The Performance Library Manual reading this week was difficult for me to get through. Although I think the topics covered could be very useful in practice, I had a hard time concentrating on what side of music to tape to which piece of paper. Maybe it’s because I’ve spent many hours taping music together and thinking about page turns. The tricks the author shared were ones I’ve employed. So, yes, it’s helpful information, but it is information I’ve been lucky enough to have shared with me by a music teacher. Even as I was reading it though, it made me appreciate what a good reference text the manual is.
The other reading from This is your brain on music was much easier to read. As I mentioned earlier, I’ve enjoyed this book immensely. I think I was also confused last week that we were only go to read the introduction and first chapter of the book, so I was pleasantly surprised to see it in this week’s assignment.
I was surprised to read that musicians get more ear worms than non-musicians (Levitin, 2006, p. 155). I sometimes wake up with songs running through my head. They are usually about 30 seconds long, and it varies whether or not it was a song that I have recently listened to or not. To start my undergraduate career, I moved from Kentucky to New York. I flew, so I also shipped a bunch of stuff to myself. Stupidly, I put my entire c.d. collection in a box, and guess which box was lost? Well, it was a major blow to me, as the music I listened to was very much a part of my identity, as Levitin also discussed. I remember a week in September or October where I woke up with the song “Sleep on the Left Side” by the band Cornershop playing in my head. Instead of being annoyed, I loved it. The c.d. was one of my favorites, and I had definitely been very sad about that particular loss. It was comforting to know that even if the physical item was gone, it was still ingrained in my mind.
Absolute Pitch or perfect pitch is very interesting to me. As a musician, I do wish that I had it, but I think ear training can bring you a long, long way. It certainly did for me. One of my many music teachers who did not have perfect pitch told me a story about doing a performance with another musician. The other musician, a violinist, had perfect pitch. Well, they arrived at the private home they were performing at, and my teacher, a pianist sits down to warm up. The piano, they had been told, was tuned. And, in fact it was, except that it was about a quarter step lower than the standard tuning for a piano. (So, the A key that would normally be 440A was halfway between G-sharp and A natural). For my teacher, this was not a problem for two reasons. First, he wasn’t forming the pitch as a pianist, just hitting the right key. Second, though he could tell it was off from the standard tuning, all the keys were in tune with each other, so it made sense to his ear. His co-performer, however, could not deal. Although the violinist could have (and perhaps did) tuned his instrument to the tuning of the piano, he was so upset that what would normally be an A on his violin was really a quarterstep lower, that he couldn’t play in tune. His idea of what a note was related to an exact pitch, whereas my teacher’s idea of what a note was related to the other pitches.
And though I don’t have perfect pitch, I can generate an A440 out of thin air fairly consistently. How do I know? Well, I’ve tested myself and occasionally shown off in front of friends. And why this particular pitch? It’s the pitch that I’ve been tuning to since I was 9 and first began playing the violin. I have sat through many elementary, middle, high school, college and other orchestra rehearsals all begun with the same A440 tone. I’m glad that I can, it makes me feel that I am a musician and not just someone saying that I play an instrument.
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
What's next, violin lessons for cats?
I really enjoyed this week’s readings. I did not have a strong opinion of The Manual for the Performance Librarian last week, but this week I really thought it was practical, concise and useful. The scope of the writing is limited, and very much geared toward a classical performing body. I think it could be interesting to people outside of the field that are curious about what goes into running an orchestra, chamber ensemble or other performing body. The audience is undoubtedly small, however. I happen to be one of those people who are interested in working with such a group, either as an intern, staff or volunteer. I was impressed with how many details the author included about what information to give to who, or to request of whom. That detail could make the book an excellent reference.
I also felt I was part of the target audience for our second reading assignment from This is Your Brain on Music. I am a musician, and I have studied some science and am interested in the overlap between the two. Part of my musical education included music theory, acoustics and discussions of non-traditional tunings. So far, nothing in the introduction and first chapter were new to me, but I was impressed with how well written it was. One concept in the first chapter was puzzling to me, however. The author asserts that loudness, “is a purely psychological construct” (p. 16). This is hard for me to understand. Can volume not be measured quantitatively in decibels? If so, then how is that psychological as opposed to physical?
I hope to finish reading the rest of this text, but I do not know if I will be able to until the semester is over. I am curious if the author discusses tone in more depth later in the book. From the chapter titles and descriptions, it does not seem so. I found myself wishing for a more in depth discussion of tone and intonation. One of the music professors I worked closely with as an undergraduate was Kyle Gann, who writes music using just intonation. Generally, Western music is now played in equal temperament, where each semitone is the same distance apart. This means the interval between notes is not usually expressed in whole numbers. Before the 20th century, this was not true. Playing in equal temperament means that each major key sounds the same and transcribing between keys is easy and you get the same sound each time. This is related to Levitin’s discussion of how our brains make pitch for us, and we approximate the overtones even when they are not exact. Just intonation uses whole number intervals, sometimes referred to as ‘purer.’ Trained ears can definitely hear the difference, though most ears are not used to anything but equal temperament in Western cultures. The piano is one reason equal temperament has taken such hold. I gathered from Levitin’s discussion he would not be a huge supporter of just intonation, but I am curious what he would have to say.
One last comment about Levitin’s book. He discusses how certain animals can recognize an octave, like cats and monkeys (p. 31). First, wow. Second, I guess I’m not that surprised as I’ve witnessed animals who appear to be moved in some way (annoyance, pleasure, etc.) by music – usually our cats when practicing piano or violin as a child. Third, how did they figure that out? I am sure it was a scientific study of some sort, but how was it run? I don’t imagine there were scientists observing a piano teacher giving cats or monkeys beginning piano lessons. With monkeys, I could see designing some sort of test that humans would be asked to take to see how well they recognized pitch. But cats?
I also felt I was part of the target audience for our second reading assignment from This is Your Brain on Music. I am a musician, and I have studied some science and am interested in the overlap between the two. Part of my musical education included music theory, acoustics and discussions of non-traditional tunings. So far, nothing in the introduction and first chapter were new to me, but I was impressed with how well written it was. One concept in the first chapter was puzzling to me, however. The author asserts that loudness, “is a purely psychological construct” (p. 16). This is hard for me to understand. Can volume not be measured quantitatively in decibels? If so, then how is that psychological as opposed to physical?
I hope to finish reading the rest of this text, but I do not know if I will be able to until the semester is over. I am curious if the author discusses tone in more depth later in the book. From the chapter titles and descriptions, it does not seem so. I found myself wishing for a more in depth discussion of tone and intonation. One of the music professors I worked closely with as an undergraduate was Kyle Gann, who writes music using just intonation. Generally, Western music is now played in equal temperament, where each semitone is the same distance apart. This means the interval between notes is not usually expressed in whole numbers. Before the 20th century, this was not true. Playing in equal temperament means that each major key sounds the same and transcribing between keys is easy and you get the same sound each time. This is related to Levitin’s discussion of how our brains make pitch for us, and we approximate the overtones even when they are not exact. Just intonation uses whole number intervals, sometimes referred to as ‘purer.’ Trained ears can definitely hear the difference, though most ears are not used to anything but equal temperament in Western cultures. The piano is one reason equal temperament has taken such hold. I gathered from Levitin’s discussion he would not be a huge supporter of just intonation, but I am curious what he would have to say.
One last comment about Levitin’s book. He discusses how certain animals can recognize an octave, like cats and monkeys (p. 31). First, wow. Second, I guess I’m not that surprised as I’ve witnessed animals who appear to be moved in some way (annoyance, pleasure, etc.) by music – usually our cats when practicing piano or violin as a child. Third, how did they figure that out? I am sure it was a scientific study of some sort, but how was it run? I don’t imagine there were scientists observing a piano teacher giving cats or monkeys beginning piano lessons. With monkeys, I could see designing some sort of test that humans would be asked to take to see how well they recognized pitch. But cats?
Saturday, September 19, 2009
Thoughts on software, Dischord & DIY and definitions
I spent some time looking at the music notation software websites Professor Simon provided us with this week. Sibelius’AudioScore got my attention with one of their features. I used Sibelius and Finale briefly as an undergraduate music student. I was not a composer so my use of it was very limited. In fact, it was usually easier to hand write the scores for class assignments than to try and fight with other students to get enough time on the department’s computer to use either Sibelius or Finale. Anyway, I was really impressed with the Mic-to-Score Automatic Notation feature of AudioScore. I wonder if it’s similar to the humming by query applications, where it works but is imperfect. It would be fun to experiment with, to be sure.
I have used Adobe Audition for several years now, mainly to edit and produce radio audio. I find Audition to be pretty intuitive and easy to use. I have definitely not explored all of the options in the program, mainly because I have not needed to use them all. It works well for mixing pre-recorded audio programs to be aired later. Although a musician, I am a visual person, so having a concrete way to look at audio and sound waves is appealing to me.
Dischord records kept coming to mind during the Kusek & Leonhard readings this week. In chapter 7, the discussion is about how the music industry is changing, or will change. Dischord records is an easy example of how outsiders to the music industry created their own way of recording, distributing, touring, selling and making their own music. I believe many musicians are finding ways to do so outside of the music industry out of necessity, but Dischord did so both out of need and out of ideals. These punk kids from DC in the 80s weren’t exactly what Warner Brothers was probably looking for. But lots of other kids and adults across the country were hungry for what they were making. Of course, the whole project was contingent on Ian Mackaye’s parents allowing the label to operate out of their house. But, it does prove that to have a long career in music does not mean you have to have an office in downtown L.A.
Of course, the DIY aesthetic is associated with certain genres of music: punk, indie, underground, etc. But other genres have ways of operating outside the confines of the ‘legitimate’ music industry. Mixtapes were also discussed in Kusek & Leonhard, and they operate almost as a proving ground to some hip-hop artists. And, as programs like Adobe Audition and GarageBand become more common and easier to use, the sophistication of the average person will likely rise. I have bought at least one album recorded and produced entirely on GarageBand by a San Francisco band that is getting some larger renown: the Tune-Yards.
The Manual for the Performance Library was interesting to me. I believe someone discussed the difference between a performance librarian and a music librarian on the discussion board this week. I think the author considers a performance librarian to be someone associated and working for a music ensemble, like an orchestra, chamber ensemble or possibly a soloist. I can agree with this definition. I would then consider a music librarian to be a subject librarian in an academic library. Some of the duties might overlap, but it seems a performance librarian is focused on assisting a performance, whereas a music librarian is more focused on assisting research. These may be fairly arbitrary definitions and not in the spirit of Girsberger at all, but they are my take. However, where does that leave librarians working at radio stations, public libraries or elsewhere?
I have used Adobe Audition for several years now, mainly to edit and produce radio audio. I find Audition to be pretty intuitive and easy to use. I have definitely not explored all of the options in the program, mainly because I have not needed to use them all. It works well for mixing pre-recorded audio programs to be aired later. Although a musician, I am a visual person, so having a concrete way to look at audio and sound waves is appealing to me.
Dischord records kept coming to mind during the Kusek & Leonhard readings this week. In chapter 7, the discussion is about how the music industry is changing, or will change. Dischord records is an easy example of how outsiders to the music industry created their own way of recording, distributing, touring, selling and making their own music. I believe many musicians are finding ways to do so outside of the music industry out of necessity, but Dischord did so both out of need and out of ideals. These punk kids from DC in the 80s weren’t exactly what Warner Brothers was probably looking for. But lots of other kids and adults across the country were hungry for what they were making. Of course, the whole project was contingent on Ian Mackaye’s parents allowing the label to operate out of their house. But, it does prove that to have a long career in music does not mean you have to have an office in downtown L.A.
Of course, the DIY aesthetic is associated with certain genres of music: punk, indie, underground, etc. But other genres have ways of operating outside the confines of the ‘legitimate’ music industry. Mixtapes were also discussed in Kusek & Leonhard, and they operate almost as a proving ground to some hip-hop artists. And, as programs like Adobe Audition and GarageBand become more common and easier to use, the sophistication of the average person will likely rise. I have bought at least one album recorded and produced entirely on GarageBand by a San Francisco band that is getting some larger renown: the Tune-Yards.
The Manual for the Performance Library was interesting to me. I believe someone discussed the difference between a performance librarian and a music librarian on the discussion board this week. I think the author considers a performance librarian to be someone associated and working for a music ensemble, like an orchestra, chamber ensemble or possibly a soloist. I can agree with this definition. I would then consider a music librarian to be a subject librarian in an academic library. Some of the duties might overlap, but it seems a performance librarian is focused on assisting a performance, whereas a music librarian is more focused on assisting research. These may be fairly arbitrary definitions and not in the spirit of Girsberger at all, but they are my take. However, where does that leave librarians working at radio stations, public libraries or elsewhere?
Monday, September 14, 2009
Windowing, manipulation, CDs, Pirates and Information Literacy
It is interesting to me that Kusek & Leonhard, both of whom appear to be intelligent, engaged individuals are not more critical of the consumer cycle that they are projecting in the future. I think much of what they discuss will come to pass in one form or another, whether in the exact prescribed manner or not is up for discussion. However, when discussion their ideas, they do not seem that concerned that the consumption pattern they describe is excessive, destructive to environment and artists, unsustainable or manipulative.
The first example of this is the discussion of the movie business’s “windowing.” First, big movie studios do the same thing that ‘big music’ does, concentrating its money and marketing power on blockbuster movies instead of seeding lots of smaller movies. Also, they saturate the market with advertisements not once, not twice, but up to seven times to squeeze as much money out of consumers as possible. Why do Kusek & Leonhard not have a problem with this? If ‘big music’ had allowed different formats to take hold in music, why would they advocate a system that would then let ‘big music’ push Britney Spears on the kids not once, twice but up to seven or eight times? Had ‘big music’ (as a side note, as a co-creator of MIDI, is Kusek not part of the music industry establishment?) adopted this style, I feel that Kusek & Leonhard are arguing, then they would not be in as much trouble. But I thought they wanted to see the industry destroyed or at least reinvented?
Also, having the multiple formats and cycling the product through each with a corresponding media and marketing push is manipulative. It does not fill a consumer need. This practice instead feeds on a darker part of capitalism, that which pushes consumers to consume and consume because of a perceived unfilled need, which has probably either been filled or is non-existent.
I am not sure I agree about the demise of the CD. Or if I do, I am not sure how quickly it will happen. It seems that lots of people still purchase CDs or vinyl at live shows. Maybe these are more mementos. Will downloads start being sold at shows or will it be assumed that audiences will buy from iTunes after or during the show?
I wholeheartedly agree with Kusek & Leonhard’s argument that downloading tracks from Limewire, Kazaa or one of the other P2P services should not be treated the same as the widespread piracy operations. I had never heard this argument articulated before, and I found myself saying, ”Yes, that makes absolute sense!” for the first time since beginning this text. The scale of the two different, currently illegal activities is very different. Someone selling pirated goods is looking to profit off someone else’s work. Someone downloading popular or obscure tracks is looking to enjoy them, or maybe impress their friends.
Now that I’ve briefly agreed with the authors, it’s time to disagree again! I am trying very hard to take Dr. Simon’s advice to not miss the forest for the trees, but I am critical of some of the ideas and assertions. On page 99, the authors assert that kids seek out information more agilely and proactively than their parents. From my LIBR 200 class, I know that kids, especially teenagers, often overestimate their information literacy skills. Sure, they can maybe find the shortcuts to the latest video game, but are they really good at not only finding information but also evaluating it? I think the authors are confusing comfort with technology and information literacy – though I wonder how familiar they are with the second term.
The first example of this is the discussion of the movie business’s “windowing.” First, big movie studios do the same thing that ‘big music’ does, concentrating its money and marketing power on blockbuster movies instead of seeding lots of smaller movies. Also, they saturate the market with advertisements not once, not twice, but up to seven times to squeeze as much money out of consumers as possible. Why do Kusek & Leonhard not have a problem with this? If ‘big music’ had allowed different formats to take hold in music, why would they advocate a system that would then let ‘big music’ push Britney Spears on the kids not once, twice but up to seven or eight times? Had ‘big music’ (as a side note, as a co-creator of MIDI, is Kusek not part of the music industry establishment?) adopted this style, I feel that Kusek & Leonhard are arguing, then they would not be in as much trouble. But I thought they wanted to see the industry destroyed or at least reinvented?
Also, having the multiple formats and cycling the product through each with a corresponding media and marketing push is manipulative. It does not fill a consumer need. This practice instead feeds on a darker part of capitalism, that which pushes consumers to consume and consume because of a perceived unfilled need, which has probably either been filled or is non-existent.
I am not sure I agree about the demise of the CD. Or if I do, I am not sure how quickly it will happen. It seems that lots of people still purchase CDs or vinyl at live shows. Maybe these are more mementos. Will downloads start being sold at shows or will it be assumed that audiences will buy from iTunes after or during the show?
I wholeheartedly agree with Kusek & Leonhard’s argument that downloading tracks from Limewire, Kazaa or one of the other P2P services should not be treated the same as the widespread piracy operations. I had never heard this argument articulated before, and I found myself saying, ”Yes, that makes absolute sense!” for the first time since beginning this text. The scale of the two different, currently illegal activities is very different. Someone selling pirated goods is looking to profit off someone else’s work. Someone downloading popular or obscure tracks is looking to enjoy them, or maybe impress their friends.
Now that I’ve briefly agreed with the authors, it’s time to disagree again! I am trying very hard to take Dr. Simon’s advice to not miss the forest for the trees, but I am critical of some of the ideas and assertions. On page 99, the authors assert that kids seek out information more agilely and proactively than their parents. From my LIBR 200 class, I know that kids, especially teenagers, often overestimate their information literacy skills. Sure, they can maybe find the shortcuts to the latest video game, but are they really good at not only finding information but also evaluating it? I think the authors are confusing comfort with technology and information literacy – though I wonder how familiar they are with the second term.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Jay-Z & Coca-Cola
I found it interesting that Downie (2003) chapter we were assigned this week began with a description of the future of the music listening, just as Kusek & Leonhard (2005) did. Could this be an intentional choice on the part of the instructor?
I found Downie’s way of organizing the chapter very compelling. Breaking down the essence of music into seven facets helps introduce MIR in an easily digestible way. I find myself wondering how many of my classmates read music or have a classical music background. My knowledge of music theory has so far helped me with the denser readings of Downie and Orio (2006). I wonder how accessible this literature is to non-musicians. A good portion of it seems like it would appeal to people interested in Information Retrieval, but not necessarily music. Audio certainly complicates IR, but music seems to compound the complications tenfold.
I really like Downie’s (2003) observation that the incompleteness of early MIR systems makes them more effective than a more complicated system. Really, in the end, isn’t part of IR or librarianship retrieving the desired information or knowledge in the easiest way? My cello teacher in college often told me, and I have repeated this to students I have taught that being lazy is in some way good. He would tell me that I should expend the least amount of energy needed to get something (a shift in the hand, a bowing or a fingering) done so the playing does not sound or feel labored.
I was very happy to see Kusek & Leonhard (2005) mention Jay-Z. I really like Jay-Z, and have enjoyed seeing his name in the press so often since his release of DOA (Death of Autotune). I felt their mention of him was especially interesting in light of the controversy or beef around the song DOA. The rapper the Game is saying Jay-Z’s objection to autotune means he’s old or irrelevant, which I interpret to mean as not open to new technology. Kusek & Leonhard’s mention of Jay-Z actually shows he has not only adapted to new technology, but embraced it in a way that furthered his fame and interests. So, keep it up Jay-Z.
In the same chapter that Kusek & Leonhard (2005) mention Jay-Z, they also make a very big generalization that I object to. They speak about the reasons people are driven to make music, asserting people make music for the same reason: emotion or creativity drive them to it. I agree this to a certain degree, but I think music creation is more complex than that. Yes, people are generally drawn to music innately, but I do not think generalizing about the reasons people use their musical ability is a good argument. Some people write music for money. That may not be why they learned how to play or write or create music, but it may be their primary motivation for continuing to create it.
I do not wish to give the impression that I am not enjoying the Kusek & Leonhard book, because I am. They just present several assertions that I disagree with. For example, satellite radio. I do not believe satellite radio is going to play a part in the future experience of listening or finding music. I feel the merger of XM and Sirius radio signaled how they are struggling, along with the traditional terrestrial radio stations. Much has been made about HD radio by terrestrial radio, and I don’t think this is going anywhere, either. So, it surprises me that Kusek & Leonhard, who seem quite savvy, felt satellite radio was worth discussing. Similarly, they mention Coca-Cola as a giant, but Coke has seen some of its dominance slip since the introduction of energy drinks. It seems to me that Coke is in danger of facing some of the same problems as the music industry. I guess I agree with much of what Kusek & Leonhard have to say, but I just extend it to other non-music industrial giants and they either are unaware of it or just do not mention it.
I found Downie’s way of organizing the chapter very compelling. Breaking down the essence of music into seven facets helps introduce MIR in an easily digestible way. I find myself wondering how many of my classmates read music or have a classical music background. My knowledge of music theory has so far helped me with the denser readings of Downie and Orio (2006). I wonder how accessible this literature is to non-musicians. A good portion of it seems like it would appeal to people interested in Information Retrieval, but not necessarily music. Audio certainly complicates IR, but music seems to compound the complications tenfold.
I really like Downie’s (2003) observation that the incompleteness of early MIR systems makes them more effective than a more complicated system. Really, in the end, isn’t part of IR or librarianship retrieving the desired information or knowledge in the easiest way? My cello teacher in college often told me, and I have repeated this to students I have taught that being lazy is in some way good. He would tell me that I should expend the least amount of energy needed to get something (a shift in the hand, a bowing or a fingering) done so the playing does not sound or feel labored.
I was very happy to see Kusek & Leonhard (2005) mention Jay-Z. I really like Jay-Z, and have enjoyed seeing his name in the press so often since his release of DOA (Death of Autotune). I felt their mention of him was especially interesting in light of the controversy or beef around the song DOA. The rapper the Game is saying Jay-Z’s objection to autotune means he’s old or irrelevant, which I interpret to mean as not open to new technology. Kusek & Leonhard’s mention of Jay-Z actually shows he has not only adapted to new technology, but embraced it in a way that furthered his fame and interests. So, keep it up Jay-Z.
In the same chapter that Kusek & Leonhard (2005) mention Jay-Z, they also make a very big generalization that I object to. They speak about the reasons people are driven to make music, asserting people make music for the same reason: emotion or creativity drive them to it. I agree this to a certain degree, but I think music creation is more complex than that. Yes, people are generally drawn to music innately, but I do not think generalizing about the reasons people use their musical ability is a good argument. Some people write music for money. That may not be why they learned how to play or write or create music, but it may be their primary motivation for continuing to create it.
I do not wish to give the impression that I am not enjoying the Kusek & Leonhard book, because I am. They just present several assertions that I disagree with. For example, satellite radio. I do not believe satellite radio is going to play a part in the future experience of listening or finding music. I feel the merger of XM and Sirius radio signaled how they are struggling, along with the traditional terrestrial radio stations. Much has been made about HD radio by terrestrial radio, and I don’t think this is going anywhere, either. So, it surprises me that Kusek & Leonhard, who seem quite savvy, felt satellite radio was worth discussing. Similarly, they mention Coca-Cola as a giant, but Coke has seen some of its dominance slip since the introduction of energy drinks. It seems to me that Coke is in danger of facing some of the same problems as the music industry. I guess I agree with much of what Kusek & Leonhard have to say, but I just extend it to other non-music industrial giants and they either are unaware of it or just do not mention it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
