runs, the more it adds, which is a serious problem when it comes to writing longer pieces. Longer pieces require the program to run for a longer time, which right now results in too many simultaneous notes.

 

Posted
11 hours ago, Quinn said:

Nice experiments but - what can you do with this music?

What's it for?

 

 

 

 

I don't foresee myself using it for anything but my own pleasure and that of other people. That's what I've always written music for.

Posted

Although nothing can beat the creativity of the human mind in terms of composition (let's face it, no algorithm can create Beethoven's 5th, at least without previous knowledge of all of Beethoven's styles), I could see some good use cases for these types of generated compositions.  For example, they can certainly provide a composer with new ideas.  There are many times I hear a short phrase on TV or in a movie not intended to be an entire composition, and I think to myself that I could probably take that phrase and turn it into a fun piece of music.  @Polaris, I would suggest using these algorithmic arrangements in coming up with your own creative composition!

  • Like 1

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...