LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  June 2005

ARSCLIST June 2005

Subject:

Re: Cow Cow 's return?

From:

Karl Miller <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 8 Jun 2005 16:36:27 -0500

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (234 lines)

Does anyone know any of the technical side of this. I recall having a
discussion once with John Eargle. He thought it would be possible to take
the fundamentals of each key stroke on a piano recording, measure the
relative amplitudes, adjusting for their frequency and then using that
information to create a midi file...so you could have a pianist playing on
whatever keyboard which could be controlled with the file created.
Certainly the dynamic range of the recording would be a limiting factor.
Then would Ansorge (a Liszt pupil whose rolls we are working on...who also
made disc recordings) play it the same way if he was at a Steinway, versus
a Yamaha, versus...

As for Glenn Gould without the singing...would it be Glenn Gould without
the singing?

Karl

On Wed, 8 Jun 2005, Dick Spottswood wrote:

> ----- Forwarded by Dick Spottswood/dick/AmericanU on 06/08/2005 04:21 PM
> -----
>
>
> [log in to unmask]
> 06/06/2005 06:13 PM
>
>         To:     [log in to unmask]
>         cc:
>         Subject:        Fwd: Can new technology allow the late great
> masters to perform once more?
>
>
>
>
> ----- Message from [log in to unmask] on Mon, 6 Jun 2005 18:06:26 EDT
> -----
> To:
> [log in to unmask]
> Subject:
> Can new technology allow the late great masters to perform once more?
> Play It Again, Vladimir (via Computer)
>
> ANNE MIDGETTE - New York Times  June 5, 2005
>
> The house lights dimmed at the BTI Center for the Performing Arts in
> Raleigh, N.C., one night last month, the stage lights came up on the grand
> piano, and in front of a rapt audience Alfred Cortot played Chopin's
> Prelude in G (Op. 28, No. 3), as he had not for nearly 80 years.
>
> Cortot is dead, of course. He was not present in physical form, nor was
> anyone else sitting at the keyboard of the Yamaha Disklavier Pro as the
> keys rose and fell. But this was his performance come back to life: his
> gentle touch, his luminosity, even his mistakes, like the light brush of
> an extra note at the periphery of the final chord.
>
> So, at least, claimed Dr. John Q. Walker, the president of Zenph Studios
> in Raleigh, which sponsored the event and created the software that
> allowed Cortot to return. Dr. Walker is developing technology that enables
> him to break down the sounds of an old recording, digitize them and
> reproduce them on a Disklavier, an up-to-the-minute player piano that can
> record and replay performances by means of a CD in a slot above the
> keyboard. Sophisticated fiber optics control the instrument's hammers.
>
> Old recordings of great performers are often marred by scratches and
> surface noise, or by sound badly filtered through primitive microphones.
> Dr. Walker is offering the same music with the immediacy of live
> performance and the acoustical advantages of a contemporary piano. To
> demonstrate the contrast, Dr. Walker also let the audience at the BTI
> Center hear the original Cortot recording from 1926, which sounds as if
> sand had been poured on the old disc's shellac.
>
> "The farther you get from the recordings, the worse they sound," Dr.
> Walker said by phone a few days before the concert. "The fundamental root
> of the problem is that I don't want to hear a recording. I want to hear
> the young Horowitz, Schnabel, Fats Waller, Thelonious Monk on an in-tune
> piano."
>
> If the claims he is making for his new technology are accurate, he will
> soon be able to. His plan is to approach the major labels with his
> software and delve into their back catalogs, acting as a record producer
> to make old recordings new. Josef Hoffman without the scratches, Glenn
> Gould without the mumbling: brought back to life and performing on modern
> pianos, recorded with modern technology.
>
> "People say this is like colorizing old photographs, but it's not," Dr.
> Walker said. "This process is like being able to set up the entire scene
> of that photograph again and shoot it with a new camera from any angle,
> forever."
>
> This is the new world of computer music. In its infancy, way back in the
> 1960's, the goal was to use digital technology to create new sounds and
> new musical forms. Today scientists around the world are turning computers
> on human performance, seeking to quantify an element once thought to be
> intangible: the expressivity of a human artist.
>
> The piano is a good place to start. It offers a relatively limited set of
> variables. With the violin, every aspect of sound production is subject to
> human vagaries: bow pressure, bow speed, the placement of the fingers. On
> the piano, it comes down to hammers hitting strings.
>
> Developed by Wayne Stahnke, the first Disklaviers were made in the 1980's
> by Bösendorfer, the renowned Viennese piano manufacturer. When that
> company stopped making them, Yamaha took up the baton, hiring Mr. Stahnke
> as a consultant. Mr. Stahnke's best-known Disklavier project was a
> foretaste of Dr. Walker's efforts: translations of piano rolls recorded by
> Sergei Rachmaninoff. The two resulting CD's of "new" Rachmaninoff
> performances, both called "A Window in Time" and released in 1998 and
> 1999, are still available from Telarc. Some listeners find these
> revelatory. Some find them mechanical, even soulless. The reactions
> demonstrate a basic difficulty with mechanical reproduction of music:
> there is a subjective element involved in determining if it works. The
> final criterion for any such reproduction is the rather imprecise "Turing
> test" of artificial intelligence: that is, whether it can make the
> listener think he or she is hearing a person rather than a machine.
>
> At the Austrian Research Institute for Artificial Intelligence, a group of
> leading researchers known as the Machine Learning, Data Mining and
> Intelligent Music Processing Group are trying to pinpoint just what it is
> that fools the ear. Led by Gerhard Widmer, they are looking at everything
> from improving the way computers "hear" music to isolating the elements of
> individual performance style, as well as creating graphs and animations to
> illustrate different pianists' interpretations of the same passage of
> music.
>
> In a 2003 paper, "In Search of the Horowitz Factor," Dr. Widmer and his
> team described giving the computer 13 recordings of Mozart piano sonatas,
> played into a Bösendorfer Disklavier by the pianist Roland Batik, to see
> if they could use the computer to determine rules that described the
> pianist's interpretive choices.
>
> They did get some rules, though it turned out that many of them applied
> equally well to other performances of other music. But the machine
> generated its own performance of a Mozart sonata movement that it had not
> heard Mr. Batik play, but based on what it had learned of his style. With
> this, it took second prize in the International Computer Piano Performance
> Rendering Contest in Tokyo in 2002. With no stage fright.
>
> "The first question was, can we hear Glenn Gould play again?" Dr. Walker
> said. "The next question: Cool, can we hear him play other stuff?" To
> this, Dr. Widmer might answer: We're getting there.
>
> But there's still the thorny matter of how to get data from an audio
> recording into the computer. It's a question not just of having the
> computer play back a CD, but of translating the music into a language the
> computer can understand.
>
> A computer, by itself, can't recognize the difference between a note of
> music and a cough. It can't pick out a melody from a dense weave of
> counterpoint. It can't tap its foot to follow a beat - not, at least, in
> classical music, where the tempos are constantly changing. The first
> problem Dr. Walker faced was how to get the computer to create a kind of
> score from the clusters of sounds in a recording.
>
> "A recording is sound waves that were sampled by a microphone," he said.
> "We feed those into the computer and try to discover what the notes are.
> The computer model is a three-dimensional thing: middle C struck in a
> certain way looks like a 3-D mountain range. We have a model that looks
> like math equations, and we try to fit to it: Yeah, this looks like it's a
> note."
>
> Dr. Walker - a trained pianist with a degree in software engineering who
> sold his company a few years ago, creating the time and financial
> flexibility to work on this project - is coming up with his own answers.
> But the process is still extremely time-consuming. He is reluctant to say
> just how slow it is, but he has been working for more than three years,
> and his demo CD includes only a few tracks: the Cortot, Glenn Gould's
> performance of the Aria and first variation of Bach's "Goldberg"
> Variations, and part of a track by Art Tatum.
>
> Even after he gets a model that works, Dr. Walker has to contend with the
> question of reproduction on a Disklavier: can it mimic human performance
> down to the last detail? Dr. Werner Goebl, a member of Dr. Widmer's team
> in Vienna, addressed this as co-author of a paper called "Are
> Computer-Controlled Pianos a Reliable Tool in Music Performance Research?
> Recording and Reproduction Precision of a Yamaha Disklavier Grand Piano."
> Precisely measuring the Disklavier's ability to replicate human touch, Dr.
> Goebl answered his own question: No.
>
> Less high-tech but just as relevant are the variations from one piano to
> another. A skilled musician compensates for changes in a room or an
> instrument. A CD cannot. Dr. Walker encountered one aspect of the problem
> when he took his technology to the Yamaha studios to play his Cortot
> performance for Mei-Ting Sun, a young concert pianist and the winner of
> the first Piano-e-Competition in 2002 (judged, in part, via a Disklavier
> in Japan, which reproduced performances thousands of miles away for one of
> the judges).
>
> It had to do with the final chord in the Chopin prelude - or, rather, with
> the extra, wrong note.
>
> "Their piano wasn't calibrating as ours was," Dr. Walker said, "and the
> note didn't sound. Mei-Ting said: 'I know this recording. This wasn't
> accurate, because Cortot misses the last chord.' I played it again, and he
> watched the keyboard and saw that the key went down but didn't sound. He
> said, 'O.K., you guys got it.' "
>
> Mr. Sun was so convinced that at the North Carolina concert where Dr.
> Walker's version of Cortot made his debut, he appeared as the featured
> live artist: Cortot played a piece, Glenn Gould played a piece, and Mr.
> Sun played the rest of the evening. He had to; Dr. Walker didn't have
> enough music to fill a whole recital.
>
> The technology, in short, is still in its infancy. But Dr. Walker is
> animated by his vision of the future. Like other scientists - including
> Dr. Goebl in Vienna, another serious classical musician - he envisions a
> future of interactive recordings. "We've been trained that a recording is
> a frozen document," he said. "Why can't it be like a video game - every
> time you hear a recorded performance it's different?" But at the moment,
> his focus is on making new recordings in a more conventional manner.
>
> Dr. Goebl, in Vienna, supports Dr. Walker's work and is interested in it.
> But he questions whether it's a "real" performance. (Dr. Walker is well
> aware of such skepticism; his response is simply that you can't judge
> until you've heard it.) "The timing you can probably get quite right," Dr.
> Goebl said. "What is really difficult is to get how long the notes were
> held and how the pedal was moved and so on. You don't have that
> information. You can just guess. The result is something that sounds like
> but never truly will be Gould. It's always an approximation."
>
> So is he saying that Dr. Walker's track isn't authentic?
>
> "There you have to go into the philosophical domain," Dr. Goebl replied.
> "A recording is just an acoustic document of what took place."
>
> In other words, a recording isn't authentic, either. It is also at a
> remove, or two or three, from the original performer, and it is also
> affected by the decisions of the engineers who helped create it.
>
> The Gould recording, after all, wasn't recorded in one take. Many
> different takes were spliced together to create it. Is it any more real
> than a computer replica? Only if you say it is.
>
> Play It Again, Vladimir (via Computer) - New York Times
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager