Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 221 posts

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#211

Post by danet »

spiralganglion wrote: post #175
danet wrote: post #174

I tend to listen to ambient music. There's radio show on CBC radio 2 -- After Dark, that plays tunes with not too many lyrics.

CBC Radio 2 used to (or might still?) have a similar program called The Signal that was really good. And before it, there was a program called Brave New Waves that was probably my favourite late night show in existence. Really sad it doesn't exist anymore.

After dark is the contiuation of the signal -- same music but different host.

I have archive of the last 3 years of the signal in mp3, it's about 90GB.

Send me a message at gimmespam at flamy.ca and I'll send you a link.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#212

Post by NelsonMinar »

Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #202
gexaha wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Aphex Twin actually listened to Stockhausen (and vice versa): http://www.synthtopia.com/content/2010/10/15/karlheinz-stock... and they probably met https://www.reddit.com/r/aphextwin/comments/8vyrbf/aphex_twi...

Richard D. James only heard Stockhausen for the first time after the press had been claiming his early works were influenced by Stockhausen. It turns out they weren't.

I don't think it's possible to make electronic music and not be influenced by Stockhausen. If not directly, then indirectly through diffusion.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#213

Post by ryankrage77 »

haasted wrote: post #201
ars wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would that work? The idea is it never ends, so how do you download it? It creates a new song each time.

Well, I would be willing to settle for a mix of 1-2 hours. :)

You can use audacity to record audio coming out of your computer - just change "MME" to "Windows WASAPI" next to the input/output device settings.

Then, play audio from generative.fm and record it for 1-2 hours. You can export to MP3 or WAV when done.

I did something similar (but with OBS) in this video where I remixed music from the game Mirror's Edge Catalyst using Sonic Pi - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gQ8dD5Bz3_E

Personally, I like the generative aspect.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#215

Post by spiralganglion »

vonseel wrote: post #99
spiralganglion wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Phrase is actually the appropriate term. A bar would be 4 beats (for this song, which is in 4/4). The main phrase of the melody is 4 bars long. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrase_(music)

Good point. I miswrote the original comment, anyways, I meant beats. I thought a bar is 4 beats, a measure is 4 bars (in 4/4)? Going to have to look this up but is measure == phrase == section? Or I guess, a section can be arbitrary number of bars depending on song structure.

There's a fair amount of looseness in how these terms are used, in practice, depending on the context.

4/4 means 4 beats per bar, and we'll use a quarter note to represent a beat when writing notation. Another example would be 7/8, which is 7 beats per bar, and we'll use an eighth note for the beat when writing notation.

Looking at music in terms of bars or measures only really matters when creating traditional western sheet music notation. If we're writing computer code, or playing by ear, or looking at other kinds of music notation, those terms like "bar" and "measure" become less meaningful, and other terms become more useful or appropriate for describing the structure of the music.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#216

Post by Mediterraneo10 »

NelsonMinar wrote: post #212
Mediterraneo10 wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Richard D. James only heard Stockhausen for the first time after the press had been claiming his early works were influenced by Stockhausen. It turns out they weren't.

I don't think it's possible to make electronic music and not be influenced by Stockhausen. If not directly, then indirectly through diffusion.

By the 1980s most Stockhausen recordings were out of print (as Stockhausen had bought the rights back from Deutsche Grammophon), and Stockhausen was no longer traveling widely to promote his works and he had become rather reclusive as he focused on writing the LICHT operas. So, there was limited opportunity to hear his work and his influence on electronic musicians of that decade is overstated. The advent of drum machines and then PCs that, as people discovered, could be modified to produce unusual sounds is really what sparked electronic experimentation for most producers of that generation.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#217

Post by logotype »

richard_todd wrote: post #194
logotype wrote: post #121

For the last 11 years I’ve been listening to autechre exclusively. Maybe that’s weird, but it’s all the sounds I need :)

How did this come about? At some point you realized you were listening to mostly Autechre, and made a conscious decision to cut everything else out? (I’m listening to LP5 now, somehow it has always been my favorite)

yes, exactly!

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#218

Post by [deleted] »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #207
pcf wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This should be doable? You could feed your entire catalogue into the machine, and have it start generating music. For every pass, you could listen to the created piece and tell it "I would not make anything like element X, because of [specific reason], so take that out." Enough of these passes and detailed removal of elements you wouldn't create, and you should get closer and closer to a machine that would be your mu…

You need a machine description of "element" - which turns out to be a lot harder than it sounds.

[deleted]

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#219

Post by AgentME »

pcf wrote: post #147
twic wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an interview with Eno in Wired in 1995 [1] that i still think about sometimes. Amongst other things, he talks about lifting himself to the next meta-level of composition, where he doesn't write music, he writes rules for a box which makes music: Q: If I could give you a black box that could do anything, what would you have it do? A: I would love to have a box onto which I could offload choice making. A thin…

This should be doable? You could feed your entire catalogue into the machine, and have it start generating music. For every pass, you could listen to the created piece and tell it "I would not make anything like element X, because of [specific reason], so take that out." Enough of these passes and detailed removal of elements you wouldn't create, and you should get closer and closer to a machine that would be your mu…

This is missing the complexity to a lot of music. Swap "music" in your post for "books" or "software" or "human interactions" and maybe the skipped complexity becomes obvious. What if the key ingredient to someone's music is a long over-arching structure throughout the song of highs and lows following the emotional progression of a predictable 3-act story? The software would need to be capable of recognizing and synthesizing and tuning that kind of high-level element and surely many others like that. Even songs that are made up of a few repeating tracks overlaid probably have high-level qualities like that the artist tweaks the setup until the end results meet the high-level goal they were aiming for.

I'm sure a musician who was also a programmer who understood their own tastes and creation process well enough could currently create something like this for a specific genre, but I think we're very far from a one-size-fits-all generator.

Re: Generating More of My Favorite Aphex Twin Track

#220

Post by budgi4 »

spacemadness wrote: post #148

In knowing the original track very well, I find this version fascinating but also frustrating to listen to. It really emphasizes for me the importance of well thought out note placement and timing and the connection throughout, especially in minimalist pieces. This might sound pompous, but it's like the original seeks to tell a story, but this version is like pulling words and phrases out of a hat; the emotional payo…

The story can only come from understanding the piece. The understanding requires a deeper knowledge. Interesting that it lacks 'emotional intelligence' - is that something which can also be learnt?
Post reply on HN