linuxaudio.org

On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:03:15PM +0000, Chris Cannam wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 9:01 AM, Frank Barknecht  wrote:

quoted text
> > Beat and rhythm detection also is a hot topic for many years in the

> > academic music scene as it's a necessary prerequisite to let a

> > computer play along with human performers, ideally in real time.

>

> I actually find this goal more distasteful than the one Fons is objecting to.

>

> I can understand why people are interested in automatic accompaniment,

> but mangling human-made music to fit a specific timing map seems like

> a more proper goal to me -- "manufactured" being somehow preferable to

> "simulated".  (I think this may be an "uncanny valley" situation -- if

> you haven't met this term before, look it up.)

'Good' automatic accompaniment will require more than

the computer's ability to listen combined with some

condensed programmed knowledge of musical structure

and performance praxis. 
By 'good' I mean that the computer should be able to

do it as expected, and without requiring specific

instructions for each particular case.
I suspect it would require 'training' of the same

form that a musician capable of the same would go

through.
Now if such ability is the result of training, can

it be called either 'manufactured' or 'simulated' ?

If yes, should we humans consider ourselves as being

manufactured or simulating ?
Ciao,
--

FA
Laboratorio di Acustica ed Elettroacustica

Parma, Italia
O tu, che porte, correndo si ?

E guerra e morte !

_______________________________________________

Linux-audio-user mailing list

Linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org

http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user