[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: lilypond GUI editors

From: Jonathan Wilkes
Subject: Re: lilypond GUI editors
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 09:36:24 -0700 (PDT)

Message: 3
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 08:07:59 -0400
From: Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden>
Subject: Re: lilypond GUI editors
To: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
Cc: address@hidden
Message-ID: <address@hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hi David,

> And you would not need one.  Why is everybody so keen on being able to
> do something he would rather not do out of his own volition?

What if one's job is something one *would* do of one's one volition?

> The whole point of machines is to not have to work.  It's time our structures cope with that.

If they invented a computer that could compose music that I liked as much or more than the stuff I compose myself, I'd be very sad: I personally *want* to "work" as a composer, love my job, and would continue to do it even if I had no need to.

Just saying.  ;)
Hi Kieren,
I think there would be some Xenophobia in your sadness.  Well, I don't know that for sure: do
you currently get sad when you hear a piece of music that you like better than something similar that
you wrote yourself?
Also, I don't think such a thing will happen any time soon.  Most of the computer-generated music I've
heard sounds like music created for the sole purpose of confusing people who know nothing about music
into thinking they're hearing the same patterns as "normal" music.  Then again, the boy Mozart knew how
to fake it in the development section when the sight-reading test got too hard, so maybe charlatanism is
just Step 1 of musical myth-building.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]