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