Forum - Week 2 - The Stimuli Simulacrum

While the forum was primarily about originality(1), we touched on a topic which I wish to pursue further. This is regarding, as I put it, the intellectual integrity of a computer.

Intellectual Property
In our highly developed society it is a criminal offence to steal or replicate another person's intellectual property and masquerade it as your own. While ownership of a physical object has always been a possibility, the prospect of owning the nonphysical has only transpired in recent times. As our species emerged from a faceless fog of anonymity into the populism of the Enlightenment, we fashioned a mentality of self-commercialisation. It was only a matter of time before this egotistical attitude conceived the monetary value that could be attributed to ownership of intellect, and in turn the legal system had to ensure the money went to the rightful owner. Today, a computer is not legally capable of owning anything physical or nonphysical, however it is in our perceived ownership of the nonphysical that a dilemma emerges...

Intellectual Integrity
The physical existence of a manufactured item certifies its creation and implies the prospect of ownership. When there is no physical manifestation of an item, its existence, creation and possibility of ownership is questionable, as it can never be proven. When an idea becomes property, the line between the physical and the intellect is blurred. If we can own a complex amalgamation of electrical stimuli in the human brain, why is it impossible for a computer to possess its own 'intellectual' creation? It could be argued that the creator of the computer owns anything that computer produces, yet our society does not pass ownership of intellectual property over to our parents, our 'creators' if you will. Where is the line that separates intelligence and artificial intelligence? The obvious difference is as simple as the boundaries of organic and mechanical. This however, reignites the initial conundrum of physical and nonphysical possession. If we suggest the nonphysical to be existent such that it can be possessed, why is there such a restrictive physical limitation of 'organic only' to the concept of ownership? We draw the line of ownership at organic, yet blur the line of physicality altogether with ownership of the nonphysical.

Intellectual Evolution
If a computer composes a piece of music based on our rules of harmony and melody, why does it not belong to the computer? When does a computer cease to be following orders, and actually resemble our creative processes? When does a byte, become an idea?

I have asked more questions than I have answered, however it is the existence of the questions that is important.



1. Stephen Whittington, "I Want To Be Original Like Everyone Else." Lecture presented in the Recording Space, Electronic Music Unit, Adelaide University, 8/3/07.

Nerd: But electrical stimuli in the brain can be considered physical!
Me: So can the electrical current in a computer. Thank you for strengthening my argument.

Forum - Week 1 - Introductions and... Uhh....

Did you know Thursdays really suck for me? I have classes 9am till 4pm without a break, meaning I have to eat in the theory lecture. Anyway, the first forum of the year started out the same as first and second semester last year, with no real plan of what to do or how to mark us. All we know is we present anything on a given topic for an unspecified amount of time, and it will somehow be worth 25% of our music tech grade. I don't know why it is necessary have 8 people on each topic, I would think 1 or 2 people could cover a topic quite sufficiently. Perhaps we could present a topic based around Music Technology that we feel needs discussion. I am to discuss the lack of women in our discipline, which to me is inconsequential to the future of Music Technology. If women were not allowed to join, then that would be a topic worth discussing. Are we supposed to force people into a study area, because their 'type' are a minority? If the heads of Music Tech feel that the lack of females is an issue serious enough that it needs investigation, I might wonder whether a woman may be accepted into the course for that reason alone. I would assume the lack of women is due to the lack of female interest in any technology based course. Who knows why? Who cares? Aren't they allowed to do whatever they want? What do they hope to achieve out of this topic? I suppose I could make my presentation on how irrelevant the topic is, but that sort of thing only floats with Mark "MC" Carroll. Maybe I'll invite him along...

Something I always enjoyed was David Harris' mind-expanding electronic music appreciation class in Sem 1 last year. I would prefer to have that class again, and perhaps be graded on an essay about Music Technology in Contemporary Society, or our interpretation of it.

In any case, this Forum ended 50 minutes early as we ran out of things to do/teach. Would I be right to assume that a lecturer teaching a 70 minute class gets paid for 70 minutes? Surely not 2 hours pay. You wouldn't think so.

AA2 - Week 1 - Session Planning and Management

For our first week in Audio Arts we created a basic checklist of the steps required for a recording. Through mostly extracurricular means, I have done about 5 recordings, plus 8 or so of a pianist who has just finished her doctorate in music. My first couple recordings were very disorganised, one of which took 2 hours to set up, but eventually I figured out that there is no such thing as too much preparation. Our exercise for this week is to create a mock session plan for a recording of an artist of notoriety(1). Despite this, I have decided to 'record' the fictional Scottish hard-rock band Love Fist, from Grand Theft Auto: Vice City fame. For those who haven't been *cough* Love Fisted, here is the official advert taken from the game.

MP3 767KB


Pre-Production

Band Name: Love Fist
Style: Hard Rock
Members/Instrumentation: Jezz Torrent (Vocals, Guitar), Willy (Bass), Dick (Guitar), Percy (Percussion)
Equipment: Vocalist, electric guitar (1&2), electric bass, 8-piece drumkit.
Influences: Any dodgy 80s hard rock.
Song(s) to be recorded: Fist Fury
Duration: 3 minutes
Recording Studio: Studio 1, EMU Space and Dead Room; EMU, Adelaide University

Microphonage
Vocals: U87 Neumann
Guitar 1: Shure 57 (x2)
Guitar 2: Shure Beta 58 (x2)
Bass: AKG-BULS
Drums: Drumkit Mic Set


ProTools
Quality: 96kHz, 24bit
Tracks
1:Kick drum
2:Snare
3:HiHat
4:HiTom
5:Mid Tom
6:Floor Tom
7:Overhead Left
8:Overhead Right
9:Bass
10:Guitar 1a
11:Guitar 1b
12:Guitar 2a
13:Guitar 2b
14:Vocals

Microphone Placement:
The lead guitar will have two Shure Beta 58s, one facing square into the centre of the cone and the other at a 45 degree angle, but still aiming to the middle. Each mic will be roughly 20cms away from the speaker face. Back up guitar will use both Shure 57s, one aimed directly into the centre of the cone and the other aimed at the outer edge of the cone. Bass will have the AKG placed in the middle of the 4 speakers in the quad amplifier, around 30cms away. The drums will have each designated drum mic for its respective drum. The overheads will be place in an xy position, to collect a close stereo field. While this sounds good in theory, all mic positions may need to be changed if the desired sound is not achieved.

Tracking

I will first record the drums by themselves, as the overheads are susceptible to bleed from other instruments in the room, and the kit itself can bleed onto the guitar mics. I will have the bassist playing quietly in the room at the same time so that the drummer does not lose his position in the song. Baffles will only be used in certain parts of the space, such at bass traps and sheer surfaces like glass. This will (hopefully) minimise early reflections and booming, but maintain the 'live' sound of the space. I will then record the guitars one at a time, with only lead guitar having any baffling, as 'fake' verb sounds more in the style of 80's dodge rock. Once the best takes have been selected, the vocalist will be recorded in the dead room.

Post Production

The band will be heavily involved in the post production phase, as their tastes on the sound may be different to mine. I have found post-production to be very much trial and error, as no techniques are universally applicable. Any dynamic effects such as compression will be added in post prod rather than during the recording process, so I have a 'blank canvas' of sound on which to weave my magic.

Result

MP3 2.15MB


1. David Grice. "Audio Arts: Semester 1, Week 1. Session Planning & Management." Lecture presented at the Electronic Music Unit, University of Adelaide, South Australia, 27th February 2007.

CC2 - Week 1 - Pseudocode

This week of CC introduced us to Pseudocode, otherwise known as 'English'. Our task description did not specify whether a note will be played by a person on an instrument or by the program itself, so I will not specify either.



If the program itself was generating the initial note, I would surmise some sort of NoteGenerator would be needed. Although if you have a NoteGenerator, why are you getting it to play in D Major only to transpose it into B Minor? One would think choosing B Minor to begin with would suffice. If a human was needed to enter the note values manually, then some additional 'code' would be needed, probably along the lines of 'IF note is played THEN' just after the REPEAT command.



1. Christian Haines. "Creative Computing: Semester 1, Week 1. Programming & Pseudocode." Lecture presented at the Electronic Music Unit, University of Adelaide, South Australia, 1st March 2007.

07

New year, new template and a new photoshoppery. No, YOU'VE got too much time on your hands! You're reading this aren't you? Don't you have something better to do?

Biology

Works well as a Windows desktop.