Melodic Shapes

For this week's assignment, we were tasked to use FM/ AM synthesis processes to form a number of simple timbral shapes (5 FM, and 5 AM), and additionally, create a short composition using these recordings.  In the soundcloud embedded component below, you fill find the 5 sounds from both AM and FM synthesis, and, the short composition.  Below the composition are the answers to the accompanying questions.

1. What parameters enabled you to produce the most subtle changes in timbre? 
• Of the different parameters, I found the modulation index to make the most subtle changes in timbre out of all the various inputs.  The noticeable change which stems from the adjustments in the modulation index is a an increased muffled filter sound, particularly in the FM.
2. Which method do you prefer better, A.M. or F.M. Synthesis?
• I prefer frequency modulation, as I feel it offers a more distinct and smooth change in tone.

Tuning forks, strings, tension, length, pitch ratio, and intervals with a monochord

For this week's assignment, we were tasked to use a PD Risset Bell patch to explore the effects of various input values on a synthesized bell.  Below, I have answered the questions provided to guide us through this exploration.  Below those answers, please find 4 samples that I have created and recorded from the PD.

Questions:

1. How much does the bell sound change with different parameters?
• As I explain more specifically in the next question, the sound changes relative to the scale of the input, meaning that for certain inputs, only a slight numerical increase is needed for a noticeable difference, while for other inputs, a much larger change is needed to notice a difference in the bell output.  That being said, as a whole, the output will change entirely depending on the values, so much so that certain values will not even resemble a bell.
2. Which parameters influence the sound the most?
• Of the three parameters to the Risset Bell (Amplitude, Durations, Frequencies), I think frequency has the greatest impact, durations the second, and amplitude has the least impact.  Again, this all depends, as there are certain values of each that would have a dramatic impact, and moreso, would completely change our perception of the others.  For example, the value of the frequency will not be as noticeable if duration and/or amplitude are near-zero values.
3. This is an example of an additive synthesis physical model: Can you imagine/ invent other physical models?  What might they be?
• Using the fundamentals of additive synthesis, we can simulate just about any form of "acoustic" sound.  For example, a computerized instrument which would simulate the full range of a grand piano could be created using these same techniques of additive synthesis.

Analog Synthesis Revisited

My Track:




For our assignment this week, we were tasked to compose a piece using an analog synthesizer exclusively.  In my composition sonic aspects which are not easily composed using computer synthesis.  After experimenting with the synth for some time, I found that I was most intrigued by the pulse-width/ frequency modulators.  Listening to my piece, I think that the use of these modulators will come through to show the unique capabilities of this analogue synthesis.

Listening Responses

WEEK 5:

One of the listening pieces which struck me the most was Stravinsky's "The Rite of Spring."  More than being struck by it, there is a particular aspect that I had a hard time getting past.  Maybe I am reading a bit too much into it, however, I want to share my thoughts in this response.

The title of this indicates that the graphical score representation plays a major role in the piece.  The artist of the graphic representation decided to add an animated aspect to the timeframe of the score.  As each note is hit, the circles/rectangles (which are originally filled) 'emit' out their contents to denote the note being played.  However, when the note is hit, the animation I find to be very counterintuitive to its 'emitted' sound.  The interior fill of the note is animated to go into the next played note.

I do not think that this is a good way to represent Stravinsky's work as this depiction seems to show that every sound is being built off the same/original notes.  Although, in a sense, this is a way to think of sound synthesis, I do not see this as a fitting for an instrumental piece like Stravinsky.  In a sense, the pieces are connected due to melodies and chords, though I think that this animation goes beyond the inherent connection.


WEEK 6:

In class last week, we had an interesting discussion about the relatively "new" comeback, as there was a point in time (even as late as the 90s) where computational synthesis was not powerful enough for the sounds to be as the artists had intended.

However, I think it is also important to show the current similarities between the sounds of today's electronic music, and that of decades ago.  For example, one of the pieces we had as listening for this week was a piece by Iannis Xenakis.

For those unfamiliar with this piece, I recommend listening to it first.  Then, listen to this more modern piece: deadmau5's Aural Psynapse.  Though the two pieces certainly have a different underlying feel, I think that there are several aspects within them that are quite similar.  Both contain several instances of dry, somewhat static tones.  In Xenakis' piece, these notes comprise the vast majority of the score.  However, the deadmau5 piece takes this tone and intertwines with the themes of more "modern" applications.

Rethinking the Score Pt. 2

For this week's exercise, I have taken two of the scores that I created last week, and made a composition based on a new interpretation of them.  I think it is particularly interesting that a week separated these two assignments, as in that time, I have somewhat forgotten the exact details of the original tracks.  Thus, my tracks here are more of an interpretation and exercise of reading and understanding my score, and not of refabricating the original sounds.

Enjoy!

1-

Score:

Synaptic Island by Ben on Sketchfab


Music:

2 -

Score:

Stockhausen by Ben on Sketchfab

Music:

Rethinking the Score

For this week's assignment, we listened to four different pieces, and made a score representing each.  I was intrigued by Smalley's "non-traditional" approach to creating scores, and took some of his visual methodology to create mine.

The central idea I wanted to convey in my score is that music should not be confined to two dimensions in terms of its visual depictions.  As such, I used Autodesk's Maya software to create a 3d model of each score.

To view each, click the center of the below containers, and once it loads, you are able to explore them in a 3d space!  If you have a WebVR enabled web browser/ HTC Vive or Oculus Rift headset, you can also view them in Virtual Reality!  Once loaded, scroll to zoom in/out, and click to rotate.  If you have a mouse, press command/middle-mouse-button and drag to pan.

Stravinsky by Ben on Sketchfab

Bach by Ben on Sketchfab

Stockhausen by Ben on Sketchfab

Synaptic Island by Ben on Sketchfab

Listening Response

I interpret this grouping of listening tracks for the week to have a concise and singular theme: the limitations of music.  In the (very entertaining) words of one of the videos, "With the right combination of sine waves, you can make any sound because all songs are made up of wiggles on top of wiggles" (The Synthesis of Synthesis- The Telharmonium, YouTube).  This is to say that, any sound can be fabricated.  Although, as the video explains, this concept came around before digitally synthesized music, we are now able to digitally fabricate any frequency, and thereby, can digitally can make any sound.

Okay, so we have established that we can create any sound at all.  This brings us to an interesting conundrum: how do we use this ability?  Well, as I see it, we really only have two options.  First, we can use a combination of the sine waves to replicate a musical object (such as a note from a grand piano).  The other option, is to go against "traditional" music and intentionally make sounds that could not be made using a classical instrument.  We see this concept explored in these videos, particularly in "D. Buxtehude - BuxWV 155 - Toccata d-moll / D minor" and "James Tenney - Critical Band (1988)."  The Buxtehude track seems closer, in many ways, to more traditional instrumental tones, while the Tenney is more distant from sound objects which stem "naturally" from instruments.


Listening tracks for the week:

Assignment 2 (Reading Response and Assignment)

Sound Object Clips: https://soundcloud.com/bcooper-357553759/sets/assignment-2

Reading Response (based on: Helmholtz Ch 3)


This is a fascinating article from Helmholtz's famed theory book, "On the Sensations of Tone."  In this particular section (Chapter 3), Helmholtz discusses the concept of, as he describes it, "sympathetic vibrations."  As the name of his book implies, Helmholtz certainly has a particularly scientific perspective on music theory, emphasizing the physiological factors that go into constructing his theories.  Helmholtz summarises an aspect of these sympathetic vibrations as such:
"When the pitch of the original sounding body is not exactly that of the sympathising body, or that which is meant to vibrate in sympathy with it, the latter will nevertheless often make sensible sympathetic vibrations, which will diminish in amplitude as the difference of pitch increases"(Helmholtz, 39).

What I found particularly interesting about this piece was Helmholtz's experimentations which he paired with his theories.  As a scientist and musician, his experiments are deeply grounded in physics, which, for me, adds a new level of understanding on sound and human perceptions of sound.  After reading this chapter, I was interested find a video of some of his experimentations.  The below YouTube video shows one such demo (please excuse the somewhat poor quality of the video).

This video shows an adaptation of Helmholtz's experiment on p. 40 of the book.  The experiment contains two tuning fork apparatuses, comprised of the fork bolted onto a hollow box.  If each of these tuning forks contain the same frequency, then (if facing one another as shown in the video), both will vibrate when one is hit.

Assignment 1

Questions

1. What is the differences between sound objects and musical objects (i.e. notes, phrases, etc.) Why does Schaeffer make this distinction? 

• The difference (and for that matter, comparison) of sound and musical objects are that musical objects are, in a sense, a way that people can understand and classify sound objects.  As Schaeffer eludes in his writing, the sound objects are, in a sense, more pure, and less complex, than the musical objects.  Schaeffer further discusses the implications of culture, which brings the discussion to part of his reasoning for making this distinction.  Going back to the sense of purity which is present in the sound objects, the musical objects are influenced by the culture for which they exist, which differentiates the two objects.  Schaeffer explained that musical objects are often quantified in an almost mathematical manor, which, to some extent, demeans the sound.

2. How do we differentiate digital, analog, and acoustic sound objects?

• In the first video, Schaeffer explains this topic by first posing a question: "Are musical objects reduced to... parameters?" (7:52).  As he explains, there are limitations/ parameters to each of these types of objects, and we must differentiate, and further understand, each by said limitations.

3. An implicit component of sound objects, is the Gestalt principles of organization (from Psychology). In what ways do you think Gestalt principles are relevant in the perception of sound objects, and in what ways are they not?

• The main and overarching principle of Gestalt is simplicity, and that objects (be it visual, sound, etc.) are "greater than the sum of [their] parts" (DePaul University).  With this general definition, I think that the Gestalt principles are heavily related to perception of sound objects.  Schaeffer discusses the notion of hearing a sound object as it is, even though there is a cultural need to split it apart, and mathematically dissect the sound to understand it.  Thus, we are left with an important question as to which is the "correct" way of interpreting and understanding sound objects.  Should we want to investigate every single characteristic of the sound, and find ways to quantify and qualify them, or should we find ways of understanding them as a whole?

4. What is Musique concrète, and how does it relate to sound objects?

• Musique concrète is, in a sense, the creation of a musical composition which manipulates, and combines a number of sound objects.

Sources:

Solfège de l'objet sonore (Schaeffer 1967) CD 1 Tracks 1-11 (Links to an external site.)

Solfège de l'objet sonore (Schaeffer 1967) CD 2 Tracks 27-37 (Links to an external site.)http://facweb.cs.depaul.edu/sgrais/gestalt_principles.htm


Sound Clips from PureData:

https://soundcloud.com/bcooper-357553759/sets/assignment-1-music-26