i've been sperging on your drum programming threads all morning- dude, i feel enlightened by the knowledge that you have thrust upon me- but i fear that my thirst may become unquenchable.
This is gold. Thank you very much for sharing this amazing work! Ever since I switched my focus from being a jazz musician to now currently studying computer science, I've always felt that my music knowledge is an advantage that I could leverage with my programming skills one day. This video just widen up that possibilities even more for me, so I can't thank you enough for that. Music consists of a great deal of patterns, after all. It's one of my goals to strip away all those patterns and programize them. I hope there will come a day where a computer generated music sounds good without any human help.
Beautiful work, Matt. Thank you for sharing. This should be essential viewing for anyone producing music with modular hardware, DAWs, Max/PD... so everyone, basically.
This is the best explanation of how rithmic, harmonic music works I have heard to date. It does however not account for exceptions. I like to make disharmony part of the harmony so it doesn´t get boring or predictable. Also as a composer you want to play with the expectation of your audience, so you also need a baseline of what complexity of music they can process. It is different when you are writing poetry for poets or doing jokes for comedians. Not radically different, but still subtly so.
hallo! you are absolutely correct, unfortunately this talk was made for a conference and I had a strict 10 minute limit, so I couldn't get into anywhere near the detail I wanted to The music I make is on the complicated side, and beleive me, I definitely use the whole "entrainment, interruption, confusion, resolution" thing that you allude to above I write microtonal music and so a lot of these details are simplifications so that they make sense to your average 12 tone musician, lots, and I mean LOTS of comprimises had to be made to keep the talk "understandable"
This is a really good overview. The idea of quantizing beat-synced LFOs to generate melodies is something I've used with modular hardware - a fun way to generate ideas and spur thinking, while still having some degree of control/musicality.
I thoroughtly enjoyed this. For people wanting to do the melodic line -> scale quantiser thing though, I would recommend not having "pitches" as your melodic contour, but rather using "scale degrees". This eliminates repeated notes caused by having fewer available pitches in the quantised version.
Yes! You are right, and this is exactly how I'm doing it in the real patch, but I had to explain all the concepts in under 10 minutes to submit the talk to the acmc conference, so I had to gloss over a bunch of stuff for the sake of clarity
@@skueuemusic2670 Right on, my man. I had actually JUST started using the "clave" framework for my own rig, so it's super interesting to see just how MUCH you're using it. It's a delightfully playful way to work with your system, since you can make very complex additive rhythms this way. I'm a max user, but I vibe really hard with this. I would LOVE to watch a full walkthrough that goes into further detail at some point in the future! And to reciprocate.
@@skueuemusic2670 fuck yeah. My kick right now is doing the clave based on numbers in my life. Like, having my sequencer clave be my phone number, social security, stuff like that.
Very useful stuff! It would be really interesting to see how you implement some of these concepts in a PD patch but this in itself has clarified a lot of things I was confused about in a big picture sense. I messed with algorithms and markov chains in Max a bit when I was in college and lately I've been itching to dig a little deeper in PD than just rudimentary conditional logic.
I think it would be hard to do, because there are too many different ways to code, and many different ways to do music theory, so unless you had a book for every combination of coding platform and music theory approach, it would be too restrictive to be useful to most people I think it's much better approach to take on a project, look at what are the best tools and resources available, and then learn those tools and resources
Obviously, you know a lot of music theory and are able to put that into an abstract presentation, which is good for learning that to a computer. Sadly you give no (short) musical examples of the details, nor any musical example of a full result. i.m.o. this is a great omission in a video presentation about automatic music generation. The musical output should be most relevant.
This was originally meant for a music conference and I had a 10 minute limit for the presentation, which is why the whole thing was rushed and I didn't have time for music examples, to complicate matters even further, I mostly write microtonal music and there was no way I could have fit that very large topic into the video as well, if you want an example of my system in action here is some music: skueue.bandcamp.com/track/amphiprotic
Also, I've been re-writing the music software for the past 3 years, and there are no current releases of music that feature this version of the software I use, ( which I am still working on regularly) but here is the most recent track I've made in it ( I think 3 months ago? ) drive.google.com/file/d/1aeqyIQaN9ITBUei1Mc6xpXy4YQ1IoXx1/view
![43 Music Theory Concepts That EVERY Modern Composer Should Master [The Music Theory Map]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qeS8txkoUH4/mqdefault.jpg)
i've been sperging on your drum programming threads all morning- dude, i feel enlightened by the knowledge that you have thrust upon me- but i fear that my thirst may become unquenchable.
Your years developing this stuff really shines through here Matt. Clear, concise and insightful. Great work 👍
This is gold. Thank you very much for sharing this amazing work! Ever since I switched my focus from being a jazz musician to now currently studying computer science, I've always felt that my music knowledge is an advantage that I could leverage with my programming skills one day.
This video just widen up that possibilities even more for me, so I can't thank you enough for that.
Music consists of a great deal of patterns, after all. It's one of my goals to strip away all those patterns and programize them. I hope there will come a day where a computer generated music sounds good without any human help.
Beautiful work, Matt. Thank you for sharing. This should be essential viewing for anyone producing music with modular hardware, DAWs, Max/PD... so everyone, basically.
This is the best thing I have found in years. Thank you so much!
the visuals and diagrams are the most comprehensive i've seen! super useful, thanks!!!!
This is the best explanation of how rithmic, harmonic music works I have heard to date.
It does however not account for exceptions. I like to make disharmony part of the harmony so it doesn´t get boring or predictable. Also as a composer you want to play with the expectation of your audience, so you also need a baseline of what complexity of music they can process. It is different when you are writing poetry for poets or doing jokes for comedians. Not radically different, but still subtly so.
hallo! you are absolutely correct, unfortunately this talk was made for a conference and I had a strict 10 minute limit, so I couldn't get into anywhere near the detail I wanted to
The music I make is on the complicated side, and beleive me, I definitely use the whole "entrainment, interruption, confusion, resolution" thing that you allude to above
I write microtonal music and so a lot of these details are simplifications so that they make sense to your average 12 tone musician, lots, and I mean LOTS of comprimises had to be made to keep the talk "understandable"
This is a really good overview. The idea of quantizing beat-synced LFOs to generate melodies is something I've used with modular hardware - a fun way to generate ideas and spur thinking, while still having some degree of control/musicality.
Really appreciate the concise look in to your process. Excited to check out the bandcamp!
Thank you!! For this video, this video helped me give structure to my musical ideas
This is such a good presentation
I thoroughtly enjoyed this. For people wanting to do the melodic line -> scale quantiser thing though, I would recommend not having "pitches" as your melodic contour, but rather using "scale degrees". This eliminates repeated notes caused by having fewer available pitches in the quantised version.
Yes! You are right, and this is exactly how I'm doing it in the real patch, but I had to explain all the concepts in under 10 minutes to submit the talk to the acmc conference, so I had to gloss over a bunch of stuff for the sake of clarity
@@skueuemusic2670 Right on, my man. I had actually JUST started using the "clave" framework for my own rig, so it's super interesting to see just how MUCH you're using it. It's a delightfully playful way to work with your system, since you can make very complex additive rhythms this way. I'm a max user, but I vibe really hard with this.
I would LOVE to watch a full walkthrough that goes into further detail at some point in the future! And to reciprocate.
@@machinate I'm still finishing off the latest version, but once it's done I'll probably do a big long realty video going through it all
@@skueuemusic2670 fuck yeah. My kick right now is doing the clave based on numbers in my life. Like, having my sequencer clave be my phone number, social security, stuff like that.
This information is gold
This is very similar way of thinking on how I write my patches as well. I got a few ideas from how you layed out the process.
Nice video!
Very useful stuff! It would be really interesting to see how you implement some of these concepts in a PD patch but this in itself has clarified a lot of things I was confused about in a big picture sense. I messed with algorithms and markov chains in Max a bit when I was in college and lately I've been itching to dig a little deeper in PD than just rudimentary conditional logic.
this is increadible
Brilliant!
where can i find a succint book that combines this sort of "music theory" with code? is that even possible? :)
I think it would be hard to do, because there are too many different ways to code, and many different ways to do music theory, so unless you had a book for every combination of coding platform and music theory approach, it would be too restrictive to be useful to most people
I think it's much better approach to take on a project, look at what are the best tools and resources available, and then learn those tools and resources
@@skueuemusic2670 that makes a lot of sense. Thanks! :)
do you do this ppl. I looking for someone to this for me.
Obviously, you know a lot of music theory and are able to put that into an abstract presentation, which is good for learning that to a computer.
Sadly you give no (short) musical examples of the details, nor any musical example of a full result. i.m.o. this is a great omission in a video presentation about automatic music generation. The musical output should be most relevant.
This was originally meant for a music conference and I had a 10 minute limit for the presentation, which is why the whole thing was rushed and I didn't have time for music examples, to complicate matters even further, I mostly write microtonal music and there was no way I could have fit that very large topic into the video as well, if you want an example of my system in action here is some music: skueue.bandcamp.com/track/amphiprotic
Also, I've been re-writing the music software for the past 3 years, and there are no current releases of music that feature this version of the software I use, ( which I am still working on regularly) but here is the most recent track I've made in it ( I think 3 months ago? ) drive.google.com/file/d/1aeqyIQaN9ITBUei1Mc6xpXy4YQ1IoXx1/view
@@skueuemusic2670 Hey, thank you! i'll be taking some time today to listen to it!