Forums > MaxMSP

TOUGH! How can I make a controller "hear" my voice?

November 28, 2006 | 8:35 am

Hi everybody:

I am looking for a controller, a tracker or another device that could act like a foot controller capable of generating taps or send MIDI CC by hearing the leading voice I play live with a string instrument or voice instead of guitar or drums. I cannot tap by foot while playing; Classical musicians don’t usually do this. With such device I can use the Tap function in Ableton Live by mapping this function to the device which sends MIDI CC data to Live


November 28, 2006 | 8:45 am


November 28, 2006 | 8:50 am

> rollers, trackers in the market that might be capable of doing this?
>
> My final goal is to sing along with Live or other program that
> contains the accompaniment file (.MID) and I want this program to
> follow my tempo fluctuations spontaneously, like a real orchestra
> with a real conductor. Tricky, isn’t it?

probably tricky ;-)

i don’t pretend to know much of it (although i once witnessed richard
dudas presenting it in a max workshop – and it worked!), but the term
"score following" may be enough to help you further!

good luck,

jan


November 28, 2006 | 8:53 am


November 28, 2006 | 9:01 am

bonk~ , fiddle~ or, maybe better, yin~. What’s a bonk?


November 28, 2006 | 9:03 am

Hi Jan, I’ll look for this gentleman on the net. Ion


November 28, 2006 | 9:08 am


November 28, 2006 | 9:14 am


November 28, 2006 | 9:19 am

Jan, do you have an email or a phone number of Mr. Dudas? Thank you again. Ion


November 28, 2006 | 9:31 am

didn’t speak with Mr. Manoury. They told me that he’s a composer as well and now he lives in the US. Do you have his email by any chance? Otherwise, I spoke with Mr. Schnell there who told me that we can play Finale and East West Libraries with ‘Suivi’ but the part of following the leading voice is not yet perfected. They’re working on it therefore; Suivi is not ready yet to be launched in the market. Initially when I contacted IRCAM, Mr. Schwarz told me it’s possible to do what I want but I need to look for ‘briques’(patches). I’m little confused. Anyway, thank you very much for your help and if you have other ideas, please write to me. Ion


November 28, 2006 | 10:16 am

i think that this, that you have sent to me , is a private email.
by the way I have Professor Manoury’s email, that you can find also
on UCSD website.

pmanoury@ucsd.edu

cheers, tom

Il giorno 28/nov/06, alle ore 10:31, John ha scritto:

>
> didn’t speak with Mr. Manoury. They told me that he’s a composer
> as well and now he lives in the US. Do you have his email by any
> chance? Otherwise, I spoke with Mr. Schnell there who told me that
> we can play Finale and East West Libraries with ‘Suivi’ but the
> part of following the leading voice is not yet perfected. They’re
> working on it therefore; Suivi is not ready yet to be launched in
> the market. Initially when I contacted IRCAM, Mr. Schwarz told me
> it’s possible to do what I want but I need to look for
> ‘briques’(patches). I’m little confused. Anyway, thank you very
> much for your help and if you have other ideas, please write to
> me. Ion
>


November 28, 2006 | 10:39 am

Hi Tom:

I don’t understand, I thought I’m replying to jmdarremont but you are not the same person, are you?

All right, I’ll contact Professor Manoury.

Ion


November 28, 2006 | 11:14 am

no i am not :-)
im tommaso perego from italy,

ciao!

Il giorno 28/nov/06, alle ore 11:39, John ha scritto:

>
> Hi Tom:
>
> I don’t understand, I thought I’m replying to jmdarremont but you
> are not the same person, are you?
>
> All right, I’ll contact Professor Manoury.
>
> Ion
>
>


November 28, 2006 | 6:03 pm

I wrote to Mr. Manoury and hope he’ll answer. It wasn’t always easy to get on hold of IRCAM people. Buona sera. Ion


November 28, 2006 | 6:47 pm

>I wrote to Mr. Manoury and hope he’ll answer. It wasn’t always easy
>to get on hold of IRCAM people. Buona sera. Ion

I don’ really get why you post this to the list, and why someone
posted manoury’s email address there etc etc – whatever

but (at least until recently, or last time i had a look at it) all
(most of) Manoury patches were/are on the Ircam forum CD….

this should help

best

kasper

Kasper T. Toeplitz
noise, composition, bass, computer

http://www.sleazeArt.com


November 29, 2006 | 2:45 pm

John wrote:
> Initially when I contacted IRCAM, Mr. Schwarz told me it’s possible
> to do what I want but I need to look for ‘briques’(patches). I’m
> little confused. Anyway, thank you very much for your help and if
> you have other ideas, please write to me. Ion

The issue of score following is not at all trivial, a bunch of
artificial intelligence is necessary. The simple way is to start
experimenting with [follow], it comes with Max and isn’t bad at all. It
might suit your needs, if not, expect some years of learning the
subject. Certainly not a beginners project…

Btw. I haven’t found a really working/usable speed/BPM detector yet, all
averaging is just way behind. I do have some ideas about it, but haven’t
found the time to implement them…
Its not as easy as often suggested…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


November 29, 2006 | 3:30 pm


November 29, 2006 | 3:57 pm

If I can add my 2 cents (too late if I cannot ;-)

> And the best score follower, including during Ircam concerts,
> including in
> Boulez’s last piece for violin and electronics, is a human being
> behind the
> computer (because yes, score following is still a difficult task for
> computers, and they fail a lot).

It all depens of the nature of the instrumental part. For an all
written part with specific tape cues, it is certainly true. For semi-
improvised sections with tight integration, a ‘space bar player’ (as
is often the human behind the computer) is certainly in the way, and
slower.

I think hybrid approach are the best, and I advocate for better DSP-
trained composers so they can get rid of their musical assistant and
do the integration at the composition stage, doing simple yet
efficient score ‘following’…

This was the bottom line of my presentation at ICMC…

pa


November 29, 2006 | 5:04 pm

Pierre-

How can I find more info about your ICMC presentation? The proceedings?

Thanks,
Keith

On 11/29/06, Pierre Alexandre Tremblay

wrote:
> If I can add my 2 cents (too late if I cannot ;-)
>
> > And the best score follower, including during Ircam concerts,
> > including in
> > Boulez’s last piece for violin and electronics, is a human being
> > behind the
> > computer (because yes, score following is still a difficult task for
> > computers, and they fail a lot).
>
> It all depens of the nature of the instrumental part. For an all
> written part with specific tape cues, it is certainly true. For semi-
> improvised sections with tight integration, a ‘space bar player’ (as
> is often the human behind the computer) is certainly in the way, and
> slower.
>
> I think hybrid approach are the best, and I advocate for better DSP-
> trained composers so they can get rid of their musical assistant and
> do the integration at the composition stage, doing simple yet
> efficient score ‘following’…
>
> This was the bottom line of my presentation at ICMC…
>
> pa
>


November 29, 2006 | 5:56 pm


November 30, 2006 | 7:17 am


November 30, 2006 | 7:36 am

Pierre Alexandre Tremblay wrote:
> I think hybrid approach are the best, and I advocate for better DSP-
> trained composers so they can get rid of their musical assistant and do
> the integration at the composition stage, doing simple yet efficient
> score ‘following’…

If a composer wants to get rid of musicians he’d better do all with
machines… Like making the music with samples instead of musicians…
I can’t see that this would benefit Music as a concept which needs to be
advocated.
Nobody needed to tell Colon Nancarrow to be trained on the player piano,
nor would any Composer who has a different approach to composing would
want to hear that real piano music should be composed for the player
piano…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


November 30, 2006 | 7:37 am

I have never tried working on score following or tempo tracking, but I
would assume that if tempo is changing continuously in a
flexible/organic manner (e.g. rubato, acc. or rit.) and you try to do
tempo detection, you would have to average, something that would
obviously introduce a time lag when speed changes. From this you would
then have to extrapolate to make predictions on where tempo is going
based on current tendencies. I don’t know how well that would work, but
it would probably be very poor at dealing with abrupt changes.

Trond

> The issue of score following is not at all trivial, a bunch of
> artificial intelligence is necessary. The simple way is to start
> experimenting with [follow], it comes with Max and isn’t bad at all.
> It might suit your needs, if not, expect some years of learning the
> subject. Certainly not a beginners project…
>
> Btw. I haven’t found a really working/usable speed/BPM detector yet,
> all averaging is just way behind. I do have some ideas about it, but
> haven’t found the time to implement them…
> Its not as easy as often suggested…
>
> Stefan


November 30, 2006 | 8:48 am


November 30, 2006 | 1:27 pm


November 30, 2006 | 1:31 pm


November 30, 2006 | 1:54 pm


November 30, 2006 | 2:04 pm

Thanks Kasper, the comparison of orchestration is the one I used in
the paper!

To quote myself ;-)

"For those of us who are interested in the live integration of
acoustic sources and electronic sounds, this means that we no longer
have to rely on a musical assistant to program our ideas; we can
subvert our algorithms to mould our artistic goal as we compose. I
would compare this change of procedure to the mature use of
orchestration by Berlioz and Ravel, who were using it no longer as a
decorative feature, but as an intrinsic part of the compositional
gesture. But such a rich universe of possibilities for the composer
comes with its own set of questions, responsibilities and challenges."

Anyway, I agree that we should respect musical assistant of the ’90s
as co-composers in lots of situations, and that the role of a musical
assistant today is much more a high flying coder and musician that
can help optimise/improve a composer’s technical integration.

This discussion has a CEC flavour ;-) It reminds me the good old
time of the Max list hosted at McGill Uni…

pa


November 30, 2006 | 2:06 pm

But I think of the Max work not as composing, but as instrument
building – this is like saying a composer who writes for violin must
be able to build a violin. Certainly for me, the possibility to build
an instrument (or instruments) to suit the needs of the composiition
was one of the big things that made me do this at all (and I include
the instruments I build for my improvised work in that) – but I never
rule out the possibility of someone else working differently – indeed
I have created electronic instruments for other composers on a number
of occasions. It is possible to understand what you want without
knowing how to make it happen.

Best

L

On 30 Nov 2006, at 13:31, Kasper T Toeplitz wrote:

> not to say the musical assistent should not exist – but he should
> be seen as a highly specialised instrumentist; in max terms someone
> who writes a diificult part of a patch, a new object (in C or Java)
> but not the one who designs the patch – that’s composer’s work (not
> different than working with a solist – he knows more about his
> instrument, but the composer has to know about it – and other
> instruments – as well

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk


November 30, 2006 | 2:21 pm

> But I think of the Max work not as composing, but as instrument
> building -

for me the integration is beyond instrument making… a musical
gesture can be influenced by technological concerns and vice versa.

That said, my luthier is working actively with performers to improve
the design of his boutique basses and guitars, and himself is a
practising musician. Violins are too old to be improved, (actually
the improvements were done long ago ;-) but younger instruments like
mine are in never-ending redesign… Max allows a customisation of
the instrument to fit the musical needs of a piece (or in my case, or
a specific gesture of a specific movement of a specific piece)

Thanks for that stimulating discussion!

pa


November 30, 2006 | 2:27 pm

>But I think of the Max work not as composing, but as instrument building -

is it?? not sure…
certainly working with a computer as instrument did change my way of
writing (and thinking) the music – the change from thinking in
"notes" (a straight line) to thinking in frequencies (exponantial) is
the most obvious one – there are others

my instrument is the computer, not the max patch. The max patch is
the "score" (or the preparation of the instument, the "tuning") for
each piece (each one of my pieces uses a diiferent patch, which
sometimes can be the only score)

>this is like saying a composer who writes for violin must be able to
>build a violin.

not "build" it – but tune it, know how it works; know its ambitus,
scordatura, possibilities, where teh harmonics are… all this stuff

> It is possible to understand what you want without knowing how to
>make it happen.
>

yes but in such a case you can only "want" what you already know. you
can not "discover" a new way of playing an instrument with only
samples of the instrument – you clearly have to relate to the real
thing: very often composers "using" the computer, but not
programming/writing patches themeselves only use "effects" which are
very basic – maybe sometimes difficlt to implement, but ceratinly not
anything "new".

best

kasper


November 30, 2006 | 2:30 pm

>
>This discussion has a CEC flavour ;-)

what is CEC ??

kasper

Kasper T. Toeplitz
noise, composition, bass, computer

http://www.sleazeArt.com


November 30, 2006 | 2:49 pm

On Nov 30, 2006, at 9:06 AM, lawrence casserley wrote:
> But I think of the Max work not as composing, but as instrument
> building

That is precisely why I compose electronic music though; the ability
to build a custom instrument for each piece. My music doesn’t exist
as scores anymore. Usually a massive patch and a recording.

Sometime the piece doesn’t work out. Then I just turn it into a
plugin and let others play with it. ;)

And not all composers *need* the assistant, but it sometimes just
speeds things a long. And the assistant role is one that can be an
invaluable apprenticeship.

My first grad assistantship assignment was to assist one of my
professors with technical matters for 1.5 hour composition. I
learned so much more about Max/MSP in those few months than I ever
did in the classroom. It was here that I was first assigned to look
into real-time granulation. There was no [stutter~] back then so I
had to figure out my own method.

—–
Nathan Wolek
nw@nathanwolek.com

http://www.nathanwolek.com


November 30, 2006 | 2:55 pm


November 30, 2006 | 3:02 pm

On 30 Nov 2006, at 14:27, Kasper T Toeplitz wrote:

>
> yes but in such a case you can only "want" what you already know.
> you can not "discover" a new way of playing an instrument with only
> samples of the instrument – you clearly have to relate to the real
> thing: very often composers "using" the computer, but not
> programming/writing patches themeselves only use "effects" which
> are very basic – maybe sometimes difficlt to implement, but
> ceratinly not anything "new".
>
My experience working with some very interesting and adventurous
composers is quite different to that – these were people who were
definitely discovering new possibilities, but with my help – just
that, for whatever reason, they felt unable to go deeply into the
technicalities themselves. In most cases the very nature of the
composition stemmed from the availability of these new possibilities
- nothing in the nature of "effects" was considered an option.

I agree, however, that the "effects" people are out there, sometimes
even if they do their own programming!

Best

L

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk


November 30, 2006 | 3:12 pm

On 30 Nov 2006, at 14:27, Kasper T Toeplitz wrote:

>
> is it?? not sure…
> certainly working with a computer as instrument did change my way
> of writing (and thinking) the music – the change from thinking in
> "notes" (a straight line) to thinking in frequencies (exponantial)
> is the most obvious one – there are others

The liberation I felt on first getting my hands on electronic music
equipment in 1967 is very much the motivation that led to where I am
today – the change in thinking was profound indeed – as I said in a
previous post, it was the ability to create the instrument I needed
that was at the centre of this, although it was nearly 25 years
before I had the tools in my hands (the ISPW) to really do it
properly. (When I first got my ISPW I talked to an old colleague from
the 70s about what I was doing with it, and he remarked that he
remembered me talking about these ideas 20 years before – finally my
vision was coming true.)
>
> my instrument is the computer, not the max patch. The max patch is
> the "score" (or the preparation of the instument, the "tuning") for
> each piece (each one of my pieces uses a diiferent patch, which
> sometimes can be the only score)

To me the computer is just a computer – a tool. The instruments I
create in Max are what make the music possible. Yes – definitely it
is not an instrument until the Max patch is running!

Best

L

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk


November 30, 2006 | 3:33 pm

>
>>
>>my instrument is the computer, not the max patch. The max patch is
>>the "score" (or the preparation of the instument, the "tuning") for
>>each piece (each one of my pieces uses a diiferent patch, which
>>sometimes can be the only score)
>>
>
>To me the computer is just a computer – a tool. The instruments I
>create in Max are what make the music possible. Yes – definitely it
>is not an instrument until the Max patch is running!
>

well, I can not play a concert with a mouse – i need a trackpad!!
and a mac Trackpad (when i tried a PC trackpad, it did not felt
"well") – also the external trackpad (cirque) never felt "right"

what’s more when another musician (laurent D) played one of my (only
electronic – max patch) pieces (using my patch, but on his computer)
he had to change its trackpad technique!!!

In other case, another musician (playing also one of my electronic
pieces) argued than, if he would be playing a violin piece of mine,
he would certainly take the score (and its annotations) but not the
violin – so he did his own patch – in Lisp what’s more, not in max

so my point of wiev is that I pay the computer – which is an
instrument – and the change of computer allows me to do other things
(just like using my custom made bass i can play higher/lower than on
all of my previous instruments) still on the new instrument I can
play older scores or pieces (max patches); the new scores, made for
the new instrument (new patches for new computer) are not playable on
the old computer/instrument.

when someone plays my computer piece, I give him the score (patch –
ok, I also give a score, which is complemented by the patch, or
vice-versa), but he brings his computer – or instrument.

I just happen to play an instrument on which i can write my email
(impossible on a trumpet!!)

best

kasper

Kasper T. Toeplitz
noise, composition, bass, computer

http://www.sleazeArt.com


November 30, 2006 | 5:19 pm

On 30 Nov 2006, at 15:33, Kasper T Toeplitz wrote:

> I just happen to play an instrument on which i can write my email
> (impossible on a trumpet!!)
>
But at least with a trumpet you can "blow your own…" ;-)>

L

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk


November 30, 2006 | 5:24 pm

Hi Stefan:

What do you do with these dedicated triggers? Are they some how related to ‘score following’ or I should say ‘soloist following’ so the score can follow the leading voice tempo changes or are they just landmarks or flags that point a certain spot in the composition? People from IRCAM didn’t develop yet this capability. Have you heard of Mr. Richard Dudas? Thank you. Yanisis


November 30, 2006 | 5:48 pm


November 30, 2006 | 6:05 pm

> I just happen to play an instrument on which i can write my email
> (impossible on a trumpet!!)

Was this the new version of PostHorn.exe?

;-)

Trond



jln
November 30, 2006 | 8:04 pm


November 30, 2006 | 11:04 pm

On 30 Nov 2006, at 20:04, jln wrote:

>
> In my humble opinion, the comparaison doesn’t work so well. Making
> a patch for a piece (which would be true for any software) is not
> so much about building an instrument rather than composing it. You
> can’t seperate the score part and the instrument one in a patch –
> which is not so true with traditionnal instrument. I’m not talking
> about the links between instrument and musical language (violin and
> tonal language for exemple) but just the process of composing a
> score and an instrument which seems a more of a same process with
> digital technologies. Of course, to a certain extend.

As I think I have said before, that is exactly how I feel in my own
work – the instrument building and the composition are part of the
same process – I just don’t think it is necessary for everyone to
think the same way – take a composer lke Jonathan Harvey, who has
done excellent things with electronic techniques, but has always used
assistants to achieve his ends. I just think that in music it is not
how you play the game that matters, but whether you win or lose – if
you get good results your method is valid, and any method is capable
of good results if it is the right method for you.

Also there are loads of pieces for traditional instruments that are
really about some particular technique(s) of playing and how that
particular sound production works – this isn’t just a matter of
computers, although it is especially significant there.

Best

L

Lawrence Casserley – lawrence@lcasserley.co.uk
Lawrence Electronic Operations – http://www.lcasserley.co.uk
Colourscape Music Festivals – http://www.colourscape.org.uk


November 30, 2006 | 11:20 pm


December 1, 2006 | 2:25 pm

Pierre Alexandre Tremblay wrote:
> You understtand the very opposite of what I am saying. I say that the
> composer can go further by doing his own musical assistant, cutting the
> musical gestures in performer-centred stress-points to allow a better
> flexibility. It might become a coarse score following, a pedal
> trigger, or another device, but most of the time, all of them in a
> piece, according to the needs of the music and its performability.

Yes… As I am both, musical assistant and composer, I am aware of these
structures. Its way more fun to work with composers who know the basics
of DSP and electronics but its also very inspireing to do cooperations
in general. Two persons pull out much more interesting stuff than if
they’d work each on their own, especially if they differ in their
knowledge…

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


December 4, 2006 | 7:10 am

John wrote:
> What do you do with these dedicated triggers? Are they some how
> related to ‘score following’ or I should say ‘soloist following’ so
> the score can follow the leading voice tempo changes or are they just
> landmarks or flags that point a certain spot in the composition?

They are just landmarks. They are also simplified to allow errors. For
example the musician would move along a scale to trigger certain events
within a score. If he misses one, or plays double triggers, the patch
would still know where and what to play. Its a simplified score very
easy to follow (and boring to play ;-):

CDEFGABCDE CDEFGABCDE CDEFGABCDE….

If the score needs an additional event because it changed, there are
some black keys left over to use…
Within that system, it would be easy to measure the distance of certain
events. (For example to determine a delay time)
But thats not freewheeling tempo tracking. This would only work in very
fixed scores.

> People from IRCAM didn’t develop yet this capability.

Thats your chance, go ahead… ;-)

Stefan


Stefan Tiedje————x——-
–_____———–|————–
–(_|_ —-|—–|—–()——-
– _|_)—-|—–()————–
———-()——–www.ccmix.com


Viewing 46 posts - 1 through 46 (of 46 total)