[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music

From: Kieren MacMillan
Subject: Re: [OT] Vivi, the Virtual Violinist, plays LilyPond music
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:55:16 -0400

Hi Graham,

> IMO, the world would be a better place if we were more precise in
> our musical judgements.

Fair enough.

> If you don't specify that something is a personal opinion, then "go objective 
> or go home".

Some philosophers would say that every statement is subjective, even "The sun 
rose today" or "I'm currently typing on a computer" -- it's just that it's 
easier to convince other people that such subjective statements are "truth".  ;)

> The easiest objective judgement is popularity -- or rather,
> "amount of CDs sold", "amount of tracks downloaded from a legal
> free music site", or even "amount of tracks downloaded from any
> source, including quasi-legal (i.e. not legal) and
> not-even-quasi-legal sources".

Yes, quantitative data is more objective than qualitative data.

> Judgements like "harmonic complexity" or "melodic construction"
> can be objective, but you need to specify which algorithm you're
> using to determine the harmonies (or melodic stuff).  And then use
> that algorithm strictly.  Which, for practical purposes, means
> using computer score analysis.

I like it!

> I think that the only objective judgement we can make is popularity.

Well, it's the easiest anyway.

> (or at least, in objective algorithms, using some constants that
> were derived from collecting listening data from hundreds of
> people in music psychology experiment -- that would be a good
> balance between completely subjective judgements of musicologists,
> and completely mathematical analyses)


reply via email to

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