Jump to content

vkxwz

Members Plus
  • Posts

    94
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Location
    The Internet
  • Interests
    Making garbage music

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Selected

Recent Profile Visitors

878 profile views

vkxwz's Achievements

Enthusiast

Enthusiast (6/14)

  • Dedicated Rare
  • Reacting Well Rare
  • First Post
  • Collaborator
  • Conversation Starter

Recent Badges

44

Reputation

  1. On the topic of taking a break from music, has anyone else noticed how much louder it sounds after a day or two break?(maybe this is obvious) Its like a t break. And a really strange thing I noticed, sleeping doesnt count as a break. I can take an 8hr break and music sounds much louder, but after an 8hr sleep it doesnt sound louder at all.
  2. This is real nice. And would definitely fit that type of game imo. If you dont mind me asking, how to you get those slow pads that run throughout?
  3. Well go on, I'm interested enough in your perspective. Also I'm wondering if there's a way to measure it's affect on peoples attention spans, mine feels incredible short and I feel sad about it but I don't know what "normal" is. The other thing is it is seemingly causing people to be always needing to multi task which i have seen a lot of; need to constantly be messaging / scrolling, etc while working / studying (maybe that's just addiction?). Having periods of time where you only focus on one thing without breaking the time up constantly by looking at your phone seems to be becoming more and more rare.
  4. I dont see why it has to be caused by your brain matching the mess to something it already knows, seems like all that needs to happen is to have an idea of the "shape" of the sound over time, built up by listening and having your expectation constantly adjusted to match what you are hearing. After reading that wikipedia page I do agree that Apophenia is somehow related though, I have noticed that with this sort of thing I hear different parts of some looped "random" noise as connected when logically they aren't, but I don't think that means contour isn't the way that you are perceiving the shape of the sound, just means that your mind is trying to explain the shape. This bit from a more recent Autechre interview relates I think: "Suppose you are looking at a turned acrylic vase on a lamp stand. You might see loads of different layers, but it’s been on a lathe and it’s been curved and you’ll see a silhouette, and you’ll see light travel through it. You’ll get ideas about what its construction is or what its materials are but you still see one surface, one curve" I think contour is perception of the shape of the surface, and Apophenia comes into play when getting ideas about it's construction. I found that paper a bit of a pain to read but I think their whole rhythmic categories thing is interesting, turning continous sound into an abstraction that would fit into sheet music / daw? if I understand that correctly. And the MMN stuff is really cool, never heard of it before but seems really important, It's strange to know there is a measurable signal that corresponds to that feeling when a kick comes half a beat early, I wonder if the MMN is treated as another dimension of content like pitch, and how quickly it disapears when syncopation remains constant, for example looping a | kik - snare - | - kick snare - | beat. Makes sense, I do think dancing helps keep time for heavily syncopated music, otherwise I personally lose track of where the beat is sometimes with really dense stuff (noob I know)
  5. These are cool, especially the last one I do agree it's not something you can just look at in a vacuum, I realise the inital premise of the thread is a bit flawed as it implies I want to do that but you're right, rhythm isn't anything on it's own. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2629434/?fbclid=IwAR2aMJrI_cFf7LumZ2KEtZzNlnJpPtktdMgy9LjR7IWtFtLSJZKBB7s6TNw I don't know how people here feel about academic papers about music but I found this cool paper, something that stands out to me is these sentences about contour: "One of the most salient aspects of relative pitch is the direction of change (up or down) from one note to the next, known as the contour" & "Recent evidence indicates that contours can also be perceived in dimensions other than pitch, such as loudness and brightness" They go on to compare perception of intervals to contour, saying that contour is more robust and easier for most people to remember / discern. It seems to me that it is something more fundamental than our perception intervals (which our response to seems mostly cultural, considering how music from other cultures expresses emotions in completely different ways using intervals that westerners are likely misinterpret). Given that contour is more robust, applies to more than just pitch(volume, timbre), and to me seems the more relevant in terms of evolution(recognising general up down differences in nature vs exact musical ratios), I'm inclined to think it's a significant part of "how rhythm functions". It's gotta be what you are experiencing when you loop any bit of disorganised sound and start perceiving a more structured rhythm in it like you are talking about thawkins. I could be just speaking out of my arse here but I feel like this is somewhat relevant to this thread at least ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ EDIT: also pitch intervals and contour are supposedly processed in different parts of the brain
  6. I feel like this thread may need some examples but my thoughts on how a very small segment of music feels fall apart when out of context. I also realise this isn't really too different from asking how melody works. This also seems like the sort of thing where the closer you look the less you see, like trying to understand how an image on your screen makes you feel a certain way by using a magnifying glass on the pixels. as for sad drum loops, I can think of some but only using drum sounds that basically act as notes in a melody. Maybe it is all just a mystery and the best composers do not understand how their own music really works and it is all just intuitive without explanation, but there is something unsatisfying about that to me.
  7. vkxwz

    AIphex

    My fav of these, goes to some weird places
  8. Well yeah but you are just listing a bunch do things that do have an effect, just not why they have an effect Yeah I should have used better wording, having a pulse or beat may be a better way to say it, basically you can tap along to all music (except for very experimental stuff) Yes I agree it's all about time and change of sound over time, but sound itself is change over time and bars are too just on a larger scale, so it's change of change over time if that makes sense? comparing one bar to the previous is comparing one sequence of change to another. I agree with you about story telling but I find it hard to conceptualise how to tell a story with that sort of structure. it's still a linear medium but the embeddedness makes it strange for telling a linear story, it's easy to do a linear progression of chords that each take up an equal amount of time and then interpret that as representing a sequence of moods that make up a story, but when it gets into the territory of stuff with repitition and modification for things that are repeated then it's harder to understand how.
  9. I've read through these pages again, it's mostly just describing what different terminology means rather than how it "functions" or feels the way it does. I suppose maybe these things are too subjective and it's impossible to have explanations that are generalisable without being like those wikipedia pages but I have some faith that there is more to it on a fundamental level. Yeah I see melody and drum rhythm as the same in this way, I specify rhythm because that is the most fundamental thing I can think of that *is* music besides sound itself. I will look for some drumming content like you mentioned. one of the most fundamental things seem to be constant timing(ignore fold4 wrap5...) that causes entrainment, which makes it so that successive bars / beats are heard relative to / in reference to previous ones, for example if you hear kik,rest,rest,snare and then kik,rest,snare,rest then the snare in the second bar will stand out as coming earlier that it did before. I do wonder if these things can be explained in psychology terms, music is for interpretation by minds anyway
  10. After doing some pretty simple/shit composition for a few years now i've become very interested in how rhythm in music actually functions, ie why things sound the way they do, create the emotion they do, just from the structure of the rhythm. I have found very little information on this online, almost nothing beyond notation and some very simple stuff that isn't really explanatory. Seems like almost everyone can come up with some decent sounding rhythms by following their intuition for what feels right, but I suspect most of this is similar to what GPT3 does, and you are just extending the track by predicting what should come next, and that prediction comes from all the music you have heard before, which to me sounds very limiting and uncreative in a way. From what i've gathered the stuff thats important is: hearing one bar relative to the previous, expectation, the "shape" of the music around the consistent time intervals and how that changes over time. obviously this is all stuff that you dont need to understand why it works for it to work. Does anyone: A) know of any good resources for learning about this B) have any theories of your own that you'd like to share
  11. And does anyone know what the vocal sample at 2:04 is saying? sounds like trace to me
  12. Making my way through these sets now, so much really good stuff, I won't lie I wasn't expecting this level of quality. Great job guys
  13. Is this the point of Merzbow? it's so unpredictable, but I tried what you said(with pulse demon) and it kind of works
  14. Yep I agree then, but I'd argue that those same people wouldn't be the ones coming up with super innovative stuff that's actually entertaining / good quality by using theory to be innovative anyway. At least in my experience using theory to innovate has ended up turning into complete wank garbage and my most entertaining new stuff has come from working completely intuitively.
  15. that kick situation is a mess, people follow the advice blindly, successfulish musician shits on but but is also wrong because of course kicks have tone, bleh Similarly this thread is a mess because we all have different ideas of what theory I think this actually relates to what that old man said in himelsteins post, I think solely going off instinct and intuition can result in falling into a groove that's cut by everything you've heard in the past, so approaching something in a theoretical way can help break out of this. On the other hand I couldn't disagree more with "People working intuitively can't transcend genre/tradition/convention". Examples that disprove this are everywhere in my opinion, so I'm not sure what you are on (about). Sure you need to know the rules to know *when* you are breaking them, but it seems a bit stupid to learn the rules just so you can deliberately break them to say hey look I'm different, it should all be done for a purpose that's above simply following or breaking rules.
×
×
  • Create New...