I'm colliding baby, i'm colliding

Want to hear winchimes but live in an area with no wind?

Want to hear music but sick of tonal chord proggressions?

Want to hear some sinewaves?

WANT TO LONGER!


Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Or is it...



The Colleidoscope! On a Collision course to COLLIDERTOWN! Now with collidervision and sound, in 1.1 mono (and with no visual). Prepare to be collided... the oldschool way.

In the beggining people were just colliding by hand. It was a slow, tedious process that led to much frustration and wasted energy. Then, somebody had the idea of making colliding a digital process and invented Collider, a sequence of digital processes that synthesizes colliding inside the computer! Collider made an impact, as expected, and its owner Bill Tocollide became a billionare within hours of its release. But something was wrong... while the program was colliding, it was not SUPER colliding. This problem was addressed in 1987 when Sony, Microsoft and BMW (SMB for short) joined forces in an effort to create the next logical step in Collider's evolution. With plently of resources and the leading scientists at NASA leading the charge, Super Collider 1 was finally released. To say it made an impact on the music world would be like saying John Cage was only a "pretty cool" guy. The shockwave experienced after its release changed music forever, like Cage changed his clothes every day. And boy, were they some clothes...

SMB enjoyed the financial compensation for this epic discovery, but the tensions between segments within the company grew. Those more interested in music and the entertaining power of Supercollider wanted to build a collider that could not only collide, but be enjoyed by the whole family in 3d graphics plugged into a TV. They wanted to release "Colliding station". The programers in the company wanted to release "Collider '95", a Colliding program that would come with every new computer and feature a free internet browser, "Collide Arouser". The third section of SMB wanted to make high quality European cars instead. So the company split appart, into Sony (who went on to create the Playstation based on its colliding concepts), Microsoft (who created Windows 95 and Internet Explorer as a way to share colliding projects with other enthusiasts around the globe) and BMW, who went on to make European cars.

The company that took over was Machintosh, a contaminated apple company somewhere in France. Machintosh wanted a collider that could not only Supercollide, but Supercollide 2. After many failed attempts Super Collider 2 was finally released.

Its welcome was as expected, and even cinemas sold out their special "SuperCollider 2" 3 hour previews. In 1991 an enthusiastic John Cage got hold of the SuperCollider 2 concepts, and, in an effort to mix the new, digital Supercollider 2 with original analogue concepts of colliding by hand, created Supercollider 3. The new collider offered unprecedented sound quality, and due to its construction could make sinewaves as pure as John Cage's concepts. It also included a random function.

Supercolider 3 is often taught in musical institutions as an alternative to colliding by hand, or composing real music.

It is with this program that I made the following piece:

http://www.box.net/shared/c4si2hu49v



The work uses 4 sinewave synths that either add notes above or bellow the note currently playing. The choice it makes of the next note is a weighted random value, so for example in the semitone synth there is a 25% that the next note will be a semitone up or down, 17% that it will be 2 semitones up or down etc. up to about 5-6 notes. There is also a chance the note repeats. In addition, the longer the synth has been playing the more chance the notes have of not playing at all, or playing (if the synth started silent). The song uses these 4 random note synths layered on top of each other (towards the middle you will hear about 7 semitone synths playing almost 10 notes a second each). The synths also play at different speeds.


May this collide with your soul as my soul collided with this program.


Also check out

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/Supercollider

My contribution to uncyclopedia.

Cheers to Ben for pointing it out to me!

Mastering Exercise

http://www.box.net/shared/anxmm0mdh5
(mastered)

As opposed to:

http://www.box.net/shared/mytyldcb9q
(original)


This is the result of the mastered version of my song. I am fairly happy with it, considering when I started I did not expect to get anything too solid from the process. But I think the file selecting had a lot to do with it too. Because it was so weak, it was easy to EQ and compress without distorting, something that cannot be said for my previous master attempt. Because it was totally electronic, it was also free of distortion, and this made it unnecessary to try and iron out "mistakes" from the recording process.

Basically I made 2 copies of the file and treated both fairly separately. In one I boosted the low end as well as a narrow Q around the 100 hz mark for the bassdrum, as well as the mid highs and highs. I also compressed and stereo imaged it a bit (narrowed the highs and left lows alone). It sounded powerful but lacked the snare punch. For this, I treated the second copy. I EQ'd the mid highs and mids to around the area of the snare, but was carefull to take out a narrow band where the a synth stood (around 1000 hz). I also compressed it a lot harder so the snare stood out more.

In addition to these 2 tracks, I also mixed in the original track at a lower volume to try and give it a bit of life. The main issue with 3 identical tracks is phasing but because the tracks were treated so differently, this is not too obvious to my ears, and the powerful sound more than makes up for the small amount of phasing that could be present. I think it's a decent attempt, not fantastic but definately better than my last and somethign I'm happy with. Enjoy!

Piece that we have to master

This week we have to master an electronic piece and luckily we are able to try it on one of mine. The piece I chose is fairly weak sounding on purpose and lacks a lot of punch, however might be able to be pumped up a bit with mastering. I haven't started mastering it before I posted this up so this is where I'm starting from too:

Enjoy! :D

http://www.box.net/shared/mytyldcb9q

Week 11 Forum Review

Well, deconstruct me a constructor, we had another week of deconstruction talks. I found the deconstruction element to feature more widely in these talks as opposed to construction. What do people have against construction? Is it because my house is next to one getting built and you don't want to offend me? Or is it because we attend the CON servatorium, and we feel we need to make up for the missing DE in our lives?

Either way, Simon Whitelock was first. I don't understand the "DJ" movement, and I have to say I never heard of my mentor using such commercial equipment. All cage needed was a bowl and some dice, as well as 1-2 well prepare mushroom meal ideas. Instead, we are hearing talks about people stealing ideas from other people (JACKONSTRUCTING) and CONSTRUCTING a new work from them. Is this a good idea? All I know is that if it's not random it's not worth doing. The devil's work, such as DJing is trying to alure you into a world of magical logical harmony and constant beats. The chance of the bassdrum comming up on exactly the first crotchet of every bar if you are randomizing it to semiquaver levels is 2^16, and the fact that this occours throughout the piece PROVES it is not random. Also, tonality seems to live and breathe through this music and this is somethign we need not encourage. Free yourselves. Take a break from this jibberish, I say, take a chance and roll the dice.

Nathan Shea was next, and the presence of strong noise content in poor quality recordings was a welcome change from the bestiality we had been subjected to. I could relate this to my own interests and if the guitars had been replaced with a sinewave modulated by the drums which could be teapots, we would be on to something.

Last and best, John Delay. A man among men. A trooper against adversity. The real deal. If we had a war, John should be the commander in chief. A veteran of rhythm and a pariot of harmony. John Delay is all this, and was even more in his eye opening presentation. Any music with little percussive content and slow constant change is to be appreciated, but the examples he played gave me a tingling in my ningling I hadn't experienced since "4'33: Live aus Berlin" came out. A wonderful expansion of the senses, and one that made sense. What a way to end the day, and what a day it was.

Week 11 Audio Arts

This week we had to master a stereo file we previously mixed. I chose to use this mix:
http://www.box.net/shared/rsj69b7gji
(last week's submission)



And here are the 3 mixes I tried doing. The 2nd might be the best but I'm not happy with any.

Mix 1: http://www.box.net/shared/qdk3812ban (Too much high frequency adds to the peaks... however, drowns them out in a weird way and is less obvious than I thought it would be)

Mix 2: http://www.box.net/shared/8viqk1ea44 (Better than mix 2, less highs, more compression. Piano sounds less natural than I would like and a lot worse than the original, however, so by taking the annoying 15,000 frequency out I killed the piano sound)

Mix 3: http://www.box.net/shared/42u0xoemnb (Highs are reduced then amplified with a 2nd EQ later on... Result is annoying peak is still there. Sounds more open than 2nd mix but peaks are a lot more obvious)

I found it very difficult to get a decent result. I tried using a lot of different EQ and compressor settings but the fact that the recording was not perfect (had some peaks) was accentuated with every attempt. This was especially evident in the piano. In addition, the mixed version (not mastered) sounded solid to me and I could find little to actually fix. The drums were probably the weakest instrument, and the bass could have a little more volume higher up (around 100-150hz) but appart from that I was very happy. The mixing was mainly an effort into taking the peaks out and compressing it a little. I also wanted to give it just a little more top end and bass, but not much. However, whenever I took out the piano peaks (which sit around 15,000 hz) by EQing them heavily, the overall sound suffers a LOT especially in the piano and drums (snare mainly). To make up I tried adding a 2nd EQ to boost the overall high frequency range (over 10,000) after taking out the 15,000, but the result was still flat. Also I found no way of boosting the drums or making them sound better. Basically here are 3 attemps I went through, but I still preffer the original (especially since the addition of any EQ's either flattens the sound by taking the peaks away or makes them even MORE obvious). Compression also adds to the peaks. Overall I tried a lot of different things but would like to learn more about this topic before I am happy with my skills. Luckily we're doing more next week!

Week 10 Forum Review

Last week's forum was the best because I got to do a presentation. Everybody thought I was super cool, and I totally was. It made everyone feel happy and eager to listen to more talks. My talk was about Construction and Deconstruction, a topic I suggested we study because I saw great learning potential... was I ever right! From the moment I started talking, I could see in people's eyes a glowing, growing passion for learning. From my talk they learned about construction in musical pieces (introduction), deconstruction in musical pieces (the end bit) and thousands more topics. It was great to finally be able to get out there and publicly express these burning feelings about construction and deconstruction. This could have been the perfect topic for me for a number of reasons. Firstly, I've been constructing all my life. I've been constructing more cells as I grew, I've been constructing musical works, and I've especially been construction an eagerness to get these feelings out about construction and deconstruction. To my own credit, I've also been deconstructing a lot through my short career: deconstructing plates when I broke them, deconstructing nuclear reactors, and deconstructing food through a powerful but effecting digestive system. If I had more time, I would've deconstructed a lot more but for my young age this is a start... In the future, I look forward to constructing a lot more opportunities for me to deconstruct this topic for young audiences. This, hopefully was the start of many such opportunities.

There were also other presenters present, who also presented. They also chose my topic.

Matt Mazzone presented about an add he wrote music for and "deconstructed" his process of "constructing" it. I was surprised at the level of professionalism Matt displayed in his choice of sound and music. It fit the images very well, went along with the story but most importantly: was NOT INTRUSSIVE. This shows a mature understanding of the add as a whole, and you can tell Matt didn't try to write a masterpiece, but rather, complement a video. The music and sounds were well chosen and worked well, and his other adds were also good. Good stuff!

Frederick May also presented about popular music and how its systematic construction can effectively make it a hit song or not. He went on to analyse (DEC on Struction) some hit songs, and made some generalizations about number 1 singles, and why they work. He claimed that every number 1 single shares a number of factors that make it stand out, and every B side that accompanies those lacks those exact elements. Although this is probably true to an extent, it is impossible to think there are exceptions. For example, what if a B side makes it to number 1 in a country but nowhere else? Does that mean that country is wrong? Does that song HAVE the features of a number 1 or not? Frederick, however, made a lot of interesting points about how these songs are constructed and played some music to back up his claims. He was a good public speaker and fun to listen to, but the generalisations were a bit too generalisatory (told a general story, or told a general a story, or story about a general).

Generally speaking, the presentations were presented well, and everybody in the audience had a great time. I am looking forward to next week's speakers, who will deconstruct this topic for us a bit more.

Music Technology Forum Presentation, EMU Space. Lecture presented at the University of Adelaide, 17th May 2007

Week 9 Forum Review

This week the diploma students presented talks on famous producers and learned about their techniques. Fortunately, I was part of a different group, one which formed the audience to Tristan Louth-Robins' presentation on his masters project. To say I was spellbound would be to overstate my feelings, seeing that a number of factors severely detracted from what could have been an enlightening talk.

While Tristan was presenting his concepts, my mind drifted back to my first experiments of similar nature, and an overwhelming sense of nostalgia filled my sinuses. I was 7 when my first encounter with the avante garde poked its head. Having noticed there is a discernible difference in sound quality between having headphones on my head and someone else wearing them, I decided to experiment with this phenomenon. My attempts were, indeed, naive, but these same concepts seem to drive me today. I remember getting my hand on all the headphones I could, then placing them on a tree in a spiral pattern so that each ear speaker is enveloped in a length of the adjacent pair's chord proportional to the diameter of the speaker cone combined with an algorhythm vaguely combining pi and the golden ratio (give or take a cent or 2... I was only 7). When music is played from a nearby fountain, the frequencies tend to align themselves harmonically, which could be displayed visually if you shined an ultraviolet beam through the water and onto a water colored fish tank enveloped in a thin layer of silver coated aluminum. There was some sort of movement in the water when there was wind, so I proclaimed the experiment a success.

Fast-forward 8 years later, and I still hadn't gone much further. I was now more interested in the effects of deep house music on sleeping mice, but since there were no mice in my house, I tested it on some insects. Most seemed to move as per usual, and only changed direction noticeably when the speaker was right in front of them or very close. I recorded these movements meticulously, using only my pencil and some teeth marks on it. When converting these movements to frequencies which controlled a MIDI orchestra, I was surprised to see how good the ants were at recreating grand works by John Cage! Seems like there's a bit of Cage in all of us.

Finally in year 12 I realized my first large work, and with the help of the London Symphony Orchestra (thanks Sir Colin Davis!) created something truly inspirational. A pure sine tone at 12,475.66680085 Hz was played loudly in the room while the orchestra prepared to improvise randomly filled with Vitamin E, in an effort to witness the effect of a powerful frequency to a supposedly atonal improvisatory setting aided by nutritional supplements. In addition, several live lions were kept nearby to keep the artists from fleeing and a large picture of John Cage was constantly projected on a star filled background in the space telescope we were rehearsing in at the time. As time went on, having microphones inside the performer's mouths proved to be a disappointment since the sound quality was poor and the room mic inside the first violin's boot was not picking up the necessary frequencies. However, the result was exactly as I intended it to the millisecond, and I couldn't be prouder.

Tristan's teapot, however, was out of tune and it made the whole experience a little less appealing. The idea of focused listening fell on unfocused ears and was therefore nullified. However it will be interesting to see how the project turns out, because Tristan has some nice ideas, just needs to think outside the square more (have you tried recording from a helicopter for example?). Either way, a nice way to spend and afternoon and looking forward to more innovative concepts.




Tristan Louth-Robins, student talk presented at EMU space, University of Adelaide, 10th May, 2007.