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:

George Brock-Nannestad <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 9 Jun 2005 07:56:12 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (82 lines)

From: Patent Tactics, George Brock-Nannestad

Hello all,

it is a healthy sign of the all-pervading curiosity of musical man that all
avenues of research are explored, and modern and in particular fast computer
technology permits us to create definitions for filters (in the most general
sense) that will distinguish even individual piano tones in a chord. This
done in many places now, and I happen to know a bit about the work by Gerhard
Widmer and his group in Austria. Basically, it is a three-pronged approach,
where the individual sounds and their significance as regards timing and
strength are determined hand-in-hand with discovering how the musical mind
hears such phenomena and how performance should be to sound "nice" or good
versus bad.

The only sad side effect of such research is that the magic disappears, and
in particular if precise goals are set for a good-sounding and selling manner
of performance, and if training in conservatories aim for just that by
technical feedback. On the other hand, perhaps we can then rid ourselves of
the need for tightly fitting dresses or strange haircuts.

It is entirely feasible to create a file that will control a piano out of the
recording of a sonic event - Jonathan Berger has done that with the sound
from the famous Brahms cylinder. Obviously he has not proposed that we are
hearing Brahms playing - it is a modelling, and we may learn something else
than by merely listening to a noise-reduced rendering or slightly more
complex, which I have done - the sound after counteracting the influence of
the recording system.

The only unethical about such approaches would be to claim that we now have
the truth, that this is the way that a particular artist played and sounded.
It is a reconstruction, we may learn something, and the sound may well
compete with modern recordings, because there will be some out there who
prefer the reconstruction. Alas, if it also comptetes with modern live
performances, then concert life as we know it will die out ("Death of a
Music"). Because it will mean that just like singers who cannot perform any
more without a microphone at the ear or cheek, we shall have pianists playing
through a processor. The grand piano with piezoelectric fine-tuning of each
string has already been patented, and I see no reason why there cannot be an
electronic Zwischensetzer placed between the keys and the piano action to
fine-adjust the actual timing of the hammer blow in accordance with the newly
developed rules for good performance. The sound would still be live from a
piano, but the pianist's ability will be extended.

The crucial question is very well put in the NY Times article:

So is he [Dr. Goebl] 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.

----- here we may say that the simpler and more transparent a
recording/reproduction method is, the easier it is to compensate for some of
the technical shortcomings and to prove that this is all that has been done.
And so, the replay of original recordings is still closer to the source than
the present experiments.

----- however it does not help at all to misuse the Turing test, as in:

> 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.
>

----- because here we do not need "a" person, but "the" person. And if we
only think that because we are told, then that is unethical.

Thanks to Dick Spottswood for having distributed the original text.

Kind regards,


George

P.S. The hums and grunts of Glenn Gould or Sergiu Celebidache can obviously
be distinguished and added in suitable proportion.

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

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