WAV to MIDI (errata)
By Claus Kucher
I forgot the following in my review of ".Wav (analog) -> .Midi" conversion:
In MMD 95.11.01 Larry (larrys@zk3.dec.com) replied to Robbie Rhodes:
> rhodes@foxtail.com (Robbie Rhodes):
>> Howzat again? Yes: true random noise on the time base doesn't sound right,
>> either. Therefore, the original performer was NOT random in his timing,
>> and there must be some sort of correlation with the musical figure he's
>> performing.
> Yeah, that doesn't surprise me one bit. I'd expect this noise to
> come from two sources, one being "expression" expressed with minute
> changes in tempo based on the material being played at the moment
> (and affected by the mood of the musician, background noise, and
> so forth and also affected by background time marks, such as clocks
> or clapping of the audience - even cadences of steps of people that
> are moving around).
>
> The other source would be smaller, but would relate to the player's
> physical ability to move to the next note - i.e. whatever the metro-
> nome marks, it takes physical time to get ready for the next note,
> which may occur slightly ahead or slightly behind depending on how
> quick it is to reach.
>
> I suspect "live" performances sound that way mostly because of the
> first effect, there is a real interaction between player and audience
> that cannot be replicated. However, one of the real charms of mech-
> anical music is listening to the "enthusiasm" of the player despite
> what (if any) enthusiasm is coming from the audience. I'm thinking
> of a "can-can" piece on a Welty I heard on CD once, whose undeniable
> enthusiasm still makes me smile when I think of it. This is mostly
> volume and fast tempo, I suspect, so using a faster arrangement and
> more velocity will help. The second effect, minor timing variations
> due to physical instrument manipulation, _could_ be simulated if you
> did an analysis of access times for each note and the effect on timing
> and velocity. Not a trivial exercise by any means. _IF_ we managed
> to create a genetic Analog-to-MIDI translator, however, it would not
> be unreasonable to post-process the MIDI output and analyze the
> timing variations to get a better idea of how to synthesize these
> effects using a relatively simple mathematical algorithm. One of
> the great strengths of genetic programming is that you don't need to
> fully understand something in order to program with it.
>
> Good stuff to think about, though. Just a few ideas off the top
> of my head. Should get some good feedback from the list, but I
> would also suggest posting it to comp.music and archiving the
> thread so Jody can put that on the list as well. I suspect there
> are some people who could really run with this on that newsgroup.
>
>> P.S. I love your enthusiasm on the music box stuff. Keep talking,
>> keep writing, keep your spirits up. I'll write a note soon suggesting
>> a method of Midi control for your traditional mechanism. (Hint: its based
>> on another widespread multi-channel control mechanism that's almost as old
>> as the pinned cylinder!)
>
> Enthusiasm is one of those things I bring to any endeavour that
> interests me. =) But, as I noted above, there is something about
> mechanical music that I just find much more engaging than a modern
> CD of some performance, no matter what one says about the quality
> of the reproduction. A mechanical instrument _is_ a _real_ instrum-
> ent, and that makes all the difference. Looking forward to hearing
> your next idea...
|
(Message sent Mon 28 Oct 1996, 08:27:34 GMT, from time zone GMT+0100.) |
|
