Jump to content

torstenanders

Members
  • Content Count

    439
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by torstenanders

  1. > You will need to wait for the upgrade. No worries, I already applied a workaround (disabling certain code...). Here is another issue I ran into with length-divide: if the argument ignore is set to either min or max, and all note values are of the same length, then that also causes an error. Now, perhaps that should be expected, but then at least the error message could be more helpful. On the other hand, perhaps it would be preferable in this situation if a warning was printed and the effect of the argument ignore was, well, ignored? (length-divide '(1
  2. Revising some older code of my I noticed that the function length-divide changed its behaviour somewhat and became more likely to cause an error. In a previous version, where the arguments count and divide where given separately, it was possible to set the count to some very high number, say, 1000, simply to mean that all notes the function can split (depending on its other arguments) will be split. Meanwhile, the function have been revised to introduce control over intervals (thank you ), but since then it seems it is not possible anymore to set an arbitrarily high c
  3. For a generic solution, you could use some function split-if that expects a Boolean function as argument comparing two consecutive pairs, and always splits a sublist if the Boolean function returns True. I don't have such a Lisp function at hand right now, but of an algorithm idea here is a similar Python function, only that this expects a Boolean function of a single argument only. If you port this function to Lisp, you could then generalise it by checking the number of arguments the given Boolean function expects, and it apply it always to the corresponding consecutive number of elements of
  4. > if you have the article of ERES HOLZ as pdf, would be nice (the link seems to be dead)... See attached. > isn't it - in general - a question about complexity and information? I think it is also a question of memory -- we can only perceive a form if we can remember the form parts (Schönberg talks about comprehensibility/Fasslichkeit) which then allows us to compare etc. Obviously, that is more easy in a visual form, where you can see the whole picture together and move between parts at your own pace. Best, Torsten Holz_2
  5. > the GAP is between visual L-systems and acoustic ones Yes, of course, there is a completely different way of perception at play. If you come up with a good answer to that, I would be interested. BTW, if you want some other examples of compositional applications, you might want to have a look at ”Cells” (1993/94) by Hanspeter Kyburz, discussed in the following two publications. Supper, M. (2001) A Few Remarks on Algorithmic Composition. Computer Music Journal. 25 (1), 48–53. Holz, E. (2012) Das Wachstumprinzip von L-Systemen in
  6. Just a brief follow-up. While Partch's book is obviously available in English, the other authors all wrote in German. More recent Neo-Riemannian theory is often pretty math-heavy, so also somewhat hard to digest for us composers. To get a taste of these harmonic theories in a highly developed form (with dualism throughout, but that is only one facet) delivered by a practicing composers, you might want to have a look at the recent English translation and discussion of Sigfrid Karg-Elert's book Acoustic Determination of Pitch, Chord and Function from 1930. Byrne, D. A. (2018) The
  7. If you want more control over the L-system generation, have a look at the original documentation of the system L-Lisp, from which Janusz derived the Opusmodus functionality: Erstad, K. A. (2002) L-systems, twining plants, Lisp. Master’s thesis thesis. University of Bergen. [online]. Available from: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~griffink/lisp_lsystems.pdf Also, the original website: http://www.ii.uib.no/~knute/lsystems/llisp.html Best, Torsten
  8. Are you simply looking for an invert function, e.g., pitch-invert? (pitch-invert '(c4 d4 e4)) => (c4 bb3 gs3) This function inverts (mirrors) around the first pitch by default. If you are looking for retaining the original ambitus, you might want to instead you my function invert-in-ambitus (https://tanders.github.io/tot/sources/pitch.html#_g251910). (invert-in-ambitus '(c4 e4 g4)) => (g4 eb4 c4) BTW, when you are specifically talking about a harmonic context in which you are "mirroring" chords, there exist extensive music theo
  9. > but SLEEP is not very precise The Common Lisp standard actually says that the number of seconds specified as arguments for sleep is approximate: > Causes execution to cease and become dormant for approximately the seconds of real time indicated by seconds, whereupon execution is resumed. CLHS: Function SLEEP WWW.LISPWORKS.COM Anyway, it seems that at least on a Mac the imprecision is rather regular, see the following discussion with empirical tests. Time to sleep under different platforms LISP
  10. > Do you consider the inconsistency of the integer-to-pitch results a bug? I cannot speak for Janusz, but for me the format of the result makes sense. If there are individual values in the integer pitch list it is assume that the overall result is considered flat and hence sublists are chords. If everything is nested, then sublists are considered bars and the nesting is preserved. Best, Torsten
  11. Thanks for the update Janusz. I am trying to port some code that uses length-divide2, but the interface changed as well, and I do not have access anymore to the old documentation of the original function. length-divide2 had three positional arguments, but length-subdivision has only two. The former first two arguments are now expressed as sublists of the new first argument, i.e., a matrix-transpose transformation of the former first and second argument? Thanks! Best, Torsten PS: I am all for refactoring of Opusmodus functions, but if you w
  12. > That is the main and most important point on the todo list i'm waiting for ! I would also welcome this greatly, but I also understand that it might be tricky to realise when implemented from scratch, as MusicXML is a large standard. This project could become much much smaller when using some library that already has some good MusicXML support. For example, one could use the pretty mature MusicXML import of music21 (http://web.mit.edu/music21/) and then use music21 + Python to generate OMN (e.g., an event list as output by Opusmodus' single-events). I did something
  13. Perhaps – if others would also find such control useful – some checkbox could also be added to the preferences, e.g., under Appearance > Listener. Anyway, only if this is relevant for other users... Thanks again! Best, Torsten
  14. Is there perhaps any way to switch off all those trace prints created by very many Opusmodus functions. Here is an example: I want to get rid of printout(s) before the actual result. OM> (pitch-transpose 2 '(q c4)) pitch-transpose, transpose: 2 ambitus: PIANO section: NIL exclude: NIL (Q D4) These constant traces are problematic for me, because in all those prints I very easily miss printouts that are particularly important (e.g., warnings from some functions). I am aware of the Opusmodus function do-verbose. I would very much like to avoid adding do-verbose to my own f
  15. >> While I can create a canon, counterpoint and a fugue myself with a bit of time, it would be much less time-consuming for me if I were able to use existing examples. Is there an existing library of OMN examples of these types of compositions? > I cannot offer ready-made examples, but a constraint-based library with various counterpoint (and also harmony) rules ready-made. Following up my own comments, some entry level introduction to the libraries Cluster Engine and Cluster rules is offered by a video I prepared for my students last autumn. https://www
  16. Brilliant. Now my most-used Opusmodus shortcuts also work in Emacs. That helps my workflow a lot! Thanks!! Could you perhaps also share some example of one of the Opusmodus keyboard shortcut definitions (e.g., something like OMN Audition). Then I could hopefully use that to define a shortcut for starting playback with my custom score data structure in Opusmodus. It does not matter if that example definition would be complex and you do not need to provide any user-friendly abstraction. Just some example code would help a lot. Thanks again! Best, Torste
  17. Thanks, but what is the Lisp function, not the shortcut, for stopping playback. I can start playback of the last score with (audition-last-score), how can I stop it Thanks! Best, Torsten
  18. What is the Lisp function for stopping playback (bound to the shortcut cmd-esc)? ... I could never add a custom keyboard shortcut to the Opusmodus text editor Hemlock (and I tried), but I just managed adding keyboard shortcuts and a menu for playing Opusmodus snippets and my polyphonic score format to Emacs (thanks to the fact that scores now can be displayed in a separate window). Only need some key for stopping playback as well. (The main thing I will then miss when using Emacs as the Opusmodus IDE is the close integration of the document, but well, you cannot have
  19. >> Common Music does not "see" CLM and the interface to it is broken, because CLM is now seemingly defined in another package. > It looks like you don't know how to use CLM in Opusmodus I understand that CLM can be used directly from Opusmodus, but there also exists an interface between Common Music and CLM (I used that already in the 90s...), which is broken in the CLM port to Opusmodus when loading Common Music into it was well. Anyway, I doubt anyone with miss that Best, Torsten
  20. Do you mean as an option for the function length-divide? That would be great, but my preferred solution would be to have some extra function complementing gen-swallow for added notes -- which then could be called within functions like length-divide -- because that would be a generic solution for all sorts of functions that somehow add notes. The slightly tricky bit would perhaps be for the function to notice which are the new notes, so it should likely get as an input both the original material and the material with the added notes to find out... I would be happy to help sketching such a f
  21. The function LENGTH-DIVIDE and friends are a useful device for introducing some rhythmic variation to some material. However, when the processed sequence is a full OMN expression (see example below), then the added notes cause all other parameters to shift forward (additional parameters are added at the end by looping). For introducing only a slight variation to some existing material (e.g., motif) these functions are therefore not so useful, because this shift of all parameters to basically "fill" the new added notes with pitches etc. greatly change the varied material for a listener. (le
  22. Thanks for coming back. Here is a little demo example snippet. This example shows a very simple motif and its repetition. I would like to annotate some motif label (I will use such labels also for segmenting parts for further processing -- that works fine). (add-text-attributes ;; motif start signs '(m1 "m1") '(m2 "m2") '(m3 "m3") '(m4 "m4") '(m5 "m5") '(m6 "m6") '(m7 "m7") '(m8 "m8") '(m9 "m9") '(m10 "m10") ) '(q c4 m1+leg d4 q c4 m1+leg d4) By contrast, the attribute num1 behaves differently. '(q c4 num1+leg d4 q c4 num1+leg d4) I would like to be
  23. Thank you for coming back. Of course, different approaches and workflows are possible, but these tend to influence what kind of musical results we are getting (e.g., certain approaches and workflows make certain musical results more easy to achieve, and therefore ending up generating these is more likely). Specifically, the functions you mention (and most of the Opusmodus functions in general) are designed for processing the part of a single instrument, and individually generated parts are then almost always combined into a polyphonic score only in a rather late or a
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use Privacy Policy