Slashdot Mirror


Broadway Musicians Replaced With Synthesizers

wooferhound writes "Sophisticated synthesizers and computer-manipulated recordings are increasingly taking over orchestras. Sounding almost like real players, while costing much less, they're especially popular with provincial or touring companies. But until mid-July — when 'West Side Story's' producers announced that a synthesizer was replacing three live violinists and two cellists, or half the orchestra's string section — staff violinist Paul Woodiel thought that at least the classics would be immune to the trend. There are computer programs able to read and play back music scores — a boon to composers who can now hear their work as they write — and software allowing conductors to control the tempo of the machine, in the same way that they direct live players."

57 of 319 comments (clear)

  1. What is the issue? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    What is the issue here?
    We automate lots of other work, why not this?

    Oh noes, someone is no longer going to be doing a repetitive job better done by a machine, truly the end of the world.
    Why where they not already using recordings was my first question when I saw this article.

    1. Re:What is the issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I can't wait until they automate programing and all related computer tasks. Removing the 'person' from those duties will save money and reduce errors

    2. Re:What is the issue? by ImNotAtWork · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There are some people who enjoy going to the same live show multiple times. They relish in what is the same as well as what is different in each performance. A synth is not even close to a live performer. A recording gets mundane to those who go to multiple showings. It is similar to the difference of using a code generator and point and click interface for a novice compared to getting in there yourself and seeing what the real code is and writing it yourself.

      --
      open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/
    3. Re:What is the issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You could replace the actors by robots, or by a fancy projector. But you don't, because it's a live show on Broadway, not a movie or a video game. People expect live performances by the actors, why not by the musicians too?

    4. Re:What is the issue? by jonbryce · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The issue is that if they do that, I may as well buy a recording and play it on my iPod.

    5. Re:What is the issue? by ushering05401 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What is the issue here?

      And industry founded on the creation, performance, and appreciation of human creativity is about to suffer devaluation of the human talent upon which it is based.

      We automate lots of other work, why not this?

      Because this is not 'work,' it is multi-sensory immersion into a subjective framework of context and meaning. Otherwise they could just have the beeb 'casters get up and read the scores/scripts and no one would notice a difference.

      Oh noes, someone is no longer going to be doing a repetitive job better done by a machine, truly the end of the world. Why where they not already using recordings was my first question when I saw this article.

      Let me guess: Your world view is that it is turtles all the way down?

    6. Re:What is the issue? by JWSmythe · · Score: 4, Insightful

          Machines make perfect replications. They can play the composure exactly as written. Unfortunately, that's a beginners mistake. When you play from the sheet music, you can tell the people who are beginners. They can play the written music technically perfect, but they can't put any feeling into it. An excellent musician will play a song where you'll feel it. It's that little something extra that we put in, so you know there's something special to it.

          I guess in an orchestral setting, you want that technical perfection. Every element of a section must play just like the rest of the elements, or something will sound wrong.

          What they're headed towards is technical perfection of the piece. It doesn't take a bunch of machines playing the part. They could do a lot better with a good recording of the orchestra. By recreating parts of the orchestra with machines, all they're doing is making themselves feel all warm and fuzzy because they spent a lot of money doing it. Wheee, you've reinvented MIDI.

          People usually show up to live shows to see the live show. If they want a recording, they can rent the video.

          I go out to see live bands. If I wanted to hear the jukebox, I'd just go where there is no live band. There's a difference, no matter how well it was recorded.

      --
      Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
    7. Re:What is the issue? by nomoreunusednickname · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Movies used to be silent, accompanied by a live piano player. Times are changing, i'm sure you will find people who pay for your robot actors.

    8. Re:What is the issue? by Naturalis+Philosopho · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Good point. I'm not a big Broadway fan, but isn't the point of a live show, after all, the fact that it's being performed, uh, live. If I want to heare edited recordings, or speakers, I'll go to a movie or wait for the Netflix viewing of the same story rather than pay for an expensive ticket to sit in a tiny theater in the middle of a dirty city to hear the same recorded sounds.

    9. Re:What is the issue? by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, many people who do not produce anything make a lot of money doing it anyway.

      Basketball players. Hockey players. American football. Soccer. Tennis. Sprint runners. High Frequency Trade floor owners. Politicians. Various PHBs. Many people who supposedly do 'create' something as well, we have all seen programmers like that, it's not only managers who can be occupying space and taking in salary and not producing shit.

      I bet a mid-range professional violin player does not make anywhere near the same money as a mid-range professional basketball player. That's because the paying audience is limited to the theater and I don't know what kind of advertising deals they get either, but it would be inconceivable. However they do produce something: an experience for the customer - patron.

      So now if you go to a show expecting live music but instead you get pre-recorded computer music, isn't that similar to lip-synching and at least shouldn't that be reflected in the ticket prices and in the show description, because if you RTFA you'll find out that the customers apparently didn't even know that half of the orchestra was replaced with a (badly built - apparently it crashes too often) computer program.

      So the ticket prices need to reflect this new reality, because otherwise it's only 'helping' the top management who get in more dough, that's about it.

    10. Re:What is the issue? by FuckingNickName · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Acting and playing music require creativity (as creativity requires work). For example, Patrick Stewart enables Shakespeare, Scrooge and Star Trek. This is not because he understands how robots work but because he understands how humans work.

      If you think that acting is for robotic simpletons, you are welcome to upload to Youtube a video of yourself reprising any of Stewart's roles. For Youtube is full of fools who think they are stars, but few so pompous as to regard a live performance as nothing but a subroutine executed.

    11. Re:What is the issue? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, yes, there are people who are sad. For example, people like me, a violinist still studying in school whose dream is to perform with professional theatrical groups in ballet, opera, cabaret, and, yes, Broadway. I suspect that when you see the phrase "Broadway musical" you're thinking of works like "Beauty and the Beast" or "Oklahoma", but musicals have come a hell of a long way from there, and suggesting that all musicals that have ever been on Broadway are simplistic, conceptually or musically, is just displaying your own ignorance. And that aside, even works at the Rodgers-and-Hammerstein level present plenty of opportunities for *actual* musicians (unlike synthesizers) to add to the expressive quality of every song and scene. This is a story about machines being used, not to let people out of a tough task, but taking jobs away entirely and reducing an art form to a less complex and less musically pure sound (not to mention massacring the intentions of the composers of these musicals).

    12. Re:What is the issue? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm sure the lights of many live shows are just as if not more controlled than this. You may say that lights aren't as important as music, but I'd say that's a matter of opinion and people in the respective fields would probably disagree.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    13. Re:What is the issue? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Funny

      And yet in musicals the actors/singers get the their names on the credits.

      Patric Stewart is in deed a fine actor, but far less creative than the person who wrote his roles. If a machine could do his job, and allow him to be even more creative, why not? You don't think he would like to be able to create virtual partrics that could go out and perform works while he did whatever he liked? Perhaps even performing a work he particularly enjoyed while they make him money or perform other useful work?

    14. Re:What is the issue? by CRCulver · · Score: 4, Informative

      Machines make perfect replications. They can play the composure exactly as written. Unfortunately, that's a beginners mistake. When you play from the sheet music, you can tell the people who are beginners. They can play the written music technically perfect, but they can't put any feeling into it.

      Depends on the composer. It is true that scores of earlier epochs left much of the detail out, and the only reason we know that the musician's deviation from the score isn't incompetence but "feeling" is because of a continuous performance tradition. Of course, with ancient music there's much controversy, because the scores have very little detail at all, but we're not sure exactly how these pieces were performed.

      But there are plenty of composers who want their music to be performed exactly as notated, with the musician putting what he thinks is "feeling" into it. They have gone on to add so much detail to their scores that the musician couldn't possibly introduce something extraneous. Ferneyhough's scores are hyper-notated like this, as are a few of Ligeti's pieces (the Cello Concerto, for instance). Stockhausen and Xenakis have written scores where instead of a general metronome marking for the movement, each segment is specified as a certain number of seconds so that the conductor or musicians don't add any rubato.

    15. Re:What is the issue? by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You are _mostly_ right. The sheet music doesn't contain full information. A good part is missing and has to be re-added by a musician every time the composition is being played.

      But... what if you record _that_? Or, create good enough algorithms that can guess that missing information?

      You get the same effect as live musicians -- and if you want little errors here and there, they can be introduced as well, just like deBeers' claims that mined diamonds are "better" can be derailed by adding some junk to diamonds being grown.

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    16. Re:What is the issue? by Inner_Child · · Score: 4, Funny

      There's already precedent for this - plenty of people paid to see Hayden Christensen as Anakin.

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
    17. Re:What is the issue? by FuckingNickName · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Patric Stewart is in deed a fine actor, but far less creative than the person who wrote his roles.

      Shakespeare was exceptionally creative with English and his plays can be admired even on paper (still much better with good actors, though). But TNG's writing was symbiotic with Stewart's panache, and TNG would have been shit if you or I had played Picard.

      If a machine could do his job, and allow him to be even more creative, why not?

      But a machine cannot do his job - to interpret a character and respond to a live audience as effectively as a human requires a human (or something sufficiently close to a human that it should enjoy the rights of a human). And it does not follow that a machine doing his job would "allow him to be" something else - he may have neither the interest nor strength of ability in writing that he possesses in acting. The guy's been honing only one of these skills for decades.

      You don't think he would like to be able to create virtual partrics that could go out and perform works while he did whatever he liked?

      Creating little humans somewhat like you and with the ability to perform as well as you do is having children. Children are not your slaves.

      Perhaps even performing a work he particularly enjoyed while they make him money or perform other useful work?

      I have no indication that Stewart's bottleneck in life is his lack of money.

    18. Re:What is the issue? by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, if there were any actual theater in Broadway, I'd say you are right, but 99.999% of Broadway is not art, is Musicals.

      Broadway is the cheap gringo alternative to actual theater. You go and see a lot of assholes run around and sing shit, that's your cheap replacement for actual theater.

      Here, we call that "Teatro de Revista" and only the illiterate masses go see that shit.

      The day Broadway figures out how to replace actors with holograms, they will, and nothing of value will be lost.

      Did you knew that the ONLY country in the world where Musical Theater means 90% of all productions is the USA? Around the rest of the world, Drama and Comedy still reign. Musicals are for the illiterate masses.

      You need a new symbol for Theater, that replaces the masks of Thalia and Melpomene for the silhouettes of the left and right gluteus of Andrew Lloyd Webber with a huge $ symbol smeared all over.

      --
      WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
    19. Re:What is the issue? by timeOday · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Are you inherently against automation, or is the limitations of currently technology you don't like? I see those as two separate issues.

      Ayways, I would support a truth-in-advertising requirement, but otherwise let people vote with their pocketbooks. If I'm watching a movie, I'd rather watch it with a highly produced soundtrack playing over loudspeakers (i.e. what is actually done now) rather than piano accompaniment (like the old days), yet nobody would buy orchestra tickets just to watch a "conductor" push the Play button.

    20. Re:What is the issue? by wooferhound · · Score: 4, Informative

      Live performances are never the same, that is why the orchestra is there. The song can be faster one night, or the onstage actor may change things up to keep it interesting, the orchestra can make changes on the fly that go along with what is happening onstage. A repeat customer appreciates the differences that they experience. It may be the same show but it is different every performance.

      I am a spotlight operator at our local theater and I can assure you that a Broadway show is different every night. This is what keeps the crew awake during something that could be incredibly repetitive.

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    21. Re:What is the issue? by PixelSlut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This industry is different in that the workers are also creators. Musicians take what is written on a page and do something creative with it. There is always a ton of detail that is left out of music, and it's up to the performers to fill in that detail. Claude Debussy said that "music is the space between the notes."

      Beethoven was the first composer to provide actual tempo markings (as in, 120 beats per minute, as opposed to just saying "Allegro" or whatever). Before him it was up to the performers to figure out how fast something should go based upon a couple words. As things progressed, composers added more and more detail to their works. Look at some works by Mahler or Hindemith and there is a lot more detail there. But even then, they're leaving out a ridiculous amount of information that's being filled in by the best judgement of trained musicians who understand the styles they're playing.

      Yeah, technology helps composers create works faster and more easily. But I don't think most composers would be very happy having their works performed by machines at this point. The machines just aren't yet capable of sounding that interesting.

    22. Re:What is the issue? by PagosaSam · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The next time you go to a concert of your favorite band or group, who needs them to be there? Just some big speakers and a tape recorder ought to be enough. I bet they could even make the tickets a little cheaper! It's just as good!

      --
      :q! Oh crap, not again...
    23. Re:What is the issue? by pete6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Programmers can be eliminated just as soon as business users are capable of grasping the FULL logic of all of their various processes so they can create an automation system with no technical or process-oriented expertise required. In other words, when hell freezes over.

    24. Re:What is the issue? by valnar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So let me get this straight. You'd have no problem seeing a concert with Milli Vanilli? Live or Memorex means nothing to you?

      BTW, a real violin and a real trumpet sound very different than a recording, or a synthesizer. No matter how good they make it.

    25. Re:What is the issue? by blind+biker · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You get the same effect as live musicians -- and if you want little errors here and there, they can be introduced as well, just like deBeers' claims that mined diamonds are "better" can be derailed by adding some junk to diamonds being grown.

      Live music and music produced by a computer really is not the same thing. I should know, I compose electronic music (have several software MIDI sequencers, a dozen hardware synths and a few softsynths). But I am also a lover of classical music, and I guarantee you, a computer will never be able to produce the emotions that some of the great artists' recordings can. The reason why you wouldn't know that this difference exists is, 90% of classical music recordings are crap. A 5-minute long movement can be pieced together from two dozen outtakes. It just sounds bland, as if it was played by a computer. But if you search carefully, especially among live recordings, you will find true gems, which reinvigorites you while you listen to it.

      Put simply, computer-generated (I am not talking about music reproduced from recorded files like .flac, .wav or .mp3) music is boring and will make the listener sleepy. Live music, or a recording of live music can (not necessarily will) infuse you with strong emotions and actually awaken you and refresh you.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    26. Re:What is the issue? by Wain13001 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Composers already do this quite easily as it's not uncommon to have synth instruments in a pit along with the traditional ones. Replacing your instrumentalists with automation really doesn't give you as a composer any more sonic freedom...you actually have more freedom when your music has to be interpreted by a performer.

      BTW I am a composer...it's what I do for a living...and I do it in theater.

    27. Re:What is the issue? by Wain13001 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The performer's individual interpretation of a work is not extravagant in a non-solo setting, it is subtle, but it is most assuredly there. In fact, the variety of performance among the performers within a section is counted on in order to get the rich colors that can come of the orchestra.

      Let me put it to you this way, if you have a chamber group that has a violin section of 6 players, and you compare it to the violin section of a full orchestra playing the exact same piece...the distinction between the two string section will not strictly be one of volume.

    28. Re:What is the issue? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your comment wins the discussion.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    29. Re:What is the issue? by name*censored* · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Eventually, the software industry is just going to have to face the fact that the days of artificial scarcity are over.

      There isn't any artificial scarcity because there isn't any scarcity. The number of possible programs left to write is practically infinite. For starters, we haven't invented a program that can write programs (artificial intelligence) (though realistically the problem would be supplying motivation in a non-programming language), so there's still that to be done. Also, computer programs help nearly every other field (niche/domain specific programs) - so saying that there are no new programs to write implies that no other field is advancing and changing. Thirdly, programs for entertainment (video games, social networking, online games, etc) are a practically inexhaustible domain - you can keep making them until kingdom come. Finally,

      "Everything that can be invented has been invented."

        - Charles H. Duell, U.S. Commissioner of Patents, in 1899.

      You're not the first to express this sentiment, and you're not the first to be wrong about it, either.

      --
      Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
    30. Re:What is the issue? by mysidia · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Controlling lights is just the sort of thing a computer can and is expected to do.

      Music is expected to be produced by musicians. There is something inauthentic about it, when a computer mechanically "produces" music.

      It's as if it removes value from its production... it's no longer a performance of the musician, but mechanical mimikery by a machine which cannot appreciate the music it "plays".

    31. Re:What is the issue? by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you are going to play the authenticity card, then I ask you to stick to only singing and body percussion, as everything else is inauthentic. The "real music" card has been played for ages, and the thing that really matters is whether or not there is vision and art in what is being done, not the means by which a work is produced. Human players can and do lack vision in art in their interpretations all the time. Also, if you read, it says the conductor still conducts, leaving a real-time human element in.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    32. Re:What is the issue? by VendettaMF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >> So, software is going to deliver an inspired performance, breaking new musical territory ala Jimi Hendrix, Jeff Beck, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Albert Collins, BB King, etc?

      NBope. But anyone in a broadway musical pit, or anyone in the regular crowd in an orchestra who tries to do so is going to get some nasty looks from the conductor, and fired.

      --
      kartune85 : Incapable of reason, observation or learning. A kind of dim, drab, flightless parrot.
    33. Re:What is the issue? by dkleinsc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As a composer, I can assure you that there are folks of 2 minds on this issue:
      1. On the upside, electronic performance allows a composer to have absolute 100% full control of what the music will be.
      2. On the downside, electronic performance allows a composer to have absolute 100% full control of what the music will be.

      Some people like this - their exact artistic vision carried out to perfection, with no mucking around with rehearsals and soloist egos and begging that clarinetist to join your project, is nothing to sneeze at. But others (including me) would much rather have a live performer's different humanizing touch and feedback. Otherwise, you could easily end up with music by and for Vulcans.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    34. Re:What is the issue? by BlueStrat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >> So, software is going to deliver an inspired performance, breaking new musical territory ala Jimi Hendrix, Jeff Beck, Stevie Ray Vaughan, Albert Collins, BB King, etc?

      NBope. But anyone in a broadway musical pit, or anyone in the regular crowd in an orchestra who tries to do so is going to get some nasty looks from the conductor, and fired.

      I think you may be confusing an inspired performance with improvisational playing of that not in a musical score, and differences in musical performance structure between genres that demand group-performance playing to a score, and others in which musicians are expected to improvise.

      An inspired performance by an orchestra chair musician would involve more nuanced details such as the perfect vibrato applied to a critical sustained note in a passage, applying just the right intonation and feel to the notes played that enhances further the emotions the music is intended by the composer and conductor to convey, and a myriad of other small details that together differentiate the performance of a first-chair at your local community orchestra from the first-chair for the NY Philharmonic or Boston Symphony for example playing the exact same piece of music.

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    35. Re:What is the issue? by strikethree · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am not a big fan of Jimi Hendrix but the recording of Voodoo Child (Slight Return) is an absolute masterpiece of what you are describing. Every note is hit perfectly, and yet he somehow makes it seem like he is playing with the timing. The overall effect is 11 on the dial. :)

      Rock on.

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  2. Help me out here... by Chordonblue · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What would be the difference between having a synth play this live, or simply a recording of a synth playing during a live performance? The one question I would ask is: Did replacing actual musicians make the ticket prices go down?

    A: Probably not. Profits will be up though!

    --
    "...Well, there's egg and bacon; egg sausage and bacon; egg and spam; egg bacon and spam; egg bacon sausage and spam..."
  3. Broadway, last bastion of resistance by fyoder · · Score: 2, Interesting

    software allowing conductors to control the tempo of the machine, in the same way that they direct live players.

    I did something like this with an Apple IIe in the early days of MIDI in a scene where an actor had to fake playing the piano faster and faster as the scene progressed. Up in the booth I tapped up the tempo following the actor, rather than have the actor have to follow a recording.

    What's amazing about Broadway is that it has held out so long. In large part that's due to unions, but I think also audience expectations. One isn't surprised a low budget production in the boonies would cut corners, but if you shell out for a Broadway ticket, you want the full meal.

    --
    Loose lips lose spit.
    1. Re:Broadway, last bastion of resistance by LizardKing · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Kahler "Human Clock" was a MIDI clock generator that allowed drummers to control the tempo of sequencers. They were produces back in the late 1980s, and one was used by New Order.

  4. What about the artists? by mangu · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The media industry makes so much noise about what they call "piracy" supposedly causing artists to starve, how can they allow this automation to happen?

    After all, a live performance is much harder to "steal". The only way I can imagine of doing it would be drilling holes in the theater wall to let people watch from the outside without paying.

    Automating musicians' jobs takes away one sure way they have to earn a living.

    1. Re:What about the artists? by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Or maybe making things that sound like they could have been made 500 years ago is not something people will pay much money for.

      It is not like they have a right to make money producing something no one likes. I do a lot of DIY stuff, much of it no one would buy but I still do it. I have a day job, and I suggest these folks investigate idea.

  5. Neat Technology by fussy_radical · · Score: 2, Interesting

    As someone who has played an instrument, I find it pretty cool that they are able to get a machine to read music... It was only a matter of time though. What is music? Fractions and frequencies. Something a computer should be able to handle.

    What I haven't heard is a really good synthesizer. My God, Have you heard CATS? That shit sounds like it was done on the Casio the kids have in their bedroom.

    In the long run though, this should make the "ARTS" more accessible to the public. I find that to be a good thing.

    1. Re:Neat Technology by FooAtWFU · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Something I read recently comes to mind, about rendering J S Bach with 8-bit chip tunes:

      The goal is not to play the right notes in the right order; that's the starting point. Then you have to adjust the timing of every single note, listening and re-listening, making sure that it doesn't sound mechanical. You have to add movement, energy, and emphasis ... You need fermatas and ornaments ... The amount of work that goes into programming the computer will never be less than the work that a traditional performer would put into studying the same piece of music.

      While in theory I agree that machine-read music is feasible, I'm skeptical as to the extent which it's going to be good, even from a quality synthesizer.

      --
      The World Wide Web is dying. Soon, we shall have only the Internet.
  6. Live performance different from film by spopepro · · Score: 5, Interesting

    There is a major difference. The big moment that happens at 93:27:34 in the movie will always happen at 93:27:34. There is no such dependability in live performance.

    I've made a few paychecks as a pit musician and I can't imagine how the synths will be controlled. If it is a person at a keyboard with a super advanced tone module then you are really just replacing a few musicians with a single one, not exactly groundbreaking, and it's frequently done with a standard piano covering parts that can't be hired (your local production of Fiddler on the Roof likely has a piano covering the accordion part).

    If this is a computer, like the one FTFA that is mentioned to keep crashing, well, I can't see this actually being ok for any real performance where people are paying money. Crashing is one thing, but even if the program works perfectly, now everything has to cue off the computer. What if someone is late on an entrance? What if there is a technical problem? What if an actor drops a couple lines? An entire verse? There is a very delicate interplay between the actors, the stage manager, the conductor and the musicians to make everything match up every time. It's why opera is, for my money, the most stressful job I have ever taken as a musician.

    1. Re:Live performance different from film by h4rr4r · · Score: 3, Informative

      The conductor controls the tempo and cues just like he controls the orchestra now. You are replacing a bunch of musicians with one robotic one that the conductor controls. This means more folks will get to do creative work, writing and conducting and less the drudgery.

    2. Re:Live performance different from film by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not true, I tend to go to the local theater pretty often. Last thing I saw was Wicked. I really loved spamalot went to that 3 times. I also enjoy going out to see local bands. Playing an instrument is not drudgery, playing the background for a musical is.

    3. Re:Live performance different from film by king+neckbeard · · Score: 2, Informative

      It depends on who you ask. A conducted musician probably sees the actual playing as where the art is, while the conductor sees the conducting to be where the art is. A good conductor is certainly important, and if the tools were sophisticated enough to handle various cues to an extent similar to a musician, the artistic elements lost could be greatly reduced while opening many new opportunities.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    4. Re:Live performance different from film by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This means more folks will get to do creative work, writing and conducting and less the drudgery.

      Nope, this doesn't create more needs for writing and conducting, it just reduces the need for performers. None of those performers will see job openings for robo-conductors with instrument-performing experience. And the creative and conducting types are next in line for automated obsolescence.

      There's repetitive drudgery that people insist on doing regularly: Eating, paying rent, etc. They'd rather keep their repetitive jobs to go along with it.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

  7. Great musicians have embraced new technology by Palestrina · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Critics see synthesizers as little better than some barbarian force trampling the classical music landscape.

    Example: J.S. Bach didn't hide from the newly invented piano and cry "Ach, mein Gott, give me mein harpsichord and save me from the barbarian pianoforte". No, Bach took the piano and made it his bitch. Ditto for Telemann and the keyed flute.

    And remember, electronic instruments have been part of classical music since the 1930's and Edgard Varèse.

    If you want to hold back the evolution of musical instruments, then you might as well throw away your violin and go back to banging sticks and stones together.

    1. Re:Great musicians have embraced new technology by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Example: J.S. Bach didn't hide from the newly invented piano and cry "Ach, mein Gott, give me mein harpsichord and save me from the barbarian pianoforte". No, Bach took the piano and made it his bitch. Ditto for Telemann and the keyed flute.

      This is not about replacing a harpsichord with a piano, but about replacing it with a pianola.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Great musicians have embraced new technology by jejones · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Heck,. JSB even took up the very first additive synthesizer, i.e. the pipe organ.

  8. Scary virtual instrument and ensemble examples by StandardCell · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Vienna Symphony Library is available today and can essentially replace an orchestra to all but the most discerning of ears. Here is an example of the E.T. theme. There are a couple of parts where I can tell it's a bit artificial sounding if I really listen, but it's approaching the flawless threshold.

    That said, there is a particular order of ease of simulation: percussion (including piano), strings, brass and woodwinds. The latter two are notoriously difficult to emulate because they are so closely tied to non-discrete complex forms of movement of the mouth (articulation). For example, see this demo of one of the betters saxophone emulators - still something missing even to uneducated ears, but not too bad in a mix. Strings can also be difficult to emulate, but if apps from companies like Prominy are coming out, guitars and violins, this is getting scary.

    There are a couple of serious implications of this. First and foremost is what the value of a live performance is with and without musicians, which the linked article addresses. The second is decreasing numbers of people willing to learn these instruments. For a lot of folks who compose for small-budget TV and movies and can't afford musicians, it's a great way to go. Nevertheless, it's the same cautionary tale as the decline in handwriting that coincided with the rise of computers with keyboards. You can't replace handwriting in a lot of circumstances.

  9. A synth? by rrohbeck · · Score: 2

    Sounds old fashioned to me. Shouldn't that be a PC with a high quality D/A converter aka sound card (or a few) these days?

  10. Very interesting. And yet informal. by fluor2 · · Score: 4, Funny

    I do declare this comment to be very authentic. I write now while drinking coffee. I insert reference http:/// and get modded up.

    (Automatic comment-system robot v0.4 r2)

  11. No kidding by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I like to toy around with music in my free time. I'm not very good, I'll never be able to make a career out of it, nor would I even want to. I want to hear what I mess with, and want to hear it as though good musicians were doing it. Problem is that being nothing but a hobbyist, I can't really afford to go hiring out a symphony. What to do?

    Buy EastWest samples, that's what. For several hundred dollars, my computer can give sound that is pretty damn close to real players. Now I can have fun at home, and it is something I can afford to do. What's more, if I had the skill to make something that people wanted, I could do so, record it (or more correctly bounce it down to two tracks) and distribute it. I could produce from my home, needing nothing but my system.

    Stuff like this, quality samples, cheap HD cameras, good 3D software, etc are great equalizers in terms of media production. You don't have to be well funded, backed by major players to create something high quality. You can be some guy, or a few friends, with a little bit of money and a lot of talent and can create something for everyone to enjoy.

  12. computer synthesis based on live performance by pikine · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Avatar uses real human actors and capture their action as well as facial expression and emotion, and then use that as the basis to synthesize a performance. Notion3 is actually similar but the motion/emotion capturing is much more primitive. The live performance mode in Notion3 allows a conductor---or a technician following a conductor---to use just one key on a MIDI keyboard to play a score. The MIDI keyboard captures the dynamics by recording key velocity as well as tempo. They then use that information to synthesize a performance based on audio samples recorded from London Symphony Orchestra.

    While Avatar probably wouldn't be successful if they only had one person play all characters, the success of Notion3 where one person plays the whole orchestra is kind of interesting. It shows that when you're part of an orchestra ensemble, the amount of individual character you contribute to the group is negligible. This would probably motivate more musicians to pursue a solo career, or inspire a music genre where all the instrument pieces are part of a dialogue rather than just playing in unison.

    --
    I once had a signature.
  13. Re:E.g., Potsdam 1747 by rivaldufus · · Score: 2, Informative

    He certainly tried them out. As far as I know, he didn't actually write anything for the fortepiano. Even though he had a favorable account of the later fortepianos, I guess it was too late in his life to really start writing for them.