The NTS Sessions do not sound algorithmic

can you repost that as white text on black background. I'm dying

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:54 PM, Ragnar said:

can you repost that as white text on black background. I'm dying

Please don't die Rangar! The IDM Valhalla isn't ready! 

Here is the full thingy: https://archive.li/WuBgz#selection-725.152-725.159 

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:39 PM, wredny said:

Ultimate answer to the generative drama (great interview tbh: https://archive.li/WuBgz#selection-619.0-216.351)

 

AR - Generative music... 

 

SB - Well, no no what is generative music? 

 

AR - Algorithmic music, random elements in system... 

 

SB - This is the part you don't understand. You don't know what you're talking about. Do you know anything about generative music? 

 

AR - Generative to me means generative algorithms, evolving systems of... 

 

SB - So you know about mapping complex numbers against imaginary numbers, but what can you tell me about our music? Do you actually know anything about the way that we make music, or are we speculating? (laughs) 

 

AR - I am speculating, so tell me... 

 

SB - For start, the word 'random' -- it takes the shit right out of me. There's absolutely nothing random about what we do. There might be a lot of number crunching going on but there's nothing random in there. 

 

AR - So you're not making instantaneous decisions based on whatever the computer is spitting out at a given time? 

 

SB - Well I don't know, it depends what kind of action or reaction to a situation you've got. I mean, yeah, if I'm controlling a patch that behaves recursively then there's a vague quantum where I can only use my ears to determine exactly what's going on process-wise because I couldn't possibly see and process the numbers in realtime. Any sort of perceptive reaction on my part is going to play a part in the way that we react to the system, or the way we react as part of the system, but, like any quantum value as soon as you kind of ascertain what it is it changes. The problem with it is that it crumbles as soon as you discuss it. 

 

I mean, all music is generative. Okay, any music. There's no.. as long as there's a rule and there's a determination in terms of process and you've got an algorithm. Any music can be broken down like that. I mean, it's really easy, the algorithm just becomes more complex in certain cases and simple in others. It might not have anything to do with how the music sounds, either. It might not be exactly directly or indirectly related. No, I don't use random number generators -- I fucking hate em. They're rubbish. I use a few chaotic operators but in terms of how much of it is bound to the system, I'm not really sure. Um, it's kinda like saying, if you program a drum machine, that the drum machine is writing the track. If that's the case, then we might as well not bother doing anything. I mean, should we give up? (laughs) 

 

AR - What I mean is, is the instrument a third member of the group... 

 

SB - No not at all. It just facilitates. It's just tools. 

 

AR - Seems chaotic, like you're on the edge of losing control.. 

 

SB - The software is available, so as far as we're concerned we have to consider its use, and so we apply it where it is necessary, where it seems applicable. I mean, you know, they are tools, we're the people that are using them, there's a definite distinction got to be made -- you can't start treating software like it's got a personality or taste, you know? Taste is what defines people, it's what makes us different to software -- we're not software, you can't possibly consider a bit of software to be like a person. It's not 2001 -- I mean, it is, but it's not. We're not talking about fucking HAL, we're talking about a few bits of number crunching objects that don't really do a great deal until you feed them numbers and tell what to come out with. 

 

It's like any generative processes are so-called lifelike algorithms; it's like cellular automatons supposedly replicating life-type behavior, it's fucking rubbish. They don't do anything of the sort, but they make really nice patterns. But I wouldn't imbue them with intelligence, just because there is intelligence behind their creation. It's like saying pyramids are clever. 

 

It's silly, really. Yeah, I'm well into like messing with algorithms, 'cause I like the way things can interfere with each other, but... and I really like the exactitude of control you can get and the amount of math you can have within your system, or amount of system within the system, you know. I don't think any different now, to the way I felt when I was plugging a 202 into a delay unit that reads the square wave and generates a delay at that pitch and then changing the square wave width so that the delay unit gets confused. I don't feel any different now to the way I felt then, it's just the same, I mean, the fact that we're using computers to do it now, just makes it different set of criteria, different quanta. 

 

I suppose the best part about it is designing systems from the outset using raw components, but that's not really different any from knocking PCBs up in college, so. It's all the same kind of thing, really. Electronics and the kinds of systems we use for programming are dead similar, that's probably why I use them. I don't do a great deal of codebase stuff, I'm pretty shit with code. 

/thread

This interview makes me think on how Bach or Beethoven or Busoni or Cage or whoever treated some instrument: they always (okay not literally always) wanted to push on the limits of the instrument. To create sound and effects that were unheard before, to unlock possibilities of the instrument. To go beyond normal use.

So me thinks Ae does the same with electronic music:

So if it's silly to say that in a Cage piece for prepared piano the piano is writing the music, it's equally silly to say at any Autechre record, that it was written BY a computer.

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:39 PM, wredny said:

 

I mean, all music is generative. Okay, any music. There's no.. as long as there's a rule and there's a determination in terms of process and you've got an algorithm. Any music can be broken down like that. I mean, it's really easy, the algorithm just becomes more complex in certain cases and simple in others. It might not have anything to do with how the music sounds, either. It might not be exactly directly or indirectly related. No, I don't use random number generators -- I fucking hate em. They're rubbish. I use a few chaotic operators but in terms of how much of it is bound to the system, I'm not really sure. Um, it's kinda like saying, if you program a drum machine, that the drum machine is writing the track. If that's the case, then we might as well not bother doing anything. I mean, should we give up? (laughs)

 

I was just about to write something like this... I cant think of music thatz not algorithmic in some way, just more or less complex in that regard

  On 5/16/2018 at 6:28 PM, xox said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:39 PM, wredny said:

I mean, all music is generative. Okay, any music. There's no.. as long as there's a rule and there's a determination in terms of process and you've got an algorithm. Any music can be broken down like that. I mean, it's really easy, the algorithm just becomes more complex in certain cases and simple in others. It might not have anything to do with how the music sounds, either. It might not be exactly directly or indirectly related. No, I don't use random number generators -- I fucking hate em. They're rubbish. I use a few chaotic operators but in terms of how much of it is bound to the system, I'm not really sure. Um, it's kinda like saying, if you program a drum machine, that the drum machine is writing the track. If that's the case, then we might as well not bother doing anything. I mean, should we give up? (laughs)

I was just about to write something like this... I cant think of music thatz not algorithmic in some way, just more or less complex in that regard

 

Anything made can be described with an algorhitm, so that's not saying much. But for sure all algorhitms for any art would be highly complex, almost to incomprehensability. There is no recipe for a masterwork.

But Sean is saying here, that any music is generative. I'm unsure of that. Depends how we define "generativity". How do we define "generativity"?

My definition for generative music would be, that there is a defined rule that with a defined input 'generates' the music (quasi automatically).

Plain example: a canon with the rule that the second part should follow the first part in the same direction in unison in 2 bars distance. Input is the first part, and the second will be created by the rule.

But IF my definition is correct, than a lot of music isn't generative (or just in the very broad sense that there are some rules defining what's possible - but not 'generated' by these rules, only 'guided': means that there are countless possibilities whitin the rules for creative decision and also the possibility for the violation of the rule).

your example is an algorithmic procedure, generative implies some sort of randomness and that the system has defined and/or undefined levels of autonomy

if i understood sean pls correctly by generative he meant level of unknown that we get from any algorithm or any music making process in the perception-action loop

imo

  On 5/16/2018 at 7:44 PM, xox said:

your example is an algorithmic procedure, generative implies some sort of randomness and that the system has defined and/or undefined levels of autonomy

 

if i understood sean pls correctly by generative he meant level of unknown that we get from any algorithm or any music making process in the perception-action loop

 

imo

If so, that would mean generative = any creative process, right?

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:01 PM, Chabraendeky said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 7:44 PM, xox said:

your example is an algorithmic procedure, generative implies some sort of randomness and that the system has defined and/or undefined levels of autonomy

 

if i understood sean pls correctly by generative he meant level of unknown that we get from any algorithm or any music making process in the perception-action loop

 

imo

If so, that would mean generative = any creative process, right?

 

in the broadest possible way we could say yes to that but we dont call everything generative cause in generative processes the emphasis is on the autonomus side of things, that's less algorithmically determined 

also, afaik and imo

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:18 PM, xox said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:01 PM, Chabraendeky said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 7:44 PM, xox said:

your example is an algorithmic procedure, generative implies some sort of randomness and that the system has defined and/or undefined levels of autonomy

 

if i understood sean pls correctly by generative he meant level of unknown that we get from any algorithm or any music making process in the perception-action loop

 

imo

If so, that would mean generative = any creative process, right?

in the broadest possible way we could say yes to that but we dont call everything generative cause in generative processes the emphasis is on the autonomus side of things, that's less algorithmically determined

 

also, afaik and imo

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:41 PM, Chabraendeky said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:18 PM, xox said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 8:01 PM, Chabraendeky said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 7:44 PM, xox said:

your example is an algorithmic procedure, generative implies some sort of randomness and that the system has defined and/or undefined levels of autonomy

 

if i understood sean pls correctly by generative he meant level of unknown that we get from any algorithm or any music making process in the perception-action loop

 

imo

If so, that would mean generative = any creative process, right?

 

in the broadest possible way we could say yes to that but we dont call everything generative cause in generative processes the emphasis is on the autonomus side of things, that's less algorithmically determined

 

also, afaik and imo

With autonomy you mean the autonomy of the system or the creator?

 

system

//decision making autonomy

i love how back when they did way more interviews half the time sean was like one question away from just beating the shit out of the interviewer and rob would just be like "lush"

^ lol 

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:52 PM, auxien said:

 

Funny now in retrospect Sean saying the software isn't a 'third member of the group' when that last Resident Advisor interview they said the exact opposite. A lot's changed in ~15 years. 

 

It's alive...

  On 5/16/2018 at 9:33 PM, Alcofribas said:

i love how back when they did way more interviews half the time sean was like one question away from just beating the shit out of the interviewer and rob would just be like "lush"

Yeah!! Were are the interviews?! NTS isnt worthy of a discussion? Dont be lazy boys!

On other hand, I was surprised how sassy Sean was in the interview.

they used to do a lot of interviews, i’m not surprised that he’d lose patience from time to time.

In that interview, Sean mentions releasing what sounds like a CD of either patches or something similar....apparently on the Falsch label? Is this real? I have never seen anything about this supposed release anywhere other than this one interview. If it is real, does anyone know any more info?

(See quote below):

Lot of stuff on Fals.ch was online only so it might be gone forever now

I had a data disc on Fals.ch in a slimline single case with all kindsa things on it, wonder where it is....

There is a discogs page for the label, but I don't find any Ae-stuff...

https://www.discogs.com/label/7511-Falsch

he's probably (among other things maybe) referring to this: https://www.discogs.com/Various-Falsch-02/release/410894 ... as gescom. it's a little graphics glitching app, mac only.

edit: also that site used to be the tits.

  On 5/16/2018 at 10:49 PM, jules said:

 

  On 5/16/2018 at 3:52 PM, auxien said:

 

Funny now in retrospect Sean saying the software isn't a 'third member of the group' when that last Resident Advisor interview they said the exact opposite. A lot's changed in ~15 years. 

 

 

 

It's alive...

 

Autechre, the first band poised to be replaced by a computer #futureofwork

I think it's a noble effort. Seob building a computer to take over as Autechre after they both cark it.

Lianne is like the female version of jules. While jules only knows a few bands (swans, tool, thom yorke and the subforum artists) they both have a tendency to overthink, resulting in some of the most cringeworthy shit ever posted on here or on reddit by hail sagan.

do not shit post in the ae forum thanks