Re: [LAU] Bpm detection/quantize

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009 20:07:18 +0100
Fons Adriaensen <fons@email-addr-hidden> wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 06:43:54PM +0100, Hartmut Noack wrote:
>
> > > The second is why one would reduce the natural
> > > rythm of any piece of music to a regular beat.
> >
> > 1.: every music has a rhythmic structure, though many great pieces do
> > not work with a straight 4/4 beat. So, if a detection tool is able to
> > analyze the rhythmic essence of say: Wagners overture for the Rheingold,
> > it could help to produce a very interesting musical comment to this
> > piece of music without destroying its initial qualities.
>
> Heiaha weia! Woglinde, Wellgunde and Flosshilde will deal
> with such a person, who will disappear into the Rhine,
> never to be seen again !
>
> It would a be difficult one for any beat detector I'd say,
> and any beats would totally destroy it. There's enough life
> in it with just the three Rheintöchter.

This is really an argument about semantics. Surely it's easier to
more clearly define what you mean by good music than it is to
fight over who best embodies the meaning of the original word which
is by now utterly bastardised. There are many different factors that
contribute to a person deciding that a given piece of music is good.
If you want to exclude any of them then you should define those
exclusions from the outset, if only to avoid the controversy that
will arise as a result of that omission.

pete.
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-user
Received on Mon Feb 16 00:15:03 2009