soma333 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Hey, thought I'd stir things up and pose a question that has ran through my mind for a while now... It's obvious that BOC tend to reference, and at times use, a plethora of mathematics in their music. However, I'm curious to what extent have they studied the subject? A lot of the compositions and references seem to allude that they have an acute understanding of systems, formulas, etc. Reading that Matador bio, it mentioned that Mike(?) was attending college at one point but dropped out... It also mentioned that one of them programmed a melody using an equation of some sort. Granted that is nothing new in the electronic music industry (specifically electronic music at times)...but I am still curious as to how much mathematical genius these guys seem to exhibit... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not_vikur Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 x + b0c = 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest twiddler Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 mmm well I think it's been exagerrated - apart from the titles(nlogax, Music is Math, A is to B as B is to C, maybe Peacock Tail - but maybe not, see the Matador bio) - where do they exactly apply math? Oh, the Devil is in the Details... so what is the equation there? The sequencing of tones? The former Davidac site(now Fredd-e) had some interesting interpretations(but just speculations, nothing specific). I think Autechre is far deeper into that than BoC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granty Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I think its another druggy influence really - LSD makes you see the geometric nature of things like leaves and trees. You can find the math in the structure of their songs. It wouldn't suprise me if they've dabbled with things like the golden ratio, fractals and fibonacci numbers to arrange the timing or even the melodic scales. I haven't actually checked this but I reckon the change to where the woman starts counting in Aquarius occurs at the golden mean, which would explain why it appears to happen at the most natural point. And the melodies in tunes like Kaini Industries and Happy Cycling sound mathematically generated as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedy Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 phi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pylonbitch Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 oh yes the fibonacci sequence can be truly beautiful...^^^ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest twiddler Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I haven't actually checked this but I reckon the change to where the woman starts counting in Aquarius occurs at the golden mean, which would explain why it appears to happen at the most natural point. No it doesn't. It's easy to check - it appears at about 3.03, the song is 5.58 - so the ratio is about 0,54(approximatlely) - and the golden ratio is at about 0,618... something. And I don't see why either Kaini Industries or Happy Cycling would have anything math generated - the melodies are catchy and sound like they just came up with them(like the rest of their tunes). There is one bit that occurs on both Twoism(the song) and Sixtyten(both at the end) - it's silly and artificial and sounds like some math generated shit - I like that one actually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
granty Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I haven't actually checked this but I reckon the change to where the woman starts counting in Aquarius occurs at the golden mean, which would explain why it appears to happen at the most natural point. No it doesn't. It's easy to check - it appears at about 3.03, the song is 5.58 - so the ratio is about 0,54(approximatlely) - and the golden ratio is at about 0,618... something. And I don't see why either Kaini Industries or Happy Cycling would have anything math generated - the melodies are catchy and sound like they just came up with them(like the rest of their tunes). There is one bit that occurs on both Twoism(the song) and Sixtyten(both at the end) - it's silly and artificial and sounds like some math generated shit - I like that one actually. The melody at the end of Happy Cycling does sound computer generated. I'm not saying it is, but I had some fractal music software that produced very similar sounding stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moebius Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 It's not just the songs titles though. There were numerous mathemetical references on the old BoC pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jedy Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 oh yes the fibonacci sequence can be truly beautiful...^^^ i have to try that brocolli romanesco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest twiddler Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 It's not just the songs titles though. There were numerous mathemetical references on the old BoC pages. Yeah, now apart from the titles, do you see anything more specific about boc using math in songs there - apart from the song titles(ONLY) - because I don't. There's plenty of random facts linked with math, but actually nothing based on BoC's work. Oh, you mean the old *official* boc site - hmm, as far as I can remember, it wasn't anything complicated - more like, 'math is cool, we like it'. There's a difference between being interested in math and being exclusively good at it. And about the fractal music software - if you have something, post it here. The melody at the end of Happy Cycling is so lovely that if a computer can generate something like that(which I doubt, seriously) - I'd be glad to check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest iep Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 some of you guys are obviously shocked by boards of canada's (sometimes) mathematical approach at musical structures.. while i think that BOC has incorperated some nice tricks, riddles and boxes inside boxes inside boxes in their music (with sometimes even very pleasing results), it still seems like they are kinda mucking around, doing it for shit and giggles.. if you are really interested in this 'structured' approach to music, there is loads of stuff to discover. start with Bach for example. if you think BOC has done some advanced stuff with certain (more well-known) mathematical structures, you'll be stunned by the amount of work that he put in his compositions.. although you might not like the actual sound of his compositions, it is very deep in a technical way :)) many of his contemporaries did some extremely experimental things with numbers and harmonies (the conventional harmonic structures, the chromatic scale and its subsets, weren't as widespread as they are now) so you'll find lots of 'microtonal' composition (which ofcourse weren't called that way back then) based on very complex numerology. for more 'modern' stuff, you can start with Schonberg and his serialism for example... and all of it's offsprings etc etc.. too much too mention.. bottomline is.. boc is just fucking around with these techniques without taking it too seriously (at least, that's how i experience it) and if you are interested, there is LOADS more to check out.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest twiddler Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 bottomline is.. boc is just fucking around with these techniques without taking it too seriously (at least, that's how i experience it) and if you are interested, there is LOADS more to check out.. yeah man, there's plenty of other music with far more complicated math going on in it. That was my point, but your references are well in place - in fact, I think boc has been influenced by Bach a lot. Apart from that, I just thought of probably my favourite example of boc's mathematical approach - on Sunshine Recorder, anout 2.45 to 2.48 - the reversed snares - what a simple thing but how perfecly executed.:heart: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sinkfield Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 i read an interview in which they mentioned something about delay settings being automated to mimic the golden ratio, i think it was on a is to b as b is to c....dont remember where i read it tho...im sure i did edit: oh yeah, you can use this program to make some math music., and if anyone finds a hack for os x please share :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest user Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 oh yes the fibonacci sequence can be truly beautiful...^^^ i have to try that brocolli romanesco It's quite nice but it looks more impressive than it tastes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bubba69 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Whats a weird number? EDIT: Wikipedia told me. I remember its 70. "The first weird number is 70, because its proper divisors are 1, 2, 5, 7, 10, 14, and 35; which sum to 74, but no subset of these sums to 70. The number 12 is abundant but not a weird number because the proper divisors of 12 are 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6; which sum to 16, but 2+4+6 = 12." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.