the topic of topics: MIDI vs AUDIO ("what is music"?)

[9V]

To the OP: your logic is completely baked. Your definition of music as "logical, writable, editable and readable" would include recorded audio, which I can chop up, mangle, and replay as music to my heart's content. Full disclaimer - I'm from the US so may not be able to completely process your superior logic.

To everyone else: when did 3phase become literate?

Of course you can chop up, mangle and replay recorded audio, but this is not a musical work. It is a "sound related" work, nothing to do with music language. If you want you can call that "music"... but it isn't actually. That is the real difference between MIDI TRACKS and AUDIO TRACKS: the first are still "music" (you edit them with musically coded parameters), the second are only "sound" (you edit them with "sound" parameters).

[crofter]

Look pal, if Reason doesn't suit your needs use something else as long as it's not Ableton Live or Cubase,I suggest Reaper, I never used Reason because it never had Audio recording but then I don't make music, just sound.

No, I don't like reaper, and it crashes a lot. I've been using ableton live since 2004 and logic pro. I like ableton live, above all. It is the most "musical" DAW out there. Logic Pro is another great DAW, but a little bit "closed" because of apple policy. What I hate is "rewire": it has nothing to do with music. It is for audio. Reason was nice untill version 5. Now, despite all the promises, PH has discontinued Reason. They call "Reason 6" something of an hybrid product for teenagers, no midi, audio tracks (?!), a dongle... an "all in one packet" with a crappy audio controller ("the balance")... Marketing strategies... Money... Business... All this crap.

You are somewhat confused, I can assist you no more, I'm off to make some sound.

[9V]

You are somewhat confused, I can assist you no more, I'm off to make some sound.

You cannot call your recorded music sessions in a DAW "music", because it is not "music" anymore. It is a recorded sound of "your music" (for your brain), that is to say: a "mirrored image" of what commons sense calls "music". So: it WAS your music, because your brain represents it in such a form. Like a reflected image in a mirror. Is that image the real thing? No, just a reflection. But the brain is easily deceived.

SO REMEMBER

The key element is TIME:

(a) acoustic music played in real time: MUSIC
(b) acoustic music recorded in an audio track: SOUND ("it was music!" says your brain. But it isn't in a musical perspective)
(c) electronic music (MIDI EVENTS): MUSIC
(d) midi and score: MUSIC (both in real time and/or as a coded language)
(e) loops, samples etc.: SOUND
(f) midi tracks in a sequencer: MUSIC
(g) audio tracks in a sequencer: SOUND
(h) vst: instrument in a midi track (MUSIC)
(i) rewire: audio connection, mixer bypass. The final result is an AUDIO TRACK (SOUND)

[glenn303]

These are not words only letters.

[9V]

these letters are not only words words are not these only letters etc. etc.

As you can see, i can change, edit, write, read your words. You can change the meaning of your letters, following some rules. "Letters" are the elements of alphabet (grammar). I can edit them. Why? Because grammar, like music, has standard RULES. It's easy. The "second" key element is RULE. MIDI is a musical code with rules. AUDIO is a matter for sound engineers. It has nothing to do with music. It is a reflection of music if you record music. A reflection of noise if you record noise. A reflection of silence if you record silence. Etc. That is why MIDI tracks are still music (in a musical perspective), while AUDIO tracks are just "sound".

[glenn303]

The sound of music.

[rote fahne]

I'm going to record Cage 433 and put it in my VST as ONE sample.

Then I'm going to play it as midi, a NOTE ON event and a NOTE OFF event.

The created audio file is not music.

Its so easy: Midi is VST, Audio is ReWire, thats all you have to remember.

Then when I put Stockhausen youtube on PH forum they ban me for calling me a troll.

[9V]

the cage 4'33 is not music, actually. It is just a conceptual joke for musicians. But your "note on" and "note off" in midi are musically related. The created audio file, instead, is not music anymore, because you cannot define a standard "start" and "end" in a coded musical language. You could define things like frequencies, resolution, noise etc. but these are sound parameters, for sound engineers, not for musicians. This could be considered a "sophism", but it isn't (for musicians): music needs rules: midi have rules, audio haven't (at least musical rules).

[crofter]

Is he still here?

[stringtapper]

Christ, where to begin?

Unfortunately for 9V and his argument this conversation already passed him by about 70 years ago. However, he was kind enough to supply the information needed to dismantle his own argument:

“Music” is when you understand it is music.

I agree 100%. Your issue is that you are only capable of understanding certain things as music. Pierre Schaeffer and John Cage were understanding many other things as music probably before you were born.

Comments like these:

…if the sounds are harmonically played it is “music” (“music” is the harmony, unless you play something “not harmonic”…)

Reveal a limited scope of thought regarding musical possibilities and a literal archaism of thinking regarding music that simply ignores well-established compositional practice and musicological study. You are a traditionalist obviously and there's nothing wrong with that, but you must know that this debate has already happened in compositional and musicological circles and you're a little late to the game.

And of course if one can't see the glaring contradiction in these statements then the issues are bigger than "what is music?":

Music, to be considered “music” must be played in real time.

Because MUSIC is the THEORY and the CODE… When music is expressed in REAL TIME (with instruments or the voice) it’s MUSIC.

It's clear that your thoughts on this matter are not clearly formed. Bring a half-baked argument like this into a forum like the Society of Music Theory or International Computer Music Association email lists and they're going to tear you to shreds.

The strangest thing about your argument is that you simultaneously argue against audio being able to be music while arguing that the score and MIDI are music. Specifically your example of a CD playback of a performance is especially contradictory because a CD can contain, as you say, a record of a performance, it is a representation of a specific performance of some music, literally a "re-presentation" of it. But a score is also a representation, not necessarily of a performance but of the musical idea of the composer. MIDI, serving as a modern form of score, is also a representation of a musical idea. I'm not necessarily against your notion that MIDI is in itself music, but I can't help but point out the glaring contradiction in your reasoning of the same not being for audio. Is the music only when music when it's played live or is it music when it's sitting there as notes on a page or midi events in an editor? Which is it? Because you have said both.

[rote fahne]

the cage 4'33 is not music, actually. It is just a conceptual joke for musicians. But your "note on" and "note off" in midi are musically related. The created audio file, instead, is not music anymore, because you cannot define a standard "start" and "end" in a coded musical language. You could define things like frequencies, resolution etc. but these are sound parameter, for sound engineers. This could be considered a "sophism", but it isn't (for musicians): music needs rules: midi have rules, audio haven't (at least musical rules).

What a load of bollox. If i play an audio file with say the 9th symphony of Bruckner, I can hear everything. Tonality, rhythm, structure, texture, whatever musical idiom you can make up, I can hear it all cause its ALL THERE CONTAINED IN THE AUDIOFILE.

An audio file has a beginning and an end, it has rhythm, it has pitch, it has all.

Midi is just a protocol. There is no rules. I can decide myself which event I want to have occur in whatever way I want it.

Like modern poetry has nothing to do with conventional syntax or semantics.

Any AUDIO file can be turned into midi. ANY.

Has nothing to do with Neubaecker, I can just listen to a piece and say, okay, here i have to play that pitch with that instrument, here I have to play a drum, etc. etc.

There is no rules for music, there is only conventions.

[9V]

Music is when one (as a musician) can write, read, perform and edit it. Otherwise it is sound. A cd is not "music" because you cannot edit it anymore, just listening to it (but "listening" is something not indispensable for music, only a consequence: see the john cage 4'33 joke). MIDI is music because every musician can edit, write, read and change it. Score is music, too.

EXAMPLE: a little kid learning music rudiments composed an easy song based on a very simple harmonic progression. He can write it, read it, edit it, play it. This is music. A very creative "music maker" samples 2 minutes of a pollini concert, 2 minutes of a professional violinist playing paganini and mixes these 2 audio tracks in a sequencer. The result is fantastic (... of course, LOL). Is this music? No, it is a beautiful collage. Why? Because the performer is not the creative guy, he cannot play that music, he cannot edit it in a musical language, he just mangles, chops up sound (not music). You can call it "a beautiful collage", you can call the guy "an artist" etc. but you cannot call the result "music" in a musical sense (both "traditionally" or "modern" intended). And if he uses midifiles instead of recordings? I don't know how to call that... maybe "copycat opera", who knows...

EXAMPLE 2: things like dj schratches, rap, noise performances, loop feedback, ableton live using samples and loops in real time, etc. are music, of course.

[9V]

Any AUDIO file can be turned into midi. ANY.

Are you the inventor of the third revolution?!

[stringtapper]

Any AUDIO file can be turned into midi. ANY.

Are you the inventor of the third revolution?!

Obviously he's saying that a musician can hear the audio and reproduce it by playing or editing it into a sequencer, thus transforming what is contained in the audio into MIDI.

[rote fahne]

Any AUDIO file can be turned into midi. ANY.

Are you the inventor of the third revolution?!

Obviously he's saying that a musician can hear the audio and reproduce it by playing or editing it into a sequencer, thus transforming what is contained in the audio into MIDI.

yep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q6yTqNPk_w0