Subject: Re: [MUSIC-IR] Re: musical complexity From: Aki Pasoulas <pasoulas@xxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 17:39:05 +0100 List-Archive:<http://lists.mcgill.ca/scripts/wa.exe?LIST=AUDITORY>--0-669270364-1315067945=:37683 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Kevin and all,=0A=0AYou may find some interesting stuff in a short paper= I had recently at the ICMC:=0Ahttp://dl.dropbox.com/u/7064728/StimulusComp= lexityandTimeJudgements.pdf=0A=0A=0ABest,=0A=0AAki=0A=0A-------------------= --------------------------=0Ahttp://aki-pasoulas.co.uk=0Aor if the server i= s still down:=0Ahttp://aki-pasoulas.110mb.com=0A=0A=0A>____________________= ____________=0A>From: Kevin Austin <kevin.austin@xxxxxxxx>=0A>To: AUDIT= ORY@xxxxxxxx=0A>Sent: Saturday, 3 September 2011, 2:10=0A>Subject: R= e: [AUDITORY] [MUSIC-IR] Re: musical complexity=0A>=0A>I would propose that= the complexity / complicatedness is in the mind, not the object, or 'acous= tical signal' [sic]. [* I don't think we want to go there.] In this case, I= suggest, there is only a psychometric of complexity, not a metric.=0A>=0A>= Mozart's "complexity" is based on many hundreds of years of western music h= istory, but locally, on about 180 years. Boulez's has the same history, plu= s another 175 years. Boulez was aware of the Mozart concertos; Mozart wasn'= t aware of Pierrot Lunaire.=0A>=0A>Kevin=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>All sound heard= at the greatest possible distance produces one and the same effect, a vibr= ation of the universal lyre, =0A>=0A>http://thoreau.eserver.org/walden04.ht= ml=0A>paragraph 15=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>On 2011, Sep 2, at 10:34 AM, Eliot Ha= ndelman wrote:=0A>=0A>> On 11/08/2011 2:20 PM, Justin London wrote:=0A>>> I= 'd also add that accounting for the number, variety, and distribution of el= ements in a sequence may not capture all of its complexities, for some aspe= cts of musical complexity are not in the acoustic signal.=0A>> =0A>> There'= s also a well-known distinction between "complexity" and "complicatedness."= =A0 When things are "complex"=0A>> many things are perceptually connected a= nd big pictures emerge, whereas when things are complicated there's many th= ings that=0A>> don't cohere into any picture at all.=0A>> =0A>> Lerdahl e.g= . claimed that a Mozart piano concerto is more "complex"=A0 than "Marteau s= ans Maitre". More=0A>> generally, one should be able to distinguish between= things that are probably going to wind up=0A>> sounding like music & thing= s that probably won't.=0A>> =0A>> To get a sense of how hard that problem i= s, consider "Happy Birthday" forwards & backwards. Should not the metric re= port that the forward version is more complex than the backwards?=0A>> =0A>= > -- eliot=0A>=0A>=0A> --0-669270364-1315067945=:37683 Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><body><div style=3D"color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:ar= ial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:10pt"><div><div><span>Hi Kevin and all= ,</span></div><div><span><br></span></div><div><span>You may find some inte= resting stuff in a short paper I had recently at the ICMC:</span></div><div= >http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7064728/StimulusComplexityandTimeJudgements.pdf<br= ></div><div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div><br></div><div>Aki</div><div><br= ></div><div>---------------------------------------------<br>http://aki-pas= oulas.co.uk</div><div>or if the server is still down:</div><div>http://aki-= pasoulas.110mb.com</div><div><br></div></div><div><blockquote style=3D"bord= er-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16, 255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">= <div style=3D"font-size: 10pt; font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; "= ><div style=3D"font-size: 12pt; font-family: 'times new roman', 'new york',= times, serif; "><font size=3D"2" face=3D"Arial"><hr size=3D"1"><b><span style=3D"font-weight:bold;">From:</span></b> Kevin Austin <kevin.austin= @xxxxxxxx><br><b><span style=3D"font-weight: bold;">To:</span></b> A= UDITORY@xxxxxxxx<br><b><span style=3D"font-weight: bold;">Sent:</spa= n></b> Saturday, 3 September 2011, 2:10<br><b><span style=3D"font-weight: b= old;">Subject:</span></b> Re: [AUDITORY] [MUSIC-IR] Re: musical complexity<= br></font><br>I would propose that the complexity / complicatedness is in t= he mind, not the object, or 'acoustical signal' [sic]. [* I don't think we = want to go there.] In this case, I suggest, there is only a psychometric of= complexity, not a metric.<br><br>Mozart's "complexity" is based on many hu= ndreds of years of western music history, but locally, on about 180 years. = Boulez's has the same history, plus another 175 years. Boulez was aware of = the Mozart concertos; Mozart wasn't aware of Pierrot Lunaire.<br><br>Kevin<= br><br><br><br><br>All sound heard at the greatest possible distance produces one and the same effect, a vibration of the universal lyre, <br><= br><a href=3D"http://thoreau.eserver.org/walden04.html" target=3D"_blank">h= ttp://thoreau.eserver.org/walden04.html</a><br>paragraph 15<br><br><br><br>= <br>On 2011, Sep 2, at 10:34 AM, Eliot Handelman wrote:<br><br>> On 11/0= 8/2011 2:20 PM, Justin London wrote:<br>>> I'd also add that accounti= ng for the number, variety, and distribution of elements in a sequence may = not capture all of its complexities, for some aspects of musical complexity= are not in the acoustic signal.<br>> <br>> There's also a well-known= distinction between "complexity" and "complicatedness." When things = are "complex"<br>> many things are perceptually connected and big pictur= es emerge, whereas when things are complicated there's many things that<br>= > don't cohere into any picture at all.<br>> <br>> Lerdahl e.g. cl= aimed that a Mozart piano concerto is more "complex" than "Marteau sans Maitre". More<br>> generally, one should be able to distinguish be= tween things that are probably going to wind up<br>> sounding like music= & things that probably won't.<br>> <br>> To get a sense of how h= ard that problem is, consider "Happy Birthday" forwards & backwards. Sh= ould not the metric report that the forward version is more complex than th= e backwards?<br>> <br>> -- eliot<br><br><br></div></div></blockquote>= </div></div></body></html> --0-669270364-1315067945=:37683--