Re: [livecode] Short comments invited by editors of a forthcoming book on Algorithmic Music

From: Nick Collins <clicksonnil_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2014 09:23:07 +0100

-- it feels like there's some great re-working of ontologies to be done too?
> For example, you say "especially by computer" in your definition – if I use mathematics in my compositions, does it become "algorithmic" at the point of codification, or earlier (what if it's only in my thinking)? Does it need to/should it be "live/realtime/dynamic" or can I pre-render? Do I have to be able to demonstrate the existence of an algorithm? What if the algorithm is derived from the music, instead of being its creator?

I am reminded of the case of Bo Nilsson and the formulas claimed to be underlying his music, when he actually worked by ear:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bo_Nilsson#Style_and_technique
So his music was promoted as algorithmic/mathematical/serialist and turned out to be intuitive

(with thanks to f0 for pointing this out to me some years ago)
-- 
Read the whole topic here: livecode:
http://lurk.org/r/topic/6We0DWQyfkVZ1yznDk9q5L
To leave livecode, email livecode_at_group.lurk.org with the following email subject: unsubscribe
Received on Mon Jul 14 2014 - 08:21:22 BST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Sun Aug 20 2023 - 16:02:23 BST