alt.milan

Birthday shout-outs (20120131)

2012-01-31T06:34:00.000-05:00

Three shout-outs today.

First, composer Franz Schubert (January 31, 1797 – November 19, 1828). The two works that I think most people know him for are his Unfinished Symphony and his Trout Quintet. Here are the bits that I think are most familiar.

The lied on which the latter is based shows up in the new Robert Downey Jr. Sherlock Holmes movie (they use it in this trailer, but also in a key scene that, shall we say, has a real *hook*).

More birthday shout-outs here.

More Schubert: audio/video, Google search results, and Wikiquote page.

Next, musicologist Alan Lomax (January 31, 1915 – July 19, 2002). I never came across Lomax until I heard some backstory about the theme song to The Vinyl Cafe.

What I heard is reflected in the description accompanying the video (which you'll have to click through to YouTube to read). Interestingly, neither Lomax nor the song's creator Joseph Spence are mentioned in each other's Wikipedia entries.

More birthday shout-outs here.

More Lomax: audio/video, Google search results.

Finally, composer Philip Glass (born in 1937 and still with us). A busy guy who has done a lot of stuff; what should I put here? Something with some visuals, I think...

More birthday shout-outs here.

More Glass: audio/video, Google search results.

Downton Abbey Syndrome

2012-01-30T08:18:00.001-05:00

Unfortunately, the longer you watch Downton Abbey, the more you may be reminded of this.

Other search results for "Downton Abbey Syndrome".

Birthday shout-outs (20120130)

2012-01-30T06:42:00.000-05:00

Two shout-outs today.

First, musician Roy Eldridge (January 30, 1911 – February 26, 1989).

More birthday shoutouts here.

More Eldridge: audio/video, Google search results.

Second, actor Gene Hackman (born in 1930, and still with us). I haven't liked everything he's done, but I do enjoy these two roles: as Harry Caul in The Conversation and Edward 'Brill' Lyle in Enemy of the State.

Interestingly, Wikipedia says that Hackman spent time in the Marines as a field radio operator.

More birthday shoutouts here.

More Hackman: audio/video, Google search results.

Anecdotes as arguments as evidence (and knowing what to believe)

2012-01-29T14:04:00.001-05:00

What, who, or even whether to believe and why: when should it be straightforward, and when (and for what) should I hold out?

Perhap you've seen something like this: a presenter or writer has a point to make, so they tell a story. At the end of the story, you get a Q.E.D. type restatement of the writer's conclusion. Having familiarized myself a bit with the problems of anecdotal evidence, I typically find myself unconvinced, even if I'm already in sympathy with the conclusion.

There are, of course, problems with trying to provide something more than anecdotal evidence, whether it's feasible or even worthwhile doing so in that particular instance, and whether that "something more" should be considered enough to settle the matter (and knowing what counts as "settled" in that particular instance).

Or should I even bother believing or disbelieving? Is a response from me even necessary?

Birthday shout-outs (20120129)

2012-01-29T00:40:00.005-05:00

First, author and dramatist Anton Chekov (January 29 1860 – July 15 1904). Now and then one of our local theatre companies puts on a Chekhov play, but this is the one I would most like to have seen (unfortunately, audio only).

More birthday shoutouts here.

More Chekhov: audio/video, Google search results, and Wikiquote page.

Next, comedian W. C. Fields (January 29, 1880 – December 25, 1946).

And speaking of juggling, as I did recently, here's Fields demonstrating his talent at it.

More birthday shoutouts here.

More Fields: audio/video, Google search results, and Wikiquote page.

Next, drummer Tommy Ramone (born in 1952, and still with us), the last (original) Ramone standing. Among his songwriting contributions to The Ramones is this.

And here's Tommy performing it solo more recently (and acoustically).

More birthday shoutouts here.

More Ramones: audio/video, Google search results.

More Tommy Ramone: audio/video, Google search results.

Finally, musician and former Tangerine Dream member Peter Baumann (born in 1953, and still with us). This is from Encore, the last Tangerine Dream album (a live one, as it turns out) that Baumann played on.

More Tangerine Dream: audio/video, Google search results.

More Baumann: audio/video, Google search results.

Birthday shout-outs (20120128)

2012-01-28T08:13:00.001-05:00

Two shout-outs today...

First, artist Jackson Pollock (January 28, 1912 – August 11, 1956). You've probably seen his work before, and if you're in Toronto you may have heard/read about or even gone to see the Abstract Expressionist New York show at the AGO and seen his work there. You might have also seen the biographical film about him directed by and starring Ed Harris.

As it's his 100th birthday today, a few other people are doing shout-outs of their own.

More Jackson Pollock: audio/video and Google search results.

Second, rapper Rakim (born on this day in 1968, and still with us). I found out about him from his work with DJ Eric B: (audio/video and Google search results).

More Rakim (with or without Eric B): audio/video and Google search results.

Birthday shout-outs (20120127)

2012-01-27T06:38:00.002-05:00

Another big day for birthdays today.

First, composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (January 27, 1756 – December 5, 1791).

I think it was at my senior recital that I played a transcription for tuba of this.

And speaking of Mozart horn music, here's something amusing by Flanders and Swann.

My favourite Mozart overture...

And here's something someone put together for their own Mozart birthday shout-out — on beer bottles.

More Mozart birthday shout-outs here.

More Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart: audio/video and Google search results.

Next, writer (and man of many other talents) Lewis Carroll (January 27, 1832 – January 14, 1898).

Here, it looks someone took a recording of Carroll reading Jabberwocky and animated it.

Terry Gilliam directed a film based on the poem. Here's the big finish (with subtitles in.

The Muppets had a go at Jabberwocky, too.

More Jabberwocky: video/audio and Google search results.

More Lewis Carroll: audio/video and Google search results.

Next, composer Jerome Kern (January 27, 1885 – November 11, 1945). I first learned of Kern through Charlie Parker's rendition of All the Things You Are.

The next version of that song I became familiar with is by Ella Fitzgerald.

Recent shoutee Joe Pass did a version as well (which you can watch/listen to where I did the shout-out).

And here's one by Serge Gainsbourg. Who knew?

Looking very relaxed, Miles Davis...

And finishing up, a great favourite and a wonderful performer of all of us here, Art Tatum.

More versions here.

More Jerome Kern: audio/video and Google search results.

Next, blues guitarist Elmore James (January 27, 1918 – May 24, 1963)

Have some singles...

More Elmore James: audio/video and Google search results.

Finally, drummer Nick Mason (born in 1944, and still with us), best known for his work with Pink Floyd.

More Nick Mason: audio/video and Google search results.

Birthday shout-outs (20120126)

2012-01-26T06:34:00.000-05:00

First up, violinist Stéphane Grappelli (January 26, 1908 – December 1 1997), who is known for working with recent shoutee Django Reinhardt (where you can see video of them playing together, so here's another one).

More Grappelli and Reinhardt: audio/video and Google search results.

And here's something solo, more recently.

More Grappelli: audio/video and Google search results.

Next, musician Eddie Van Halen (born in 1955, and still with us). The guy gets the band named after him and he wasn't even the singer. How cool is that?

(Hmmm... there's probably a list of similar cases somewhere.)

The first song I recall hearing by Van Halen the band was a cover.

And, for reference, the original.

Oh, the fights over which version was better; what I dug, though, was what came before.

And a longer version, if you like.

More Eddie Van Halen: audio/video and Google search results.

And finally today, singer Anita Baker (born in 1958, and still with us). She's the one you hear when you're in the grocery store but it's too noisy to make out the song or who's singing it.

Yeah, that's the one. Or maybe it's this one.

Curse you, grocery store with your noisy customers and crap sound system...

More Anita Baker: audio/video

and Google search results.

"power" - modifiers, collocations

2012-01-25T22:33:00.001-05:00

So here's a question. Today I ran across the phrase "strong discriminatory power" (the context is risk model validation). I had a look through a "corpus" of journal articles and the like that I've been assembling, and found the modifiers "higher" and "less"; I assume that "lower" and "more" would also be acceptable in those contexts.

But that leads me to another question: what modifiers are typically, in the relevant context, used with "power", and are "strong" and "weak" among them?

I could find this out with a proper (preferably subject-relevant) corpus and a concordance tool. Or, another, perhaps more interesting idea: create a sentence using "power" with a space in front for a modifier (try post modification too?) and provide a pool of words from which to choose modifiers, and then ask people who are familiar with the subject matter to indicate which words they would or wouldn’t use and see how often "strong" and "weak" are selected (disqualified).

balls in the air

2012-01-25T06:56:00.001-05:00

This video was making the rounds not too long ago, as I recall.

(Not the best quality one I could find, but that one doesn't have embedding enabled)

Anyway, this morning I was thinking about a conversation I was having with my boss about risk. To paraphrase him, risk is a certain way of looking at the world that makes certain assumptions, focuses on certain things, and ignores others. I suppose you could say the same about economics, physics, and perhaps even technical communication, baseball, and crack cocaine.

One exception — or at least, one way of thinking that may attempt to be an exception — could be systems thinking, at least as I understand it. And for me this idea of looking at things as a whole raises the question of how many balls can you keep in the air at once.

Birthday shout-outs (20120125)

2012-01-25T06:32:00.002-05:00

Another big day for birthdays...

First up, natural philosopher Robert Boyle (25 January 1627 – 31 December 1691). I first found out about him from Leviathan and the Air-Pump. Interestingly, Boyle was born the year after Sir Francis Bacon (whose birthday was not long ago) died. Way to carry on the torch, sir...

Not surprisingly, Boyle himself doesn't show up much on the Web, but there is a bit of video/audio and other stuff, too. Check it out.

Next up, another Robert: poet Robert Burns (25 January 1759 – 21 July 1796) ("the name's Burns, Robert Burns...").

Er… what do we know this guy for? Hmmm... I think maybe this. And this. And, er, some other stuff that may or may not appear here and here.

Next, jazz musician Benny Golson (born in 1929, and still with us), who you can read is/was a contemporary of a number of jazz greats, including past birthday shout-outee Red Rodney. Unfortunately, I couldn't find a sample of that, but here's something from early in Golson's career, playing with Art Blakey's Jazz Messengers.

More Benny Golson: video/audio and Google search results.

Next, recently departed singer Etta James (January 25, 1938 – January 20, 2012). James' career hit the big time when she was discovered by also recently departed Johnny Otis.

Don't everybody leave all at once, now...

Here's the song everyone knows Etta James for.

A popular one at weddings, I hear — perhaps unlike this one.

More Etta James: video/audio and Google search results.

Finally, John Cooper Clarke (born in 1949, and still with us — thanks for sticking around, sir). The man is a poet. Really, that's not just a metaphor...

Also performs with a band.

More John Cooper Clarke: video/audio and Google search results.

Birthday shout-outs (20120124)

2012-01-24T06:31:00.000-05:00

Big day for birthdays...

Muzio Clementi (24 January 1752 – 10 March 1832) is one of those names that rings a bell from school way back when. I can't recall any particulars, but the name has stuck with me. That, and my certainty that I didn't hear any Clementi played on banjo.

More video/audio here; Google search results here.

Next, actor Ernest Borgnine (born in 1917 and still with us). I remember seeing him on TV in McHale's Navy.

More McHale's Navy video here; Google search results here.

The first film I have a clear memory of seeing him in is The Devil's Rain.

Plenty of The Shat in that trailer, but not so much of The Borg. However, more video of The Devil's Rain here; Google search results here.

More Borgnine video here; Google search results here.

Next, musician Warren Zevon (January 24, 1947 – September 7, 2003). The first song of his I recall hearing was one of these.

Two other points of connection for me: Hunter S. Thompson and Kevin Smith.

More video/audio here; Google search results here.

Penultimately, actor John Belushi (January 24, 1949 – March 5, 1982). I first saw him on TV on, of course, Saturday Night Live.

(Crap sound, but you get what you get)

More John Belushi + Saturday Night Live: video; Google search results.

The first film I saw him in was, naturally, Animal House.

More John Belushi + Animal House: video; Google search results.

The Blues Brothers, however, was most inspiring to me.

More John Belushi + Blues Brothers: video/audio; Google search results.

Finally, musician Jools Holland</a> (born in 1958, and still with us). I heard him first with the band Squeeze.

(I believe that's Holland behind the bar, and also transporting the piano)

More Squeeze: audio/video; Google search results.

He's also notable for his television show Later... with Jools Holland. The BBC has a site for the show.

More Jools Holland: video/audio; Google search results.

Happy Birthday, Django and Sonny

2012-01-23T06:29:00.000-05:00

First, guitarist and composer Django Reinhardt (23 January 1910 – 16 May 1953).

A year or two behind me in high school was a trumpet player who, after I graduated, lost a couple of fingers on his right hand to a band saw in the industrial arts room. Rather than giving up the trumpet, he learned to play left-handed. He also, as I recall, got involved with a Christian group in school that made its own Left Behind-type video. Make of that what you will.

Anyway, Reinhardt had his own injury and recovery, which led to an interesting guitar technique, which you can get a peak at here.

Back on Joe Pass' birthday I posted a link to him playing Reinhardt's Nuages. Other video/audio available here, and Google search results available here.

Also, if you haven't checked out The Triplets of Belleville, you can catch some Reinhardt-inspired music there: video/audio, and Google search results.

Also today, actor Sonny Chiba (born in 1939 and still with us). Here's the trailer for The Street Fighter.

More video here, and Google search results here. And more birthday shout-outs here

2012 Hatsu Basho: congratulations Baruto

2012-01-22T11:06:00.000-05:00

On the third last day of the tournament, Kotooshu beats Hakuho, leaving Baruto too far ahead for anyone else to catch up.

Next day, Baruto beats Kotooshu — not that it matters to winning the tournament, but it puts him one step closer to a perfect record.

On the last day, Hakuho beats Baruto, depriving him of a perfect record for the tournament.

Final results of the basho here.

Google video search results for the 2012 Hatsu Basho here.

Birthday shout-outs (20120122): a Frank and two Jims

2012-01-22T09:56:00.001-05:00

First up, Sir Francis Bacon (22 January 1561 – 9 April 1626), perhaps best well known for his early influence on the scientific method. Wikipedia tells us that he did a bunch of other important social and statesmanly things.

Video/audio here; Google hits here.

Next, trombonist J. J. Johnson (January 22, 1924 – February 4, 2001). Here's a bit of his playing, with transcription.

More video/audio here; Google hits here.

Finally, director Jim Jarmusch (born in 1953, and still with us). I'm most familiar with him through his work with Tom Waits.

Here's Jarmusch himself in conversation with Charlie Rose.

More video/audio here; Google hits here. And some other birthday shout-outs here.

Questions arising (20120121)

2012-01-21T12:40:00.002-05:00

A few questions come to mind after reading this and the discussion that followed.

When do you consult (ask others), when do you reflect (ask yourself), and when do you research (go beyond anecdote and opinion)? Who do you ask, how much time and effort do you spend on the question, and how far do you go to get "the truth"?How far do you have to go to get something of at least minimal value (and before which it's not even worth having tried)? You can spend too much time and effort on something, but you can also spend too little and end up stopping before you get anything of value.

What are you going to do with the answer? And what other things are vying for your attention? Given limited time and resources, do you have bigger fish to fry? What might be the consequences of not answering this question?

The original question might not be that big a deal; the scrutiny was being given could be way out of proportion to the attention it would receive from the intended reader. My interest in it, though, is more about questions about how to answer the question (this one or any other).

And in case you're wondering about the phrase "out of proportion to", so did this person.

Birthday shout-outs (20120121): a composer and two DJs

2012-01-21T10:13:00.000-05:00

I don't know why the name Alexander Tcherepnin (21 January 1899 – 29 September 1977) looks so familiar; I don't think I studied him directly, but something is ringing a bell. Maybe something to do with how many of his other family members were also composers.

A whole bunch of Google hits here, and a whole bunch of video/audio here. Here's some, played by Yo-Yo Ma

Next, disc jockey Wolfman Jack (21 January 1938 - 1 July 1995). As I recall, he's the first impersonation I ever tried; at about twelve years of age I don't think I was very convincing. I've got a feeling that I first heard of him through this song.

Other video/audio here; Google hits here.

Last for today, another DJ: Jam Master Jay (January 21, 1965 – October 30, 2002), of Run-D.M.C fame.

Tougher Than Leather was my first Run-D.M.C. album (on cassette, as I recall). They had me at the first song.

But back to Jam Master Jay.

More video/audio here; Google hits here.

Birthday shout-outs (20120120)

2012-01-20T06:54:00.001-05:00

Five shout-outs today.

First up, composer, music theorist, and professor Walter Piston (January 20, 1894 – November 12, 1976). I didn't have to study from any of Piston's books myself, but I do remember reading what Frank Zappa had to say about him.

You can listen to a bunch of Piston's compositions here. Also, check out these articles.

Reappraising Walter Piston

Walter Piston,Practical Theorist

Harvard Composers: Walter Piston and His Students, from Elliott Carter to Frederic Rzewski.

More birthday shout-outs to Walter Piston here.

Next, actor DeForest Kelley (January 20, 1920 – June 11, 1999), perhaps better known as Dr. McCoy from the original Star Trek series (those links and others on the Wikipedia page). Check out some Dr. McCoy clips here and some DeForest Kelley clips here.

More birthday shout-outs to DeForest Kelley here.

Next, pianist and composer David Tudor (January 20, 1926 – August 13, 1996). For some reason I recall reading a column written by him in a magazine called The Wire, but once again my memory doesn't seem to be all that accurate. At any rate, the magazine does have some stuff about him

Listen to some David Tudor here.

More birthday shout-outs to David Tudor here (yes, no returns for the phrase in quotes; perhaps we can change that).

Next, drummer Jimmy Cobb (born in 1929, and still with us), perhaps best known for having played on Miles Davis' album Kind of Blue (those links and others on the Wikipedia page). Plenty of Jimmy Cobb videos here. And more birthday shout-outs here.

Finally, bringing it back to something Zappa related, is (ex?) bassist Scott Thunes (born in 1960, and still with us). In addition to the Wikipedia page, there's also the Zappa Wiki Jawaka page. And here's a bit on Scott from Barry Miles' bio of Frank. I remember reading somewhere else (the same book, different page, or maybe a different source) that the cake incident was what led Frank to end that particular tour prematurely and break up the band.

Video featuring Thunes here. And more birthday shout-outs here (same story as with David Tudor).

Happy Birthday, Paul and (Sir) Simon

2012-01-19T07:02:00.002-05:00

Two shout-outs today. First, artist Paul Cézanne (19 January 1839 to 22 October 1906). Loads of pointers on the Wikipedia page; here's what I found for video on the Web.

More parts of that one available...

If the embedded video isn't cooperating, try here. Loads more of that sort of thing at the MoMA site and on YouTube.

This one appears to be a song about Cézanne by French singer France Gall.

And... plenty more of those sorts of things, but not much else. Let's see what other people doing Cézanne shout-outs have done:

Remembering Artist Paul Cézanne: Born 127 Years Ago Today (Geeks of Doom, last year; check that number?)
Google Logo Honors Paul Cezanne's Birthday (Huff Post, last year)
Contemporary Psychoanalytic Musings
Galeria Surreal
and so on...

Moving on; shout-out #2 today goes to conductor Sir Simon Rattle (born 1955, and still with us). Apropos of his birthday...

Composer John Adams wrote Sir Simon something for his birthday a while back.

There's a tag for Sir Simon on Tumblr.

He has a Twitter account that he may (not) someday start using (click through for an alternative), and a Facebook page that has seen a bit of action, though not much recently.

Plenty of video stuff; I'll give you this link and you can peruse at your whim.

to be technical or non-technical may not be the question

2012-01-18T22:48:00.001-05:00

This idea of "technical" vs "non-technical" technical writers comes up every so often, and I think one could be forgiven for thinking that no matter how many times it comes up, the professional community (such as it is) is never wiser or stronger for it. Perhaps it's too small a question.

Products result from workflows, and workflows are carried out by systems. So, look at the product, the workflow that produced it, and the system that carried out the workflow. If it all works, then what does it matter whether the system is populated by technical writers, engineers, secretaries, or janitors? If it doesn't, then there's investigation to be done, and even if it is decided that someone "non-technical" is doing a job that needs someone "technical", then isn't the bigger question how that person got there? Who's minding the system?

Questions arising (20120118)

2012-01-18T22:16:00.000-05:00

This techwr-l post (yes, another one) raises some questions for me.

How could we find out more (in terms of both quantity and quality) about how documentation is perceived and used? Not based on opinion and individual experience, but in a way that has a better chance of being credibly generalizable to broader contexts?

If the way people interact with things has changed, how did they do it before, how has that changed over time, and what drove those changes?

What patterns can we observe around or between the usability of products and the documentation offered to support them? For example, if we took a random sample of products from a given sector, rated them for usability, and then looked at the accompanying documentation and rated it in some way indicating its quality and/or quantity, might we find some correlation(s)?

How do you measure "qualified for the job" and being over or under that level? If it's subjective, then what makes one person's assessment over being over/under/just right more trustworthy than another person's?

That's enough for now, if any of that makes any sense...

Happy Birthday, Beat Takeshi

2012-01-18T06:54:00.000-05:00

Today's shout-out goes to actor-and-a-bunch-of-other-things Takeshi Kitano (born 1947 and still with us) — you might know him better as Beat Takeshi, and you might be familiar with some of his older television work through a show called MXC. He was also in Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence with yesterday's shout-out recipient.

At the bottom of the Wikipedia page (when it comes back) you'll find some links of interest. Here are a few vids on the Web that I think are worth looking at.

Not for the squeamish...

OK, you can look again...

A couple of other birthday shout-outs to him (past and present) here and here.

Your search engine of choice can turn up more material, like this.

Happy Birthday, Ryuichi Sakamoto

2012-01-17T07:17:00.003-05:00

One shout-out today: musician Ryuichi Sakamoto (born 1952, and still with us).

Where do I begin? Here's:

his site
his Twitter feed
his Facebook page
a Google Plus profile, but I can't find a link to it that I can put here
his Last.fm page
his IMDb page

Your search engine of choice should help you find more.

Some vids (solo and with Yellow Magic Orchestra)...

Again, there's more to find if you look.

attributive spreader

2012-01-16T22:20:00.001-05:00

(Click image above to embiggen.)

So, in Gmail what do the ads have to do with the searches?

Questions arising (20120116)

2012-01-16T22:08:00.000-05:00

This techwr-l post gives rise to some questions (for me, anyway).

Is product documentation actually getting smaller and less useable as time goes on? How do you get a picture of that, anecdotal evidence aside?

Similarly, how do we get a picture of how documentation is used — again, anecdotal evidence aside?

If documentation is "getting smaller", might this be part of a larger trend of things getting smaller in general?

Is there such a thing as too much documentation? How much documentation is "enough"?

How do you measure the usability of something longitudinally? How, for example, would you compare the usability of MS Word 1.0 with the current version? What measures would make sense across the product's history? How would you "adjust for inflation"?

If product makers expect us to figure out more on our own, is that necessaarily a bad thing? (think of minimalism) Might this be part of a larger social or cultural pattern?

Re: the rise of third-party documentation (Missing Manual, etc.): doesn't this fit in with a larger pattern of finding more ways to generate economic activity, i.e. finding new ways to make a buck that someone else isn't already doing?

Happy Birthday Robert and Frank

2012-01-16T20:45:00.001-05:00

The theme of "cold" unites my two shout-outs today.

First, poet Robert Service (January 16, 1874 – September 11, 1958), "the Bard of the Yukon". I have this memory — apparently false, judging from my inability to find any evidence of it now — of hearing a song on Dr. Demento (I'm not dating myself for anyone who knows me, and for anyone who doesn't, it doesn't matter) with the line "I'm Robert Service at your service", spoken/rapped in a Scottish-ish accent (even though Service was born in England). I recall it being somewhat in the vein of Uncle Jack Sez Relax.

Anyway, here are a couple of Service's most famous pieces, read by the man himself.

Second, inventor Frank Zamboni (January 16, 1901 – July 27, 1988). Yes, that Zamboni.

You might have heard this song before.

An acquaintance of mine from my Saskatoon days has some connection to Zamboni ice resurfacers — and though I heard the story some time ago I don't remember it now (other than that it might have involved a contest and fan voting). My friend Kevin Steele would remember it.

Birthday shout-outs (20120115)

2012-01-15T17:59:00.000-05:00

Yep, got some people busy being born today, yessiree…

First, playwright Molière (born Jean-Baptiste Poquelin, baptised January 15, 1622 – February 17, 1673). We saw The Misanthrope at Stratford this past season with Ben Carlson in the lead (also playing Feste in Twelfth Night at the same time, which we also saw).

Apparently, there have been several dramatizations of Molière's life. Here's the trailer for the most recent one.

Here's a behind-the-scenes video about that Stratford production of The Mistanthrope.

Next, drummer Gene Krupa (January 15, 1909 – October 16, 1973). Apparently true fact (according to Wikipedia): one of Krupa's students went on to play in a band that became well-known for their cosmetics — I'll let you fill in the rest.

Here's Krupa with Benny Goodman on Sing, Sing, Sing.

Here's something from a DVD about Krupa, aptly titled Swing, Swing, Swing.

Next, civil rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. (January 15, 1929 – April 4, 1968).

It seems anything by him or about him will always be timely, but this one stands out to me.

Next, musician and artist Captain Beefheart (January 15, 1941 – December 17, 2010). The Cap'n is another artist who I first found out about through Frank Zappa. Finding a video of them performing together with good sound took too long, so I gave up and instead present this - visually interesting, if not great sounding.

Here he is with The Magic Band.

And on Letterman.

And finally, Andrea Martin (born 1947, and still with us). I think most of us - certainly those of us of (at least) a certain age - know her from her work on STCV.

Here's an interview she did with Jian Ghomeshi.

Happy Birthday Allen, Ben, and James

2012-01-14T00:15:00.000-05:00

Everyone today is still with us. Isn't that nice?

First, musician Allen Toussaint (1938), who I first heard of in association with Elvis Costello.

If you're still looking for a resolution for the new year, you could do worse than this.

Next, tenor Ben Heppner (1956).

("Nessun dorma" on Wikipedia)

And here's some promo...

Finally, rapper LL Cool J (1968)

("Mama Said Knock You Out" on Wikipedia)

Here he is on Sesame Street.

Happy Birthdays (20120113)

2012-01-13T12:25:00.001-05:00

Four of them today...

First, singer and actress Sophie Tucker (January 13, 1886 – February 9, 1966). As may also be the case for you, I knew the voice before I knew the name.

One thing I learned from the Wikipedia article is that "Last of the Red Hot Mamas" refers to her. A little more digging around on that phrase led me to this episode of the Simpsons (if the embedded video below doesn't cooperate, go here).

Next, guitarist Joe Pass (January 13, 1929 – May 23, 1994).

Playing Jerome Kern's "All the Things You Are".

Playing Django Reinhardt's "Nuages".

Wikipedia article on Pass here.

Next, actor and director William B. Davis (born on this day in 1938, and still with us), best known as The Smoking Man from The X-Files.

Here we learn a few things about the man in real life, in conversation with X-Files alum and (former?) talk show host Brendan Beiser.

Wikipediacs, get more here.

Finally, Madness frontman Suggs (born Graham McPherson on this day in 1961).

("Baggy Trousers" on Wikipedia here.)

And later...

If you have about 40 minutes to spare, here's an interview (with this fella, I think).

Wikipedia article on Suggs here.

Happy Birthday, George and Haruki

2012-01-12T00:07:00.002-05:00

Only three years apart — they're like brothers or something...

First born, musician George Duke, on this date in 1946. I know him best from his work with Frank Zappa; here's a bit of it here:

And here's George more recently.

Wikipediacs, go here for more on George.

And bringing up the rear, author Haruki Murakami, born in 1949. Here's a bit of an interview (or is it a press conference?) with him.

And a trailer from a movie based on his novel Norwegian Wood.

Wikipedia article here.

Happy Birthdays (20120110)

2012-01-11T06:53:00.002-05:00

Three birthday greetings today...

First, philosopher and psychologist William James (January 11, 1842 – August 26, 1910). Wikipedia article here. In looking for something visual/aural to share, I came across this (not by him, but about him):

Next, Laurens Hammond (January 11, 1895 – July 3, 1973), inventor of the Hammond Organ. Wikipedia article here. And here's a Hammond organ in action.

Finally, guitarist Lee Ritenour (born in 1952 and still with us). Wikipedia article here. And here's something to listen to and watch.

And if you are (at least) of a certain age, you'll probably recognize this.

Happy Birthday, Max Roach

2012-01-10T06:44:00.000-05:00

January 10, 1924 – August 16, 2007; Wikipedia article here — and according to which, the performance in this video was his last, in Massey Hall.

Happy Birthday, Simone de Beauvoir

2012-01-09T21:54:00.000-05:00

Born on this day in 1908, supposedly died on April 14, 1986.

A few interesting looking things on video for the franco-enabled; for the rest of us, here's something from the BBC.

Wikipedia article here.

sudoku idea - pizzicato plus marimba

2012-01-08T17:46:00.000-05:00

Listen to this:

I took this idea and changed Voices 1 and 4 to marimba.

sudoku idea - pizzicato

2012-01-06T21:41:00.001-05:00

Listen to this:

I took the last idea, changed the instrument from piano to violins, violas, and cello (all pizzicato), and slowed the tempo down to 80 bpm.

I quite like how it works.

sorting it all out

2012-01-06T11:10:00.002-05:00

The title refers to a Kliban cartoon that I can't find online anywhere to point you to (the image above is completely unrelated). If you already know it, imagine it; if you don't, just read on...

When we're doing our jobs, what should influence our decisions?

If I’m employed to write documentation for a product, I want to accomplish at least a couple of things.

I want the users to know how to use the product to successfully accomplish their goals, which includes using it safely.
I want the users to feel good about having purchased the product, perhaps even good enough to influence other people to buy the product as well.
I want the people paying me to write the instructions to feel that they’re making a good investment.

Similarly, in my current real job of editing other people’s reports, I want to accomplish at least the following:

I want to show that the writers did their job properly.
I want readers to understand what the writers did and how they arrived at their conclusions — and to carry out, as applicable, the writers' recommendations.
I want to reinforce the idea that the work our group does (mine included) is important and worth (at least) what it costs.

These scenarios are also contextualized by webs of policies, procedures, standards, regulations, requirements, and corporate/organizational Realpolitik.

Anyone who feels an affiliation with others who do similar work might want to consider “the profession” in their decisions (by, for example, contributing to good precedents or avoiding bad ones, or acting as a responsible representative of the group).

Is there more? How do we factor in all of that when deciding what to spend our time on and how to get things done?

more on the sudoku idea

2012-01-05T18:45:00.002-05:00

First, listen to this.

If you're curious, that was set up in 3/4 @ 120 bpm.

The first time I did something with a Sudoku puzzle, I assigned the pitches of the C major scale to the numbers 1 through 8 — 1 and 8 were the tonic, the latter an octave higher than the former. I assigned F# (the tritone) of the tonic to the number 8. I then made another version based on the A (natural) minor scale.

This time, I went for modes. One small catch is that the Lydian and Locrian modes already include the tritone, so assigning it to 9 doubles it up. I don’t have a replacement idea for that right now, however, so I’ll leave it as it is.

The next question is how to sequence the modes. One answer is to grab a random sequence of 1–7 from random.org and then repeat the last one as a return to the start:

Aeolian, Phrygian, Ionian, Dorian, Locrian, Mixolydian, Lydian, and Aeolian

I then assigned the pitches as follows (click image to enlarge):

Although I treated each row as its own voice, I changed it up from last time by assigning the voices (in groups of three) to different octaves. Voices 1, 2, and 3 play their notes in Octave 5 (C5 to B5; this time the puzzle numbers 1 and 8 represent the same pitch in the same octave), Voices 4–6 and 7–9 play theirs in Octaves 4 and 3, respectively.

As for rhythms, I created some one-beat (four sixteenth note) rhythms, one for each of the puzzle numbers 1 through 9 (click image to enlarge).

For simplicity, I tied them directly to the puzzle numbers, with no shifting. So much for variety, as you can hear in the file above.

Also for simplicity, everything is plaid with a generic piano sound. Ho-hum.

And now that I’ve made this, I’m thinking back on this [sound of rolling eyes] ambitious idea I had earlier (which I could still do, and may yet do but without taking myself so seriously) and contemplating doing something similar with Sudoku puzzles. All I have to do is to get ambitious.

from whence cometh my knowledge?

2012-01-03T20:41:00.000-05:00

Some things, like putting your unprotected hand on a hot stovetop, have chains of cause and effect, risks, etc. that you can deduce without gathering your own empirical evidence.

Other things — a lot of things in technical communication — don't seem to be as clear. So when I see what someone says about something in technical communication, I wonder where it comes from.

A reasonable question

2012-01-02T20:04:00.000-05:00

If all you've got is a head full of questions, what do you deploy when you sit down to do something (such as your job)?

Hypotheses. I guess...

exit to street

2012-01-02T16:37:00.000-05:00

Listen to this:

I took a 25-second slice of street noise, cut it into 0.500 second slices, and arranged them as I did here.

That's all.

Why questions?

2012-01-02T12:19:00.000-05:00

Recently I said that I’m more interested in a body of questions than a body of knowledge. This morning, the phrase “body of answers” occurred to me. A bit too clever, perhaps, but it might help my thinking. For example:

What might be the question that led to this answer?
How might that answer have been arrived at (or, how did we get from point Q to point A?*)
If we take a different approach to answering the question, could we find a different answer?

*perhaps also a bit too clever

questions

2012-01-01T15:57:00.000-05:00

The current job is, mostly, to edit other people’s writing. The basic questions this brings to mind are:

What do people try to accomplish through communication?
What rules do they try to follow to do this?
What techniques do they try to use to ensure success?
By what mechanisms do they think these techniques work?
How do/would/can they tell whether they succeed?

And these questions themselves bring more questions to mind; one they all have in common is “how does one go about answering this question?”. It might be worthwhile considering one's approach before diving in, no?

As I said before, a body of questions is more interesting to me than a body of knowledge.

sing us a Tom (piano man)

2011-12-31T15:39:00.000-05:00

I listened to this but it doesn't seem to be recorded with a strict metre/tempo in mind. It might be possible to impose something on it and add some backing tracks, but I'm not the one with the skills for the job. At least, I think it'd be more work than I'd care to do. And as you might guess, I'm more inclined to do something like this.

I broke the file down into verse, chorus, and "la-di-dah" files, and then stacked them on top of each other (trying to line them up at the initial downbeat); see the image of the multitrack session at the top of this post.

There are interesting sounds within the original file and the multitrack session that could be exploited; maybe sometime later...

to become (pump chili)

2011-12-31T12:49:00.001-05:00

Listen to this:

I started with a slice from Episode 13 of Roderick on the Line (starting at 34:23.600 and lasting 0:07.392). I then cut the slice into 3:4:5 sections (starting with 5) and looped them in a multitrack session.

The 5 slice (track 3 in the image above; click to enlarge) is 3.080 seconds long. The last 0.500 seconds (highlighted in the image) contain the words "to become". I set the cursor at 2.580 in the multitrack session and took 0.500 seconds slices from the tracks containing the 3 and 4 slices (tracks 1 and 2). I then repeated this every 3.080 seconds (5.660, 8.740, 11.820, etc.) until the end. I named the files as follows:

3 01
3 02
3 03
...
3 12

4 01
4 02
4 03
...
4 12

and for the 5 file
to become

This is similar to what I did in my Bridesmaid Revisited piece.

Here's a pattern for arranging the files (click image to enlarge).

This can be played two ways. One way looks like this (click image to enlarge).

Then repeat the pattern with the remaining files (02, 03, 04... 12). The other way looks like this (click image to enlarge).

i.e. play all the 3s, 4s, and 5s together as groups.

For the file I made, I used both of these (you can figure out in which order, yes?) with other material at the beginning, middle, and end.

sing the rink electric

2011-12-26T21:39:00.000-05:00

Imagine a hockey game in which the goals “know” the location of the puck, and the puck knows (and “remembers”) the time and force of its last contact with another object.

Let’s also say that the goals and the puck give off their own continuous signals — those from the goals based on the position of the puck, and that from the puck based on the force of and the time elapsed since its last contact. These signals could be received by some sort of equipment and processed into something we can hear. The signals could be processed live or recorded for later processing.

A variety of sound pieces could be created: each game would have its own pattern, and a variety of techniques for processing the signals could be developed. Has someone come up with an idea like this already? If not, what would it take to get someone interested in developing the technology?

important man

2011-12-26T12:54:00.001-05:00

Listen to this:

It follows the same numerical idea as this one; the source material is a 2.88 second slice from Episode 14 of Roderick on the Line, starting at 1:17:07.135.

correction: sounds of sudoku

2011-12-25T11:44:00.000-05:00

UPDATE: Also, my earlier assertion that harder sudoku might be more sparse doesn't seem to hold up to scrutiny -- at least, the brief unsystematic sort...

Here's how the sound files and scores should go:

C Major

A minor

ANOTHER UPDATE: Also see these:

'twas the idea before Christmas

2011-12-24T23:59:00.000-05:00

First, listen to this.

I started with a 4-second slice from near the beginning of Back to Work 45. I divided it into 16 pieces. I then went to random.org and generated a random sequence:

7 5 10 14 13 8 16 3 9 2 6 15 12 11 4 1

I arranged the slices according to this sequence, then mixed them down into four sets of four:

Set 1: 7 5 10 14
Set 2: 13 8 16 3
Set 3: 9 2 6 15
Set 4: 12 11 4 1

I then sequenced the sets into groups of four as follows:

1 2 3 4
1 2 4 3
1 3 2 4
1 3 4 2
1 4 2 3
1 4 3 2
2 1 3 4
2 1 4 3
2 3 1 4
2 3 4 1
2 4 1 3
2 4 3 1
3 1 2 4
3 1 4 2
3 2 1 4
3 2 4 1
3 4 1 2
3 4 2 1
4 1 2 3
4 1 3 2
4 2 1 3
4 2 3 1
4 3 1 2
4 3 2 1

(I have a feeling I've blogged those sets somewhere but I can't find it at the moment.)

I then arranged the sets in the order shown in a multitrack session and tossed in a few other items to break things up, and got the file you heard at the top.

I'm sure one really hasn't anything to do with the other...

2011-12-24T23:33:00.001-05:00

sounds of sudoku

2011-12-16T15:29:00.003-05:00

UPDATE: Correction posted here.

Here’s an idea I wanted to listen to, using a C major scale to set it up.

Denote the following:

C natural (C5, specifically) is 1
D natural (D5) is 2
E natural (E5) is 3

etc. until

C natural above 1 (C6) is 8
F sharp (yes, the dreaded tritone) (F#5) is 9

Get an unsolved sudoku puzzle, such as the one above.
In a multi-track midi editor, set the time signature to 9/8 (anything divisible by nine will do). Each ninth of a measure represents one column of the sudoku.
Populate the first track of the editor according to the first row of the sudoku (see the one above).
Add a second track representing the second row of the sudoku and do as before, keeping the notes in the same octave (for this trial, anyway).
Continue for the remaining rows of the puzzle. With all tracks set to the same instrument (I'll try multiple instruments later), and assuming all the notes are right, it sounds like this:

Here are the notes on a staff (click image to embiggen):

Transposed to A natural minor:

1 becomes A natural (A4)
2 becomes B natural (B4)
3 becomes C natural (C5)

etc. until

9 becomes D sharp (D#5)

It sounds like this:

On a staff, it looks like this (click to embiggen):

Harder sudoku start with fewer numbers, which would result in a sparser output. Additional ideas to play with are multiple instruments and octaves.

UPDATE: Also see these:

edgy wolf bookend

2011-12-05T21:57:00.000-05:00

I could be interested in the BoK project if it were more a BoQ project — a Body of Questions:

Figure out important questions about technical communication.
Figure out what the challenges would be in coming up with valid answers to those questions.

You could trawl through all the content that's out there, sort the wheat from the chaff, and then try to organize it; if that's your thing, have at it. Me, I'd rather work forward from questions.

We're talkin' 'bout the fair. The people died...

2011-12-05T20:43:00.001-05:00

I was listening to Smodcast 192 when I heard an interesting sound (Kevin Smith ~~yelling at~~ chastising his dachshund, Shecky), which I then turned into this:

The image at the top is the multitrack session; click it to embiggen it. Tracks 3 and 4 contain the original snip from the podcast, and Tracks 1 and 2 contain the first and second "halves" (by duration, they're actually somewhat less than halves) of that snip, respectively, minus the silence in the middle. Looping the original against the two shorter bits makes the pattern a bit more complex. Note the position and effect of the lone slice in Track 4.

Any questions?

endings

2011-12-04T12:41:00.000-05:00

A squeeze bottle starts out being convenient but becomes less so as the content empties out. Jars are not as convenient at the start, but are also less inconvenient at the end.

That might be an analogy for something.

The pontification-motivation-inspiration-industrial complex

2011-12-03T10:48:00.000-05:00

I think I'm onto something, but I'm still working on it.

tone row idea (20111126)

2011-11-26T19:51:00.001-05:00

Here's a fairly minimalist way of presenting a tone row.

The tone row is the one from here.

A twelve-tone row can be broken up into strings of three, four, and five, and then played at the same time (using the same tempos as in the previous post).

Now, rotating the row through the voices (and more or less preserve the order of the pitches), I get these (click image to enlarge).

Playing through the combinations (start in the upper left, then read left to right through the rows), I get what you heard at the beginning.

And now I know how that sounds...

Sprinting aside...

2011-11-26T15:20:00.001-05:00

What could a couple, or a few, or several technical communication types get together and do that would result in the creation of something that would be of interest to:

themselves, later on.
others who weren't there, be they other tech comm types or not.

What is there beyond getting together with a few people for coffee or lunch, or gathering with a bunch of other people in a room to pay attention to the words and gestures of someone standing at the front?

Open source documentation sprints are one possibility. What else might there be?

Googlebarfight

2011-11-23T20:47:00.001-05:00

Never mind why I was looking at those words (I edit for a living, I see a lot of words, and sometimes I wonder about them). Just look at the numbers and the sizes of the bars.

Shouldn't those numbers be the other way around?

This is your life, and it's ending one minute at a time

2011-11-23T20:34:00.001-05:00

I cannot, no matter how hard I try, dance to the 20th Century Fox music. Try it sometime, and see if you can do it.

I mean, I can move to it, but it's not satisfying.

On the plus side, Fight Club is a pretty good movie.

Seriously, though, your life is ending one minute (or more) at a time. Probably. Enjoy it.

And now I know how that sounds (row20111111)

2011-11-20T19:39:00.001-05:00

First, a randomly generated tone row.

As numeric values (0 = C♮), it looks like this.

On a music staff, it looks like this.

Now, going back to the 3:4:5 idea, set up three voices: the first plays at 75 bpm, the second at 100 bpm, and the third at 125 bpm. Putting the row into each voice as straight eighth notes with no rests, the 75 bpm voice plays the row three times in the time it takes the other two voices to play it four times and five times, respectively.

And now I know what how that sounds.

maybe just a little blame

2011-11-17T22:40:00.001-05:00

It's not what you say...

2011-11-16T07:46:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, STC Toronto sent me a survey to complete. Its goal appears to be to help the community leadership plan future events. One of the questions goes "What topics would you like to learn more about? (Select all that apply.)”, and it’s followed by a list of about 20 items ending in a blank for “Other”.

For me, it's not only what topics are presented, but how they’re presented:

If you have an opinion on a subject, how did you arrive at that opinion? Have you tried falsifying it? Have you investigated counterclaims? What’s the evidence to support the argument?
If there’s something you didn’t know before and you set out to find out about it:

How did the question come up?
What made the question important enough to investigate?
How did you investigate it?
What did you find out?
Having found out what you did, what did you do next?

In other words, less advocacy/persuasion and more inquiry — perhaps not what anyone else needs or wants, but right now it's the sort of thing that I could really go for.

flute-pipe thing 1

2011-11-09T07:19:00.000-05:00

This is kind of long (i.e. you might find it gets old well before it gets to the end), but in hindsight I shouldn't be surprised.

It was made similarly to this, but based on the retrograde of the row.

The instruments in question are bagpipe (with accompaniment) and "native flute" (solo) -- from different CDs of course, courtesy of a large national drug store chain. The original source file (see the image at the top of this post) is about 14.5 seconds long, hence the length of the final product.

Another idea -- though one that would take a long time to do -- would be to cut each of the 12 pieces into 12 pieces and apply the transformation idea at two levels.

Anything is possible with love - redux

2011-10-21T22:03:00.000-04:00

Here's another version of this, with some extra sound mixed in.

Anything is possible with love

2011-10-16T20:46:00.000-04:00

I took a little slice from SModcast 186 and made this.

It's based on the row from my previous blog post, taking the prime form and transforming it step by step to a straight numerical sequence.

If you look at how the row changes from the prime to the "original" (click the image to enlarge it), you should see what the pattern of transformation is.

idea20111015

2011-10-15T23:33:00.004-04:00

Here's a little something.

Some of the low notes are too low for the instrument I chose, and that instrument also seems to have some "ringing" about it, but other than those it mostly seems to work okay.

Here's the grid it's based on.

The piece is based on 12 transpositions of the prime form (the rows in the grid), played by three voices, thus:

As before, 0 = C natural, 1 = C sharp, and so on to 11 = B natural.

As for the octaves, I'll denote them as {x, y}, where x represents the starting pitch of the row and y the octave (again, as before, per scientific pitch notation).

In the case of the row starting on 2, the pitches were placed into the range {6,4} to {5,5} rather than entirely within one octave.

Pitch durations are based on the number associated with the pitch: the duration of C sharp is 1 eighth note (at 180 bpm) and the duration of C natural is 12, and the rest fall between.

Well-Tampered Clavier

2011-10-05T20:36:00.003-04:00

(The blog post title sounds like something about prepared piano; here are other instances that Google found.)

I previously cited this as inspiration.

Here's something similar done with the Well-Tempered Clavier, Books 1 and 2.

Rather than start them off together, though, I ended them together (see image at the top for a screen shot of the multi-track session). In order to have all these parts together in the same mix (i.e. at the end), I have to set the level of each track fairly low; the mixdown looks like this.

As you can see, the beginning is really quiet; I adjusted the volume of the mixdown to even things out a bit.

Perhaps a more expert way of doing this would be to work with individual tracks, and perhaps also play with the audibility of one track vs another to get a more pleasing mix. If I were to put more time into this, I might give that a go, but for now this gives at least a rough idea of how this idea sounds.

Any questions?

Correction

2011-10-04T22:55:00.000-04:00

So, previously I said that the three sets would not loop neatly back to the starting point.

That, of course, is incorrect -- but it'd take nearly 12 minutes to get back to the starting point, and who wants to listen to it for that long?

First, we multiply 30 * 22 * 26 to get a number (17160) that could be divided by each set length and result in an integer (i.e. that the set lengths would go in evenly). I then halved that number (giving 8580) and checked it -- the set lengths still went in evenly. I halved that number (giving 4290) and it still worked. Halving it again (2145) didn't.

I then divided 4290 (the smallest number all the set lengths would go into evenly) by the number of seconds each set takes at (my arbitrarily selected) 180 bpm ("duration(sec)" in figure at the top) to get the number of seconds it would take to loop the sets often enough to get back to the starting point.

And there you have it. Any questions?

Pensive Neath One Wry Pass - redux

2011-10-02T22:19:00.000-04:00

A little while back I did this. Then tonight I put it together with a bit of looping music and came up with this.

The looping music: I was playing around with this four-note set plus its transpositions.

As it turns out, the transpositions [4 1 6 11] and [8 5 10 3] when combined with the prime form [0 9 2 7] cover all pitches of the 12-tone scale.

If I want to arrange these vertically, I have eight choices, indicated below by the starting pitch of the set (Voice 1 is the highest).

For no particular reason (i.e. I have to pick one, and I can do others later), I'll choose the last one, and put the lowest voice starting in the "4" octave.

Now, I need some durations. An easy way to do it is that represents it. [0] will be 12 units long, [1] will be 1 unit, and so on.

The durations of each set, in terms of units, are as follows.

For the actual time, we need to now how long our basic unit is. When I put these sets into a midi editor and played with them, I found that 180 bpm was a good sounding tempo. Picking the eighth note as my unit, I get the following durations (in seconds) for each set.

Because of the odd (i.e. non-integer) lengths of two of these, it's hard to get a number of times by which I can loop them until they return to the starting point -- easier to loop them for an arbitrary length of time, and if I set the looping against something else, the length of that something else could more or less determine the duration for me. I thus dove into my hard disc and Pensive Neath One Wry Pass was the first thing I found.

Any questions?

Four-note sets, by intervals

2011-09-30T19:37:00.001-04:00

It was from Allen Forte that I picked up on the idea of four-note sets (e.g. the four-tone rows I find on the subway). I think it was also from his ideas on pitch-class set theory that I got the idea of focusing on intervals fron one to six semitones (minor second to augmented fourth, or tritone), treating the others beyond as variations on those.

Recently I've been thinking about how to set out and work with types of four-note sets. This might get me away from finding sets "in the wild" (i.e. in strings of numbers that I encounter by chance) and working with a known group of entities. Whether that's an idea from my student days, I don't recall.

So: think of a four-note set as a set of three intervals; intervals can be up, down, or tritone (unlike the other intervals, six semitones either direction lands you on the same note, e.g. C to F#, so the direction makes no difference, the same pitch in different octaves being treated equally, again per Forte) (click image to enlarge).

Then we can apply some actual intervals. For the first, [u u u], we can have the following (click image to enlarge).

Anytime you're going only up or down, you don't have any restrictions. However, when you mix directions, you have fewer choices because of the need to avoid repeating pitches. For example, [u u d] (click image to enlarge):

[1u 1u 1d] and [1u 1u 2d] are avoided, for example. because they would result in repeated pitches.

Tritones offer the least choice; to avoid repeating a pitch, you can't have two of them in a row in a set.

Robert Roland Chudnick

2011-09-27T07:02:00.000-04:00

Happy Birthday, Red Rodney, wherever you are, and thanks for the music...

Here's something I found on YouTube by him.

And the same number performed by Billie Holiday.

Another one by him.

And the same number performed by Miles Davis.

I recall a scene from the movie Bird where Red Rodney picks up the nickname "Albino Red", but I can't seem to find that one on YouTube; in lieu, here's the trailer.

Thanks also to YouTube and Wikipedia for the material...

Late Addition: the scene from Bird where they do the "society gig".

Tensome

2011-09-25T17:26:00.000-04:00

Twice as much Dan&Merlin goodness as before.

Further increments of five to be added later; I expect that at some point it'll stop making any difference to the sound. And if there's an "artistic statement" to be made about this, perhaps that's it.

Sources of inspiration for this stuff include Charles Ives and Billy Joel (below):

fivesome

2011-09-23T07:46:00.001-04:00

You say you can't get enough of Merlin Mann and Dan Benjamin? I may have the answer; grab five episodes and drop them into a multitrack session in your digital audio workstation and mix them together (note to Mr. Benjamin: how about something around the notion of "5 by 5 by 5"?).

If the episodes aren't the same length, you could arrange them so that some line up with the beginning of the longest episode and some with the end (see image at the top), or you could limit the mix to the length of the shortest episode, or... well, you'll think of something.

Here's a minute of what you could get:

And if a fivesome is not enough, stick around and maybe I'll try piling more of them together.

Patterns of six, played twice (polyrhythms)

2011-09-21T07:18:00.001-04:00

Previously, I left off with this chord progression:

In score form, it looks like the image at the top (click image to enlarge).

From that progression, I went to this:

First, I assigned different metres to each note in each chord. As before, Voice 1 indicates the highest note, Voice 2 the next one down, and Voice 3 the lowest (click image to enlarge).

Notice that this is a pattern of six permutations played twice; tempos are as described here.

Then, using the Random / Probability Drum Beat Generator, which I mentioned here, I generated six 1-measure rhythms for each metre.

Six 1-measure rhythms in three (score and piano roll views, with velocities) (click image to enlarge)

Six 1-measure rhythms in four (score and piano roll views, with velocities) (click image to enlarge)

Six 1-measure rhythms in five (score and piano roll views, with velocities (click image to enlarge))

If I'd played around with the images more, I might have gotten the measures in the two views to line up; maybe another time...

Finally, I arranged the rhythms thus (click image to enlarge).

(5 with the subscript 1 indicates the first 1-measure rhtyhm in 5).

That is, in the first measure (chord) of the progression, the first rhythm is used for each metre, the second rhythm in the second measure, and so on to the sixth measure, then starting over at the first rhythm; again, a pattern of six played twice.

Any questions?

metal

2011-08-26T07:37:00.002-04:00

Got it right here.

'Nuff said.

Rolling dice: options

2011-08-21T17:08:00.002-04:00

(OK, I'm getting a little lazy, sticking with that one image. Nothing handy of my own pertaining to dice, though...)

Here I suggested the dice could be used to generate rhythms. Here are some options for that approach.

Got rhythm? (2)

2011-08-21T17:06:00.003-04:00

Given three measures of 3, 4, and 5 beats (respectively) at the same tempo (quarter note equals the same value) we can loop them 20, 15, and 12 times (respectively) until they come back to where they started. This is like what I showed here. It might have something to do with the idea of interlocking rhythms, but I'm still looking at it.

Another way to play with these measures is to set them to different tempos so that they all last the same amount of time. It is, essentially, a polyrhythm, though perhaps without the benefit of a strong pulse against which to experience the "poly"; as Frank Zappa put it,

Polyrhythms are interesting only in reference to a steady, metronomic beat (implied or actual) -- otherwise you're wallowing in rubato.

For example, if you have a measure of 3 beats played at 75 bpm, a measure of 4 at 100 bpm, and a measure of 5 at 125 bpm, each takes 2.4 seconds to play. Playing that live might be tricky -- could a group of musicians together keep track of a downbeat every x seconds while subdividing and playing according to different values from each other? Putting something together on the computer is easier, though the only way I know of doing so is to to make the measures separately according to their metre and tempo and then put them together as sound blocks in a multi-track sessions.

As for listeners, they may have to rely on something other than a pulse to make sense of what they're hearing.

Got rhythm? (1)

2011-08-21T16:57:00.001-04:00

Want a rhythm without thinking one up yourself? You could try one of these ideas...

This is intended to generate drum beats, but you could use it to simply create a MIDI file to which any software instrument could be applied.

Another approach is to roll dice (or generate random numbers in a similar manner). Let's say we want to generate a rhythm of 4/4 time:

Begin with a notional "grid" of 16 sixteenth notes.
Roll 1d8 to determine the number of tied pairs of notes.
Roll 1d8 again to determine the number of rests.
Roll 1d16 to find the first member of a tied pair of notes; discard "16". The number that comes up represents a sixteenth note to be tied to the one that follows.
If the result in Step 2 was greater than 1, continue rolling to find the other ties; discard "16", a previous result, or a result that is one less than a previous result (e.g. if you rolled 5 before, discard 4).
Roll 1d8 to find the first rest. If the result is one of a tied pair, both notes in the pair become rests.
If the results in Step 3 was greater than one, continue rolling to find the other ties; discard previous results (including notes that have already been "rested" by being tied to a previous result).

Here's an example.

Roll 1d8 for pairs of tied notes: 3
Roll 1d8 for rests: 7
Roll 1d16 for tied pairs: 15, 12, 14 (discard), 10
Roll 1d16 for rests: 2, 7, 3 (discard), 10 (tied to 11), 5, 5 (discard), 8, 14, 4.

If I've done that correctly, it gives

Going back to the notional grid, you could also toss a coin for each sixteenth note to determine whether it's sounded or silent. As for varying the note duration, you could come up with some procedure of your own: my first thought is to tie everything between the rests.

Other ideas?

row-tation [3]

2011-08-04T22:28:00.002-04:00

Start with a generic 12-tone row (click to enlarge).

Arrange the notes of the row across three voices.

Move the last note to the position of the first, then shift the others.

Repeat

If we repeat again, we get chords that we had earlier. Therefore, stop at two shifts.

Put the notes of Voice 1 in Octave 5 (C5 to B5), Voice 2 in Octave 4, and Voice 3 in Octave 3. It then remains to apply rhythms to them and we have a bit of music.

Here's an actual row
0 5 6 11 2 7 8 1 4 9

Recall from earlier blog posts that 0 = C natural (any octave).

Here are the notes set and shifted among three voices (click to enlarge).

Here are the voices set into their respective octaves (hope I got this right; it's been ages... ) (click to enlarge).

Here's how it sounds on piano (as played by my Mac).

Rhythms to come...

and stylish, too

2011-07-25T21:44:00.001-04:00

Rather than starting here and then continuing like this, perhaps I'd start with "why make a style guide?", and explore the following directions:

Ask people who've made style guides about why they did so, how it worked out, etc.
Find out when style guides historically appeared and the circumstances around their genesis.
Consider style guides as part of larger patterns of human behaviour around making things consistent (i.e. standardization) and facilitating decision-making; how are style guides like and unlike other things that also fit these patterns?

We (and I'd include myself in this too) seem to spend a lot of time talking about what to do or what should be done, and perhaps not enough time looking simply -- though with rigour and some effort to avoid bias -- at what actually happens.

more 3:4:5

2011-07-24T19:25:00.002-04:00

Listen to these similar but slightly different things I did with the source file from exceptional guests...

Going back to the 3:4:5 idea. the sound file you're working with doesn't have to be sliced 3, 4, and 5 in that order. There are six ways to slice it, giving a total of 18 slices.

One of the things we can do is to run each 3:4:5 set as usual (the first one above).

Another is to combine all the 3s, 4s, and 5s into their own files, then run those in the usual 3:4:5 way. Similar to the previous arrangement, but if you listen closely you'll hear things repeating in a slightly different way because the content of the 3, 4, and 5 slices now overlaps (the second one above).

Underlying both of these mixes is a the original file stretched to the length of the 3:4:5 mix.

I won't work up examples this time, but you could also do 3:4:5 within itself, cutting up the 3:4:5 slices each into 3:4:5 slices and then arranging them as above or in some other way.

improvising row-tation

2011-07-23T16:05:00.001-04:00

For either of these two ideas -- rotation, rotation [2] -- the voices could improvise rather than work from fully written out music. In other words, you could just give the musicians the row, the procedure, some rules (e.g. play the notes in order, either direction, but without skipping any), and let them do their thing.

row-tation [2]

2011-07-23T15:28:00.000-04:00

Let's take the previous idea one step further. Given two voices, we first put the entire row in Voice 1:

After Voice 1 finishes doing its thing with the row, the first note of the row (X1) is passed to Voice 2.

Voice 1 does its thing with the rest of the row, while Voice 2 does something with X1 in accompaniment. When Voice 1 finishes, Voice 2 exchanges X1 for X2, and they continue as before.

This repeats until Voice 2 has had all the notes of the row. They then go through it again, starting with X1 and X2 in Voice 2.

Repeat for X2,X3.

It continues until X12, X1, and then working through the cycle as many more times as it takes to move the entire row from Voice 1 to Voice 2. There's probably an equation for that, but I don't know it yet.

By the way, Voices 1 and 2 for this or the previous idea don't have to be separate instruments -- they could, for example, be two hands on a keyboard.

row-tation

2011-07-21T21:43:00.001-04:00

Working on a write-up for something more i did with the source material for this. In the meantime, here's an idea for something I've yet to make.

(probably stirring up something long forgotten from a long-ago composition/modern music class; anyone who knows their way around a 12-tone row probably won't see anything new or interesting here, but maybe there's something for the rest of you...)

So, imagine we have a 12-tone row.

Let's break it in half to share it between two voices.

After each voice gets done doing its thing with its half of the row, let's rotate the row as follows.

Each voice does its thing again, and the notes rotate again.

And we continue until we return to where we started.

We could do the same with three, four, or six voices; that's the beauty of 12.

exceptional guests

2011-07-17T22:01:00.000-04:00

Recently I got someone to record some impromptu audio on my phone, and from a bit of that I made this.

Here's a generic description of the technique I used to make this (the question is, does it make sense?):

Given a sound block, denote the following:

Duration = 1.0.
Reference points within the sound block = 0.0 (beginning), 0.1, 0.2...0.9 (nothing to be done with 1.0 for this)
Subset durations of the block = 0.1 (one-tenth), 0.2, 0.3...0.9

Using the "save selection as" function, select and save the files indicated in this table (click to enlarge).
For example, starting at point 0.0, select the duration 0.1 and save the file as "0.0-0.1", then select the duration 0.2 and save as "0.0-0.2", and so on. Save a copy of the original file as "0.0-1.0"
Using the "stretch" function, use these files to create new files of other durations; the table below (click to enlarge) displays the ones to create from the 0.0-* files (for the shaded cells in the table, no stretch is required; use "save as").
For example, stretch the file "0.0-0.1", to a duration of 0.2, then save the file as "0.0-0.1-0.2". Continue to make other files of other durations.

To make the piece at the start, I used only the *-0.1 files and arranged them in the 1 2 1 3 1 4 2 3 2 4 etc. order that I've used elsewhere.

Pensive neath one wry pass

2011-07-09T00:16:00.001-04:00

Have a listen to this:

If you'd like to know more, read on...

Start with a 12-tone row (I like to start on 0, representing C natural):

0 11 1 3 4 2 9 5 10 8 7 6

We'll refer to this as the prime.

This time, let's have them stand for pieces of a sound block (0 will be the first, followed by 1, etc.). We'll cut up a sound block into 12 pieces and then rearrange the pieces into a segment according to the row and mix them down.

Next, we create 11 transpositions of the row, and a segment and mixdown of the pieces for each transposition.

Then, we arrange the segments in order, starting with the one beginning on 0, and mix them down.

Setting that aside, let's create another series of rows representing a transition from the prime to the original order of the pieces. We start with the prime; 0 is already in position, so let's move 11 (the second item in the row) to the end, putting 1 in the second position. We can then keep rotating items to the left until 2 is in place, then 3 and so on until the entire original row is recreated.

Again, we arrange the pieces into a segment and create a mixdown for each of these rows, then arrange the segments in order, starting with the prime and ending with the original.

Finally, we put the first idea and second idea together (one after the next) and mix them down to get the piece at the top of this post.

As for the voice, it's Paul Kennedy.

Advance and be recognized

2011-07-01T23:46:00.003-04:00

I had this conversation with @dmnguys a little while back. But what does it mean for the theory and practice of technical communication to be advanced, anyway, whether by individuals or groups?

Zuckerman-Enright

2011-06-26T20:33:00.001-04:00

I was half-listening to the radio last Sunday morning when I heard this voice in conversation with Michael Enright.

It was interesting enough to make me want to try something with it.

The interview starts at 23:10.930 of Hour 3 of The Sunday Edition, June 12 and lasts 1257.778 seconds (that's 20:57.778, but I find it easier to work in seconds).

I started by breaking the conversation down to 3:4:5 pieces (in order, from the beginning).

3: 314.445
4: 419.259
5: 524.074

I then took the 4 section and broke it down to 3:4:5 (again, in order from the beginning).

4_3: 104.815
4_4: 139.753
4_5: 174.690

I then created a 3:4:5 mix from them.

I redistributed the slices among tracks as described in Step 6 here.

I panned the tracks as follows:

Track 1: Left 75
Track 2: Right 75
Track 3: R 75
Track 4: L 75
Track 5: 0 (centre)
Track 6: R 75
Track 7: L 75

In the 4_3 slice at 0:54.896, I found an interesting-sounding bit of Michael Enright lasting 5.48 seconds.

Though it was the other guy's voice that originally drew me to this material I decided to use this bit as a focal point (here's something I did with Enright's voice previously).

First, I wanted all the time points in the 3:4:5 mix at which that 5.48 second bit starts. The first point is, of course, 54.896 seconds. The 4_3 slice is 104.815 seconds long, the next time point is at 54.896 + 104.815 = 159.711 seconds. The 4_3 slice occurs 20 times, so the complete list of time points (in seconds) based on this slice is:

54.896
159.711
264.526
369.341
474.156
578.971
683.786
788.601
893.416
998.231
1103.046
1207.861
1312.676
1417.491
1522.306
1627.121
1731.936
1836.751
1941.566
2046.381

Next, I figured out time points starting from 54.896 seconds but based on the length of the 4_4 slice (139.752 seconds). These are (again, in seconds):

54.896
194.648
334.400
474.152
613.904
753.656
893.408
1033.160
1172.912
1312.664
1452.416
1592.168
1731.920
1871.672
2011.424

And, based on the 4_5 slice (174.690 seconds):

54.896
229.586
404.276
578.966
753.656
928.346
1103.036
1277.726
1452.416
1627.106
1801.796
1976.486

These latter two sets of time points are added for variety

I next reconciled these into a single list. When two values are similar but not the same then I chose the one based on the lower-numbered slice. That is, when two similar values are based on the 4_3 and 4_4 slice (e.g. 474.156 is based on 4_3 and 474.152 on slice 4_4), I took the one based on the 4_3 slice (that's where the Enright bit is). And keeping consistent with that, if two similar values are based on 4_4 and 4_5, I took the former. The complete list is

54.896
159.711
194.648
229.586
264.526
334.400
369.341
404.276
474.156
578.971
613.904
683.786
753.656
788.601
893.416
928.346
998.231
1033.160
1103.046
1172.912
1207.861
1277.726
1312.676
1417.491
1452.416
1522.306
1592.168
1627.121
1731.936
1801.796
1836.751
1871.672
1941.566
1976.486
2011.424
2046.381

(I'm wondering about other things going on at these points, but I'll save that for a later blog post.)

Now, at each of these points in the 3:4:5 mix, I saved

a 5.480 second mixdown
a 0.548 second mixdown

I chose to take shorter slices as well to build something more rhythmic.

I numbered and arranged the 5.480 slices according to their order of appearance in the 3:4:5 mix, then added some looped material at the beginning and end, and came up with this:

For the shorter slices, I numbered them in their order of appearance in the 3:4:5 mix, and arranged them thus:

1, 2, 1, 3, 1, 4, 2, 3, 2, 4, 3, 4, 2, 3, 2, 4, 2, 5, 3, 4, 3, 5, 4, 5... 34, 35, 34, 36, 34, 37, 35, 36, 35, 37, 36, 37, 35, 36, 35, 37, 36, 37, 36, 37

This is similar to what I did with the slices here.

Again, I added some looped material at the beginning and end, and came up with this:

Communicating value

2011-06-26T13:05:00.000-04:00

Ben Woelk touches something important in this comment:

[Marketing communication is] foundational because it's important for a chapter/community to share what they're doing in order to make an impact. Otherwise, they're just serving themselves. They may be doing great things. If those things aren't publicized they lose their opportunity to impact their community.

Here's where I agree with him: if five people get together and do something that only provides value for those five people, then they're serving only themselves. But if what they did was to learn something about, say, FrameMaker or online editing, and if they went on to use those skills effectively to benefit their employers, then the value diffuses beyond the original five.

But why only five? Why not fifteen or fifty? The value diffuses even further then, doesn't it?

Perhaps -- it really depends on what actually happens after the event -- remember that I said "if" earlier. If you want to share anything, share that; put the effort into reporting the value that was actually achieved instead putting it into selling the promise of value beforehand.

But who will notice if you don't have a communication plan to draw attention to it?

Simple: if there are people looking for it and if you put it somewhere easy for them to find, they'll find it. What more is needed? And if it turns out that no one else is looking for it, then marketing is just noise.But to return to what I said earlier, if the original five and those connected to them have still gotten something from the effort, some good has still been done.

Doing it, or talking about it?

2011-06-25T22:58:00.000-04:00

In one of his comments on this blog post, Ben Woelk wrote:

In the context in which I'm using the term [marketing communication], I'm referring to analyzing your audiences, developing messaging, choosing vehicles, and scheduling the release of the messages. All of this is to promote the value your organization brings. Communities are trying to rebuild. This is intended to help them attract new members by communicating their value.

Depending on what the value is, it may not need all that much promoting or communicating if it's actually being provided.

For me, STC's value and its intended beneficiaries are set out in the Society's mission statement:

STC advances the theory and practice of technical communication across all user abilities and media so that both businesses and customers benefit from safe, appropriate, and effective use of products, information, and services.

If the mission is being accomplished, the intended beneficiaries can tell; if they can't tell anything has changed, then we can question whether the mission is being accomplished.

Perhaps results would speak for themselves, if they were being achieved.

Marketing communications are foundational?

2011-06-15T21:09:00.002-04:00

Marketing communications are foundational to increasing your community's reach and energizing your fan base.
Communications Liftoff: Rocketing Your Community to the Stars (STC webinar)

I thought what was foundational for the STC ran something like this:

STC advances the theory and practice of technical communication across all user abilities and media so that both businesses and customers benefit from safe, appropriate, and effective use of products, information, and services.

and that growth and motivation in STC would be indicators of success at accomplishing the mission rather than explicit goals themselves (sort of like passing the test being an indicator of having learned the material).

Perhaps "foundational" is not meant to be read in the way I'm reading it. Or perhaps my mental image of "marketing" is not the same as what STC leaders have in mind. I'll have to wait and see what their ideas contribute to the advancement of technical communication knowledge and practice. But if we know what the central issues, questions, problems, puzzles, etc. of technical communication are, then how do we expect marketing to help us work on them? And if we don't know what they are, how do we expect marketing to help us figure them out?

thirds

2011-05-27T20:07:00.004-04:00

When I listen to podcasts these days, I like to subject them to the 3:4:5 process first*. If I'm short on time, the next best thing is to divide the podcast into equal thirds and mix the first, second, and third parts together. If I'm really in a hurry** and don't have time to cut them up, and I can set them up as shown in the image above.

Convert the length of the podcast into seconds (to the third decimal place) and divide by three.

Insert the podcast into Track 1 in a multi-track session.

Move the insertion point to one third the way along the podcast and insert it again into Track 2.

Move the insertion point another third the way and insert the podcast into Track 3.

Adjust track volumes to below the clipping point.

Mix down the portion that overlaps.

*It lacks clarity, but with interest.

**I don't know if this procedure would actually be faster than, say, downloading three different episodes of the same podcast and mixing them together; maybe I should test that.

jesu20110522c

2011-05-22T23:02:00.003-04:00

This started out as a bit of nice, proper music -- a line from Jesu, Joy of Man's Desiring -- that I turned into this thing that kind of stomps along, screeching, moaning, and rumbling in spots, for about 6'40".

Here's how I made this mess:

I first downloaded a midi file of the piece (from one of the first hits on Google, but no I didn't note which one) and stripped it down to a single line of the first 12 measures.

I slowed the tempo down to 60 bpm.

I moved same pitches to the same octaves as follows:

I saved an audio file of the midi file.

I cut the audio file into three slices in a 3:4:5 ratio and looped them.

I redistributed the "3", "4", and "5" slices as follows:

For the "3" slices, I moved every other slice to a new track.

For the "4" slices, I moved the second, fifth, eighth, etc. slices to their own track, and the third, sixth, ninth etc. to their own.

For the "5" slices, I moved every other slice to a new track.

I mixed down these seven tracks individually and applied reverb (Adobe Audition 1.0 preset Martian Echo) to each.

I put these tracks together in a multitrack session and mixed them down. I'll refer to this herein as the 3:4:5 mixdown.

I made copies of each of the "3", "4", and "5" slices and stretched them to 90 seconds in length.

I applied reverb to each of these stretched files (preset In the Shower 2).

I looped the first two seconds of the 3:4:5 mixdown to create an intro, and the last 1.5 seconds to create an outro.

I saved a copy of the first half of the 3:4:5 mixdown and applied a slight fade of volume to it (from 0 to -3 dB), then a copy of the second half of the mixdown and applied the opposite fade (from -3 to 0 dB).

I set these pieces in a multi-track session as follows (see the image at the top of this post):

Track 1 - intro, 1st half mixdown (starting at 0:10) and 2nd half mixdown (at 5:25.030), and outro (at 6:10)

Track 2 - 3:4:5 mixdown, looped twice (three times in total), starting at 0:55; track volume set at -3 dB

Track 3 - the three stretched pieces, one after another, starting at 0:55; track volume set at 2 dB

I mixed it all down.

How did I get here?

2011-05-22T12:12:00.001-04:00

I couldn't tell you how I started following a lot of the people I do on Twitter, how I found certain Web pages, etc. because I tend not to keep track. I just see something in a feed, follow a link or two, and next thing I know I've found interesting. However, I haven't kept track of how I got there and in not doing so I think I'm missing something interesting. Let's see if I still think so after trying to keep track for a while.

So...

Ilmar posted this video to his LinkedIn account:

I, however, prefer reading (i.e. I haven't actually watched the video myself), and Google helped me find this this. I followed the article's suggestion at the end and did a search on the #filterbubble tag, found Eli Pariser on Twitter and started following him to see what else he has to say. Lots of other #filterbubble directions to pursue as well, if one were so inclined.

(Are the links to those Google searches coming through for you? Or do they only work as part of my bubble?)

Picking up the idea from the start of this post, it's not going to be an easy habit to develop. I think while I was poking around teh #filterbubble posts I came across @stevenbjohnson and found this. But I've already lost track of how I got there. Oh well...

Rambling on a Saturday morning...

2011-05-21T12:52:00.001-04:00

I left a comment here.

The comment is awaiting moderation; it goes like this:

A way of looking at "information architecture" (and not just as a profession, which strikes me as a rather narrow view) might be to look at one of its constituent terms -- "architecture" -- and then consider how it applies to the other -- "information".

You could try that the other way around, but architecture seems the easier entry point.

Arguably, going to Wikipedia for such things is lazy, but here goes:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architecture

You see this focus in the ostensive profession of technical communication; a lot of talk about the collective body of workers and how they add value to wherever it is they're working, but relatively little observation and analysis of the phenomenon itself. You don't need "technical commuicators" in order to have "technical communication", just people engaged in activities that have technicalities to communicate. (Yeah, that post is kind of on the mean side; meanness aside, I still hold that position.)

Digging back through my blog, looking for that post to link to, I found this:

in this post. The song is from Joe Henry's album Civilians.

I also found this post, which led to a brief exchange with Richard Thompson. I went back to his blog today, and found this post on "letting go of formats" and thinking about what content is for.

Also catching my attention this morning is this book giveaway. Not that I need any suggestions for reading material, and not that there isn't already enough stuff to read already (sorry authors). But something in the Wikipedia article for the book caught my attention:

It traces a large cast of mostly self-destructive characters as they grow older and fate sends them in directions they did not intend to go.

specifically, the "grow[ing] older and being sent by fate in directions they did not intend" part. I think it's feeding some psychological need I have to perceive myself in a certain way -- comfort food for the psyche, if you will.

Enough for now; off to other things...

Not the Santa Fe Institute

2011-05-16T21:32:00.003-04:00

Something I did a while back, then stalled on doing the writeup until now.

Started with the interview recording at http://www.openculture.com/2011/04/werner_herzog_and_cormac_mccarthy.html.

Selected a random point in the interview: 913 seconds.

Grabbed a 12-second slice starting at that point, which turned out to contain the voice of Cormac McCarthy.

Started playing with this for something else (which I may post later) and reversed a portion of it because I didn't want it recognizable (for that other thing; here, it wouldn't have mattered); then decided to make an array.

Cut the 12 second slice into 10 1.2-second slices.

Cut each 1.2 second slice into 10 sections.

Made a 10 x 10 array, each 1.2 second slice (divided by 10) in its own track; muted all the slices. Numbered slices - Track 1 = 1 to 10, Track 2 = 11 to 20, etc.

Generated a 1-100 random sequence:

22, 80, 35, 5, 38, 76, 46, 2, 73, 41, 53, 69, 89, 82, 43, 4, 14, 26, 17, 7, 70, 39, 65, 74, 45, 85, 12, 11, 56, 58, 78, 90, 84, 63, 33, 60, 79, 64, 86, 8, 92, 40, 51, 29, 10, 59, 67, 19, 34, 88, 21, 49, 37, 1, 100, 62, 71, 27, 42, 24, 30, 94, 87, 50, 68, 3, 72, 77, 81, 97, 20, 9, 57, 31, 44, 95, 6, 61, 18, 54, 13, 91, 28, 93, 16, 23, 36, 52, 47, 25, 96, 98, 48, 66, 75, 15, 32, 83, 99, 55

Selected the items in the array corresponding to the first 10 items in the sequence (22, 80, 35, 5, 38, 76, 46, 2, 73, 41) and unmuted them; create a mixdown.

Muted the first (22) and unmuted the 11th (41); create a mixdown.

Continued in a similar pattern until and including the 99th to the 9th (wrapping the order around).

Arranged the blocks in order and mixed them down.

Added reverb to flavour, and enjoyed.

Bridesmaids revisited

2011-05-15T21:11:00.006-04:00

So, I saw this:

I went and grabbed the file, and made this:

I broke the file down into three pieces in a 3:4:5 ratio and then looped them. But instead of mixing them down I marked a one-second cue each of the base files at the 35 second mark (35 being selected randomly). I then grabbed one-second slices of all three tracks wherever the cue marks appeared in at least one of the track.

I named the slices according to the file where the cue mark is (3, 4, or 5) and its position in the track. For example, the first slice I take based onthe Slice 3 track is 03_01, the seventh based on the Slice 4 track is 04_07, and the 10th based on the Slice 5. track is 05_10.

This process gives me 47 one-second slices in total (20 based on Slice 3 cues, 15 on Slice 4 cues, and 12 on Slice 5 cues). I then arrange them in this order:

03_01, 03_02, 04_01, 03_03, 04_02, 05_01, 03_04, 04_03, 05_02, 03_05, 05_03, 03_06, 04_04, 03_07, 04_05, 03_08, 04_06, 05_04, 03_09, 05_05, 03_10, 04_07, 05_06, 03_11, 04_08, 03_12, 04_09, 03_13, 05_07, 03_14, 04_10, 05_08, 03_15, 04_11, 05_09, 03_16, 04_12, 03_17, 03_18, 04_13, 05_10, 03_19, 04_14, 05_11, 03_20, 04_15, 05_12

I then capped it with loops from the first and last slices.

Cheap price for paint job

2011-05-15T16:15:00.001-04:00

And...

kitchenated

2011-05-15T12:47:00.002-04:00

A new portable recorder: first tried it out in the kitchen (where else?), uploaded the file, and made these (about 3 min and 10 min, respectively):

No descriptions of how they were made; I got a bit wrapped up in playing and forgot to take notes. I may try piecing something together later, but for now it's just the noise.

spelling (c)

2011-05-01T21:41:00.003-04:00

In Episode 12 of Back to Work, Merlin Mann spells "Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi". In editing the podcast, it seems that Dan Benjamin put an "edited" version of that spelling at the beginning:

mcskiiecmaninilysz(c?)ehmtiszkamilayhlysicninmmknlytihs

Not sure if there's a pattern, but the sound of it is interesting so I may make a few things from it. Or, at least, I've made one.

The spelling segment 15.176 seconds long. I cut it into 10 slices (1.518 seconds each), then put each slice in its own track in a multi-track session. I muted all tracks to start, then unmuted and mixed them down into three-track segments in this pattern:

1 2 3
1 2 4
1 2 5
...

8 9 10

(120 segments in all.)

I then lined them up in order and mixed them down -- 3:02.147 minutes long. I then added a fade-intro and fade-outro. Enjoy...

Canonical (that's fine for Michael Pollan)

2011-05-01T14:02:00.004-04:00

I was listening to Episode 12 of Back to Work and thinking that Merlin Mann was using the word "canonical" a lot", so I went back to the beginning and counted. I found six instances (not that many, really, but for some reason they stood out to me), and as I counted them I wondered how I could use this information to make something interesting to listen to.

For each instance of "canonical", I saved six, eight, and 10 second slices (notice the 3:4:5 ratio) starting three, four, and five seconds ahead of the instance, respectively.

Does that make sense? If not, try this.

Here's the first instance -- click the image to enlarge, and look at the cue marks in the middle of the image.

I move the insertion point to three seconds before the cue.

I select and save the six seconds starting at that point.

I then move the insertion points four and five seconds before the cue and save eight and 10-second slices, respectively.

I repeat those steps for the other five instances of "canonical" I found in the podcast.

Now, what do I do with this?

Mix all the six-second slices together, in order, into their own sound block, then do the same for the eight-second and 10-second slices.

Put the aggregate six, eight, and 10-second blocks into their own tracks in a multi-track sessions.

Loop as follows:

six-second aggregate block: 19 times (20 total)

eight-second aggregate block: 14 times

10-second aggregate block: 11 times

Mix down, and enjoy.

The outcome: it's kind of a limited amount of material to repeat over 12 minutes, but it's not bad if you listen more to the juxtaposition of things. And the word "canonical" stands out enough as a central thing, though it's not the only one. Enjoy...