[eu-gene] Psst...Wanna Buy an Algorithm? (Working Title)

[Michael Gogins]

The computer WILL produce the same output EVERY time for the the same inputs.

In the case you cite the inputs are different because the random number generator is seeded differently each time. If it was not the results would be identical. 

Regards,
Mike


-----Original Message-----
From: Andrei <drusca70 at yahoo.com>
Sent: Oct 15, 2005 11:20 PM
To: generative art <eu-gene at generative.net>
Subject: Re: [eu-gene] Psst...Wanna Buy an Algorithm? (Working Title)

--- alalexalalexlab.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 2005-10-15 at 15:15 -0700, Andrei wrote:

> > A composition can't be "algorithmic" - in the "generative" sense -
> > if it produces the EXACT same music with each "performance." 
>
> How do you mean "in the generative sense"?  

See below.

> If an algorithm runs
> without any external interaction, then it will produce the same
output 
> every single time, unless the computer is broken.

I'm really surprised to hear you say that. With SuSuperCollideror
example (and I'm sure also with Max, C Sound and other apps) you can
create very simple patches which will produce very different output
each time you run them. The output might not constitute a piece of
music, but the sound ththat'lle produced will vary each time. There are
all sorts of things you can do: mess around with arrays of values, use
if-then-else conditionals, use noise unit generators to control
parameters, etc., etc.. 

Besides pressing 'return' on your keyboard, in order to start the
process, there's no need for additional interaction.


> > And if the piece were electronic/computer generated
> > it would be even more antithetical to the idea of "generative"
> > music, since even the element of human imperfection involved in a
> > performance is absent from the equation.
> 
> Hm, I think we're going to have to resort to definitions here - what
> is the idea of generative music in your opinion?

"Generative" to me means a process which involves some element of
"chance"/unpredictability/surprise/indeterminacy. I see "generative" as
an overall category, under which things like stochastic and "aleatory"
processes fall.

Algorithm to me just means a set of instructions necessary to perform a
task. I tend to associate the use of algorithms in composition more
with "process" music.

It can get confusing. I haven't actually sat down and tried to sort it
all out. Maybe the category under which a piece falls depends on which
aspects of the piece are "generative." The structure could be
indeterminate, timbres could vary, pitches could be indeterminate,
interaction between different elements could be indeterminate, etc..

I don't really lose my time thinking about terminology when it comes to
creating music. I tend to think more like "I want this aspect or
element of the piece to be inindeterministicindeterminate?) to some
degree". I just want to be surprised a bit by what happens. So far in
my efforts it's tended to be more about using some element of
randomness to choose between different variations. I think it's
actually quite difficult to compose something that's indeterminate to a
great extent. It can get kind of self defeating in the end and you
arrive at some philosophical conundrums. You're putting all this effort
into creating something which you don't want control over. You're
making all this effort trying to create something effortless. You might
as well just let things be the way they are, or improvise, or
something...

- Andrei


		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Music Unlimited 
Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/
-- 
'The world is actually pear shaped'
To unsubscribe from eu-gene visit
http://www.generative.net/mailman/listinfo/eu-gene