41–50 of 83 posts
Lots of other cool Spotify-scraping projects by the author at the bottom.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Then I'll back up to the fact that it should actually play the correct music for the tag.
Talk about false advertising. I couldn't find the button that plays all of the samples at the same time.
If you still feel that you didn't get what you were looking for ... here's an acceptable substitute perhaps?
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's a great music discovery service that I've used several times in the past. I've found some good artists this way, and really wish someone would build something similar for fiction books. The only downside is it's tied exclusively to Spotify.
This reminds me of the old school flash app Ishkur's Guide to Electronic Music. Man was that thing ahead of it's time. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishkur%27s_Guide_to_Electronic...
I 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.
I was expecting to just hear white noise. Isn't that what all frequencies is added together, like the color white is all colors added together?
A more even-sounding spectrum is pink noise which is equal energy per base 2 logarithmic bandwidth. Sounds like a waterfall.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sound waves are physical. You cannot change the empirical outcome by doing the math differently. Sound waves are indeed cancelled out by their inverse.
Well, for starters, it's physically impossible to have an infinite number of speakers playing an infinite number of waveforms simultaneously, so this silly idea does require mathematical abstraction to be meaningful. That shouldn't be too surprising because there are many places in the physical world where we use infinite series to calculate simple finite physical quantities, e.g. when we integrate to find the area o…
(Also, you're missing the frequency components there; your math cannot reproduce any sound at all, it can only reproduce different amplitudes of the same sine wave.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, for starters, it's physically impossible to have an infinite number of speakers playing an infinite number of waveforms simultaneously, so this silly idea does require mathematical abstraction to be meaningful. That shouldn't be too surprising because there are many places in the physical world where we use infinite series to calculate simple finite physical quantities, e.g. when we integrate to find the area o…
That reasoning allows you to get any final signal you want depending on where you stop in the series, not on how you order the individual coefficients. Addition is still commutative. The parent comment was about every sound _and_ its inverse, which can only ever add up to zero. (Also, you're missing the frequency components there; your math cannot reproduce any sound at all, it can only reproduce different amplitudes…
Also, your point about commutativity is more subtle than you think; it fails for an infinite sum because you have an infinite space in which to rearrange things. Sure, the terms cancel eventually, but you can keep sticking the negative terms farther and farther back in a pattern so that by the time they've cancelled earlier positive terms, there's already a bunch of new positive terms to take their place. The subtlety comes from the fact that you can keep doing this forever, and you can do it in a way where the sum eventually converges to a specific value.
But don't take my word for it. This is an extremely well-known and basic result in mathematical analysis (the fancy math term for calculus and related topics). Again, see links above, or go straight to a proof [0]. If you want a deeper understanding, check out Rudin's Principle's of Mathematical Analysis [1], which explains this and other fun math stuff very well.
[edit] Just to be crystal clear, the Riemann series theorem does not apply to partial sums, which is what you are saying; if you do an infinite sum on a conditionally convergent series (like the alternating harmonic sum, a variation on which I used in my example), then your final result can literally be any number you want based on how you order the terms in the series. You can set it up so that the infinite sum keeps getting closer an closer to an arbitrary value. If this sounds nonintuitive, it's because infinite phenomena are subtle and nonintuitive!! This is a very cool example of how weird things get once you start dealing with the infinite.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riemann_series_theorem#Proof
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Principles-Mathematical-Analysis-Inte...