tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9617011.post5253391776385813710..comments2024-03-27T23:45:06.093+01:00Comments on Renewable Music: Is once enough?Daniel Wolfhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09093101325234464791noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9617011.post-58604268302366849892011-02-23T01:52:37.343+01:002011-02-23T01:52:37.343+01:00I recall the error being in the earlier computeris...I recall the error being in the earlier computerised I Ching Cage used, the one made by Lejaren Hiller in the late 1960s when they composed HPSCHD. The error was noticed when writing Mureau and/or Empty Words, which used all 14 volumes of Thoreau's Journal as source material: certain sections of text kept reappearing. Cage accepted the error and the consequences of it, as the error wasn't a conscious, subjective decision.<br /><br />I didn't think it would be possible to realize Williams Mix in other media, as the score explicitly demands tape to be spliced at odd angles, and cut into irregular shapes. I have wondered before, if there was any way this effect could be simulated digitally, either as a treatment of sound or as a process in itself.<br /><br />Cage's use of chance is certainly a lot more complex than many people (even supportive critics) seem to think. This is probably largely because of Cage's own explanations and published rationales for his use of chance simplify it - to the point of misrepresenting it, in much of his earlier writing on the subject. It would be interesting to compare how his understanding of how to work with chance developed over time, to how he felt able to discuss it in increasingly sophisticated terms. Surely he couldn't have written Music Of Changes if his awareness of aesthetic considerations was as limitied as his essays and lectures of the time suggest, compared to the awareness evident in his working processes in the 1970s.Ben.Hhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11879705585399028153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9617011.post-11654625107638939172011-02-21T17:50:58.496+01:002011-02-21T17:50:58.496+01:00Steve, what error are you referring to? Cage some...Steve, what error are you referring to? Cage sometimes used biased decision-making processes (which were also realized in IC) and he was also well-aware that a computational random number generator was pseudo-random, but accepted this as an imitation of nature in operation, i.e. an imitation of a physically random system.<br /><br />The evolution of Cage's thought with regard to chance is interesting and shows him to be much more sophisticated about the nature of his work than is often given credit. For example, his turn in the 1970s to a "music of contingency", some years after switching to the use of computer-generated pseudo-I-Ching output, represents an engagement with natural systems in which the relationship between cause and effect is, for a human observer, unpredictable.Daniel Wolfhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09093101325234464791noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9617011.post-69842927122837487652011-02-21T15:50:02.686+01:002011-02-21T15:50:02.686+01:00The process is not the piece. While Cage did repe...The process is not the piece. While Cage did repeat the process (or procedure) quite often the end result is often quite different. Cage always started with questions. Culver just sped up the process for answering them (though it was revealed that the I Ching program had a programming error that limited it's 'randomness'). <br /><br />Reproducing Williams Mix with today's home computer would still render "Williams Mix" the piece (the score would determine how events would change over time). However, using Culver's I Ching to determine time frames and pitch would yield a different piece (hence 1, 64, 81, 1o1 or any of the "squared' pieces).<br /><br />And for me, this is completely different from the birth/death of a piece occurring at the same performance. For most of us the second performance is the recorded performance (and that's a whole different can of worms).Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06310742759332058328noreply@blogger.com