Fractal music debates...

[fmshawn]

I think y'all should both debate it and make it!

This has been one of the most lively discussions here in years!

Back in 2000 I stirred up some debate here on what fractal music
really means.  I tried to give it a definition, but I think in the
end, the definition I proposed was a little too loose to be useful.  
(Say that 5 times fast...)  

I do think, at the end of the day, the music based on the fractal
images is indeed fractal.  And despite my (once legendary) insistence
that humans don't putz with the output of their musical fractal
generators (I preferred 'pure' fractals), I still think that the human
arrangements of fractally generated patterns also qualifies as
fractal.  

Shawn


My earlier post, cleaned up a bit, may be found in our files
repository:  
http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/ICvkSLsTx10Ro8chEJg9hZSJYeNj4Klx_CrLTO_6C
9Gqma9CitVVcMwmcaAW9kMDMFKeya87gzPnEkESLcX1Y267bvqjOu3F1xmR-
VnaUqc/FractalDefinitions1-shawns-take.doc

[webmonkey]

Indeed, if perhaps not the most amicable one - we've lost one member
over it already....

Really, you can all re-classify it as "broccoli music" and I don't
really don't mind too much. My interest lies not in its esoteric
properties, but whether my ears like the end result.  Whether it follows
one strict mathematical model or another is the very least of my
concerns.  So many already will combine the output of several different
generative processes, and perhaps even remix with a variety of live
instruments that "fractal music" is not being used as it's own end, but
simply as another "tool" to be incorporated into a larger work.  

Phil J.

On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 02:04 +0000, fmshawn wrote:

>
> I think y'all should both debate it and make it!
>
> This has been one of the most lively discussions here in years!
>
> Back in 2000 I stirred up some debate here on what fractal music
> really means. I tried to give it a definition, but I think in the
> end, the definition I proposed was a little too loose to be useful.
> (Say that 5 times fast...)
>
> I do think, at the end of the day, the music based on the fractal
> images is indeed fractal. And despite my (once legendary) insistence
> that humans don't putz with the output of their musical fractal
> generators (I preferred 'pure' fractals), I still think that the
> human
> arrangements of fractally generated patterns also qualifies as
> fractal.
>
> Shawn
>
> My earlier post, cleaned up a bit, may be found in our files
> repository:
> http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/ICvkSLsTx10Ro8chEJg9hZSJYeNj4Klx_CrLTO_6C
> 9Gqma9CitVVcMwmcaAW9kMDMFKeya87gzPnEkESLcX1Y267bvqjOu3F1xmR-
> VnaUqc/FractalDefinitions1-shawns-take.doc
>
>
>
>
>  

[Harlan Brothers]

I agree with Phil (J) that concerns about "classification" are
entirely unnecessary to the creative process.  It's all about the
ears - if it sounds good, do it.

The interesting part for me (aside from the listening), is figuring
out what aspects of music are actually "fractal" in the same sense
that we measure visual fractals. We take it for granted that we
often "see" the way in which an image or object is self-similar.  
However, whether we see the fractal structure or not, it is
mathematically demonstrable.

A rich area of investigation lies in identifying where to find
fractal structure in the arts and in nature:
   
http://classes.yale.edu/Fractals/Panorama/welcome.html

In each case, it is important to be specific about what
characteristic of the object under consideration is actually
fractal.  A well-known example is the Mandelbrot set.  The "set" is
not fractal, but the boundary is.  In this case it is obvious to the
eye.

Given its intangible nature, music presents difficulties.  Just as
images can possess different fractal qualities, so can music.  In
some cases ears or a score are useful, but otherwise we must rely on
mathematical analysis, which means we need to be specific about what
musical characteristics we are measuring.  

Assuming that music derived from a fractal is automatically fractal
is something like taking a poem by Kipling, transliterating it using
the Cyrillic alphabet and then presenting it as Russian poetry.  The
point here is simply that the desired outcome is by no means
guaranteed.

As I wrote earlier, it is possible to insure fractality by being
careful with mapping.  It is also possible that fractal structure
exists without intent, but to be certain of this it is necessary to
make some sort of measurement relative to pitch, interval, duration,
dynamics, etc.

Often researchers try to link some concept of fractal dimension to
genre or "likeability," though this is not my focus.  Some use MIDI
renditions while others use audio files.  The common thread is that
all such efforts require identifying specific attributes for
measurement.

AND... none of this matters if one simply wishes to make music!


Harlan



--- In cnfractal_music@..., PhilJackson <pjackson1@...>
wrote:
>
> Indeed, if perhaps not the most amicable one - we've lost one member
> over it already....
>
> Really, you can all re-classify it as "broccoli music" and I don't
> really don't mind too much. My interest lies not in its esoteric
> properties, but whether my ears like the end result.  Whether it
follows
> one strict mathematical model or another is the very least of my
> concerns.  So many already will combine the output of several
different
> generative processes, and perhaps even remix with a variety of live
> instruments that "fractal music" is not being used as it's own end,
but

> simply as another "tool" to be incorporated into a larger work.  
>
> Phil J.
>
> On Thu, 2008-10-02 at 02:04 +0000, fmshawn wrote:
> >
> > I think y'all should both debate it and make it!
> >
> > This has been one of the most lively discussions here in years!
> >
> > Back in 2000 I stirred up some debate here on what fractal music
> > really means. I tried to give it a definition, but I think in the
> > end, the definition I proposed was a little too loose to be

useful.
> > (Say that 5 times fast...)
> >
> > I do think, at the end of the day, the music based on the fractal
> > images is indeed fractal. And despite my (once legendary)
insistence

> > that humans don't putz with the output of their musical fractal
> > generators (I preferred 'pure' fractals), I still think that the
> > human
> > arrangements of fractally generated patterns also qualifies as
> > fractal.
> >
> > Shawn
> >
> > My earlier post, cleaned up a bit, may be found in our files
> > repository:
> >

http://f1.grp.yahoofs.com/v1/ICvkSLsTx10Ro8chEJg9hZSJYeNj4Klx_CrLTO_6C
> > 9Gqma9CitVVcMwmcaAW9kMDMFKeya87gzPnEkESLcX1Y267bvqjOu3F1xmR-
> > VnaUqc/FractalDefinitions1-shawns-take.doc
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

[webmonkey]

Hi all,

I agree with some of this.

> <Harlan>
> I agree with Phil (J) that concerns about "classification" are
> entirely unnecessary to the creative process. It's all about the
> ears - if it sounds good, do it.

<me>
I think that is aim of most people in this group, to produce something
that sounds good, or least interesting.  Not as a mathematical proof.

<Harlan>
>
> The interesting part for me (aside from the listening), is figuring
> out what aspects of music are actually "fractal" in the same sense
> that we measure visual fractals. We take it for granted that we
> often "see" the way in which an image or object is self-similar.
> However, whether we see the fractal structure or not, it is
> mathematically demonstrable.

<me>
I think it would be a much easier chore with a graphic fractal.  With
music, the waters are further muddied by the fact that in practice, a
lot of people do a good bit of editing and combining the output of
several things together these days.  (Much to Shawn's chagrin ;-)



   


<Harlan>

>
> Assuming that music derived from a fractal is automatically fractal
> is something like taking a poem by Kipling, transliterating it using
> the Cyrillic alphabet and then presenting it as Russian poetry. The
> point here is simply that the desired outcome is by no means
> guaranteed.
>
> As I wrote earlier, it is possible to insure fractality by being
> careful with mapping. It is also possible that fractal structure
> exists without intent, but to be certain of this it is necessary to
> make some sort of measurement relative to pitch, interval, duration,
> dynamics, etc.
>

<me>
I would think the mapping important, or rather how you arrive at the
mapping.  Graphically, you might iterate over sets of points in the
real/complex planes and paint a pixel a certain color depending upon how
many iterations of a complex equation occur before either an "escape
value" is reached or N iterations occur and you determine it will never
reach "escape velocity".  Music-generating software would mostly follow
that same model I would think, though there are others.  I think that
there was software at one time that produced notes at each iteration, so
not sure about that...

<Harlan>
> Often researchers try to link some concept of fractal dimension to
> genre or "likeability," though this is not my focus. Some use MIDI
> renditions while others use audio files. The common thread is that
> all such efforts require identifying specific attributes for
> measurement.

<Me>
Interesting.  If they are looking for "likeability" does that mean that
they are analyzing the "fluff" on top-40 radio stations?  Surely not.
 
<Harlan>
>
> AND... none of this matters if one simply wishes to make music!
>

<me>
Quite true!  I am sure that your research is quite challenging, but what
if you used your acquired knowledge thus far on this subject to actually
write a fractal music composition tool that was 100% aligned to your
ideal of what fractal music should be like?


Phil J.


>

[Will Grant]

I'd like to use some fractal signal generation in musical  
composition.  There are some fractal generators in Jitter that output  
matrices, but I'm stymied trying to get them into serial floats.  
Though maybe one could just split the list, of course.

[cherideshaw]

Hello everyone,
 
  Haven't added a word in the past, so it is about time I put my feminine two cents worth. It doesn't matter a bit about how anyone looks at fractal music, because in all reality it is different for everyone. No two people hear it exactly the same. We all vibrate at different frequencies and not all of us get the same thing out of music, or life. One person may feel the calming effect and another an irritating effect. It is what they hear from it, how it resonates with their own frequencies and vibration. I have  studied with Barbara Hero, whom I call the Einstein of Music, Sound and Frequencies. She has the Lamboma Keyboard and so much research, I have not been able to keep up with her genius. Robert Walker has worked with her over the years and been instrumental in some of her software used on the Lambdoma. Her website is www.lambdoma.com . I also have a Lambdoma, have used it in treatment for myself and others, I will over the next few years
 develop a method that people will be able to use the keyboard and create Printable Fractal Art from their own Fractal Musical Frequencies. It will be like taking an imprint of your iris and blowing it up, our eyes are the window to our organs and our health, as fractal music created by ones self is a healing modality and a window to our well being. We are able to look inside and create a vibrational harmony to heal thyself. As I look at things a little differently than others, I've been told, I vision our universe as a mathematical calculation, everything in essence is and has a number related to it. Just think about it. So if we take those numbers and turn them into a calculation on the keyboard, or musical tones, cords, in certain frequencies, they turn into music (sound) and then if you speed them up they turn into light and light turns into infinity (infrared).I feel I have expressed my point of view, there is no right or wrong, we all have our
 opinions and as long as we respect one another and realize that we are all right in our own beliefs, we will then be the teacher and the student. For isn't that what life is about.


Cheri DeShaw
Camp Comfort
1370 John St
Camano ISland, WA 98282
360 572-4220
760 567-6684 Cell

--- On Sat, 10/4/08, PhilJackson <pjackson1@...> wrote:

From: PhilJackson <pjackson1@...>
Subject: Re: [cnfractal_music] Re: Fractal music debates...
To: cnfractal_music@...
Date: Saturday, October 4, 2008, 8:19 PM






Hi all,

I agree with some of this.

> <Harlan>
> I agree with Phil (J) that concerns about "classification" are
> entirely unnecessary to the creative process. It's all about the
> ears - if it sounds good, do it.

<me>
I think that is aim of most people in this group, to produce something
that sounds good, or least interesting. Not as a mathematical proof.

<Harlan>
>
> The interesting part for me (aside from the listening), is figuring
> out what aspects of music are actually "fractal" in the same sense
> that we measure visual fractals. We take it for granted that we
> often "see" the way in which an image or object is self-similar.
> However, whether we see the fractal structure or not, it is
> mathematically demonstrable.

<me>
I think it would be a much easier chore with a graphic fractal. With
music, the waters are further muddied by the fact that in practice, a
lot of people do a good bit of editing and combining the output of
several things together these days. (Much to Shawn's chagrin ;-)

<Harlan>

>
> Assuming that music derived from a fractal is automatically fractal
> is something like taking a poem by Kipling, transliterating it using
> the Cyrillic alphabet and then presenting it as Russian poetry. The
> point here is simply that the desired outcome is by no means
> guaranteed.
>
> As I wrote earlier, it is possible to insure fractality by being
> careful with mapping. It is also possible that fractal structure
> exists without intent, but to be certain of this it is necessary to
> make some sort of measurement relative to pitch, interval, duration,
> dynamics, etc.
>

<me>
I would think the mapping important, or rather how you arrive at the
mapping. Graphically, you might iterate over sets of points in the
real/complex planes and paint a pixel a certain color depending upon how
many iterations of a complex equation occur before either an "escape
value" is reached or N iterations occur and you determine it will never
reach "escape velocity". Music-generating software would mostly follow
that same model I would think, though there are others. I think that
there was software at one time that produced notes at each iteration, so
not sure about that...

<Harlan>
> Often researchers try to link some concept of fractal dimension to
> genre or "likeability, " though this is not my focus. Some use MIDI
> renditions while others use audio files. The common thread is that
> all such efforts require identifying specific attributes for
> measurement.

<Me>
Interesting. If they are looking for "likeability" does that mean that
they are analyzing the "fluff" on top-40 radio stations? Surely not.

<Harlan>
>
> AND... none of this matters if one simply wishes to make music!
>

<me>
Quite true! I am sure that your research is quite challenging, but what
if you used your acquired knowledge thus far on this subject to actually
write a fractal music composition tool that was 100% aligned to your
ideal of what fractal music should be like?

Phil J.

>

 













[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]