Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by LaminatorX on Saturday March 22 2014, @08:45AM   Printer-friendly [Skip to comment(s)]
from the irrational-exuberance dept.

jorl17 writes:

"Brady Haran over at Numberphile has brought us an amazing experimental track based on Pi. Everything follows patterns of the irrational number, and the result is a mind-blowing progressive rock song. This expands upon the concept first tried with the Golden Ratio song. Notice the length of the video?"

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by RamiK on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:39AM

    by RamiK (1813) on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:39AM (#19650)

    BTW, How do you call the computer generated music field? I've been wondering for a while now if there has been any work in having completely computer generated theme music for games. Like for an FPS the computer will be reacting to speed of mouse movements, gun fire, visible enemies, lighting, general environment... And will write the notes and play appropriate music live instead of playing per-recorded tracks.

    Of course, each game will need a musician to setup the initial parameters... A melody, genre constraints (scales, tempo), choice of instruments... Like queuing-in the double-bass at X beat that is triggered by gun-fire... Or intensifying the low drone in small dark corridors...
    It will also probably be pretty computationally intense taking up at least a processor core so I'm guess even if it's been studied for decades it couldn't have been done in games until quite recently...

    Anyone?

    --
    compiling...
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @10:52AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @10:52AM (#19660)

    We human have got 10 fingers, so what? That's not an intrinsic mathematical property of anything, it's just arbitrary.
    It might have been less arbitrary if they'd also chosen to subdivide the octave into 10 tones, but nope, they used the also-arbitrary 7-note scales based on the also-arbitrary 12 semitone subdivisions of the octave. So they could have used base 7 or 12, not 10, and I would have had fewer complaints. Of course even using base 7 gives them the freedom to just arbirtarily chose different keys or modes during the different phases of the song, meaning that yet again you were hearing their conscious artistic choice, not an intrinsic property of the number.

    Did you also notice that in the Phi one, the first phi-ratio split of the string on the fretboard was actually at 2-phi not phi-1 (so they threw away the larger proportion), but the subsequent splits they threw away the smaller portion. Why the difference? Arbitrary!

    Math-metal is just reverse gematria.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @02:06PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @02:06PM (#19696)

      Math-metal is airtameg? What's an airtameg?

    • (Score: 4, Informative) by DeKO on Saturday March 22 2014, @04:22PM

      by DeKO (3672) on Saturday March 22 2014, @04:22PM (#19732)

      The 12-TET is far from arbitrary. Read up on the history of scales, and you will see that there was no lack of conventions on how to create them. See this for instance [wlonk.com]:"

      The twelve-tone equal-tempered scale is the smallest equal-tempered scale that contains all seven of the basic consonant intervals to a good approximation — within one percent.

      In other words, 12-TET is both mathematically sound, and outlived nearly every alternative ever devised.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2014, @09:17PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 23 2014, @09:17PM (#19992)

        Why 1%?
        Why not 0.979534234987976 percent?

        Seems pretty arbitrary to me.

        • (Score: 1) by DeKO on Monday March 24 2014, @03:30AM

          by DeKO (3672) on Monday March 24 2014, @03:30AM (#20068)

          Sorry, I didn't use the full quote, it ends with:

          ... and contains more consonant intervals than dissonant intervals.

          The 12-TET is a local minimum regarding the approximation to the ratios, the next best approximation is the 53-TET (with 31 and 41 coming close). They are, however, full of dissonant intervals, so most of the notes would never be used anyways. The 1% is not an arbitrary choice, it just happens to be within 1%, all near possibilities are much worse than 1%.

    • (Score: 1) by jorl17 on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:33PM

      by jorl17 (3747) on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:33PM (#19804)
      I never thought of it as the actual "sound" of Pi. It's creative work, there's no doubting it. However, it is made by mapping our knowledge of Pi to other kinds of knowledege we have, involving maths to do part of that mapping. Bases are arbitrary, the instruments are arbitrary, everything is pretty much arbitrary, but they didn't build the music and search for patterns, they made it with the patterns. It doesn't really matter to me if they're the most X or Y patterns -- they are patterns.
  • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Subsentient on Saturday March 22 2014, @11:11AM

    by Subsentient (1111) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 22 2014, @11:11AM (#19663) Homepage Journal

    I will not touch anything Google. Upload it somewhere else.

    --
    "It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @11:49AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @11:49AM (#19668)

      I use 'youtubedown' to just grab the raw vid. (My home directory is pretending to be no-longer-spinning rust currently, so don't have my usual browser paranoia settings, and won't touch their javascript with a barge pole, so am doing everything via youtubedown presently. This is also why I'm not logged in - memorised password for the site inaccessible.)

    • (Score: 1) by gishzida on Saturday March 22 2014, @02:35PM

      by gishzida (2870) on Saturday March 22 2014, @02:35PM (#19702) Journal

      Someone is giving something away... free... and you won't touch it? I can't imagine why you have a problem with Google... do tell!

      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by Nerdfest on Saturday March 22 2014, @03:31PM

        by Nerdfest (80) on Saturday March 22 2014, @03:31PM (#19714)

        It's not free, you pay with your personal information or browsing habits. Some don't think it's a fair trade, as is their right.

        • (Score: 1) by gishzida on Saturday March 22 2014, @05:53PM

          by gishzida (2870) on Saturday March 22 2014, @05:53PM (#19762) Journal

          Guess they have never heard of no-script, Ad Blocker Plus, or better Privacy...

          Something else they may not have heard of... TANSTAAFL-- There ain't no such thing as a free lunch... or a "free video" or even "free software" -- somebody pays. If you are too lazy to minimize or fully mitigate that cost for yourself then that is your problem and not mine.

          Of course if you have a better idea concerning hosting I'd love to hear that too...

          You see I too create things... Writings [blogspot.com], Music [blogspot.com], A Quote book [blogspot.com] and a a Markov Chain Quote book [blogspot.com]. You will notice that they are all hosted on Blogspot, a Google site. Why? Simple. No one is interested enough in covering my costs and expenses for the things I create... and frankly I don't have the money to give away free culture AND free bandwidth... So the price that someone pays for not covering those expenses is what Google free services cost. Facebook is a cesspit relative to Google so you get what you get.

          Don't want to pay? That's fine... I certainly don't expect you to listen or read the things I do... You are free to choose the things you wish to read or listen to... But I am not obliged to provide them to you on a "non-encumbered" site or service... since you are not paying my expenses.

          While I too miss the passing into history anon FTP and GOFER I have to work with what is...

          • (Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Saturday March 22 2014, @08:26PM

            by Nerdfest (80) on Saturday March 22 2014, @08:26PM (#19793)

            Oh, I myself think it's quite a good deal and even have Google host email for several domains using Google Apps. I think it's a great deal, but not everyone does. There also seems to be a great deal of anti-Google FUD going around these days, so the number of people avoiding them is growing. They don't seem to realize that unless they host everything themselves, all of their other options tend to be worse.

    • (Score: 2) by lhsi on Saturday March 22 2014, @04:09PM

      by lhsi (711) on Saturday March 22 2014, @04:09PM (#19725) Journal

      There is a link to the song on iTunes in the YouTube description. I'll put it here so you don't have to go to YouTube to find it https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/progressive-inst rumental-single/id839814816?ign-mpt=uo%3D4 [apple.com]

    • (Score: 1) by bugamn on Saturday March 22 2014, @07:30PM

      by bugamn (1017) on Saturday March 22 2014, @07:30PM (#19780)

      You could use Youtube-dl to download, would that help?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:32PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @09:32PM (#19802)

      Give me a link to an FTP site (or similar) that you trust, and I'll stick the cclive'd .mp4 files there.

  • (Score: 1) by lajos on Saturday March 22 2014, @03:53PM

    by lajos (528) on Saturday March 22 2014, @03:53PM (#19717)

    Yep. It's 3 minutes 7 seconds.

    • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @05:18PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 22 2014, @05:18PM (#19747)

      No, it's 6 minutes 28 seconds. 6.28 being a rough approximation of the number tau, which is 2*pi, and was also briefly featured in the song.

      Now go back to Slashdot, because you fail here.