Slashdot Mirror


Concert to be Performed from Beyond the Grave

rtphokie writes "Raleigh, NC based Zenph Studios is hosting a live concert performed by two piano virtuosi long since dead. Zenph developed software which digitally transcribes performances even from the scratchy recordings. A more faithful transcription of timing, key and pedal pressure is achieved using Yamaha's high resolution version of MIDI."

196 comments

  1. elvis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Only 4 hours from me. darn sounds cool how they do these.

    Here comes elvis next.

    1. Re:elvis by ari_j · · Score: 4, Funny

      The day MIDI can duplicate Elvis's unique voice is the day they find a way to electrically control the spinal columns of about 10,000 people in Vegas.

    2. Re:elvis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Sure they do. Fancy lighted and noisy slot machines, cause fools by the thousands to empty their pockets.


      Elvis? Don't we have some internet radio stations that play Elvis all the time?
      That's good enough.

    3. Re:elvis by knBIS · · Score: 1

      Um, to bad Kurt Cobain has been doing performances from beyond the grave just about every day on my ipod...

  2. Holograms by justdweezil · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Coupling a performance like this with a 3D Projected likeness of the artist would be mindblowing. The projection wouldn't even have to be very good.. but being able to visualize the person while hearing the digital "passion" in their notes.. live.. would be something amazing.

    1. Re:Holograms by EnronHaliburton2004 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Then you need to take extra care to avoid power surges in the holographic matrix, because then you'll be stuck with some piano-playing hologram who won't go away.

      Then you'll have to make a moral decision: Endure the wisecracking hologram as a poorly-needed comedic relief, or shut off the power and kill the poor dude.

    2. Re:Holograms by krakelohm · · Score: 1

      True 3d holgrams of their courpse? Dude that is sick!



      yea I know, just kiddin. :)

      --
      You are all a bunch of idots.
    3. Re:Holograms by SA+Stevens · · Score: 1

      I was thinking more that it would be similar to a Chuck E Cheese experience. Do they still have robotic musicians at said venue?

    4. Re:Holograms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jerry Garcia on marionette strings...the day is fast approaching.

    5. Re:Holograms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I'd definitely go see it if it had that giant electronic gorilla that they used to have at Showbiz Pizza.

    6. Re:Holograms by NanoGator · · Score: 4, Funny

      "The projection wouldn't even have to be very good.."

      Frankly, I don't care if it is very good or not. If they don't stick to the standard of emblazaning an H on his forhead, I'm going to nitpick!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:Holograms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sharon Apple... Well, we are still probably a few years away from duplicating the presentation aspect of swinging over the audience or interacting by programmed response rather than AI or even the human assisted programming, but there is hope at least!

    8. Re:Holograms by Tsiangkun · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the type of idea that, with a nice CG presentation, could get some people to sign over some cash. Get the venture capital, transfer the funds offshore, and close the company.

    9. Re:Holograms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      then you'll be stuck with some piano-playing hologram who won't go away

      What? Like Billy Joel or Elton John?

    10. Re:Holograms by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can see it now... "Mr. Garcia, what's it like being a ridiculous puppet?" "Well, all I can tell you is, I'm grateful to be dead."

    11. Re:Holograms by Noofus · · Score: 1

      Sometimes I think im the only fan....

      Comments like this let me know I am not the only loon in the universe :)

    12. Re:Holograms by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      Hehe.

      I'm actually shocked that made it to +5. I thought it was a little too obscure!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    13. Re:Holograms by walstib · · Score: 1

      Oh spin my nipple nuts and send me to Alaska! :) Glad to see another fan.

      --
      The most dangerous strategy is to jump a chasm in two leaps. - Benjamin Disraeli
    14. Re:Holograms by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      Heh. Cheers.

      Not sure if ya know this or not, but you can buy seasons 1-6 on DVD at Best Buy. Just 10 minutes ago I was watching Gunmen of the Apocolypse. The extras aren't bad either, quite a few deleted scenes etc!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  3. Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I thought this was going to be about dead musicians coming back from the grave to kill those who use their music as ring tones. Still cool though.

    1. Re:Meh by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 1

      Hell we don't need them to come back, I'll do it. Whatever happened to the simple ring? It worked damnit.

    2. Re:Meh by kclittle · · Score: 1
      You can, of course, dl ringtones that sound *exactly* like a phone from the 1940's.

      --
      Generally, bash is superior to python in those environments where python is not installed.
    3. Re:Meh by tepples · · Score: 1

      Whatever happened to the simple ring? It worked damnit.

      Customizable ringtones help distinguish one phone from another. Before we had customizable ringtones, it was common for everybody in the room to reach for a phone whenever anybody's phone rang.

    4. Re:Meh by MetalliQaZ · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now they don't reach for their own phones, they just roll their eyes and try not to laugh at the fool who chose that stupid ring tone.

      --
      "Here Lies Philip J. Fry, named for his uncle, to carry on his spirit"
    5. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I, for one, welcome our... oh forget it... too easy.

    6. Re:Meh by antic · · Score: 1



      I went forward in time and took this photo at the gig!

      Rock on!

      --
      'Thats they exact same thing a banana wrench monkey.'
    7. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or slap the shit out of anyone who doesn't

    8. Re:Meh by rob_squared · · Score: 0

      I thought we were going to somehow broadcast heavy metal and marilyn manson to the dead up in heaven, just to piss them off.

      --
      I don't get it.
  4. Side Note by Paperweight · · Score: 4, Funny

    Unfortunately insiders acknowledged that it would be impossible to bring Michael Jackson's mucis back from the dead.

    1. Re:Side Note by krakelohm · · Score: 1

      Ahhh comon now... I bet if you get some schoolboys listing to it... uhh... no wait thats not funny.

      --
      You are all a bunch of idots.
    2. Re:Side Note by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Unfortunately insiders acknowledged that it would be impossible to bring Michael Jackson's mucis back from the dead."

      I wonder how many bitter-beer-faces that little typo caused.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  5. imagine... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A beowulf cluster of Elvis impersonators!

  6. Not dead yet by Nadsat · · Score: 2

    Glen Gould is alive in my heart.

    1. Re:Not dead yet by jnana · · Score: 1

      The name is Glenn Gould, with two ens.

    2. Re:Not dead yet by nacturation · · Score: 5, Funny

      Glen Gould is alive in my heart.

      Damn, that must really hurt.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    3. Re:Not dead yet by alex2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Glenn Gould is alive in my closet.

    4. Re:Not dead yet by ThePatrioticFuck · · Score: 1

      Have you checked on him lately?

    5. Re:Not dead yet by alex2 · · Score: 1

      Only when I need to get a pair of socks to wear.

  7. Just a tad misleading... by EvilCabbage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... not that I'm surprised by a Slashdot (or submitted article) being misleading, but there's not much to crow about here.

    We're talking about a slightly more modern idea of the old player pianos. Stuff that matters indeed..

    1. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      did you actually read the article - or even the summary?

      The piano is just the thing they play it on, no one's saying that's a great achievement - MIDI enabled pianos have existed for years.
      The achievement is being able to accurately translate a recording into MIDI instructions.

      Whether or not it's as good as they claim is yet to be seen.

    2. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you've got a better way to remove the noise out of old recordings, then please tell us how.

    3. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Texodore · · Score: 5, Informative

      Disclaimer. I used to work for the founder of Zenph Studios, back when he founded a networking software company and he left when it merged with a larger one. I am still in touch.

      Someone takes a recording from long ago on vinyl. They play it on vinyl. Advanced signal processing listens to the sound from the original recording and detects which note is played when keys are pressed and lifted, and apparently when pedals are in use as well. This is laid down in a high-fidelity MIDI format. This MIDI file is fed through a high-performance Yamaha piano and the concert is played live on the piano in the concert hall. The piano translates the MIDI files and hits the keys, pedals, everything to the exact timing specified in the file. The magic is in the signal processing of the original recording. The idea is to replicate the original recording, note for note, tone for tone, microsecond for microsecond, feeling for feeling.

      So, this is a HUGE step beyond player pianos. We can replicate old recordings and (GASP!) re-record them using modern methods, saving old lost tapes, making old recordings available in SACD and DVD-Audio. We can replicate concerts across the globe. Piano competitions can be done remotely. This could be of incredible significance to old classical music libraries and performances.

    4. Re:Just a tad misleading... by SA+Stevens · · Score: 1

      The achievement is being able to accurately translate a recording into MIDI instructions.

      Yes!! Then we can download said MIDI files off Usenet and play them on our 8-bit Sound Blaster Pro cards. What a great idea! I'm getting excited just thinking about those warm tones ol' Sound Blaster is capable of.

    5. Re:Just a tad misleading... by SA+Stevens · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The original music, recorded on vinyl, as you say, was played by the performer from sheet music, which includes dynamic cues and precise timing data.

      I even have this fancy software (not sure if it's still published) called 'Desktop Sheet Music' published by Midisoft. It lets you enter the score, completely and 100% accurately, and then it's played back EXACTLY how the composer intended.

      When I want to listen to a great performance of classical music, I want the original recording, played back on equipment that does the best possible job of playing back that actual recording. Worrying about and/or corrupting the fidelity of the recording to remove 'scratches' seems to me like fretting about the back of the theatre seat in front of you at a theatre performance. Deal with the fact that you have no business 'cleaning up' something you didn't originate.

    6. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I get the feeling you don't really understand what MIDI actually is...Also, wtf is upsida?

    7. Re:Just a tad misleading... by justforaday · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How well does this software you mention deal with the subtle nuances of a performance? Accellerandos and decelerandos (as notated on the original score)? You know, there's a lot more to a performance than playing it note perfect...

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    8. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you have _no_ idea what MIDI is, do you?

    9. Re:Just a tad misleading... by RedWizzard · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This MIDI file is fed through a high-performance Yamaha piano and the concert is played live on the piano in the concert hall.
      It's not really live though, is it? It's just a different (and technically very advanced) form of recording and playback.
    10. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Urusai · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Next step--algorithmically extracting nuance templates to make AI piano players that sound as good as a human but are technically superior (and cheaper to book). The problem is that we'll all get sick of people running the Rachmaninov filter on "Kitten on the Keys", "Chopsticks", etc.

    11. Re:Just a tad misleading... by ockegheim · · Score: 5, Informative

      In my job as a sound engineer, I regularly edit classical piano music. High-end midi pianos have an amazing potential for recording, as no high fidelity recording can substitute for a real live sound. A recorded midi file would have the feel of an artist, and it would be easy to correct wrong notes.

      Extracting a usable midi file from a recording is very sophisticated signal processing. If the pedal is down a new attack can get lost among the wash of notes. The musical score would help if the program knew what notes to expect. Even so, I suspect they chose Glenn Gould because he was very sparing with the pedal when he played Bach.

      --
      I’m old enough to remember 16K of memory being described as “whopping”
    12. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Sneftel · · Score: 2, Informative

      Believe it or not, there isn't much more to it than pressing buttons. The striking of a particular note contains few variables: the time at which the note is pressed, the velocity at which the hammer is propelled, and the length of time during which the note is sustained (some piano effects involve the speed at which the key is lifted, but this is rare in most performances). Pedals are a simple question of displacement over time.

      --
      The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
    13. Re:Just a tad misleading... by rookworm · · Score: 1

      Not sure what piano they're using, but the Yamaha Disklavier produces excellent reproductions. I know many professional musicians who cannot tell the difference between the original performance and its subsequent playback. It really does capture the nuance. Unfourtunately there are some silly limitations, like maximum 16 notes sounding at a time (discounting pedal tricks) and it uses floppy disks. Good enough for playing back a single human performance, but not, say for superimposing several, or playing "player piano" music. (Google for "Nancarrow" for example)

      --
      The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
    14. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      uhh... no, it's really not like that. if that were the case, there would be nothing special about a great pianist. they're not just excellent "button pushers".

      the score doesn't indicate with that much precision how the notes are supposed to be played- it'll give the rhythms, general tempo and volume changes, but it's the subtleties that make it difficult. a good pianist is one who reads the music and interprets it with the appropriate feeling, which often means playing notes behind/ahead of the beat, playing certain notes slightly louder or softer, or shorter/faster. if ordinary sheet music had notation for all of these things, it would be too complex to be readable (it's bad enough as it is, IMHO)

      this software is translating a master performance into a high resolution form of MIDI- a form of musical notation that has the capability to record all those subtleties. ordinary computers can play a MIDI file that is technically correct, but sounds totally lame for lack of feeling. it's like Data's poetry.

    15. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      Is this the Bosendorfer piano? I have a recording of Mozart sonatas from probably 15 years ago that called itself the "First transoceanic recording" because it was played by the pianist (Philippe Entremont) in Austria, where the HiFi MIDI recorded it and the pianist then went back in the computer and tweaked it to perfection, and then it was played back by computer in a sound studio in the US where it was recorded. A fantastic record.

    16. Re:Just a tad misleading... by NarrMaster · · Score: 1

      I'm still waiting for polyphonic transcription. That, coupled with said nuance templates, and realistic sounding virtual instruments, would be awesome. Mixing and swapping musician's from various bands would be a neat way to pass the time.

      --
      That's right. All your base.
    17. Re:Just a tad misleading... by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      I even have this fancy software (not sure if it's still published) called 'Desktop Sheet Music' published by Midisoft. It lets you enter the score, completely and 100% accurately, and then it's played back EXACTLY how the composer intended.

      Please tell me you're not serious.

      No composer intends for a performer to interpret their music mechanically.

      Music ebbs and flows; that's what makes it human. Mechanical reproductions are utterly flat in comparison with a human performance.

      Notes are only a means for communicating the smallest quanitifiable details of what a piece of music is actually trying to communicate.

    18. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 0

      so you realize you're an idiot. good.

    19. Re:Just a tad misleading... by eh2o · · Score: 1

      ...unless its a Victor Borge performance.

    20. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think what the poster before you was trying to point out is that this new method isn't just reading sheet music.

      What it's doing is listening with enough accuracy to tell exactly when said master pianist pressed a given key, how fast he pressed it, how long he pressed it, etc.

      So what this newer form of MIDI plays back is almost impossible to tell from what the original pianist played.

      I have no idea how good it actually is, but it sounds like the machine making the recordings is almost as impressive, if not more so, than the super-expressive newer form of MIDI.

      And while it may not be able to do any of its own improvisations - there are other projects working on that - what it can do is faithfully reproduce what some master has already played.

    21. Re:Just a tad misleading... by eh2o · · Score: 1

      according to heresay, some grad students were responsible for burning out the servos on early disklaviers by programming them to hit all 88 keys at once (naturally, its probably the first thing anyone would try given the opportunity...).

    22. Re:Just a tad misleading... by 10seconds · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I even have this fancy software (not sure if it's still published) called 'Desktop Sheet Music' published by Midisoft. It lets you enter the score, completely and 100% accurately, and then it's played back EXACTLY how the composer intended.


      Wow. This has got to be one of the most uninformed and/or naive posts regarding music I have read in a long time. Musical notation is quite imprecise. Modern composers have been in fact often struggling to find out how to translate their musical ideas into sheet music. Sure, you can write a program that plays Bach pretty well. But get into the romantic and modern repertoire, and there is simply no way you can have software that does a good job at this today.

      Sheet music leaves a lot of room for interpretation. This is why the Horowitz and Rubinstein of this world are important. This is why an orchestra conductor is the most important element of a symphonic or operatic performance, something few people are aware of.

      There is also not a unique way of interpreting a piece of music. Composers themselves has been known to perform their own music differently at different times of their lives. Sometimes, they are impressed by the interpretation of their own music made by other musicians, interpretation that they had not necessarily intended.
    23. Re:Just a tad misleading... by zotz · · Score: 1

      "We can replicate old recordings and (GASP!) re-record them using modern methods, saving old lost tapes, making old recordings available in SACD and DVD-Audio."

      Naturally, all with brand spanking new COPYRIGHTS on them that are so durable that they will last and last.

      Any bets on which lasts longer - the Eveready Bunny, or modern copyrights...

      Hey Yamaha, make me proud, put them under a copyleft or in the public domain. (If they are there now that is.)

      all the best,

      drew

      --
      FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
    24. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1

      MIDI files contain time information for each event. Accelerandos and decelerandos will be recorded as they are played.

    25. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1
      a good pianist is one who reads the music and interprets it with the appropriate feeling, which often means playing notes behind/ahead of the beat, playing certain notes slightly louder or softer, or shorter/faster.
      These are all saved in a MIDI file. MIDI does not give "general tempo", as you say, but exact timings of events.
      ordinary computers can play a MIDI file that is technically correct, but sounds totally lame for lack of feeling. it's like Data's poetry.
      If it lacks the feeling, then it is not "technically correct". If a perfect robot plays the same piano from a MIDI file, then the audio will be exactly same as original. (counting out hand claps, coughing, etc...)
    26. Re:Just a tad misleading... by justforaday · · Score: 1

      I understand that a MIDI recording made of someone playing will be a (very near) perfect rendition of what was played. I was referring to the parent's post that software that could scan in the original sheet music would play it exactly as the composer intended, which simply isn't true. I was pointing out that the software probably wouldn't take into account things like accels/decels and other slight timing nuances (playing slightly before or after the beat, slight delays in pickup notes, etc). Not to mention that many scores only give a general tempo marking, sometimes in the form of ranges. This is, as the composer intended, to give the conductor/performer some artistic license with the piece.

      If you'll notice, anyone with any training in music will tell you that a perfectly timed note-perfect performance is stiff and robotic. It removes the exact things that differentiates a good performance from an amazing one.

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    27. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say- If a MIDI file is made from the sheet music, it may have the dynamics and tempo changes per the sheet music, and be "technically correct" in the sense that all the notes are being played as written, but it will not have the "feeling". Even attempts to humanize are not close to a human playing it.

      Yes, if you record MIDI of the human playing it, it'll be the same (although standard MIDI may not have quite the resolution to fool a discerning ear as far as time and volume is concerned, thus this "high-resolution" MIDI)

    28. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I was referring to the parent's post that software that could scan in the original sheet music would play it exactly as the composer intended, which simply isn't true.


      The software scans the exact performance (to a certain precision), not the original "sheet". The original sheet is an inaccurate representation of the composers idea.

      I was pointing out that the software probably wouldn't take into account things like accels/decels and other slight timing nuances (playing slightly before or after the beat, slight delays in pickup notes, etc)


      MIDI takes those things into account

      If you'll notice, anyone with any training in music will tell you that a perfectly timed note-perfect performance is stiff and robotic. It removes the exact things that differentiates a good performance from an amazing one.


      You seem to be suggest that MIDI can only play back roughly quantized events, however, MIDI clock can be set to accurate as, say, microsecond (1/1,000,000 second). At such clocks, all variations and nuances will also be recorded.
    29. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1
      I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say- If a MIDI file is made from the sheet music, it may have the dynamics and tempo changes per the sheet music, and be "technically correct" in the sense that all the notes are being played as written, but it will not have the "feeling". Even attempts to humanize are not close to a human playing it.
      I agree. But, in my opinion, nobody suggested making MIDI files from sheet music. There was only a poster who stated that that Midisoft's program plays the music exactly as he intends; he did not, however, claim that it will sound any particularly better than "unexactly played" music.
    30. Re:Just a tad misleading... by justforaday · · Score: 1

      You still seem to be missing the point that I was responding to the parent to my original post (the guy talking about scanning sheet music into a program called "Desktop Sheet Music"). I am not arguing in the slightest that the software discussed in TFA will do amazing things. Try reading the entire thread next time. Or learn how to use those threshold pulldown menus...

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    31. Re:Just a tad misleading... by justforaday · · Score: 1

      nobody suggested making MIDI files from sheet music. There was only a poster who stated that that Midisoft's program plays the music exactly as he intends

      I have the feeling you have some serious reading comprehension problems. The statement above contradicts itself entirely.

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    32. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Keith+Handy · · Score: 1

      So, this is a HUGE step beyond player pianos. We can replicate old recordings and (GASP!) re-record them using modern methods, saving old lost tapes, making old recordings available in SACD and DVD-Audio.

      I don't know if this is how these "replications" will be presented to the public, but it's not correct to refer to them as if they are restorations of old tapes. Certainly it's a lot closer to a restoration than, for example, bringing in someone else to play the material, because of the exactly matched timing and dynamics. But there are obviously going to be slight timbral differences, and significant phase difference, between the sound of the instrument originally recorded, and the instrument producing the sound in the present.

      That said, once something is marketed a certain way, people begin to accept the new definition of the word. Remember when "3D" meant stereoscopic? Or when "remix" meant mixing again from the original multitrack tape?

      --
      -- -Keith
    33. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      "But, in my opinion, nobody suggested making MIDI files from sheet music."

      I even have this fancy software (not sure if it's still published) called 'Desktop Sheet Music' published by Midisoft. It lets you enter the score, completely and 100% accurately, and then it's played back EXACTLY how the composer intended

      sure sounds to me like he did. maybe he meant playing it into the program w/a MIDI controller, but that was not inferred. in any case, if you just enter the sheet music, it's not going to sound EXACTLY how the composer intended.

    34. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1
      sure sounds to me like he did. maybe he meant playing it into the program w/a MIDI controller, but that was not inferred. in any case, if you just enter the sheet music, it's not going to sound EXACTLY how the composer intended.
      He said "to enter the score", nothing about sheets! I interpreted it so that HE IS THE ORIGINAL COMPOSER, and therefore knows what he wants the music to sound like.
    35. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1

      Read again: it does not, if he is a composer.

    36. Re:Just a tad misleading... by utexaspunk · · Score: 1

      whatever. i guess that shows how one person can read something one way and another can read it completely differently.

    37. Re:Just a tad misleading... by atom_pheer · · Score: 1

      ok, stupid fight :)

    38. Re:Just a tad misleading... by snullbug · · Score: 1

      When I want to listen to a great performance of classical music, I try to get tickets to a live performance. This would seem to agree with the definition of "performance".

      If information can be extracted from a recording that enables duplication of all the mechanical actions that activated the piano in that recording all that will be missing are the visuals of the gyrating human body. This would seem to be a far cry from " 'cleaning up' something you didn't originate" and in some very real sense a live performance.

      --
      .......Ya doesn't has to call me Johnson!
    39. Re:Just a tad misleading... by justforaday · · Score: 1

      My bad. He is talking about entering the score as the composer (so maybe your reading isn't as bad as i thought : p). His comment still ignores the human aspect of music playing/performance by suggesting that a purely mechanical rendition is what the composer intended. That is, unless of course, he intends for his music to be rigid and lifeless.

      --
      I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
    40. Re:Just a tad misleading... by Sneftel · · Score: 1

      A little testy, aren't you? Read the original post to which I was replying. The original poster's implied contention was that the easily-measurable dynamics of a performance were insufficient to reproduce that performance.

      --
      The opinions stated herein do not necessarily represent those of anybody at all. Deal with it.
    41. Re:Just a tad misleading... by SA+Stevens · · Score: 1

      I was using MIDI back when the GUI interface for the software I was running was the GEM Desktop. On a MIDI-out keyboard and into a MIDI-in synth about the size of an external modem.

      Do you know what MIDI is?

      Do you have any sense of humor at all?

    42. Re:Just a tad misleading... by ockegheim · · Score: 1

      I remember Hindemith quoting a study that scientists had found no difference in the touch (for one note) between a concert pianist and "Mr Smith's umbrella". A good pianist is a button pusher par excellence. They can hit a four or five note chord and bring out one of the notes. With pedalling and "touch" (relative strength of notes maybe) they can make a line sing, which is a fine achievement for what is essentially a percussion instrument.

      --
      I’m old enough to remember 16K of memory being described as “whopping”
    43. Re:Just a tad misleading... by CoughDropAddict · · Score: 1

      If it lacks the feeling, then it is not "technically correct". If a perfect robot plays the same piano from a MIDI file, then the audio will be exactly same as original. (counting out hand claps, coughing, etc...)

      The only instrument this could be strictly true for is an electric action organ. MIDI doesn't have enough information for the piano.

      MIDI doesn't know if you let a piano key up slowly, causing a moment of fuzz when the felt damper touches the string.

      MIDI doesn't know if you re-strike a key without letting it up all the way, resulting in a duller sound (for example, during a quiet trill).

      There's nothing that's theoretically impossible to reproduce, but there is a lot to capture -- certainly more than MIDI provides.

  8. What a concert by Calvin+Deck · · Score: 0

    Normally you look at the pianist while he is playing, i don't know why maybe just for having something to look at.

    What will they do in this case? put up a plastic dull on the pianists chair, or just turn the piano to the audience and let the it play by its self?

    1. Re:What a concert by XFilesFMDS1013 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe they can rent the space to parents who want to take pictures of their 2 mo playing the piano. Even better, take videos of this, and send it to all your relatives, just to show that your smoking during your pregency DID NOT affect your child at all.

  9. "High-def" MIDI? by NuclearKangaroo · · Score: 1, Interesting

    This story is pretty low on the accuracy scale, at least from a technical standpoint. I don't think they're talking about some new form of MIDI as the teaser statement implies. The author of the article just seems to think that MIDI is "high-def", which is pretty funny, actually. Especially considering how slow MIDI's transmission speed is.

    1. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by swg101 · · Score: 0

      Actually, the technology in question is a variation on the standard MIDI made by Yamaha for their pianos (and high-end keyboards). The difference is that normally MIDI can only tell the note, duration, and voice. This format, however, can also tell key velocity.

      I have one of Yamaha's Clavinova electric pianos, and I can tell you that the MIDI recordings done on the keyboard, and played back on it are far above when played on regular computer MIDI tool. Being able to have volume control adds much to a MIDI file.

      --
      Like pi? Try 10,000 digits.
    2. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I always wondered why there wasn't a "high-def" version of MIDI. When I move a volume slider up or down on an audio mixer I can adjust it the slightest bit, but with MIDI it increments by 1, up to 255. Same thing with panning, 127 right, -127 left, it seems like you would be able to hear the difference if you switched back and forth between 127 and 126. Now I don't really know much about MIDI, so maybe I'm mistaken, but I think that music like this COULD benefit from an increased amount of accuracy.

    3. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1
      Especially considering how slow MIDI's transmission speed is.

      Yes, 31200bps really is limiting. Or rather, it would be if there wasn't MIDI over USB (PDF) and MIDI over IEEE-1394 (Firewire) (PDF).

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    4. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ehhhh?

      As an amateur musician, i must tell you that you are wrong. Velocity exists in "normal" midi too and has, afaik, always done so.

    5. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by mabinogi · · Score: 4, Informative

      Velocity is a standard part of the MIDI protocol...

      There are a few MIDI things related to volume -

      Channel volume and Key velocity are the most common used.
      Volume just being the output volume.
      Velocity is usually used to affect both volume and timbre.
      There's also Chanel aftertouch and Key aftertouch, which depending on the instrument may affect volume, timbre, pitch, or nothing at all.

      Controller 11 - Expression is often volume related, and there's also the Breath controler (I don't know the number off the top of my head) which can also be used to affect volume and / or timbre, pitch or whatever...

      There's plenty of room in standard MIDI for a wide range of expressiveness, it's usually the instrument that falls short, not the protocol.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    6. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by VGPowerlord · · Score: 2, Informative
      Actually, the technology in question is a variation on the standard MIDI made by Yamaha for their pianos (and high-end keyboards). The difference is that normally MIDI can only tell the note, duration, and voice. This format, however, can also tell key velocity.

      That's incorrect. Velocity is sent as part of a Note On event in General MIDI 1.

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
    7. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      First article quote: The key to the phantom concert lies in the transcription of the scratchy recordings into a high-resolution version of MIDI

      Second article quote: It has successfully tried out the Cortot and Gould pieces on the Disklavier Pro, one of only a few concert grand pianos that can record and play back high-definition MIDI files.

      It looks like you skimmed the article, only saw the second quote, and rushed to post an half-assed comment about how 'the author of the article just seems to think that MIDI is "high-def"'.

      If you'd have read the full article carefully, you'd have noticed the first quote and understood that "high-def MIDI" denotes another format.

    8. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      MIDI (Musical Instrument Digital Interface) is not a file format, it's a hardware interface and a wire protocol.

      a .mid is a file based representation of the protocol, but the hardware interface and the protocol came first.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    9. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      He's an australian, excuse him... ;)

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    10. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by mabinogi · · Score: 1

      The MIDI spec allows for 14 bit resolution for most controllers - including Volume, Expression and Pan.

      It's implemented through using two controller numbers for each controller, a fine and a coarse.
      Most instruments just ignore the fine settings though, so it's more of an implementation issue.

      I think Velocity only has 7 bits though, and it seems to me that would be the setting that would most benefit from higher resolution.

      --
      Advanced users are users too!
    11. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      See, most MIDI devices only go up to 255, but mine goes up to 256.

    12. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by clifyt · · Score: 1

      Yeah, velocity is 7bit -- 127 values.

      I have one synth that can send and receive velocity using MSB and LSB, but I don't know of any shipping synth that can use it (and it is a bit more latent than standard midi -- shame there wasn't mLan back then).

      Does it sound any better? Not much because the built in samples use only 16 layer of velocity and no accompanying synthesis to filter the inbetween velocities.

      But yeah, even on most other controllers, most synths ignore any 14bit resolution except on pitch bend and thats a special type of CC anyways.

    13. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Last I looked, Midi over USB and Firewire (generally in the mLan protocol) still has the 31200bps limitation.

      You get a lot more channels out of this running parallel (as opposed to trying to string 16 midi channels side by side -- which at 31200bps, you can hear flams if all 16 channels are sounding at the same time on the same midi bus, even more pronounced if CC data is also being sent).

      But then again, its been a few years since I talked with any of the Yamaha engineers. A good frind of mine was manager of the mLan project over there, but I think he's off doing something else in the company now (Hey George!).

      But all in all, for the data thats being sent through, its not that limiting if you are only dealing with one channel.

    14. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by ElephanTS · · Score: 2, Informative

      No this is wrong. Yamaha has a form of high def MIDI for recording grand pianos. They abandoned 7-bit MIDI because it couldn't reproduce all the nuances they wanted to capture. This is the data that is captured. However, there is no such this as high-def MIDI really, it's an analogy (which is strange for a digital idea).

      --
      spoonerize "magic trackpad"
    15. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by ockegheim · · Score: 2, Informative

      An acoustic piano doesn't have a volume control. The only control over the volume is the key velocity, as a performer has almost no control over the sound after a key has been hit.

      "Lo-def"MIDI would include keystrokes with their velocity, key releases, and when the pedal is engaged and released. I believe Yamaha's hi-def MIDI treats the pedals as continuous controllers so every move can be accurately recorded. They probably log the pressure and speed of release of the keys as well, though this would have only a marginal effect on the sound in all but exceptional circumstances.

      --
      I’m old enough to remember 16K of memory being described as “whopping”
    16. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by ukleafer · · Score: 1

      And a Velocity byte is also included of Note Off events, although rarely used for anything.

      I guess if Yamaha were going totally nuts with this, they could interpret how fast keys were lifted, but I don't want to try and imagine how they'd do that.

    17. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by NuclearKangaroo · · Score: 1

      So, lets clear up some confusion here. I still don't see anything that sets apart MIDI on Yamaha's player pianos from regular MIDI. Note On/ Off, Velocity, Aftertouch (Key Pressure), Volume and Damper pedal messages aren't anything special. They're all part of the original MIDI spec, which dates back to the 70's! So far as I can see, there's nothing "hi-def" about Yamaha's MIDI. Anyone who I use to work with at Yamaha want to fill me in? =-)

    18. Re:"High-def" MIDI? by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      I don't know who you are that knows George Hamilton, but.... hi. :) I haven't heard from him in a while either. :(

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

  10. PR junk by big.iron.wiz · · Score: 1

    /. just today released a story about PR works.

    Can you guess the 3 experts and who payed for this one?

    And by the way: who want's to ear this old gizzers, anyway?

    --
    I am portuguese. If you think my written english is bad, try posting in portuguese!
  11. Not the same by ShamanDave · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Part of the charm of Glenn Gould's recordings stems from the fact that you can hear him humming along with the music if you listen carefully. I guess he drove recording techs nuts.

    1. Re:Not the same by mendax · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Let's not forget Glenn Gould's beloved piano that he hauled around with him wherever he went. The humming and the piano were the bane of recording engineers. But then the man was a true eccentric. But will the "performance" reflect accurately the eccentricies of his performance style? At least they need to put a guy wearing what looks like Gould's winter wardrobe (which he preferred to wear even in the summer) on stage in front of the piano to give it at least some authenticity.

      --
      It's really quite a simple choice: Life, Death, or Los Angeles.
    2. Re:Not the same by Quirk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Glen Gould was a supreme recording tech. He stopped playing publicly "on 10 April 1964 in a Los Angeles recital". The list of Gould's idiocyracies would fill a few pages. He would steep his hands and forearms in steaming hot water to loosen them and increase the circulation. Those who witnessed this ritual said his arms would come out burnt red. He loved recording technology and was a master of the craft. Some detractors have suggested his later output reflected his virtuosity as a technologist more than his ability as a pianist, but those who heard him live state unequivocably that his mastery of the keyboard was unparalleled, especially his ability to play at a blinding speed.

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
    3. Re:Not the same by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Glenn Gould, not Glen.

    4. Re:Not the same by rookworm · · Score: 1

      Gould often "spliced" several takes together to make a sort of Frankenstein performance. So when you go to this concert, remember you are listening to a reproduction of a reconstruction of a recording of an imaginary performance played by a dead man. Cool.

      --
      The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
    5. Re:Not the same by Threni · · Score: 1

      > Gould often "spliced" several takes together to make a sort of Frankenstein
      > performance. So when you go to this concert, remember you are listening to a
      > reproduction of a reconstruction of a recording of an imaginary performance
      > played by a dead man. Cool.

      Firstly, Gould himself didn't do the splicing. That practice is actually pretty widespread, especially on large works which aren't performed live very often, or which are difficult to play.

      Also, it's unlikely - though hard to determine given the lack of detail in the article - that these recordings are anything other than live performances captured on tape (or perhaps even wax cylinder) especially the 1928 one.

      But if such creations interest you, then you should be checking out Frank Zappa's music. He often used the drums from one performance of a song, the vocals from another, etc. He even used the drum part (for example) of a different song altogether, for added oddness.

      For more splicing fun, check out Stockhausen's "Gesang de jungling" or Hymnen, or Negativland's "A big 10-8 place", "Death sentences of the polished and structurally weak" or "U2".

    6. Re:Not the same by adrianbye · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > He would steep his hands and forearms
      > in steaming hot water to loosen them
      > and increase the circulation.

      He most likely had a repetitive strain injury (RSI) from his piano playing, and this was how he reduced the pain. That his arms came out burnt red may indicate the level of pain he felt.

  12. Rumor has it... by GillBates0 · · Score: 2, Funny
    ...that they'll be opening with the Adams family theme song

    They're creepy and they're kooky,
    Mysterious and spooky,
    They're all together ooky,
    The Addams Family.

    da da da da. tum tum.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:Rumor has it... by mrisaacs · · Score: 1

      Actually the Addams were supposed to be alive although ghoulish. I hate to say it, but the Munsters theme (ripoff that they were...) would be more appropriate, Herman was a re-animated corpse, his wife and father-in-law were undead.

      --
      ...carrier dead.....
  13. transcribing polyphonic notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Attempts to transcribe polyphonic notes are typically only 80 percent successful, says New Scientist. About 10 percent of polyphonic notes are missing and another 10 percent are mistranscribed, which can give the replicated music a hollowness or discordance.

    Zenph Studios, a software company based in Raleigh, North Carolina, claims that it has found a solution to the problem, although it refuses to say how for commercial reasons.


    By taking the musical score into account?

    1. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by kebes · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Exactly. These are famous last words, but: "how hard can it be?"

      You have the exact musical score, and that as a first-guess MIDI file should be pretty good (but will lack "feeling")... then you have an algorithm (genetic algorithm maybe?) that varies the exact timing and release of keys and stuff, until it best approximates the original recording. Since you're starting with the real musical score, getting the notes right shouldn't be the hard part... the rest of it should be the hard part.

      In fact, you can always ask a music expert what notes are being played, and guide the algorithm appropriately. Any human composer can tell you what notes are supposed to be played... the hard part is specifying microsecond timing of how the keys/pedals are pressed and released.

      Now, IANAM (musician), but I have programmed fitting routines many times... so what am I missing?

    2. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by rbarreira · · Score: 2, Informative

      Nice post, but just a small remark - sometimes the score won't be available, since for example Fugues (which Glenn Gould liked to play) involve some improvisation, and I bet that even in other places he would improvise some times.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
    3. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Quirk · · Score: 2, Informative

      Gould's reputation was built on improvisation. His 1955 recording of the Goldberg Variations became an instant best seller and was one of, or, possibly, the first classical best seller. His refusal to play Legato (smoothly) upset the status quo of the classical music world. Leonard Berstein, legendary conductor of the New York Philarmonic, deferred to Gould's quirky redition of a work, suggesting that genius of Gould's level should be allowed leeway.

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
    4. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Arker · · Score: 1

      Of course he improvised. So what? There are lots of people that can sit down with a recording and transcribe it accurately, and many of them have empty larders as we speak.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    5. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by rookworm · · Score: 1
      His refusal to play Legato (smoothly) upset the status quo of the classical music world. Leonard Berstein, legendary conductor of the New York Philarmonic, deferred to Gould's quirky redition of a work, suggesting that genius of Gould's level should be allowed leeway.

      What does this have to do with improvisation??!!

      --
      The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
    6. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Quirk · · Score: 1

      Granted I'm playing loosely with the definition of improvisation. Improvisation is probably better applied to Jazz or a cadenza, so maybe it's my bad, but I think there's room to move within a broad definition of improvisation. Other than the obligatory years of piano lessons as a kid and an ongoing love of jazz and classical music I haven't the education or musical ability to back my usage up.

      --
      "Academicians are more likely to share each other's toothbrush than each other's nomenclature."
      Cohen
    7. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by eh2o · · Score: 1

      its a fitting problem all right but in polyphonic transcription the number of independent variables is non-trivial, the cost of evaluating a guess is very high, and there are tons of local minima due to harmonic equivalence, which, due to the curious nature of instrument physics (missing fundamentals, even/odd harmonic patterns, detuning, etc), often beat the true optimum if your fitness evaluation is not sophisticated enough. a genetic algorithm will converge about as fast as 1000 monkeys banging on typewriters.

    8. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bernstein was talking about the Brahms, where Gould had a complete brain failure and decided to play the thing at one third the correct speed. We only know what Bernstein thought about it because he got up on the podium and made it quite clear that the absurd tempo was Gould's choice, not his.

    9. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gould had a habit of deliberately playing things totally wrong.

      his recording of Mozart sonatas is widely regarded as the worst classical recording ever committed to disc.

    10. Re:transcribing polyphonic notes by Dhaos · · Score: 1

      Ahh, but a fugue is a very mathematical type of composition! Perhaps if the program was told the "theme" of the fugue, it could try to match notes against inversions and other variations on that theme?

      Fugues are cool.

      --
      It's not what you know, or even who you know- It's how many people recognize your damn .sig
  14. Pragmatic Programmer article on the company by jarich · · Score: 4, Informative
    Andy Hunt wrote an article about this company... catch it here:

    http://www.pragmaticprogrammer.com/articles/zenph/ index.html

    1. Re:Pragmatic Programmer article on the company by chiph · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points for you.
      This is an excellent article.

      Chip H.

  15. Ancient???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    FTA:
    "live rendition of ancient recordings made by Alfred Cortot in 1928 and Glenn Gould in 1962."

    1962???. What WAS the world like in those dark times??? Can anyone even begin to imagine the dark power we risk unleasahing upon the world?? Oh yeah, really ancient...Ooooooooohhh, ancient and scary!! What if they come back to life as mummies and go on a rampage for defaming their ancient masterpieces??!!!

  16. This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by SpudB0y · · Score: 2, Informative
    1. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice, but it could use a little more cowbell.

    2. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by Fancia · · Score: 1

      Not quite. That's an audio recording of player piano rolls, but this is really the opposite - it's converting a recording into the digital equivalent of a player piano roll to play back on a real piano.

      --

      Bít, zabít, jen proto, ze su liska!
    3. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by cascino · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin
      That project was similar, but it's not quite the same thing. The Gershwin recordings were done using player piano rolls recorded by Gershwin himself - i.e.: his performances were already in a MIDI-like format - whereas this project is starting from the raw audio recordings of Gould and Cortot and creating MIDI files. In both cases the "concert" featuring dead performers' MIDI files is the headline grabbing story.

    4. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by SpudB0y · · Score: 1

      Wrong, it was a Yamaha disklavier, probably the same model piano.

    5. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by Leibel · · Score: 1

      I don't see how MIDI is the headline grabber. I see the fact that it is possible to reproduce performances faithfully from audio recordings is very significant. There are already piano roll recordings of Gershwin, Grainger, Rachmaninof etc. and these have been around since the artists made them.

      It is entirely different to be able to capture and reproduce the data from a scratchy old recordings. These reproductions are clearer than the original performer could ever have dreamed possible.

    6. Re:This was done 12 years ago with Gershwin by rbrander · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify - the Gershwin project used not "piano rolls" per se, but recordings of a device truly like the MIDI pianos - it recorded the weight of key impact, the use of pedals, everything.

      I caught this concert with the Yamaha player-less piano together with the local symphony and it was uncanny.

  17. And now all we need... by Tuxedo+Jack · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is a (not-so-) live concert by the legendary Hotblack Desiato.

    Unfortunately, he's spending a year dead for tax purposes, but hey, we can't but hope, eh?

    --

    Striking fear in the authors of godawful fanfiction, I am here, appearing in darkness, Tuxedo Jack!
    1. Re:And now all we need... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Restaurant at the End of the Universe.

    2. Re:And now all we need... by WWWWolf · · Score: 1
      spending a year dead for tax purposes,

      Dead for tax purposes? That isn't going to work. Remember the Curse of the Mummy: One of the Pharaohs awakened from 6000-year slumber, and the first thing he saw was the tax man demanding some teeny bit late dues.

      (I know, old joke...)

  18. can you spell enthuasiasticK? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.zenph.com/images/photos/SongsBetweenFri ends2.jpg

  19. What's more amazing... by whitetiger0990 · · Score: 1

    The piano, the polyphony from a MIDI thing, or scratchy music.


    Or did I miss something...
    I think the cool part is getting it to work with scratchy music.

    --
    You have been warned.
    1. Re:What's more amazing... by mrjb · · Score: 1

      They prolly cleaned it first with gwc :)

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  20. The Joy of Pi by Sparr0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    http://joyofpi.com/pi.html

    who the hell teaches people this kind of web design? i havent made a page that screwed up since my first day of html. i can *BARELY* read the black text where it goes over left dark green border of the second tiling of the background.

  21. Since when is 1962 ancient? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ouch! Guess I don't have much long til I'm ancient then...

    But seriously, there are thousands if not millions of fantastic recordings still listenable and enjoyable that were made in 1962 or earlier... This doesn't seem very old, I'm kind of puzzled. It seems like they'd try to restore earlier less well preserved works, like the old edison style recordings. I don't know if piano recordings exist from that era, or if they're of signifigant artistic (vs. historical) merit this process.

  22. Play it backwards by LuckyPhil · · Score: 5, Funny

    Gives a whole new perspective on the term 'de-composing'

    1. Re:Play it backwards by EvanED · · Score: 1

      No no, the artists are already decomposing.

      (With apologies to Monty Python and their "Decomposing Composers")

  23. Other ways... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    The Danish Royal Academy of Music actually has a bunch of player piano transcriptions of...who was it? My violin teacher told me (he was trained there). I think it was Rachmaninoff.

    Essentially, they hooked up a player piano on record, and had him play. The result is a tape which is essentially the analog equivalent of MIDI. If you know someone in the archives and they're feeling nice, they'll still pull 'em out and put 'em in a player piano for you.

    1. Re:Other ways... by glen604 · · Score: 1

      I have a CD of this somewhere. It wasn't exactly a "player piano", but iirc, some different technology from around the same time which never caught on. The recording is pretty decent, and doesn't sound stiltled.

      if you want to go look for it at a store, I think it was called "Rachmaninoff plays Rachmaninoff- the Ampico Piano Player rolls" on Decca- but I may be way wrong on that.

  24. polyphony by cahiha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Zenph Studios, a software company based in Raleigh, North Carolina, claims that it has found a solution to the problem, although it refuses to say how for commercial reasons.

    There have been attempts at music transcription software since the 1970's. For some obscure reason, many of the people who tried didn't seem to think of the fact that classical music comes with a score.

    So, the "solution" to the problem is simple: use the known score to get the notes and polyphony, and use the recording primarily to infer the performance parameters. It's not a very complicated problem, actually. I suspect the main reason why you haven't seen this before is because it is of fairly little commercial interest.

    1. Re:polyphony by JJ · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If this could be extended to vocal performances then I know of the perfect recording to utilize. I heard it on the Dr Demento show many years ago, it was an operatic aria by a castratti, a "modified" human. The vocal power was that of a man but the range encompassed both that of a woman and a man. Quite an eery performance when you considered that the singer paid a huge sacrifice to become a great singer. Many operas were written so that only castratti could perform certain roles and are now non-performable.

      --
      So long and thanks for all the fish . . . !!!
  25. Stuff that matters, like cash by Mechcozmo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Who gets the royalties?

  26. They already have that by P-Frank · · Score: 1

    and it's called a slot machine.

  27. FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by eh2o · · Score: 2, Informative

    The "high def" MIDI the slashblurb refers to is probably what yamaha calls "Yamaha XP MIDI".

    I can't find a technical spec on this right now, but its mostly backwards-compatible with MIDI plus the addition of a few extra details about the piano performance, e.g. key stroke depth, using the MIDI controller extensions. (However I'd be really suprised if it it was actually possible to determine key stroke depth from signal analysis of an old recording).

    If they did their homework it would should also have a higher clockrate. MIDI is notorious for its poor time resolution with a clock of only 1khz -- and studies have shown that virtuoso pianists can control timing down to the sub msec range, so this is essential.

    The article also beats around the bush on the polyphonic transcription issue -- but since these are classical pieces, score following seems like an obvious if not relatively easy way to do it.

    1. Re:FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...studies have shown that virtuoso pianists can control timing down to the sub msec range

      Seriously doubt that. Guess what? It's called "feel" and "emotions".

    2. Re:FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by eh2o · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Microtiming is control of event timing, but not necessarily *absolute* timing., e.g. the inter-onset time between two near-coincident notes.

      Virtuoso pianists (typically having 15-20 years of formal training starting at age 2-4 years) have exceptional control of microtiming.

      Non-virtuosos are very sloppy when it comes to timing. Non-musicians are even worse. Each category is like an order-of-magnitude difference.

      There are plenty of virtuoso pianists who are totally dead in the "emotion" department.

    3. Re:FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by mrjb · · Score: 1

      MIDI is notorious for its poor time resolution True. with a clock of only 1khz False. MIDI interfaces run at 31250 bit per second, which gives (including start- and stopbit) for 3125 bytes. Although it is true that a note-on or note-off generally takes 3 bytes (which I suspect is why you say the clock is 3000/3=1 khz), MIDI distinguishes between data bytes (msb unset) and command bytes (msb set).

      Thus, (hex) 80 6c 3c would mean 'note on, channel 0' 'key 6c' 'velocity 3c'. When the command is not repeated for the next MIDI message, the same channel and command are assumed. Additionally a note on with zero velocity is considered a note off. Thus, when playing a piece on channel 0, most of the time 2 bytes per note suffice, allowing for over 1500 notes to be played per second:

      80 6c 3c 6c 00 6c 3c 6c 00 6c 3c 6c 3c

      would strike and release note 6c several times.
      Of course a periodic 'note on, channel 0' every now and then would help other devices to sync with the MIDI stream, in case they missed the first command byte 80.

      -- If I missed something here please kindly hit me with the cluebat.

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
    4. Re:FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by eh2o · · Score: 1

      (which I suspect is why you say the clock is 3000/3=1 khz)

      yeath that is pretty much what I was getting at... thanks for the detailed explaination though, very informative.

    5. Re:FYI: the Yamaha XP Midi format and virtuosism by NuclearKangaroo · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected! =-)

  28. One step further by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    With this information, it should be possible to build a robot to play the piano the way the original artist did. That would be very interesting to watch, especially if it were done over every year, and we could the robot's progression.

    1. Re:One step further by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They could replace the Abraham Lincoln exhibit at DisneyLand...

    2. Re:One step further by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hi-res MIDI piano is the robot.

    3. Re:One step further by mrjb · · Score: 1

      Yes, let's the robot's progression!

      --
      Visit http://ringbreak.dnd.utwente.nl/~mrjb/growingbettersoftware to download your free copy of the book
  29. Software to make midi from singing or humming? by NeMon'ess · · Score: 1

    I can't play music, but I can hum and vocalize it. There must be software by now that will create a midi based on my voice into a microphone, right? Does anyone know what's available and how well they work?

    1. Re:Software to make midi from singing or humming? by rich_r · · Score: 1

      Yes, there is. I can;t recall the name, but it's made by antares (of autotune fame).
      quick google brings us Kantos...
      As to how well, it works? Good question! It's too late in the day for me to see if there's a demo, but you could always report back for us?

    2. Re:Software to make midi from singing or humming? by benchbri · · Score: 1

      Actually, any recent copy of finale will also do this. Of course it's a $400 piece of software, but if you know any music majors - and odds are you know somebody that knows somebody that has this - I'm sure you could "borrow the licence for a week" I tried it with a ukelele before... It wasn't too bad. Of course, you've got to set the time signature, tempo, etc... but it's worth it.

    3. Re:Software to make midi from singing or humming? by rookworm · · Score: 1

      There are, but if you really can sing in tune, you'd be better off just entering in the notes yourself (if not by learning your intervals, then by trial and error). Any "singing-input" system is probably going to suck a lot. You can get lots of midi-sequencers free online.

      --
      The toad can't burp - and for some reason can't fart either, so it swells up and eventually explodes. --Anonymous Coward
  30. Coming soon, Just need an Electronic Hip Swiveler? by infonography · · Score: 1
    Now all we need is some source of moral outrage.

    hmmmmm

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  31. Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    2pac's been making music from beyond the grave for years. Shit, he's even doin' movies now. Old news, in typical Slashdot fashion. Way to go.

  32. RE: Stuff that matters indeed by weighn · · Score: 1
    Stuff that matters indeed

    Aww, boo hoo mister stomped sandcastle.
    Go and read The Raw Feed if you want some riviting nerd repartee. NOT!

    --
    Mongrel News all the news that fits and froths
  33. In other news... by isny · · Score: 4, Funny

    The Rolling Stones are on tour this summer.

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... and we're bringin' back the Dead!

  34. My thoughts by jessecurry · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I love the idea that they can transcribe polyphonic notes with such clarity. I think that being able to hear these piano masters from a real piano and not just recording would be a great experience, I wish that I could see it live.
    One of the huge benefits I see is that now electronic music artists can incorporate classical pieces as done by the actual artist instead of a poor transcription. I don't know if anyone has heard tracks such as Gotti's Revenge, but I find that electronic music that integrates classical or otherwise note heavy songs has a much better sound.

    --
    Those who know, do not speak. Those who speak, do not know. ~Lao Tzu
  35. the technology, or something similar by rawshark · · Score: 3, Interesting

    A few years ago I heard a CD made with this (or a similiar) technology.

    The way the technology was described to me was as follows: as you know a piano works by having a small hammer attached to each key. The recording technology has a modified piano where below each hammer is a pool of mercury. When the key is struck the hammer enters the pool, completing an electrical circuit, this causes a line to be drawn (???) on a piece of paper. Another modified piano will read the piece of paper like a player piano.

    We listened to music performed by Richard Strauss. It was very cool.

  36. PR Stunt by carlmenezes · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else wonder that it seems they want to draw more attention by the "Beyond the grave" phrase than from the actual technology itself?

    --
    Find a job you like and you will never work a day in your life.
  37. Brandon Heat by Rosyna · · Score: 1

    dang it. I though and was hoping this article was about Brandon Heat, a former mafia hit man (and second in command basically) come back to life to kill the person that betrayed the family...

  38. Won't take into account piano tuning by jgardn · · Score: 0

    I had the opportunity to study a bit about the physics of music. I was surprise by how many different ways a simple instrument like a piano can be tuned. I'm not a very good piano player, but I can hear now what the difference is between tuned pianos. Frankly, the way modern pianos are tuned annoys me. None of the chords are very "pure". They are all equally bad. Not too long ago every piano was tuned by ear, and certain chords would be perfect or near perfect, while others would stink terribly. But that was part of the music. If you shift the key, all of a sudden everything sounds very very different. Shift it back and everything sounds good again.

    I never really liked MIDI because you can't really take this into account easily. I know you can tune individual notes by cents, but I guess I never bothered to try to take a MIDI piece and play it in different tunes by tuning each note off by a couple of cents.

    What I'm saying is that we can't really ask the piano player "For this piece, how would you like the piano tuned?"

    Another spot I don't think they'll be able to hit is the fact that every piano is a little bit different. When you play a piece, you have to adapt to the piano. One friend of mine who played so much piano that he would go through several strings a month would complain endlessly about certain pianos ("You have to use a frigging sledgehammer to get that thing to forte") and others were magical for him. Needless to say, merely reproducing the mechanics of how someone performed a piece on a different piano (with a different room temperature and humidity and even different acoustics in the room) won't really do it justice in my mind.

    --
    The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
    1. Re:Won't take into account piano tuning by eh2o · · Score: 1

      he would go through several strings a month...

      sounds like he really *did* take a sledgehammer to the thing!

      btw; if you use a synth on a computer its pretty easy to retune MIDI into just intonation or whatever.

      I used to think about the possibility of a disklavier that could retune itself automatically. Theoretically it should work... but it might not be good for the strings / frame, etc, and the piano tunerss society would probably lobby Santorum to sponser a bill to make it illegal.

    2. Re:Won't take into account piano tuning by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ahhh, tuning. There are subtleties there.

      Fans of "Donald Duck in Mathmagic Land" know that a "perfect fifth" interval has two notes, with a 3:2 ratio of frequencies. 1.5000000000000. And a major fourth interval has frequencies with a 4:3 ratio. 1.3333333333333....

      Intro to music theory (or a little piano experience) notes that an octave is a doubling in frequency, and contains 12 half steps. A major fourth is five half steps, and a perfect fifth is seven. From an octave (2:1), one can compute the frequency ratio for a half step by solving for x:
      x^12 = 2. I get 1.0594630943592952645618252949463

      Five of these gets a frequency ratio of 1.3348398541700343648308318811823, not 4/3. A touch sharp. Seven mathematical half-steps yields a frequency ratio of 1.4983070768766814987992807320264, not 1.5. A touch flat.

      A piano tuner (or the designer of any instrument) can use the mathematical equal-tempered scale, and have fourth and fifth intervals sound a bit off. Or the tuner can make some, but not all, of the fourth and fifth intervals work perfectly. Choose which ones. Make too many perfect, and the other notes will sound off, and may sound horrible in chords.

      It's all about tradeoffs.

    3. Re:Won't take into account piano tuning by AndyCater · · Score: 1

      Especially Glenn Gould - the sleeve notes I have for the Glenn Gould 48 emphasise how particular he was about tuning and how he attempted to modify a particular Steinway to produce the sound he wanted - somewhere between a harpsichord and piano - such that some pieces recorded sounded so poor that the takes could not be released and had to be composited. Gould would be interesting to hear in any event - they'd have to dub in the humming :) Close to us here is a mechanical music museum which plays origianl Gershwin recordings on a special player piano. Apparently, at one point there were only about 12 recording mechanical pianos world-wide.

  39. Player Pianos and Joplin by jgardn · · Score: 1

    I remember one of the cool things about Scott Joplin was that he recorded his own song's player piano rolls. If you went to the store at that time and picked up a player piano rolls for one of his pieces, it was performed by him. So you were getting it exactly as he would've played it - within the parameters of what a player piano can do.

    Player pianos could only record which notes were pressed and for how long. They couldn't reproduce the dynamics of the piece. MIDI is a huge step forward because you can record that nowadays.

    I don't believe MIDI or anything like it will ever replace actual recordings of the music. There is just so much that happens beyond playing the notes of the song that MIDI will never be able to fully capture.

    --
    The radical sect of Islam would either see you dead or "reverted" to Islam.
    1. Re:Player Pianos and Joplin by eh2o · · Score: 1

      IIRC many of his rolls were actually "enhanced" by his publishing company... extra bass lines added, etc., without his approval and sometimes in rather inappropriate ways.

      And, while its true that a MIDI recording is not 100% true to the source, its also true that an audio recording is not 100% true. a lot of the dynamics and spatial acoustic information are lost in a stereo rendering due to microphone placement, compression, etc. -- one could argue that playback on a disklavier is better in at least some respects.

      I don't know about you, but if I had a disklavier in my living room, I'd pay good money for MIDI recordings of great pianists.

  40. Quick... by Walker2323 · · Score: 0

    Quick, someone make a Jerry Garcia joke!

  41. MIDI compared to the real thing by Siener · · Score: 1

    Good quality midi is difficult to distinguish from the real thing. See how good you are by trying MIDI or virtuoso

    Unfortunately the you need Real Player to listen to the files.

    1. Re:MIDI compared to the real thing by Anne+Thwacks · · Score: 1
      And good quality player-piano IS the real thing, and we have had it since 1890. (Ever heard of Scott Joplin?)

      Machines to record key strokes from organs existed around 100 years before that.

      No news here folks!

      --
      Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
    2. Re:MIDI compared to the real thing by varkatope · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not difficult at all. I got 100% right on the first try. I don't think those midi clips were recorded using a player piano though. They're most likely from a synthesized source, just like your sound blaster's midi synthesizer(maybe a bit better admittedly). You can always tell; the attack, decay, timbre are all wrong. Alternately, you can have a facsimile based on one sampled note, very often C3. To get all the other notes, that sample of c3 is pitched up or down. Again, you can tell it from the real thing because c3 might sound amazing but all the other notes have an odd synthetic timbre to them, getting odder the further away you get from C3. But now if you have an actual MIDI player piano recreating a virtuoso's performance, that would be very hard to tell appart from the real deal.

      --
      I got a fever...and the only cure is more cowbell!
  42. Not possible by chip+of+known+space · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A recording does not contain enough information due to the mechanical limitiations of the technology to enable such a transferance of performance to occur. The dynamic range is too limited, even for just a single note, and the bandwith/resolution does not allow for a workaround. Although it might fool most people, it's NOT a *reproduction* of a performance, but a *facsimile* of one.

  43. well, it WAS working... by jcomeau_ictx · · Score: 1

    I hacked this together once: frequency.py but it seems to be broken now. Feel free to play around with it, meanwhile now that I know there's some interest I'll move it onto the front burner. You'll need to download some of the other modules in the src/ directory, and get Numeric Python from sourceforge.

    1. Re:well, it WAS working... by jcomeau_ictx · · Score: 1

      oops, wrong, it was wav2mid.py, in the same directory. i just got it working again, under cygwin on win2k (last time i had it working, it was on an xp system). resulting midi will be the original file with a .mid extension, i.e.:

      wav2mid.py ~/docs/test.wav

      will result in a file ~/docs/test.wav.mid

      use sndrec32 to make a simple file of yourself humming; the better the humming the better the resulting midi. has a high suck factor anyway but this was just a prototype, someday i'll work some more on it.

  44. Say what? Spoiled? by SEWilco · · Score: 1
    two piano virtuosi long since dead. Zenph developed software which digitally transcribes performances even from the scratchy recordings.

    The dead piano players recorded scratches? Where, on their coffin lids? I'm impressed by the abilities of the software to translate the performances.

  45. pfft...I can do that by omeomi · · Score: 1

    To transcribe a recording, I use these magical little things called my "ears", and to play it back I use "hands".

  46. Yamaha XP MIDI format by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Yamaha Disklavier Pro

    Powerful Pro MIDI Data Format Holds Expanded Performance Data
    To achieve its superior recording and playback performance, the Disklavier Pro generates extra MIDI data to accommodate precision parameters. All essential data such as hammer speed, key release speed and pedaling is recorded and reproduced within the standard MIDI format, enabling full compatibility with other MIDI devices. For recording piano performances with even more subtlety and detail, you can select the expanded Yamaha XP MIDI format. This utilizes general-purpose controller numbers in the MIDI specification to record additional performance data including key speed and stroke depth, for recordings of enhanced sensitivity and precision. Multi-mode flexibility allows the Disklavier Pro to interact smoothly with existing MIDI configurations and reproduce data generated in either XP or enhanced mode, with automatic selection of the appropriate playback format.

  47. Hardly a new thing at all by guidemaker · · Score: 1

    At the BBC Proms several years ago, the long-dead pianist Percy Granger played Grieg's Piano Concerto along with the BBC Symphony Orchestra, courtesy of a piano-roll recording of his performance whose tempo was controlled live by an operator (to ensure piano and Orchestra kept together). At the time I was amazed at the subtleties of performance that the roll had captured. I had assumed (knowing next to nothing about them) that piano rolls were a crude digital version, with little or no intonation, but this was (to my poor ears) as impressive as a live performance.

  48. minor corrections and comments by meiting · · Score: 2, Informative

    First of all, the concert is not only given by 2 dead pianists. I'm the performer of the recital. The 2 dead pianists are present during the middle of the recital where we will demo this new technology.

    For all of you who has reservations about the results, i suggest that you come and hear the demo. This is not about getting a piece of music performed the way a composer wants it performed. It is also not about taking an old recording and "cleaning it up". What this technology will do, is completely recreate the original performance. And before we can legitimately question the accuracy of this re-performance, we need to look at the chain that constitutes a recording. In the original recording session, there are the following variables:

    1. The performer, who is playing the piece on a piano whichever way they preferred.
    2. The actual acoustic recording, going from mics to preamps to tape/dat/cylinder/whatever the method maybe.
    3. The acoustics of the hall, room, space that the recording is taking place in.

    In the re-performance cycle, there are the following variables:
    1.Deciphering the original performance from the other variables, such as recording noise, reverb, out-of-tune notes, etc. However, the original performance's qualities to be preserved include nuances of tone, minute timing changes for every single note, loudness of every single note, pedal usage (including different gradations of pedal), and many other things.
    2.Playing back this "essence" of the performance on a Yamaha Disklavier Pro.
    3.Accurately matching the Yamaha Disklavier to the sound and tone qualities of the piano used in a recording, and adding whatever acoustic ambience variations to the performance (space, hall, room, etc).

    The purpose of the re-performance is to throw out all of the variables during the recording, except for the performer. The ability of the Yamaha disklavier pro to reproduce this is not to be questioned - When it is accurately calibrated, I cannot tell the difference between my own performance and a played back version. In fact, if I were to acoustically record my own performances, and the played-back performances of the Disklavier, i would not be able to distinguish between the two (with a few minor exceptions, at least as far as the Mark III pro is concerned).

    What this means, is that there are 2 variables still to be controlled in the playback cycle. The piano and the acoustics, and the actual "decoding" of the performance. The demonstration on May 19th will be about the decoding. All of the other variables, save the piano matching, has been take care of.

    It is an amazing piece of technology, and I say this as someone who has critiqued the process every step of the way, and has seen the results firsthand, multiple times. Come on out, enjoy the recital, and see the tech demo. Mei-Ting Sun

  49. Minor corrections and comments by meiting · · Score: 1

    First of all, the concert is not only given by 2 dead pianists. I'm the performer of the recital. The 2 dead pianists are present during the middle of the recital where we will demo this new technology.

    For all of you who has reservations about the results, i suggest that you come and hear the demo. This is not about getting a piece of music performed the way a composer wants it performed. It is also not about taking an old recording and "cleaning it up". What this technology will do, is completely recreate the original performance. And before we can legitimately question the accuracy of this re-performance, we need to look at the chain that constitutes a recording. In the original recording session, there are the following variables:

    1. The performer, who is playing the piece on a piano whichever way they preferred.
    2. The actual acoustic recording, going from mics to preamps to tape/dat/cylinder/whatever the method maybe.
    3. The acoustics of the hall, room, space that the recording is taking place in.

    In the re-performance cycle, there are the following variables:
    1. Deciphering the original performance from the other variables, such as recording noise, reverb, out-of-tune notes, etc. However, the original performance's qualities to be preserved include nuances of tone, minute timing changes for every single note, loudness of every single note, pedal usage (including different gradations of pedal), and many other things.
    2. Playing back this "essence" of the performance on a Yamaha Disklavier Pro.
    3. Accurately matching the Yamaha Disklavier Pro to the sound and tone qualities of the piano used in a recording, and adding whatever acoustic ambience variations to the performance (space, hall, room, etc).

    The purpose of the re-performance is to throw out all of the variables during the recording, except for the performer. The ability of the Yamaha Disklavier Pro to reproduce this is not to be questioned - When it is accurately calibrated, I cannot tell the difference between my own performance and a played back version. In fact, if I were to acoustically record my own performances, and the played-back performances of the Disklavier Pro, i would not be able to distinguish between the two (with a few minor exceptions, at least as far as the Mark III Pro is concerned).

    What this means, is that there are 2 variables still to be controlled in the playback cycle. The piano and the acoustics, and the actual "decoding" of the performance. The demonstration on May 19th will be about the decoding. All of the other variables, save the piano matching, has been take care of.

    It is an amazing piece of technology, and I say this as someone who has critiqued the process every step of the way, and has seen the results firsthand, multiple times. Come on out, enjoy the recital, and see the tech demo.

    Mei-Ting Sun