The bottom of the page is a little weird. "Byzantine" is not Russian Liturgical Music. This is Byzantine Chant: https://youtu.be/Bs--5yMg1g0 Also, Georgian Polyphony did not involve strings as a general rule. There were regional exceptions, but early Slavic polyphony was generally a capella. Here's a good example of Gerogian polyphony: https://v-s.mobi/elia-lrdei-princeton-georgian-choirs-fall-2... Sorry to nitpick,…
It seems like "Byzantine" is just an unfortunate label, which should be "church music", but if you expand it you will see that byzantine chant is present.
Every Noise at Once
31–40 of 83 posts
Re: Every Noise at Once
#32Talk about false advertising. I couldn't find the button that plays all of the samples at the same time.
...but it IS still pretty cool.
Re: Every Noise at Once
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like "Byzantine" is just an unfortunate label, which should be "church music", but if you expand it you will see that byzantine chant is present.
It's still too broad. Byzantine chant is an entire discipline in itself, and so are a bunch of other categories included in "Church Music". There's a category for Anglican choirs, so why not for Russian "Greek" chant or Kievan/Znamenny Polyphony? There's a lot of territory here.
Re: Every Noise at Once
#34I don't get it. I mean, I understand what I'm looking at; a word cloud of music genres that is each linked to a sample. That part I got. But when you label your website 'Every Noise at Once'... I kind of expect to hear multiple (perhaps not 'every') noises at the same time.
Re: Every Noise at Once
#35for starters, no Kwela, Mbaqanga, Marabi, or Highlife. Allthough here is Kwaito
Re: Every Noise at Once
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Depends how you take the sum! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divergent_series#Absolute_conv... [edit] See my comment below: my joke is about the fact that, depending on the order in which you sum an infinite sequence of waveforms, you can create a sequence that converges to any sound you want [1] (as long as those waveforms together span the full frequency space). Note also that a sum over a truly continuous space of…
Sound waves are physical. You cannot change the empirical outcome by doing the math differently. Sound waves are indeed cancelled out by their inverse.
My point is that if you really sum every possible waveform, the resulting value may or may not converge depending on the order in which you sum them; in fact, it's a well-known property of such conditionally-convergent series that you can actually get any limiting value you want based on how your order them [0]! (let's ignore the fact that the fourier coefficients can take on a continuous set of values). For example, even if you were only allowed to play a single frequency sound wave sin(x) at volumes that are the inverse of some integer value multiplied by a max volume of 1 (in arbitrary units), you may or may not have them cancel depending on how you group the terms in the sum:
sum = 1*sin(x) + -1*sin(x) + (1/2)*sin(x) + -(1/2)*sin(x) ...
were the ith term in the sequence (starting at i=1) is a_i = (2/n-1)*sin(x) for odd x
a_i = -(2/n)*sin(x) for even x
This is a conditionally-converging series that will hit all positive and negative harmonic coefficients 1/n and -1/n: the even terms cancel each preceding odd term, and the Nth partial sums therefore alternate between 0 and 2 * sin(x)/(N+1), which itself tends towards zero. But you can group these terms in a different order and get a different limit for the sum; in fact, you can group them to get whatever final value you want!Now, if you extend this thinking to every frequency of sinusoidal wave, you can start summing every pure tone in arbitrary order to get an arbitrary coefficient for each frequency. By picking your limit for each frequency correctly, you can sum your sine waves in a fourier series [1] to get any song you could ever want! And this is while limiting ourselves to discrete frequencies and alternating harmonic coefficients (since it allows us to take a discrete infinite sum).
So the unexplained punchline to my previous comment is that the problem is ill-defined, or rather, that you can view any song as just a specific ordering of an infinite series of other sounds. (You don't have to use sine waves as your basis, by the way; you can use a bunch of different waveforms that look more like "noise" as long as their combination spans the same infinite-dimensional linear space as pure sine waves; you just end up with different coefficients. For example, in quantum mechanics, you can get a sine wave (momentum eigenstate) by summing energy eigenstates (non-sine waves with a specific form) with the correct coefficients.)
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_series_theorem#Alterna...
Re: Every Noise at Once
#37Re: Every Noise at Once
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's still too broad. Byzantine chant is an entire discipline in itself, and so are a bunch of other categories included in "Church Music". There's a category for Anglican choirs, so why not for Russian "Greek" chant or Kievan/Znamenny Polyphony? There's a lot of territory here.
It's a map of Spotify, not an encyclopedia of music. I believe it's intended to give you a taste of something you've never heard of.
Re: Every Noise at Once
#39I don't get it. I mean, I understand what I'm looking at; a word cloud of music genres that is each linked to a sample. That part I got. But when you label your website 'Every Noise at Once'... I kind of expect to hear multiple (perhaps not 'every') noises at the same time.