WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.465 align:middle line:90% [SQUEAKING] 00:00:02.465 --> 00:00:04.437 align:middle line:90% [RUSTLING] 00:00:04.437 --> 00:00:05.916 align:middle line:90% [CLICKING] 00:00:05.916 --> 00:00:10.592 align:middle line:90% 00:00:10.592 --> 00:00:12.050 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: You'll remember-- 00:00:12.050 --> 00:00:15.650 align:middle line:84% probably it's all gone because it's like, what, a week ago-- 00:00:15.650 --> 00:00:20.970 align:middle line:84% p set four was mostly about the topic of equivalence classes, 00:00:20.970 --> 00:00:24.573 align:middle line:90% equivalence in music. 00:00:24.573 --> 00:00:27.190 align:middle line:90% 00:00:27.190 --> 00:00:29.690 align:middle line:84% What were some of the things that we were talking about back 00:00:29.690 --> 00:00:32.357 align:middle line:84% then, because this is just going to keep coming up all semester? 00:00:32.357 --> 00:00:35.240 align:middle line:84% What are some things that we could say, in some contexts, 00:00:35.240 --> 00:00:38.310 align:middle line:84% that two notes or two pitches are different, 00:00:38.310 --> 00:00:41.060 align:middle line:84% but in another context, we might say they're 00:00:41.060 --> 00:00:42.640 align:middle line:90% equivalent to each other? 00:00:42.640 --> 00:00:43.190 align:middle line:90% Yeah? 00:00:43.190 --> 00:00:43.585 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Octaves. 00:00:43.585 --> 00:00:44.960 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Octaves, great. 00:00:44.960 --> 00:00:46.083 align:middle line:90% Let's just shoot out. 00:00:46.083 --> 00:00:47.000 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Permutation. 00:00:47.000 --> 00:00:48.595 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Permutation. 00:00:48.595 --> 00:00:49.512 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Cardinality. 00:00:49.512 --> 00:00:50.336 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Cardinality. 00:00:50.336 --> 00:00:50.750 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Transposition. 00:00:50.750 --> 00:00:51.504 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Transposition. 00:00:51.504 --> 00:00:52.260 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Inversion. 00:00:52.260 --> 00:00:53.427 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Inversion. 00:00:53.427 --> 00:00:55.280 align:middle line:84% And the one that's not part of the optic? 00:00:55.280 --> 00:00:56.072 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Spelling. 00:00:56.072 --> 00:00:57.860 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Spelling, good. 00:00:57.860 --> 00:01:00.115 align:middle line:84% Just while I put some things on the board, 00:01:00.115 --> 00:01:02.240 align:middle line:84% shout out some more things we talked about in class 00:01:02.240 --> 00:01:03.510 align:middle line:84% that we didn't put on the problem set. 00:01:03.510 --> 00:01:05.090 align:middle line:84% What were some other things that we 00:01:05.090 --> 00:01:06.890 align:middle line:84% say things are the same, even though they 00:01:06.890 --> 00:01:09.617 align:middle line:90% might sound different? 00:01:09.617 --> 00:01:10.700 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Instrumentation? 00:01:10.700 --> 00:01:11.940 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Interpretation, yeah. 00:01:11.940 --> 00:01:13.610 align:middle line:84% We say, hey, that note's a C. And it's 00:01:13.610 --> 00:01:15.430 align:middle line:84% like, no, that note was on a piano 00:01:15.430 --> 00:01:16.680 align:middle line:90% and this one was on a trumpet. 00:01:16.680 --> 00:01:20.032 align:middle line:90% Good, other things? 00:01:20.032 --> 00:01:21.092 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Inharmonics? 00:01:21.092 --> 00:01:22.550 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Inharmonics, yep, 00:01:22.550 --> 00:01:26.900 align:middle line:84% that goes as a special class of spelling. 00:01:26.900 --> 00:01:28.800 align:middle line:90% It's good to use that term. 00:01:28.800 --> 00:01:30.680 align:middle line:90% Anything else? 00:01:30.680 --> 00:01:33.180 align:middle line:84% So I said, it doesn't matter how long the note is, 00:01:33.180 --> 00:01:35.520 align:middle line:90% it's still a C, right? 00:01:35.520 --> 00:01:38.460 align:middle line:84% Yeah, so duration, when we're talking about notes. 00:01:38.460 --> 00:01:39.470 align:middle line:90% Good. 00:01:39.470 --> 00:01:41.410 align:middle line:84% I can't, apparently, lead a discussion 00:01:41.410 --> 00:01:42.660 align:middle line:90% and write things on the board. 00:01:42.660 --> 00:01:47.030 align:middle line:84% But I want to talk about two things that came up a lot. 00:01:47.030 --> 00:01:49.880 align:middle line:84% One of them, I don't need notation for and one of them 00:01:49.880 --> 00:01:50.475 align:middle line:90% I do. 00:01:50.475 --> 00:01:51.600 align:middle line:90% One of them is much better. 00:01:51.600 --> 00:01:55.500 align:middle line:90% B sharp 4 to-- 00:01:55.500 --> 00:01:58.570 align:middle line:84% I don't know, it doesn't really matter, but it's F sharp 5. 00:01:58.570 --> 00:02:01.230 align:middle line:84% You were asked to write a program to automatically 00:02:01.230 --> 00:02:02.593 align:middle line:90% generate the interval. 00:02:02.593 --> 00:02:04.663 align:middle line:90% 00:02:04.663 --> 00:02:06.330 align:middle line:84% Sorry, you were asked to write a program 00:02:06.330 --> 00:02:09.180 align:middle line:84% to automatically generate the interval of anything. 00:02:09.180 --> 00:02:11.790 align:middle line:84% This was one of my hidden test cases, 00:02:11.790 --> 00:02:16.480 align:middle line:84% that I think it's the only problem that over half, 00:02:16.480 --> 00:02:21.450 align:middle line:84% maybe 3/4 of the class, the problem came up with. 00:02:21.450 --> 00:02:25.140 align:middle line:84% Which one of these two notes is the problematic one? 00:02:25.140 --> 00:02:25.770 align:middle line:90% Take a guess. 00:02:25.770 --> 00:02:26.520 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: B sharp? 00:02:26.520 --> 00:02:28.120 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: B sharp, good. 00:02:28.120 --> 00:02:32.340 align:middle line:84% Now, B sharp is a problematic note the way E sharp is. 00:02:32.340 --> 00:02:33.630 align:middle line:90% Right? 00:02:33.630 --> 00:02:37.180 align:middle line:84% But it also has its own special problematic things. 00:02:37.180 --> 00:02:38.710 align:middle line:90% What's B sharp for? 00:02:38.710 --> 00:02:40.560 align:middle line:90% What note does that sound like? 00:02:40.560 --> 00:02:41.430 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: C 5. 00:02:41.430 --> 00:02:43.130 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: C 5, good. 00:02:43.130 --> 00:02:46.590 align:middle line:90% 00:02:46.590 --> 00:02:51.220 align:middle line:84% The issue that came up a lot is the only thing. 00:02:51.220 --> 00:02:53.050 align:middle line:90% What should this interval be? 00:02:53.050 --> 00:02:55.810 align:middle line:90% Let's think about that first. 00:02:55.810 --> 00:02:59.242 align:middle line:90% What should the interval be? 00:02:59.242 --> 00:02:59.845 align:middle line:90% Yeah? 00:02:59.845 --> 00:03:00.970 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Diminished fifth. 00:03:00.970 --> 00:03:03.660 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Diminished fifth. 00:03:03.660 --> 00:03:06.540 align:middle line:84% Let's think about the diminished fifth. 00:03:06.540 --> 00:03:08.500 align:middle line:90% Good. 00:03:08.500 --> 00:03:15.240 align:middle line:84% What would be the interval if it was C 5 to F sharp 5? 00:03:15.240 --> 00:03:17.137 align:middle line:90% Anybody? 00:03:17.137 --> 00:03:17.970 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Augmented. 00:03:17.970 --> 00:03:18.930 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Augmented? 00:03:18.930 --> 00:03:19.680 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Fourth. 00:03:19.680 --> 00:03:21.090 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Fourth, good. 00:03:21.090 --> 00:03:23.970 align:middle line:84% The 4 and the 5 are changed around, 00:03:23.970 --> 00:03:29.130 align:middle line:84% based on the number of distances in the step spacing, which 00:03:29.130 --> 00:03:31.620 align:middle line:90% you all did great on. 00:03:31.620 --> 00:03:34.060 align:middle line:84% But now, we have a different problem. 00:03:34.060 --> 00:03:39.810 align:middle line:84% And so, what came up a lot from various things, I saw a lot of-- 00:03:39.810 --> 00:03:44.010 align:middle line:90% [WRITES MULTIPLE D'S ON BOARD] 00:03:44.010 --> 00:03:47.220 align:middle line:90% --is that the right number? 00:03:47.220 --> 00:03:51.420 align:middle line:84% 12th, I think that might not be enough Ds. 00:03:51.420 --> 00:03:56.220 align:middle line:84% Because the issue is that the B sharp is something 00:03:56.220 --> 00:04:00.670 align:middle line:84% that sounds in kind of octave 5, but it's not. 00:04:00.670 --> 00:04:04.680 align:middle line:84% So always, when you're thinking of how's your screwy prof going 00:04:04.680 --> 00:04:07.440 align:middle line:84% to try to screw you up, think about these things 00:04:07.440 --> 00:04:10.870 align:middle line:84% that cross over the boundaries between octaves, 00:04:10.870 --> 00:04:13.770 align:middle line:84% or sound like one thing, not the other. 00:04:13.770 --> 00:04:16.800 align:middle line:84% A lot of times, what happened was you 00:04:16.800 --> 00:04:19.779 align:middle line:84% needed to do something mod 12 at a certain point, 00:04:19.779 --> 00:04:23.430 align:middle line:84% add an offset depending on how your algorithm works, and then, 00:04:23.430 --> 00:04:27.450 align:middle line:84% mod 12 it again, so this sort of double mod 12. 00:04:27.450 --> 00:04:30.360 align:middle line:84% At this point, we're going to be working for algorithms 00:04:30.360 --> 00:04:31.630 align:middle line:90% that get things right. 00:04:31.630 --> 00:04:36.480 align:middle line:84% We can work on efficient algorithms, more efficient ones, 00:04:36.480 --> 00:04:37.990 align:middle line:90% as kind of a project later. 00:04:37.990 --> 00:04:42.540 align:middle line:84% Good, the second one that came up had to do with asking you 00:04:42.540 --> 00:04:45.240 align:middle line:90% to-- this was done by hand-- 00:04:45.240 --> 00:04:50.190 align:middle line:84% to come up with a pitch set that was equivalent to the one 00:04:50.190 --> 00:04:54.090 align:middle line:84% I gave you, using p permutation and t 00:04:54.090 --> 00:04:57.450 align:middle line:84% transposition, but without octave inversion 00:04:57.450 --> 00:04:59.710 align:middle line:90% or cardinality equivalence. 00:04:59.710 --> 00:05:01.560 align:middle line:84% And most of you are like, phew, I 00:05:01.560 --> 00:05:04.745 align:middle line:84% don't even want to think about inversional equivalence. 00:05:04.745 --> 00:05:05.370 align:middle line:90% So that's good. 00:05:05.370 --> 00:05:07.093 align:middle line:84% cardinality equivalence just means 00:05:07.093 --> 00:05:08.260 align:middle line:90% that I gave you three notes. 00:05:08.260 --> 00:05:09.658 align:middle line:90% How many notes should you have? 00:05:09.658 --> 00:05:10.325 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Three. 00:05:10.325 --> 00:05:11.970 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Three, good. 00:05:11.970 --> 00:05:18.572 align:middle line:84% The hard part, this was A 4, E 5, C sharp 4. 00:05:18.572 --> 00:05:21.030 align:middle line:84% What I'd like you to do, when you have a problem like this, 00:05:21.030 --> 00:05:24.630 align:middle line:84% is go back to do it the old-fashioned way first. 00:05:24.630 --> 00:05:28.800 align:middle line:84% Get out staff paper or use Finale music score or whatever 00:05:28.800 --> 00:05:31.350 align:middle line:84% you're using, and try to make sure that you're 00:05:31.350 --> 00:05:32.980 align:middle line:90% seeing what the notes are. 00:05:32.980 --> 00:05:35.215 align:middle line:90% So where's A4 go? 00:05:35.215 --> 00:05:36.090 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:05:36.090 --> 00:05:36.780 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Stop? 00:05:36.780 --> 00:05:37.410 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Two. 00:05:37.410 --> 00:05:38.040 align:middle line:90% Stop. 00:05:38.040 --> 00:05:41.280 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Stop, OK, good A4. 00:05:41.280 --> 00:05:42.390 align:middle line:90% What's the next one? 00:05:42.390 --> 00:05:42.890 align:middle line:90% E5. 00:05:42.890 --> 00:05:45.600 align:middle line:90% 00:05:45.600 --> 00:05:46.475 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:05:46.475 --> 00:05:47.850 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Stop, OK, good. 00:05:47.850 --> 00:05:48.810 align:middle line:90% Go slower, prof, right? 00:05:48.810 --> 00:05:53.230 align:middle line:90% And then, what's the next one? 00:05:53.230 --> 00:05:57.490 align:middle line:90% C sharp 4. 00:05:57.490 --> 00:05:58.240 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Stop. 00:05:58.240 --> 00:06:00.520 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Stop. 00:06:00.520 --> 00:06:03.160 align:middle line:84% What's the common name we would call 00:06:03.160 --> 00:06:06.820 align:middle line:90% to this, if this were a chord? 00:06:06.820 --> 00:06:07.570 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: A major. 00:06:07.570 --> 00:06:08.857 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: A major-- 00:06:08.857 --> 00:06:09.940 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: First inversion. 00:06:09.940 --> 00:06:12.100 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: --in first inversion, yeah. 00:06:12.100 --> 00:06:15.130 align:middle line:84% Oops, I got to jostle this, otherwise this is blood red. 00:06:15.130 --> 00:06:16.870 align:middle line:90% Yes, first inversion. 00:06:16.870 --> 00:06:19.600 align:middle line:84% OK, so then, what you need to do-- 00:06:19.600 --> 00:06:22.730 align:middle line:84% you want to do is something that-- 00:06:22.730 --> 00:06:24.350 align:middle line:90% and it had to use both. 00:06:24.350 --> 00:06:26.830 align:middle line:84% Now, I think I tried to say it in such a way 00:06:26.830 --> 00:06:29.690 align:middle line:84% that even an MIT student wouldn't be allowed to say, 00:06:29.690 --> 00:06:34.310 align:middle line:84% well, you know, not rearranging anything is a permutation 00:06:34.310 --> 00:06:37.820 align:middle line:84% and transposition by perfect unison is a transposition. 00:06:37.820 --> 00:06:40.280 align:middle line:84% But you needed to change them in some way. 00:06:40.280 --> 00:06:43.810 align:middle line:84% So one of the things you could do-- 00:06:43.810 --> 00:06:46.630 align:middle line:84% one of the things that happened a lot was that the octaves got 00:06:46.630 --> 00:06:47.180 align:middle line:90% changed. 00:06:47.180 --> 00:06:50.290 align:middle line:84% And so, that ended up being about 40% of the errors 00:06:50.290 --> 00:06:51.310 align:middle line:90% that we saw. 00:06:51.310 --> 00:06:55.030 align:middle line:84% What you can do is, you could first re-permute things. 00:06:55.030 --> 00:06:57.910 align:middle line:84% Probably, the re-permutation that I would do first 00:06:57.910 --> 00:07:00.880 align:middle line:84% is, let's just put it in ascending order. 00:07:00.880 --> 00:07:03.220 align:middle line:84% That's probably the permutation you'd 00:07:03.220 --> 00:07:08.380 align:middle line:84% like to have your computer do, anyhow. 00:07:08.380 --> 00:07:11.170 align:middle line:84% And then, let's just shift everything up. 00:07:11.170 --> 00:07:12.923 align:middle line:90% One way you can do it-- 00:07:12.923 --> 00:07:15.340 align:middle line:84% well, in this one, I was going to say you shift everything 00:07:15.340 --> 00:07:17.990 align:middle line:84% up a space or a line, but the E is the problem. 00:07:17.990 --> 00:07:20.840 align:middle line:84% So let's just transpose up a major second. 00:07:20.840 --> 00:07:22.460 align:middle line:90% What are we going to get here? 00:07:22.460 --> 00:07:23.440 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: D sharp. 00:07:23.440 --> 00:07:28.060 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: D sharp, B-- 00:07:28.060 --> 00:07:28.810 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: F sharp. 00:07:28.810 --> 00:07:31.840 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: F sharp, good, not because-- 00:07:31.840 --> 00:07:35.440 align:middle line:84% well, no, this one, we had implicitly, because everything 00:07:35.440 --> 00:07:37.210 align:middle line:90% on this we had spelling-- 00:07:37.210 --> 00:07:39.100 align:middle line:90% that's an F, not a 5-- 00:07:39.100 --> 00:07:41.170 align:middle line:90% spelling equivalents. 00:07:41.170 --> 00:07:48.580 align:middle line:84% Yeah, so D sharp 4, B 4 and F sharp 5. 00:07:48.580 --> 00:07:50.930 align:middle line:84% When you get that back, that's there. 00:07:50.930 --> 00:07:53.203 align:middle line:84% Any other questions on problem set four? 00:07:53.203 --> 00:07:57.040 align:middle line:90% 00:07:57.040 --> 00:07:59.480 align:middle line:84% Hardest programming problem set so far? 00:07:59.480 --> 00:08:00.040 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: No. 00:08:00.040 --> 00:08:00.670 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: No? 00:08:00.670 --> 00:08:01.450 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Two was. 00:08:01.450 --> 00:08:02.530 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Two was harder for some people. 00:08:02.530 --> 00:08:04.040 align:middle line:90% Any would vote for one? 00:08:04.040 --> 00:08:04.540 align:middle line:90% No? 00:08:04.540 --> 00:08:05.040 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:08:05.040 --> 00:08:09.460 align:middle line:84% If one was the hardest, probably you're not here now. 00:08:09.460 --> 00:08:12.970 align:middle line:90% Sorry, I shouldn't-- yeah. 00:08:12.970 --> 00:08:15.170 align:middle line:84% Problem set six, we'll be announcing today. 00:08:15.170 --> 00:08:17.780 align:middle line:84% It is also a slight programming one. 00:08:17.780 --> 00:08:21.340 align:middle line:84% It's designed to give you a little bit of a break. 00:08:21.340 --> 00:08:22.880 align:middle line:90% I'll talk about it in a bit. 00:08:22.880 --> 00:08:27.340 align:middle line:84% But it's more of the only participation grade 00:08:27.340 --> 00:08:31.180 align:middle line:84% type of problem set than trying to get the exact results. 00:08:31.180 --> 00:08:35.200 align:middle line:84% We're going to have a little bit of a break coming up for things. 00:08:35.200 --> 00:08:36.590 align:middle line:90% Somebody want to volunteer? 00:08:36.590 --> 00:08:42.039 align:middle line:84% What electronic corpora did you find online? 00:08:42.039 --> 00:08:42.553 align:middle line:90% Adam? 00:08:42.553 --> 00:08:43.970 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Yeah, we used Musipedia. 00:08:43.970 --> 00:08:45.800 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Musipedia, great. 00:08:45.800 --> 00:08:46.930 align:middle line:90% What is that? 00:08:46.930 --> 00:08:52.010 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: It's a dual database and search query data corpus. 00:08:52.010 --> 00:08:53.300 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Cool, great. 00:08:53.300 --> 00:08:54.730 align:middle line:90% Another group? 00:08:54.730 --> 00:08:55.930 align:middle line:90% Yeah? 00:08:55.930 --> 00:08:57.380 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: We did Ultimate Guitar. 00:08:57.380 --> 00:08:59.088 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Ultimate Guitar, great. 00:08:59.088 --> 00:09:01.240 align:middle line:90% How's that encoded? 00:09:01.240 --> 00:09:03.850 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: I mean, they started off with just like, text, 00:09:03.850 --> 00:09:07.720 align:middle line:84% ASCII guitar tab, but then, they expanded and incorporated more 00:09:07.720 --> 00:09:08.470 align:middle line:90% advanced software. 00:09:08.470 --> 00:09:09.595 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Oh, cool. 00:09:09.595 --> 00:09:11.930 align:middle line:84% Yeah, I remember when it was a lot of ASCII guitar tabs. 00:09:11.930 --> 00:09:15.220 align:middle line:84% I think everybody had their own parser for Ultimate Guitar 00:09:15.220 --> 00:09:16.420 align:middle line:90% at some point. 00:09:16.420 --> 00:09:18.740 align:middle line:90% Good, anybody else? 00:09:18.740 --> 00:09:19.690 align:middle line:90% Vanessa? 00:09:19.690 --> 00:09:22.100 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: We did the Video Game Music Database. 00:09:22.100 --> 00:09:24.950 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Video Game Music Database, fantastic. 00:09:24.950 --> 00:09:25.730 align:middle line:90% Great repository. 00:09:25.730 --> 00:09:27.833 align:middle line:84% What were things mostly encoded for that? 00:09:27.833 --> 00:09:29.750 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Almost everything was in MIDI files. 00:09:29.750 --> 00:09:31.208 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Almost everything 00:09:31.208 --> 00:09:33.280 align:middle line:84% was in MIDI files, why do you think that was? 00:09:33.280 --> 00:09:34.863 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: I think it's like, generally 00:09:34.863 --> 00:09:36.950 align:middle line:84% a standard and it's relatively small file sizes, 00:09:36.950 --> 00:09:39.950 align:middle line:84% so it's easier to mask out a whole bunch of different files. 00:09:39.950 --> 00:09:40.360 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: It is. 00:09:40.360 --> 00:09:42.190 align:middle line:84% Also, that's probably how they were encoded 00:09:42.190 --> 00:09:44.510 align:middle line:84% in a lot of-- especially the early video games-- that 00:09:44.510 --> 00:09:46.580 align:middle line:84% were encoded, so when you're ripping from 00:09:46.580 --> 00:09:49.422 align:middle line:84% or something like that, but definitely not encoding 00:09:49.422 --> 00:09:50.130 align:middle line:90% sharps and flats. 00:09:50.130 --> 00:09:50.630 align:middle line:90% Good. 00:09:50.630 --> 00:09:53.580 align:middle line:84% One last one, Sruthi, your group? 00:09:53.580 --> 00:09:55.410 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Oh, we did Jazzomat. 00:09:55.410 --> 00:09:56.550 align:middle line:90% It was a jazz database. 00:09:56.550 --> 00:09:58.740 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: A jazz database, fantastic. 00:09:58.740 --> 00:10:00.920 align:middle line:84% What were the encodings for that? 00:10:00.920 --> 00:10:02.260 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: They had a variety. 00:10:02.260 --> 00:10:04.010 align:middle line:84% They had like, the transcribed sheet music 00:10:04.010 --> 00:10:05.593 align:middle line:84% for a lot of jazz solos, and then also 00:10:05.593 --> 00:10:08.240 align:middle line:84% a CSV file that just had every notes offset 00:10:08.240 --> 00:10:10.592 align:middle line:84% from the very beginning and its pitch as a number. 00:10:10.592 --> 00:10:11.550 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Cool. 00:10:11.550 --> 00:10:15.240 align:middle line:84% What you'll find is a lot of these data sets, 00:10:15.240 --> 00:10:19.850 align:middle line:84% they really have their own one-off, make your own format. 00:10:19.850 --> 00:10:22.140 align:middle line:84% I don't think that one's a standard, 00:10:22.140 --> 00:10:24.620 align:middle line:84% but I've seen lots of these, because that's 00:10:24.620 --> 00:10:28.380 align:middle line:90% how things tend to go. 00:10:28.380 --> 00:10:32.960 align:middle line:84% Great, we're going to get to right back to representation 00:10:32.960 --> 00:10:34.200 align:middle line:90% in just a bit. 00:10:34.200 --> 00:10:36.210 align:middle line:84% We have special guest, Michael Good, 00:10:36.210 --> 00:10:39.060 align:middle line:84% who knows a little something about representations, 00:10:39.060 --> 00:10:44.825 align:middle line:84% being the creator of MusicXML, also from the dean's office. 00:10:44.825 --> 00:10:47.480 align:middle line:90% 00:10:47.480 --> 00:10:50.510 align:middle line:84% If you guys can stick around for 10 minutes, 00:10:50.510 --> 00:10:53.358 align:middle line:84% I'd like to-- before we do that-- let's get warmed up 00:10:53.358 --> 00:10:55.400 align:middle line:84% for probably, the thing that are on some people's 00:10:55.400 --> 00:10:58.310 align:middle line:84% mind, the downgraded midterm, which is now, 00:10:58.310 --> 00:10:59.750 align:middle line:84% I'm calling it a quiz, because I'd 00:10:59.750 --> 00:11:04.010 align:middle line:84% like to divide this into two smaller, lower stress things. 00:11:04.010 --> 00:11:06.270 align:middle line:90% That will be on Wednesday. 00:11:06.270 --> 00:11:09.330 align:middle line:84% We'll start recording about 30 or 40 minutes in. 00:11:09.330 --> 00:11:11.070 align:middle line:84% I'm designing it to take 30 minutes. 00:11:11.070 --> 00:11:13.380 align:middle line:84% If we take a little bit longer, that's OK. 00:11:13.380 --> 00:11:14.820 align:middle line:90% It's not all about the rush. 00:11:14.820 --> 00:11:20.270 align:middle line:84% But we will do one type of thing that is about recall. 00:11:20.270 --> 00:11:26.720 align:middle line:84% The quiz will be not about your programming skills, 00:11:26.720 --> 00:11:28.488 align:middle line:90% but about the reading. 00:11:28.488 --> 00:11:30.530 align:middle line:84% I want the quizzes to be more about the readings, 00:11:30.530 --> 00:11:33.080 align:middle line:84% so that you keep thinking about ideas that you're going 00:11:33.080 --> 00:11:34.470 align:middle line:90% to be doing in your projects. 00:11:34.470 --> 00:11:41.720 align:middle line:84% As we keep going with further problem sets, each one of them 00:11:41.720 --> 00:11:45.080 align:middle line:84% will start having a little bit of what 00:11:45.080 --> 00:11:51.450 align:middle line:84% do we call it, assign yourself your own problem and start it. 00:11:51.450 --> 00:11:52.770 align:middle line:90% OK, we got some sound going. 00:11:52.770 --> 00:11:55.395 align:middle line:84% We don't really need that, but we can turn that down for a bit. 00:11:55.395 --> 00:11:57.620 align:middle line:90% Who has done Kahoot before? 00:11:57.620 --> 00:12:01.070 align:middle line:84% OK, who knew that MIT, apparently, let their Kahoot 00:12:01.070 --> 00:12:04.970 align:middle line:84% subscription lapse sometime between the last time I'm 00:12:04.970 --> 00:12:05.570 align:middle line:90% in here? 00:12:05.570 --> 00:12:09.470 align:middle line:90% I'm only able to do 10 players. 00:12:09.470 --> 00:12:13.000 align:middle line:84% Can you all pair up and do in teams with the other people? 00:12:13.000 --> 00:12:13.500 align:middle line:90% I know. 00:12:13.500 --> 00:12:16.010 align:middle line:84% I was trying to fill out the subscription form 00:12:16.010 --> 00:12:17.270 align:middle line:90% right behind class. 00:12:17.270 --> 00:12:20.070 align:middle line:84% Can you team up one, two, three-- 00:12:20.070 --> 00:12:22.830 align:middle line:84% three and three-- four, five, six, seven, eight? 00:12:22.830 --> 00:12:24.830 align:middle line:84% Actually, you can be your own team nine. 00:12:24.830 --> 00:12:27.330 align:middle line:84% Or do you want to do it with Michael? 00:12:27.330 --> 00:12:30.600 align:middle line:84% OK, we might have one more thing to do it. 00:12:30.600 --> 00:12:33.060 align:middle line:84% Oh, yeah, use any nickname you want. 00:12:33.060 --> 00:12:34.840 align:middle line:90% Just make it family safe. 00:12:34.840 --> 00:12:38.240 align:middle line:90% 00:12:38.240 --> 00:12:39.810 align:middle line:90% [STUDENTS CHATTER] 00:12:39.810 --> 00:12:43.637 align:middle line:84% Oh, you can decide if you want to be-- 00:12:43.637 --> 00:12:44.970 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: How confident are you? 00:12:44.970 --> 00:12:45.730 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: I'm not confident. 00:12:45.730 --> 00:12:46.605 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: OK. 00:12:46.605 --> 00:12:49.470 align:middle line:90% 00:12:49.470 --> 00:12:52.470 align:middle line:84% This is just to judge how much time you 00:12:52.470 --> 00:12:56.640 align:middle line:84% feel like you might need to spend reviewing the things. 00:12:56.640 --> 00:12:58.360 align:middle line:84% OK, we have one, two, three, four. 00:12:58.360 --> 00:13:04.553 align:middle line:84% We have nickname, nickname two, great, four, five, six. 00:13:04.553 --> 00:13:10.260 align:middle line:90% 00:13:10.260 --> 00:13:13.620 align:middle line:84% OK, we'll do a little bit of the background music, but although, 00:13:13.620 --> 00:13:14.200 align:middle line:90% maybe-- 00:13:14.200 --> 00:13:16.500 align:middle line:90% [JAUNTY MUSIC] 00:13:16.500 --> 00:13:18.040 align:middle line:90% We have eight. 00:13:18.040 --> 00:13:20.010 align:middle line:90% Anybody waiting on? 00:13:20.010 --> 00:13:23.520 align:middle line:84% Two more people want to be loners, go on their own? 00:13:23.520 --> 00:13:24.230 align:middle line:90% OK, no. 00:13:24.230 --> 00:13:24.730 align:middle line:90% That's good. 00:13:24.730 --> 00:13:26.610 align:middle line:90% We're going to get started. 00:13:26.610 --> 00:13:28.180 align:middle line:90% Oh, we got winners. 00:13:28.180 --> 00:13:29.520 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:13:29.520 --> 00:13:30.780 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Ooh. 00:13:30.780 --> 00:13:33.390 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: OK, great, super. 00:13:33.390 --> 00:13:34.090 align:middle line:90% Here we go. 00:13:34.090 --> 00:13:36.430 align:middle line:84% So about 20 or 30 seconds on each one. 00:13:36.430 --> 00:13:40.445 align:middle line:84% There's 11 questions, I think, 13 questions maybe. 00:13:40.445 --> 00:13:46.606 align:middle line:90% 00:13:46.606 --> 00:13:48.570 align:middle line:90% [GONG] 00:13:48.570 --> 00:13:51.546 align:middle line:84% Which of the following is a binary music representation? 00:13:51.546 --> 00:14:00.285 align:middle line:90% 00:14:00.285 --> 00:14:02.410 align:middle line:84% This is your time, if you haven't done this before. 00:14:02.410 --> 00:14:04.050 align:middle line:90% Lock in something. 00:14:04.050 --> 00:14:05.320 align:middle line:90% No points for wrong. 00:14:05.320 --> 00:14:08.220 align:middle line:90% 00:14:08.220 --> 00:14:09.610 align:middle line:90% 3, 2. 00:14:09.610 --> 00:14:12.450 align:middle line:90% 00:14:12.450 --> 00:14:13.890 align:middle line:90% What do we have? 00:14:13.890 --> 00:14:14.820 align:middle line:90% MIDI. 00:14:14.820 --> 00:14:17.910 align:middle line:84% MIDI is the only one that is typically represented 00:14:17.910 --> 00:14:23.250 align:middle line:90% in binary code and not in text. 00:14:23.250 --> 00:14:24.270 align:middle line:90% OK, I know. 00:14:24.270 --> 00:14:27.930 align:middle line:84% You would have thought I would have made the answer MusicXML 00:14:27.930 --> 00:14:29.788 align:middle line:84% to honor our guest, but we didn't. 00:14:29.788 --> 00:14:31.330 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: We knew it wasn't MusicXML. 00:14:31.330 --> 00:14:32.970 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: You knew it wasn't MusicXML, because you 00:14:32.970 --> 00:14:34.090 align:middle line:90% studied that well enough. 00:14:34.090 --> 00:14:36.185 align:middle line:90% Good, let's keep going. 00:14:36.185 --> 00:14:40.440 align:middle line:90% 00:14:40.440 --> 00:14:42.930 align:middle line:90% Creative nicknames are up top. 00:14:42.930 --> 00:14:45.750 align:middle line:84% According to Cook, what is ironic about the timing 00:14:45.750 --> 00:14:48.690 align:middle line:84% of the rise and fall of comparative and computational 00:14:48.690 --> 00:14:49.460 align:middle line:90% musicology? 00:14:49.460 --> 00:14:59.597 align:middle line:90% 00:14:59.597 --> 00:15:03.048 align:middle line:90% [DIGITAL MUSIC] 00:15:03.048 --> 00:15:05.520 align:middle line:90% 00:15:05.520 --> 00:15:07.240 align:middle line:90% Mostly, we got it. 00:15:07.240 --> 00:15:11.040 align:middle line:84% Comparative musicology, which is kind of designed well 00:15:11.040 --> 00:15:15.070 align:middle line:84% for computers, declined at the time computers came up. 00:15:15.070 --> 00:15:16.830 align:middle line:90% [GONG] 00:15:16.830 --> 00:15:19.140 align:middle line:84% That's Nicholas Cook's Comparative and Computational 00:15:19.140 --> 00:15:22.240 align:middle line:84% Musicology to review, if that one wasn't obvious. 00:15:22.240 --> 00:15:23.290 align:middle line:90% We'll keep going. 00:15:23.290 --> 00:15:25.025 align:middle line:90% We got much more on the board. 00:15:25.025 --> 00:15:28.890 align:middle line:90% 00:15:28.890 --> 00:15:32.010 align:middle line:84% Who was not a composer whose music was discussed 00:15:32.010 --> 00:15:34.070 align:middle line:90% by Cook, who was not in there? 00:15:34.070 --> 00:15:41.490 align:middle line:90% 00:15:41.490 --> 00:15:42.550 align:middle line:90% This is a hard one. 00:15:42.550 --> 00:15:44.008 align:middle line:84% This is about as hard as it'll get. 00:15:44.008 --> 00:15:46.314 align:middle line:90% [STIRRING MUSIC] 00:15:46.314 --> 00:15:47.691 align:middle line:90% 00:15:47.691 --> 00:15:48.485 align:middle line:90% Three seconds. 00:15:48.485 --> 00:15:52.050 align:middle line:90% 00:15:52.050 --> 00:15:53.490 align:middle line:90% Oh, most people got it, Wagner. 00:15:53.490 --> 00:15:56.520 align:middle line:84% No, Ligeti was the one with all the graphs showing 00:15:56.520 --> 00:15:58.180 align:middle line:90% when things come in and out. 00:15:58.180 --> 00:16:01.440 align:middle line:84% And the Haydn one, Haydn was used 00:16:01.440 --> 00:16:06.310 align:middle line:84% as the example for the German nationalist song. 00:16:06.310 --> 00:16:09.643 align:middle line:84% He was the composer of the music, but not the lyrics. 00:16:09.643 --> 00:16:13.350 align:middle line:90% 00:16:13.350 --> 00:16:14.970 align:middle line:90% OK, we got one fire. 00:16:14.970 --> 00:16:18.570 align:middle line:90% 00:16:18.570 --> 00:16:22.470 align:middle line:84% The music21 iterator-- talking about my own stuff-- 00:16:22.470 --> 00:16:25.853 align:middle line:84% that returns offsets from the start of the Part is-- 00:16:25.853 --> 00:16:34.316 align:middle line:90% 00:16:34.316 --> 00:16:38.645 align:middle line:90% [DIGITAL MUSIC] 00:16:38.645 --> 00:16:40.180 align:middle line:90% You know. 00:16:40.180 --> 00:16:40.940 align:middle line:90% You too. 00:16:40.940 --> 00:16:46.890 align:middle line:90% 00:16:46.890 --> 00:16:48.150 align:middle line:90% Got one more person. 00:16:48.150 --> 00:16:51.490 align:middle line:90% 00:16:51.490 --> 00:16:53.530 align:middle line:90% Two seconds. 00:16:53.530 --> 00:16:56.030 align:middle line:84% Hey, almost everybody got flattened. 00:16:56.030 --> 00:16:56.530 align:middle line:90% I know. 00:16:56.530 --> 00:16:57.730 align:middle line:90% You know that recurse-- 00:16:57.730 --> 00:17:01.540 align:middle line:84% somebody was trying to do the thought experiment 00:17:01.540 --> 00:17:02.827 align:middle line:90% that I recurse better. 00:17:02.827 --> 00:17:04.160 align:middle line:90% I keep telling you, use recurse. 00:17:04.160 --> 00:17:07.819 align:middle line:84% But in this case, flatten is the better one. 00:17:07.819 --> 00:17:08.319 align:middle line:90% Whoops. 00:17:08.319 --> 00:17:11.859 align:middle line:90% 00:17:11.859 --> 00:17:12.359 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:17:12.359 --> 00:17:15.790 align:middle line:90% 00:17:15.790 --> 00:17:20.480 align:middle line:84% Who wrote about musical codes in the introduction to Beyond MIDI? 00:17:20.480 --> 00:17:23.414 align:middle line:90% 00:17:23.414 --> 00:17:26.348 align:middle line:90% [LAUGHTER] 00:17:26.348 --> 00:17:29.013 align:middle line:90% 00:17:29.013 --> 00:17:31.881 align:middle line:90% [BOUNCY MUSIC] 00:17:31.881 --> 00:17:37.630 align:middle line:90% 00:17:37.630 --> 00:17:39.320 align:middle line:90% Oh, very nicely done. 00:17:39.320 --> 00:17:41.620 align:middle line:90% Nicely done. 00:17:41.620 --> 00:17:44.452 align:middle line:84% Michael Good does have an article in that book. 00:17:44.452 --> 00:17:45.410 align:middle line:90% But no, you don't know. 00:17:45.410 --> 00:17:46.610 align:middle line:84% That was an excellent virtual score. 00:17:46.610 --> 00:17:48.260 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: What I wrote before starting. 00:17:48.260 --> 00:17:49.135 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: OK. 00:17:49.135 --> 00:17:52.990 align:middle line:90% 00:17:52.990 --> 00:17:55.260 align:middle line:90% Hey, getting close. 00:17:55.260 --> 00:17:56.980 align:middle line:90% [STUDENTS CHATTER] 00:17:56.980 --> 00:18:03.040 align:middle line:84% Yeah, Tymoczko criticized me for all of these things 00:18:03.040 --> 00:18:06.340 align:middle line:90% about music21 except what? 00:18:06.340 --> 00:18:07.005 align:middle line:90% This is hard. 00:18:07.005 --> 00:18:11.753 align:middle line:90% 00:18:11.753 --> 00:18:15.400 align:middle line:90% [STACCATO MUSIC] 00:18:15.400 --> 00:18:31.570 align:middle line:90% 00:18:31.570 --> 00:18:34.390 align:middle line:84% No, the one thing he didn't criticize me for 00:18:34.390 --> 00:18:36.350 align:middle line:90% is the worst feature on it. 00:18:36.350 --> 00:18:37.940 align:middle line:90% It is really hard to install. 00:18:37.940 --> 00:18:39.890 align:middle line:84% But somehow, he already got it installed, 00:18:39.890 --> 00:18:42.850 align:middle line:90% so he didn't care about that. 00:18:42.850 --> 00:18:50.020 align:middle line:84% OK, so that was one that shook things up, the snowman. 00:18:50.020 --> 00:18:51.190 align:middle line:90% Here we go. 00:18:51.190 --> 00:18:52.580 align:middle line:90% We're over halfway there. 00:18:52.580 --> 00:18:54.950 align:middle line:84% This is an extra credit from an optional reading, 00:18:54.950 --> 00:18:55.610 align:middle line:90% so don't worry. 00:18:55.610 --> 00:18:56.818 align:middle line:90% But take a guess on this one. 00:18:56.818 --> 00:19:00.850 align:middle line:84% Donald Byrd created his Extremes of Music Notation thing 00:19:00.850 --> 00:19:03.880 align:middle line:90% to show that notation what? 00:19:03.880 --> 00:19:05.530 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: It's got to be that one. 00:19:05.530 --> 00:19:06.760 align:middle line:90% It's got to be red. 00:19:06.760 --> 00:19:07.940 align:middle line:90% It's got to be red. 00:19:07.940 --> 00:19:13.480 align:middle line:90% 00:19:13.480 --> 00:19:15.980 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Yeah, good. 00:19:15.980 --> 00:19:17.802 align:middle line:84% We don't need to discuss that, even 00:19:17.802 --> 00:19:19.010 align:middle line:90% if you didn't do the reading. 00:19:19.010 --> 00:19:21.260 align:middle line:84% It's a really cool article if you haven't had a chance 00:19:21.260 --> 00:19:22.400 align:middle line:90% to look through it. 00:19:22.400 --> 00:19:24.370 align:middle line:90% Some weird things in there. 00:19:24.370 --> 00:19:26.890 align:middle line:90% Craig Sapp's name-- good guy-- 00:19:26.890 --> 00:19:29.320 align:middle line:84% appeared in this class for his creation of what? 00:19:29.320 --> 00:19:50.150 align:middle line:90% 00:19:50.150 --> 00:19:51.360 align:middle line:90% OK, what did we get? 00:19:51.360 --> 00:19:55.070 align:middle line:84% Yes, the illustration of the same passage of music in dozens 00:19:55.070 --> 00:19:58.490 align:middle line:84% of encodings-- also known, allowing you to translate from 00:19:58.490 --> 00:20:00.740 align:middle line:84% one encoding to another, called the-- 00:20:00.740 --> 00:20:01.975 align:middle line:90% Rosetta Stone. 00:20:01.975 --> 00:20:05.750 align:middle line:90% 00:20:05.750 --> 00:20:08.070 align:middle line:90% He now runs the Humdrum thing. 00:20:08.070 --> 00:20:13.790 align:middle line:84% But David Huron here, nobody did this one and yeah. 00:20:13.790 --> 00:20:16.970 align:middle line:84% I don't know the answer to the red. 00:20:16.970 --> 00:20:19.340 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Does the yellow exist? 00:20:19.340 --> 00:20:23.180 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Yes, I believe so, somewhere. 00:20:23.180 --> 00:20:25.520 align:middle line:84% This is from the reading for today. 00:20:25.520 --> 00:20:27.390 align:middle line:84% We'll see if we got today's reading. 00:20:27.390 --> 00:20:29.990 align:middle line:84% What does David Lewin call his unifying rule 00:20:29.990 --> 00:20:31.770 align:middle line:90% for Species Counterpoint? 00:20:31.770 --> 00:20:36.171 align:middle line:90% 00:20:36.171 --> 00:20:39.105 align:middle line:90% [SUSPENSEFUL MUSIC] 00:20:39.105 --> 00:20:46.460 align:middle line:90% 00:20:46.460 --> 00:20:48.590 align:middle line:90% A lot of people, global rule. 00:20:48.590 --> 00:20:50.790 align:middle line:84% Those who said golden rule, by the way, 00:20:50.790 --> 00:20:53.840 align:middle line:84% I am going to misspeak and call it the golden rule a lot 00:20:53.840 --> 00:20:56.983 align:middle line:90% because I do that. 00:20:56.983 --> 00:20:59.650 align:middle line:84% We'll talk about it a little bit more at the end of class today. 00:20:59.650 --> 00:21:05.690 align:middle line:90% 00:21:05.690 --> 00:21:10.430 align:middle line:84% common or conventional music notation, also CWMN, 00:21:10.430 --> 00:21:12.460 align:middle line:90% consists of what? 00:21:12.460 --> 00:21:18.280 align:middle line:90% 00:21:18.280 --> 00:21:21.437 align:middle line:90% [SUSPENSEFUL MUSIC] 00:21:21.437 --> 00:21:22.300 align:middle line:90% Seven answers. 00:21:22.300 --> 00:21:35.540 align:middle line:90% 00:21:35.540 --> 00:21:37.100 align:middle line:90% Yeah, I know. 00:21:37.100 --> 00:21:39.283 align:middle line:84% All of the above is almost always the right answer 00:21:39.283 --> 00:21:40.200 align:middle line:90% when you take a guess. 00:21:40.200 --> 00:21:43.040 align:middle line:84% But no, in this case, it was just 00:21:43.040 --> 00:21:47.910 align:middle line:84% things that traditional western music notation, in some ways, 00:21:47.910 --> 00:21:49.850 align:middle line:84% so that you can write down non-western. 00:21:49.850 --> 00:21:51.660 align:middle line:84% You can encode-- as you all know, 00:21:51.660 --> 00:21:55.040 align:middle line:84% you can encode many things into the computer that are not that. 00:21:55.040 --> 00:21:56.995 align:middle line:90% So great, we're doing well. 00:21:56.995 --> 00:21:59.600 align:middle line:90% 00:21:59.600 --> 00:22:03.230 align:middle line:90% Now, OK, three more. 00:22:03.230 --> 00:22:04.192 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Oh, my god. 00:22:04.192 --> 00:22:10.790 align:middle line:90% 00:22:10.790 --> 00:22:14.720 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Oh, wow, nice. 00:22:14.720 --> 00:22:16.530 align:middle line:84% We don't need to do that anymore. 00:22:16.530 --> 00:22:19.925 align:middle line:90% [DIGITAL MUSIC] 00:22:19.925 --> 00:22:20.895 align:middle line:90% [GONG] 00:22:20.895 --> 00:22:23.330 align:middle line:90% 00:22:23.330 --> 00:22:26.300 align:middle line:84% Aarden and Huron showed how European Folksong 00:22:26.300 --> 00:22:30.980 align:middle line:84% varied across genres, times, locations, functions? 00:22:30.980 --> 00:22:35.300 align:middle line:90% 00:22:35.300 --> 00:22:38.240 align:middle line:90% [JAUNTY MUSIC] 00:22:38.240 --> 00:22:42.170 align:middle line:90% 00:22:42.170 --> 00:22:44.340 align:middle line:84% Hey, yeah, almost everyone's got that. 00:22:44.340 --> 00:22:48.080 align:middle line:84% This was the article that showed the geographic information 00:22:48.080 --> 00:22:50.460 align:middle line:84% systems back when that was very hard to do. 00:22:50.460 --> 00:22:52.520 align:middle line:84% We should be able to do this more easily 00:22:52.520 --> 00:22:55.280 align:middle line:90% with Google Maps and things. 00:22:55.280 --> 00:22:59.750 align:middle line:90% OK, before we do the last one-- 00:22:59.750 --> 00:23:01.770 align:middle line:90% before we do the last one-- 00:23:01.770 --> 00:23:04.640 align:middle line:84% just to note, the quiz will not be a bunch 00:23:04.640 --> 00:23:06.390 align:middle line:90% of these little factoid things. 00:23:06.390 --> 00:23:08.640 align:middle line:84% That's just all I can figure out to do on Kahoot. 00:23:08.640 --> 00:23:12.920 align:middle line:84% It will be, actually, about conceptual issues and ability 00:23:12.920 --> 00:23:16.370 align:middle line:90% to apply these ideas. 00:23:16.370 --> 00:23:17.160 align:middle line:90% Let's finish this. 00:23:17.160 --> 00:23:20.820 align:middle line:84% Oh, it's about Sophia Sun and me showed connections 00:23:20.820 --> 00:23:24.633 align:middle line:84% between music and emotion using what types of musical scores? 00:23:24.633 --> 00:23:31.824 align:middle line:90% 00:23:31.824 --> 00:23:34.752 align:middle line:90% [DIGITAL MUSIC] 00:23:34.752 --> 00:23:37.633 align:middle line:90% 00:23:37.633 --> 00:23:38.300 align:middle line:90% And your answer? 00:23:38.300 --> 00:23:41.490 align:middle line:90% 00:23:41.490 --> 00:23:42.940 align:middle line:90% Oh, no. 00:23:42.940 --> 00:23:43.440 align:middle line:90% I know. 00:23:43.440 --> 00:23:45.910 align:middle line:84% I do too many Bach chorales and I do medieval music, 00:23:45.910 --> 00:23:49.240 align:middle line:90% but it was lead sheets. 00:23:49.240 --> 00:23:50.370 align:middle line:90% Oh, yeah, you read it. 00:23:50.370 --> 00:23:57.490 align:middle line:84% Great, so we have on the podium, third place, Nickname3. 00:23:57.490 --> 00:23:59.020 align:middle line:84% Anybody want to claim their podium? 00:23:59.020 --> 00:24:00.010 align:middle line:90% Nicely done. 00:24:00.010 --> 00:24:02.280 align:middle line:90% Nickname2, yep. 00:24:02.280 --> 00:24:06.210 align:middle line:90% And on top-- 00:24:06.210 --> 00:24:08.640 align:middle line:90% [LAUGHTER] 00:24:08.640 --> 00:24:13.260 align:middle line:84% I guess this shows that some people spend their time not 00:24:13.260 --> 00:24:17.470 align:middle line:84% thinking of creative names, but just reading the articles. 00:24:17.470 --> 00:24:19.290 align:middle line:90% Congrats, everybody. 00:24:19.290 --> 00:24:21.640 align:middle line:84% So we've been talking a lot about encodings. 00:24:21.640 --> 00:24:24.600 align:middle line:84% And what you'll be doing over the course of the semester, 00:24:24.600 --> 00:24:27.790 align:middle line:84% sometimes, is working with these strange encodings. 00:24:27.790 --> 00:24:30.600 align:middle line:84% And maybe, as we're starting to get-- 00:24:30.600 --> 00:24:31.680 align:middle line:90% well, let me say. 00:24:31.680 --> 00:24:34.260 align:middle line:84% You've had some problem sets where I've given you questions 00:24:34.260 --> 00:24:35.590 align:middle line:90% and you've given answers. 00:24:35.590 --> 00:24:36.310 align:middle line:90% Right? 00:24:36.310 --> 00:24:39.600 align:middle line:84% And now, you've given two problem sets, that encoding one 00:24:39.600 --> 00:24:44.220 align:middle line:84% and this corpora one, where you've been doing the research 00:24:44.220 --> 00:24:46.050 align:middle line:84% to find interesting problems, but I 00:24:46.050 --> 00:24:48.580 align:middle line:84% haven't been asking you to actually get an answer. 00:24:48.580 --> 00:24:52.620 align:middle line:84% You didn't need to make a corpus, a parser for guitar, 00:24:52.620 --> 00:24:55.902 align:middle line:84% Ultimate Guitar, in order to answer any questions. 00:24:55.902 --> 00:24:57.610 align:middle line:84% We're getting to the end of the semester. 00:24:57.610 --> 00:24:59.068 align:middle line:84% We'll be bringing those two things, 00:24:59.068 --> 00:25:01.710 align:middle line:84% colliding together and doing more 00:25:01.710 --> 00:25:04.260 align:middle line:84% on how you can come up with your own problems 00:25:04.260 --> 00:25:05.830 align:middle line:84% and come up with your own solutions. 00:25:05.830 --> 00:25:08.570 align:middle line:84% Michael, would you like to come up and talk for just a little 00:25:08.570 --> 00:25:09.070 align:middle line:90% bit? 00:25:09.070 --> 00:25:11.310 align:middle line:84% I'd like to introduce Michael Good, who's 00:25:11.310 --> 00:25:14.730 align:middle line:84% an MIT grad and the inventor of MusicXML 00:25:14.730 --> 00:25:16.170 align:middle line:90% up here, who's visiting. 00:25:16.170 --> 00:25:18.150 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:25:18.150 --> 00:25:19.560 align:middle line:90% In here. 00:25:19.560 --> 00:25:22.150 align:middle line:84% You all have seen an interview with Michael, right? 00:25:22.150 --> 00:25:25.110 align:middle line:84% So just wanted to talk, the interview's 00:25:25.110 --> 00:25:26.920 align:middle line:90% a couple of years old now. 00:25:26.920 --> 00:25:29.670 align:middle line:90% I think we did it during COVID. 00:25:29.670 --> 00:25:33.150 align:middle line:84% Yeah, so what's been up and interesting in the world 00:25:33.150 --> 00:25:36.120 align:middle line:84% of anything with computer music, but especially 00:25:36.120 --> 00:25:37.860 align:middle line:84% music theory and coding, anything 00:25:37.860 --> 00:25:41.160 align:middle line:90% that you've been finding? 00:25:41.160 --> 00:25:44.320 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: I retired in January, 00:25:44.320 --> 00:25:49.733 align:middle line:84% so my mind has gone out of the music notation area. 00:25:49.733 --> 00:25:51.900 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: I'll just stand close to the mike. 00:25:51.900 --> 00:25:52.980 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: I mean, some of the things 00:25:52.980 --> 00:25:54.880 align:middle line:84% that were in these projects were really cool. 00:25:54.880 --> 00:25:57.250 align:middle line:84% The body percussion encoding stuff, 00:25:57.250 --> 00:26:00.120 align:middle line:84% and it's like oh, well, that's pretty great. 00:26:00.120 --> 00:26:02.820 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Do you feel like now, you've 00:26:02.820 --> 00:26:04.950 align:middle line:84% got to come out of retirement and find a way to put 00:26:04.950 --> 00:26:06.443 align:middle line:90% all these things into MusicXML? 00:26:06.443 --> 00:26:07.360 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL GOOD: Not yet. 00:26:07.360 --> 00:26:09.200 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: OK. 00:26:09.200 --> 00:26:10.480 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Maybe in the future. 00:26:10.480 --> 00:26:12.147 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: But what are some ways 00:26:12.147 --> 00:26:16.110 align:middle line:84% that somebody could get a particular musical project, 00:26:16.110 --> 00:26:19.110 align:middle line:84% if they're interested in non-western music or something 00:26:19.110 --> 00:26:24.860 align:middle line:84% else, and get such a standard musical encoding as you've 00:26:24.860 --> 00:26:25.360 align:middle line:90% created? 00:26:25.360 --> 00:26:27.870 align:middle line:84% What kind of advice would you give for that? 00:26:27.870 --> 00:26:33.480 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Well, to develop a standard for a music 00:26:33.480 --> 00:26:36.510 align:middle line:84% representation, you need to have multiple people who 00:26:36.510 --> 00:26:37.600 align:middle line:90% are using it, right? 00:26:37.600 --> 00:26:42.310 align:middle line:84% And you need to have, I think, tools that support it. 00:26:42.310 --> 00:26:44.950 align:middle line:84% So that becomes-- if it's non-standard-- 00:26:44.950 --> 00:26:47.760 align:middle line:84% that becomes more of a less common repertoire, that 00:26:47.760 --> 00:26:49.810 align:middle line:84% becomes more of a chicken and an egg problem. 00:26:49.810 --> 00:26:54.600 align:middle line:84% So look for something that has at least two applications that 00:26:54.600 --> 00:26:58.650 align:middle line:84% are doing that type of music, and see if you can do. 00:26:58.650 --> 00:27:00.930 align:middle line:84% Maybe, one's an application you wrote 00:27:00.930 --> 00:27:03.150 align:middle line:84% and one's an application somebody else wrote. 00:27:03.150 --> 00:27:05.620 align:middle line:90% Try to put something in between. 00:27:05.620 --> 00:27:08.790 align:middle line:84% When I was starting MusicXML, a lot of people 00:27:08.790 --> 00:27:10.770 align:middle line:84% had tried to do a standard common western music 00:27:10.770 --> 00:27:12.150 align:middle line:90% notation format. 00:27:12.150 --> 00:27:15.872 align:middle line:84% I knew that if it didn't work with either Finale or Sibelius-- 00:27:15.872 --> 00:27:17.830 align:middle line:84% because those are the two programs people cared 00:27:17.830 --> 00:27:21.100 align:middle line:84% about then-- if it didn't work with at least one 00:27:21.100 --> 00:27:22.510 align:middle line:84% of those two programs, I was just 00:27:22.510 --> 00:27:24.940 align:middle line:84% going to give up, go home and find something else to do, 00:27:24.940 --> 00:27:28.360 align:middle line:84% because nobody would care about MusicXML if it didn't work 00:27:28.360 --> 00:27:29.510 align:middle line:90% with one of those programs. 00:27:29.510 --> 00:27:34.990 align:middle line:84% Nowadays, it would be MuseScore or Dorico or things like that. 00:27:34.990 --> 00:27:37.760 align:middle line:84% If you're trying to do a standard music representation, 00:27:37.760 --> 00:27:39.790 align:middle line:84% then you need to have a community 00:27:39.790 --> 00:27:43.630 align:middle line:84% of people who are using it and applications that use it. 00:27:43.630 --> 00:27:46.672 align:middle line:84% Maybe, more interesting is just at this point, 00:27:46.672 --> 00:27:48.130 align:middle line:84% is to come up with cool things that 00:27:48.130 --> 00:27:53.950 align:middle line:84% could be represented, and do some analysis there, and try 00:27:53.950 --> 00:27:56.140 align:middle line:84% to figure out ways that these representations could 00:27:56.140 --> 00:27:59.860 align:middle line:84% be useful for the musicians who are doing 00:27:59.860 --> 00:28:01.660 align:middle line:90% these type of repertoires. 00:28:01.660 --> 00:28:04.402 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Michael, you did music when you were at MIT? 00:28:04.402 --> 00:28:05.360 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL GOOD: Oh, yeah. 00:28:05.360 --> 00:28:06.920 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: What kinds of things did you do? 00:28:06.920 --> 00:28:08.712 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Well, I was a trumpet player. 00:28:08.712 --> 00:28:09.950 align:middle line:90% Nowadays, I sing. 00:28:09.950 --> 00:28:11.700 align:middle line:84% My wife and I met in the MIT Concert Band. 00:28:11.700 --> 00:28:13.950 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: She's an electrical engineer, right? 00:28:13.950 --> 00:28:16.540 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Yeah, she's one of the 40 top engineers 00:28:16.540 --> 00:28:18.070 align:middle line:90% at Analog Devices. 00:28:18.070 --> 00:28:21.730 align:middle line:84% She just was talking with Ray Stata at her company conference 00:28:21.730 --> 00:28:23.410 align:middle line:90% a couple days ago. 00:28:23.410 --> 00:28:24.440 align:middle line:90% She's 6' 1". 00:28:24.440 --> 00:28:25.570 align:middle line:90% I'm 6' 3". 00:28:25.570 --> 00:28:26.810 align:middle line:90% I'm class of '79. 00:28:26.810 --> 00:28:28.210 align:middle line:90% She's class of '82. 00:28:28.210 --> 00:28:29.360 align:middle line:90% She played piccolo. 00:28:29.360 --> 00:28:30.730 align:middle line:90% I played trumpet. 00:28:30.730 --> 00:28:34.150 align:middle line:84% I played trumpet in the band, the orchestra, the Festival Jazz 00:28:34.150 --> 00:28:37.240 align:middle line:84% Ensemble, Chamber Music Society, musical theater, anything 00:28:37.240 --> 00:28:38.410 align:middle line:90% that needed trumpet. 00:28:38.410 --> 00:28:39.320 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Laptop ensemble? 00:28:39.320 --> 00:28:39.770 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL GOOD: I played it. 00:28:39.770 --> 00:28:40.540 align:middle line:90% There was no-- 00:28:40.540 --> 00:28:41.510 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: There was no laptop. 00:28:41.510 --> 00:28:43.177 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Laptops were not invented. 00:28:43.177 --> 00:28:45.970 align:middle line:90% 00:28:45.970 --> 00:28:48.910 align:middle line:84% The coolest thing, I did my thesis 00:28:48.910 --> 00:28:51.505 align:middle line:84% in the experimental music studio with Professor Barry Vercoe-- 00:28:51.505 --> 00:28:53.380 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Which is now the Media Lab. 00:28:53.380 --> 00:28:53.800 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: --one of the groups 00:28:53.800 --> 00:28:55.490 align:middle line:84% that became part of the Media Lab. 00:28:55.490 --> 00:28:57.640 align:middle line:84% And the coolest thing was, we got 00:28:57.640 --> 00:29:02.950 align:middle line:84% to use VT 52 terminals instead of-- video terminals-- instead 00:29:02.950 --> 00:29:07.090 align:middle line:84% of paper terminals that I was using for all my other classes. 00:29:07.090 --> 00:29:09.880 align:middle line:84% I got to use the coolest computer technology 00:29:09.880 --> 00:29:13.270 align:middle line:84% that I had seen, at that point, in my computer music class. 00:29:13.270 --> 00:29:14.367 align:middle line:90% That was awesome. 00:29:14.367 --> 00:29:16.700 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Michael, here's a question I haven't-- 00:29:16.700 --> 00:29:18.880 align:middle line:84% I don't think I've ever asked you. 00:29:18.880 --> 00:29:21.530 align:middle line:84% You did music while you were at MIT and you did other things. 00:29:21.530 --> 00:29:28.090 align:middle line:84% And then, music wasn't your primary putting money 00:29:28.090 --> 00:29:30.040 align:middle line:90% in the bank for a bit. 00:29:30.040 --> 00:29:32.110 align:middle line:84% You could ask a little bit about what that was. 00:29:32.110 --> 00:29:34.670 align:middle line:84% But what made you want to come back and do it? 00:29:34.670 --> 00:29:36.208 align:middle line:84% And is there anything for anybody 00:29:36.208 --> 00:29:38.500 align:middle line:84% who's not thinking of graduating this year or next year 00:29:38.500 --> 00:29:40.083 align:middle line:84% or whatever and doing music, but might 00:29:40.083 --> 00:29:41.650 align:middle line:90% follow a career like yours? 00:29:41.650 --> 00:29:43.900 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Well, yeah, following a career like mine 00:29:43.900 --> 00:29:44.823 align:middle line:90% is kind of-- 00:29:44.823 --> 00:29:46.490 align:middle line:84% I mean, it's a whole different time now. 00:29:46.490 --> 00:29:50.290 align:middle line:84% When I was doing my bachelor's thesis at the experimental music 00:29:50.290 --> 00:29:54.940 align:middle line:84% studio, it was on one of these alphanumeric encodings, which 00:29:54.940 --> 00:29:55.910 align:middle line:90% is now called SCOT. 00:29:55.910 --> 00:29:59.560 align:middle line:84% It's actually still shipped, I think, as part of Csound. 00:29:59.560 --> 00:30:02.930 align:middle line:84% I was rewriting it from an earlier version, called SOGO. 00:30:02.930 --> 00:30:06.650 align:middle line:84% But this was in 1979, so there was no MIDI, right? 00:30:06.650 --> 00:30:09.150 align:middle line:84% There was no computer music technology industry. 00:30:09.150 --> 00:30:12.150 align:middle line:84% OK, New England Digital was doing some claviers, 00:30:12.150 --> 00:30:15.620 align:middle line:90% but that was one tiny company. 00:30:15.620 --> 00:30:18.930 align:middle line:84% There wasn't any industry to go to for a job, 00:30:18.930 --> 00:30:22.800 align:middle line:84% so I started to do usability work for my grad school. 00:30:22.800 --> 00:30:25.190 align:middle line:90% I got my master's here too. 00:30:25.190 --> 00:30:29.510 align:middle line:84% I did usability work until 2000, when 00:30:29.510 --> 00:30:30.942 align:middle line:84% you could see that everything was 00:30:30.942 --> 00:30:32.900 align:middle line:84% going to-- this is when the web was coming up-- 00:30:32.900 --> 00:30:36.110 align:middle line:84% and everything was going to be move this app over 00:30:36.110 --> 00:30:38.570 align:middle line:90% to the web from a GUI. 00:30:38.570 --> 00:30:40.710 align:middle line:84% The first time I did that, it was a lot of fun. 00:30:40.710 --> 00:30:44.160 align:middle line:84% But doing it 1,000 times was going to be really boring, 00:30:44.160 --> 00:30:48.920 align:middle line:84% so I looked at-- there was an opportunity to do a standard 00:30:48.920 --> 00:30:52.070 align:middle line:84% music notation format that was downloadable sheet music 00:30:52.070 --> 00:30:53.070 align:middle line:90% starting to happen. 00:30:53.070 --> 00:30:55.370 align:middle line:90% It was a nascent thing. 00:30:55.370 --> 00:30:59.420 align:middle line:84% There was, obviously, a demand for a standard computer 00:30:59.420 --> 00:31:00.930 align:middle line:90% music, because it was silly. 00:31:00.930 --> 00:31:03.320 align:middle line:84% You could download the music and all 00:31:03.320 --> 00:31:05.700 align:middle line:84% you could do was use it in the player or print it out. 00:31:05.700 --> 00:31:07.575 align:middle line:84% And it's like, you should be able to share it 00:31:07.575 --> 00:31:10.100 align:middle line:84% back and forth between programs like HTML and MIDI. 00:31:10.100 --> 00:31:12.200 align:middle line:84% If you don't have a standard, it's 00:31:12.200 --> 00:31:15.920 align:middle line:84% nothing for that type of common thing. 00:31:15.920 --> 00:31:17.760 align:middle line:84% That was the motivation to do it, 00:31:17.760 --> 00:31:20.180 align:middle line:84% that I wanted to use downloadable music 00:31:20.180 --> 00:31:23.030 align:middle line:90% in any application. 00:31:23.030 --> 00:31:25.760 align:middle line:84% But I had the financial ability to do that, 00:31:25.760 --> 00:31:27.530 align:middle line:84% because my wife works for Analog Devices 00:31:27.530 --> 00:31:28.760 align:middle line:90% as an electrical engineer. 00:31:28.760 --> 00:31:31.230 align:middle line:84% And their company did really well. 00:31:31.230 --> 00:31:34.530 align:middle line:84% And so, if I totally failed, it didn't matter, financially. 00:31:34.530 --> 00:31:38.880 align:middle line:84% So I mean, I was in a extremely lucky position there. 00:31:38.880 --> 00:31:43.970 align:middle line:84% Nowadays, though, you got each other all interested in music 00:31:43.970 --> 00:31:44.840 align:middle line:90% technology. 00:31:44.840 --> 00:31:48.990 align:middle line:84% There's all sorts-- I mean, to go through-- 00:31:48.990 --> 00:31:51.620 align:middle line:84% if I'd had a class like this, I wouldn't have had a class like 00:31:51.620 --> 00:31:52.920 align:middle line:90% this, because you didn't. 00:31:52.920 --> 00:31:55.680 align:middle line:84% I had to spend all my time like, building infrastructure. 00:31:55.680 --> 00:31:58.660 align:middle line:84% Now, you can do the cool things on top of it, 00:31:58.660 --> 00:32:00.480 align:middle line:90% the cool problems on top of it. 00:32:00.480 --> 00:32:03.560 align:middle line:84% So find cool problems that people 00:32:03.560 --> 00:32:07.320 align:middle line:84% are interested in if you want to make a career. 00:32:07.320 --> 00:32:09.687 align:middle line:84% If you're just studying, find a cool problem 00:32:09.687 --> 00:32:10.770 align:middle line:90% that you're interested in. 00:32:10.770 --> 00:32:12.420 align:middle line:84% Well that's, I guess, the starting point anyway. 00:32:12.420 --> 00:32:14.190 align:middle line:84% Find a cool problem that you're interested in, 00:32:14.190 --> 00:32:15.815 align:middle line:84% because if you're not interested in it, 00:32:15.815 --> 00:32:17.850 align:middle line:84% you won't be able to make a living at it. 00:32:17.850 --> 00:32:19.760 align:middle line:90% You'll just be terribly bored. 00:32:19.760 --> 00:32:23.090 align:middle line:84% And then, find if somebody else is interested in that 00:32:23.090 --> 00:32:24.692 align:middle line:90% or something adjacent. 00:32:24.692 --> 00:32:26.150 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: One last question 00:32:26.150 --> 00:32:28.820 align:middle line:84% before I let you go, if that's OK. 00:32:28.820 --> 00:32:32.420 align:middle line:84% It's hard for us to think of that you 00:32:32.420 --> 00:32:35.790 align:middle line:84% went from the essentially teletype era, 00:32:35.790 --> 00:32:37.170 align:middle line:90% you don't see things on screen. 00:32:37.170 --> 00:32:39.003 align:middle line:84% You have to type it onto it and then, it all 00:32:39.003 --> 00:32:44.330 align:middle line:84% comes out on paper and stuff and what, 30 bytes per second modems 00:32:44.330 --> 00:32:46.680 align:middle line:90% and things like that? 00:32:46.680 --> 00:32:48.840 align:middle line:84% Until two months ago, when you retired, 00:32:48.840 --> 00:32:53.160 align:middle line:84% you were still totally on top of 99%-- 00:32:53.160 --> 00:32:55.970 align:middle line:84% as many percent of the new technologies as anybody 00:32:55.970 --> 00:32:57.470 align:middle line:90% can do and things. 00:32:57.470 --> 00:32:59.370 align:middle line:84% Someday, it's hard for us to think, 00:32:59.370 --> 00:33:01.850 align:middle line:84% but these will seem as outrageous 00:33:01.850 --> 00:33:04.970 align:middle line:84% as a teletype or a horse and buggy and stuff. 00:33:04.970 --> 00:33:08.310 align:middle line:84% Not just for music people, but how do we keep up? 00:33:08.310 --> 00:33:09.560 align:middle line:90% How do we keep up, like you. 00:33:09.560 --> 00:33:11.877 align:middle line:84% With all the changing technology? 00:33:11.877 --> 00:33:13.460 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: If you're a tech person, 00:33:13.460 --> 00:33:16.880 align:middle line:90% I think you kind of do that. 00:33:16.880 --> 00:33:18.000 align:middle line:90% I live in Silicon Valley. 00:33:18.000 --> 00:33:20.990 align:middle line:84% You got to stay with what's going. 00:33:20.990 --> 00:33:22.800 align:middle line:84% I mean, I had this usability background, 00:33:22.800 --> 00:33:25.920 align:middle line:84% so I was always interested in user interface technologies. 00:33:25.920 --> 00:33:28.340 align:middle line:84% I don't know anything about machine learning, 00:33:28.340 --> 00:33:30.720 align:middle line:90% outside of applications for it. 00:33:30.720 --> 00:33:33.860 align:middle line:84% In the music space, I'm excited to see what Soundslice 00:33:33.860 --> 00:33:36.860 align:middle line:84% is doing for using machine learning for optical music 00:33:36.860 --> 00:33:40.070 align:middle line:84% recognition, what AudioShake is doing for source 00:33:40.070 --> 00:33:42.330 align:middle line:90% separation of audio-- 00:33:42.330 --> 00:33:45.170 align:middle line:84% which everybody tried to do and nobody-- 00:33:45.170 --> 00:33:47.150 align:middle line:84% they're the first ones who are able to do it. 00:33:47.150 --> 00:33:50.120 align:middle line:84% They're very clear about which problems they can handle 00:33:50.120 --> 00:33:53.660 align:middle line:84% and which problems they can't, and why it's a good market 00:33:53.660 --> 00:33:55.793 align:middle line:84% and why it's supporting musicians. 00:33:55.793 --> 00:33:57.710 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: We were talking a little bit 00:33:57.710 --> 00:34:00.590 align:middle line:84% earlier about with generative music things. 00:34:00.590 --> 00:34:03.420 align:middle line:84% To sum up, what you're saying is, 00:34:03.420 --> 00:34:05.980 align:middle line:84% make sure that there's a problem that you're trying to solve. 00:34:05.980 --> 00:34:07.290 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL GOOD: Yeah, a problem that you're 00:34:07.290 --> 00:34:09.623 align:middle line:84% trying to solve that isn't putting musicians out of work 00:34:09.623 --> 00:34:12.403 align:middle line:90% would be great. 00:34:12.403 --> 00:34:14.070 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Well, thanks, Michael. 00:34:14.070 --> 00:34:15.719 align:middle line:84% I wish we could have had you earlier 00:34:15.719 --> 00:34:18.310 align:middle line:84% when we were specifically talking MusicXML, 00:34:18.310 --> 00:34:21.540 align:middle line:84% but you can't go six weeks into the semester 00:34:21.540 --> 00:34:23.040 align:middle line:90% without knowing MusicXML. 00:34:23.040 --> 00:34:26.590 align:middle line:84% Even knowing you're coming now, it's so great. 00:34:26.590 --> 00:34:28.344 align:middle line:90% So thanks again. 00:34:28.344 --> 00:34:31.110 align:middle line:90% [APPLAUSE] 00:34:31.110 --> 00:34:31.960 align:middle line:90% Feel free to stay. 00:34:31.960 --> 00:34:33.340 align:middle line:90% Feel free to move on. 00:34:33.340 --> 00:34:36.090 align:middle line:90% We're going to unlock intervals. 00:34:36.090 --> 00:34:38.850 align:middle line:84% We're going to be moving on to the shortest 00:34:38.850 --> 00:34:42.100 align:middle line:84% topic of the semester, and that is a voice leading. 00:34:42.100 --> 00:34:44.830 align:middle line:84% You're going to get just a little bit from me today. 00:34:44.830 --> 00:34:47.370 align:middle line:84% You're going to have the world's shortest-- 00:34:47.370 --> 00:34:50.260 align:middle line:84% not the world's shortest, but a pretty short-- problem set. 00:34:50.260 --> 00:34:52.650 align:middle line:84% And then, we'll talk about it a little bit 00:34:52.650 --> 00:34:56.830 align:middle line:84% after the midterm on Wednesday and that will be it. 00:34:56.830 --> 00:34:58.113 align:middle line:90% It's a very important topic. 00:34:58.113 --> 00:34:59.530 align:middle line:84% We're going to keep working on it. 00:34:59.530 --> 00:35:01.447 align:middle line:84% That's why it deserves to have its own number. 00:35:01.447 --> 00:35:03.700 align:middle line:90% 00:35:03.700 --> 00:35:05.710 align:middle line:84% When we're talking about voice leading, 00:35:05.710 --> 00:35:08.460 align:middle line:84% we're generally talking about how-- 00:35:08.460 --> 00:35:11.430 align:middle line:84% we just need one staff for this-- 00:35:11.430 --> 00:35:17.293 align:middle line:84% how multiple parts are moving at the same time. 00:35:17.293 --> 00:35:22.050 align:middle line:90% 00:35:22.050 --> 00:35:25.030 align:middle line:84% This would be pretty bad voice leading, maybe very dissonant, 00:35:25.030 --> 00:35:26.670 align:middle line:90% but something. 00:35:26.670 --> 00:35:35.460 align:middle line:84% We're talking about not what's happening here and not what's 00:35:35.460 --> 00:35:40.380 align:middle line:84% happening-- that one's hard to do-- here, 00:35:40.380 --> 00:35:43.170 align:middle line:90% but the combination of the two. 00:35:43.170 --> 00:35:48.390 align:middle line:84% And why voice leading becomes a particularly interesting problem 00:35:48.390 --> 00:35:56.850 align:middle line:84% for computers is, there's two general ways of iterating. 00:35:56.850 --> 00:36:01.270 align:middle line:84% Both flatten and recurse are, in some ways-- well, no. 00:36:01.270 --> 00:36:05.467 align:middle line:84% Sorry, recurse is you go through one part or one voice, 00:36:05.467 --> 00:36:07.050 align:middle line:84% and you go through everything, and you 00:36:07.050 --> 00:36:08.860 align:middle line:84% go through the other part and the other voice, 00:36:08.860 --> 00:36:10.180 align:middle line:90% and you go through everything. 00:36:10.180 --> 00:36:16.050 align:middle line:84% And then, you have something like flatten, which in the end-- 00:36:16.050 --> 00:36:18.400 align:middle line:84% especially if everything is just quarter notes-- 00:36:18.400 --> 00:36:22.080 align:middle line:84% you're going through one slice going to the next 00:36:22.080 --> 00:36:24.990 align:middle line:90% and going to the next slice. 00:36:24.990 --> 00:36:27.720 align:middle line:84% Voice leading is a particular problem that 00:36:27.720 --> 00:36:31.080 align:middle line:84% requires you to be constantly moving 00:36:31.080 --> 00:36:34.890 align:middle line:84% back and forth between I'm moving according to voice 00:36:34.890 --> 00:36:37.140 align:middle line:84% or according to part, and I'm looking 00:36:37.140 --> 00:36:41.610 align:middle line:84% at what's happening at one time or another. 00:36:41.610 --> 00:36:46.650 align:middle line:84% One of the classic applications for starting off 00:36:46.650 --> 00:36:50.370 align:middle line:84% computational voice leading is to work on a topic called 00:36:50.370 --> 00:36:52.860 align:middle line:90% species counterpoint. 00:36:52.860 --> 00:36:54.840 align:middle line:84% Who has done species counterpoint 00:36:54.840 --> 00:36:56.410 align:middle line:90% in one of their classes? 00:36:56.410 --> 00:36:57.480 align:middle line:90% Some instructors do it. 00:36:57.480 --> 00:36:57.980 align:middle line:90% Some don't. 00:36:57.980 --> 00:36:59.300 align:middle line:90% Not everybody has. 00:36:59.300 --> 00:37:02.070 align:middle line:90% 00:37:02.070 --> 00:37:06.160 align:middle line:84% I think it's invented-- it's an 18th century way of learning 00:37:06.160 --> 00:37:10.630 align:middle line:84% to write music like they wrote it in the 16th century. 00:37:10.630 --> 00:37:16.720 align:middle line:84% Not 100% relevant to music composition today, but still 00:37:16.720 --> 00:37:21.280 align:middle line:84% a fundamental skill, like you practicing your scales 00:37:21.280 --> 00:37:21.830 align:middle line:90% or something. 00:37:21.830 --> 00:37:26.775 align:middle line:84% Mozart and Brahms practiced species counterpoint every day, 00:37:26.775 --> 00:37:29.020 align:middle line:90% sort of keep up their chops. 00:37:29.020 --> 00:37:32.530 align:middle line:84% The earliest, the first species that we tend to call it, 00:37:32.530 --> 00:37:34.490 align:middle line:84% is something is all in whole notes. 00:37:34.490 --> 00:37:38.403 align:middle line:84% Let me see if I can compose one while we're-- 00:37:38.403 --> 00:37:42.970 align:middle line:90% 00:37:42.970 --> 00:37:44.270 align:middle line:90% How many notes did I write? 00:37:44.270 --> 00:37:46.728 align:middle line:84% One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, good. 00:37:46.728 --> 00:37:49.580 align:middle line:84% Classic ones tend to be around nine notes long. 00:37:49.580 --> 00:37:54.100 align:middle line:84% And then, against this, in first species, 00:37:54.100 --> 00:37:59.260 align:middle line:84% you're going to write one whole note for every note 00:37:59.260 --> 00:38:02.020 align:middle line:90% with particular conditions. 00:38:02.020 --> 00:38:07.610 align:middle line:84% Some of these conditions will be horizontally constraining, 00:38:07.610 --> 00:38:09.166 align:middle line:90% like for instance-- 00:38:09.166 --> 00:38:12.040 align:middle line:90% 00:38:12.040 --> 00:38:14.590 align:middle line:90% yeah, now that particular one. 00:38:14.590 --> 00:38:18.830 align:middle line:90% Don't do that. 00:38:18.830 --> 00:38:20.110 align:middle line:90% Why not? 00:38:20.110 --> 00:38:20.860 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Tritone. 00:38:20.860 --> 00:38:24.790 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Tritone, yep, this case augmented fourth 00:38:24.790 --> 00:38:28.960 align:middle line:84% or diminished fifth usually not allowed also, especially 00:38:28.960 --> 00:38:30.470 align:middle line:90% in this context. 00:38:30.470 --> 00:38:32.020 align:middle line:84% Good, so some of these things are 00:38:32.020 --> 00:38:36.700 align:middle line:84% going to be based on one case and some of them 00:38:36.700 --> 00:38:39.290 align:middle line:84% are going to be based on vertical things. 00:38:39.290 --> 00:38:40.880 align:middle line:90% This would not be allowed. 00:38:40.880 --> 00:38:41.640 align:middle line:90% Why not? 00:38:41.640 --> 00:38:44.410 align:middle line:90% 00:38:44.410 --> 00:38:47.530 align:middle line:90% Sorry, I need two colors. 00:38:47.530 --> 00:38:48.242 align:middle line:90% What? 00:38:48.242 --> 00:38:48.950 align:middle line:90% Somebody said it. 00:38:48.950 --> 00:38:49.742 align:middle line:90% I just didn't hear. 00:38:49.742 --> 00:38:50.680 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:38:50.680 --> 00:38:53.110 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: No, I think I heard it properly. 00:38:53.110 --> 00:38:53.860 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Seventh? 00:38:53.860 --> 00:38:56.200 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Seventh, yeah. 00:38:56.200 --> 00:38:59.320 align:middle line:84% In first species, the rule is all 00:38:59.320 --> 00:39:02.840 align:middle line:84% horizontal vertical intervals must be consonant 00:39:02.840 --> 00:39:08.470 align:middle line:84% and all vertical intervals must be consonant. 00:39:08.470 --> 00:39:12.390 align:middle line:84% But then, there are other strange little rules. 00:39:12.390 --> 00:39:17.590 align:middle line:90% 00:39:17.590 --> 00:39:20.200 align:middle line:90% This is a consonant interval. 00:39:20.200 --> 00:39:22.018 align:middle line:90% This is a consonant interval. 00:39:22.018 --> 00:39:23.060 align:middle line:90% And this is a consonant-- 00:39:23.060 --> 00:39:24.530 align:middle line:90% I said I was going to do red. 00:39:24.530 --> 00:39:25.790 align:middle line:90% This is a constant interval. 00:39:25.790 --> 00:39:27.560 align:middle line:84% All these intervals are consonant. 00:39:27.560 --> 00:39:32.410 align:middle line:84% What's the problem here with these two, 00:39:32.410 --> 00:39:34.570 align:middle line:90% for anybody who's done this? 00:39:34.570 --> 00:39:36.530 align:middle line:90% Yeah, so parallel fifths. 00:39:36.530 --> 00:39:38.680 align:middle line:90% So what's the interval G to D? 00:39:38.680 --> 00:39:40.240 align:middle line:90% Perfect fifth. 00:39:40.240 --> 00:39:43.960 align:middle line:90% E to B, perfect fifth. 00:39:43.960 --> 00:39:46.720 align:middle line:90% Two perfect fifths in a row. 00:39:46.720 --> 00:39:52.300 align:middle line:84% I just want to give there, for anybody who wants to, 00:39:52.300 --> 00:39:55.010 align:middle line:84% I don't have a formalized extra credit for this. 00:39:55.010 --> 00:39:59.110 align:middle line:84% But if you can, writing software that 00:39:59.110 --> 00:40:02.470 align:middle line:84% can solve any given what we call the-- this 00:40:02.470 --> 00:40:04.247 align:middle line:90% is the part that's given to you. 00:40:04.247 --> 00:40:06.080 align:middle line:84% There's always one part that's given to you. 00:40:06.080 --> 00:40:10.190 align:middle line:84% It's called the cantus firmus, or the fixed song in Latin. 00:40:10.190 --> 00:40:11.240 align:middle line:90% And so, you fixed. 00:40:11.240 --> 00:40:12.610 align:middle line:90% You can't change it. 00:40:12.610 --> 00:40:15.580 align:middle line:84% One of the classic things is to write-- 00:40:15.580 --> 00:40:18.100 align:middle line:84% nowadays, in computers-- is to write software 00:40:18.100 --> 00:40:20.200 align:middle line:84% that can solve the other part, that 00:40:20.200 --> 00:40:22.060 align:middle line:84% can give you the other part there. 00:40:22.060 --> 00:40:23.440 align:middle line:84% That's one of the ones, if you're 00:40:23.440 --> 00:40:26.860 align:middle line:84% interested in optimization and algorithmic things. 00:40:26.860 --> 00:40:29.890 align:middle line:84% This is one of the cases, the first cases in this class, 00:40:29.890 --> 00:40:32.950 align:middle line:84% where it is easy to write something that will do it 00:40:32.950 --> 00:40:36.640 align:middle line:84% properly, but for a 20-note or 40-note one won't be able 00:40:36.640 --> 00:40:39.670 align:middle line:84% to generate it in the time that the universe-- 00:40:39.670 --> 00:40:41.450 align:middle line:84% before the heat death of the universe. 00:40:41.450 --> 00:40:45.110 align:middle line:84% So it's something where algorithmic complexity comes in. 00:40:45.110 --> 00:40:49.000 align:middle line:84% You are not going to be given that assignment this year. 00:40:49.000 --> 00:40:50.860 align:middle line:84% You all have worked pretty hard, right? 00:40:50.860 --> 00:40:52.870 align:middle line:90% This class is-- yeah, OK. 00:40:52.870 --> 00:40:55.810 align:middle line:84% So not doing that seems like a good thing. 00:40:55.810 --> 00:41:02.250 align:middle line:84% But instead, what you're going to be asked to do, 00:41:02.250 --> 00:41:07.800 align:middle line:84% between now and next Friday, is to come up and encode 00:41:07.800 --> 00:41:11.220 align:middle line:84% some of the basic features underlying 00:41:11.220 --> 00:41:14.110 align:middle line:84% how you might solve a problem like this, 00:41:14.110 --> 00:41:18.820 align:middle line:84% and specifically, how you might avoid things like this. 00:41:18.820 --> 00:41:20.980 align:middle line:84% There's one or two things on this. 00:41:20.980 --> 00:41:25.530 align:middle line:84% This is not a get everything correct problem set, but looking 00:41:25.530 --> 00:41:27.430 align:middle line:84% quite down the road to the second-- 00:41:27.430 --> 00:41:29.010 align:middle line:84% probably the second to last problem 00:41:29.010 --> 00:41:31.590 align:middle line:84% set in this class, problem set nine-- 00:41:31.590 --> 00:41:33.930 align:middle line:84% this will be foundational knowledge on it. 00:41:33.930 --> 00:41:35.490 align:middle line:84% That one, problem set nine, you're 00:41:35.490 --> 00:41:37.050 align:middle line:90% going to be given a piece. 00:41:37.050 --> 00:41:39.240 align:middle line:84% You're going to be asked to remove all the passing 00:41:39.240 --> 00:41:41.910 align:middle line:84% tones and all the ornaments and leave it just 00:41:41.910 --> 00:41:43.450 align:middle line:90% with the block chords. 00:41:43.450 --> 00:41:46.560 align:middle line:84% And so, being able to identify voice leading moments 00:41:46.560 --> 00:41:48.770 align:middle line:90% is pretty important. 00:41:48.770 --> 00:41:51.510 align:middle line:90% OK, so let's unlock intervals. 00:41:51.510 --> 00:41:53.070 align:middle line:84% You've been working a lot on them. 00:41:53.070 --> 00:41:56.210 align:middle line:90% 00:41:56.210 --> 00:42:00.620 align:middle line:84% Unlocking interval, let's go ahead 00:42:00.620 --> 00:42:04.730 align:middle line:84% and from music21, import corpus-- 00:42:04.730 --> 00:42:07.730 align:middle line:84% which we'll use just at the very end, if we have time-- 00:42:07.730 --> 00:42:13.000 align:middle line:84% note, pitch, and the brand-new interval module. 00:42:13.000 --> 00:42:15.620 align:middle line:90% 00:42:15.620 --> 00:42:16.850 align:middle line:90% Is that big enough? 00:42:16.850 --> 00:42:17.680 align:middle line:90% Bigger, better? 00:42:17.680 --> 00:42:24.530 align:middle line:90% 00:42:24.530 --> 00:42:27.260 align:middle line:84% We'll start with the worst variable name ever, 00:42:27.260 --> 00:42:31.040 align:middle line:90% i equals the interval module. 00:42:31.040 --> 00:42:33.020 align:middle line:90% It's lowercase. 00:42:33.020 --> 00:42:37.920 align:middle line:90% The interval class in there, P5. 00:42:37.920 --> 00:42:39.960 align:middle line:84% Let's start with a perfect fifth. 00:42:39.960 --> 00:42:42.800 align:middle line:84% These are all things that you've been doing. 00:42:42.800 --> 00:42:45.030 align:middle line:84% Within the interval module, by the way, 00:42:45.030 --> 00:42:48.180 align:middle line:84% there are interval classes called chromatic interval, 00:42:48.180 --> 00:42:50.520 align:middle line:84% diatonic interval, generic interval, all these things. 00:42:50.520 --> 00:42:53.990 align:middle line:84% But the interval class will let you do, basically, 00:42:53.990 --> 00:42:55.710 align:middle line:90% almost anything in there. 00:42:55.710 --> 00:42:57.080 align:middle line:90% Great. 00:42:57.080 --> 00:42:59.520 align:middle line:84% So now, you've created a P5 interval. 00:42:59.520 --> 00:43:02.760 align:middle line:84% You can get its name, which is very unhelpful. 00:43:02.760 --> 00:43:05.510 align:middle line:84% It just tells you what you just put in. 00:43:05.510 --> 00:43:09.320 align:middle line:84% But you can get its nice name with a capital N 00:43:09.320 --> 00:43:13.100 align:middle line:90% in the middle, perfect fifth. 00:43:13.100 --> 00:43:14.880 align:middle line:84% That's just a little bit more helpful. 00:43:14.880 --> 00:43:16.620 align:middle line:90% Let's keep going. 00:43:16.620 --> 00:43:19.580 align:middle line:84% We can get its directed nice name. 00:43:19.580 --> 00:43:21.680 align:middle line:84% This is all in snake case or camel case, 00:43:21.680 --> 00:43:25.100 align:middle line:84% whatever you want to call it-- directedNice with a capital N, 00:43:25.100 --> 00:43:26.600 align:middle line:90% name with a capital N-- 00:43:26.600 --> 00:43:30.710 align:middle line:90% and get ascending perfect fifth. 00:43:30.710 --> 00:43:33.800 align:middle line:84% Sometimes, we care about what direction the interval is 00:43:33.800 --> 00:43:35.430 align:middle line:90% and sometimes we don't. 00:43:35.430 --> 00:43:36.320 align:middle line:90% In melodies. 00:43:36.320 --> 00:43:37.480 align:middle line:90% We care or don't care? 00:43:37.480 --> 00:43:40.190 align:middle line:90% 00:43:40.190 --> 00:43:41.052 align:middle line:90% Take a guess. 00:43:41.052 --> 00:43:42.510 align:middle line:84% When you're talking about melodies, 00:43:42.510 --> 00:43:44.777 align:middle line:84% do we care which direction the interval is? 00:43:44.777 --> 00:43:45.360 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Yes. 00:43:45.360 --> 00:43:45.780 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Yes. 00:43:45.780 --> 00:43:48.298 align:middle line:84% When we're talking about the notes of a chord, do we care? 00:43:48.298 --> 00:43:48.840 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: No. 00:43:48.840 --> 00:43:50.257 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: No, not usually, 00:43:50.257 --> 00:43:52.400 align:middle line:84% because we're just talking about what things are. 00:43:52.400 --> 00:43:52.900 align:middle line:90% Great. 00:43:52.900 --> 00:43:56.120 align:middle line:84% So if we want to create a descending interval, 00:43:56.120 --> 00:44:04.640 align:middle line:84% we can create interval.Interval ('P-5') and get its 00:44:04.640 --> 00:44:06.950 align:middle line:90% directedNiceName. 00:44:06.950 --> 00:44:09.570 align:middle line:84% You don't have to type all these things. 00:44:09.570 --> 00:44:12.390 align:middle line:84% I'll put this up later, if you're not a fast typist. 00:44:12.390 --> 00:44:14.420 align:middle line:90% But you can do that. 00:44:14.420 --> 00:44:18.090 align:middle line:84% Also, because I can never remember which one we prefer, 00:44:18.090 --> 00:44:23.480 align:middle line:84% you can do negative P5, because I don't know which one of those 00:44:23.480 --> 00:44:26.840 align:middle line:90% is actually better. 00:44:26.840 --> 00:44:29.510 align:middle line:84% That's the most basic way of doing things. 00:44:29.510 --> 00:44:37.710 align:middle line:84% Let's try to get the intervals from pitches first off. 00:44:37.710 --> 00:44:39.360 align:middle line:90% So let's create two pitches. 00:44:39.360 --> 00:44:46.735 align:middle line:84% We'll create pitch.Pitch ('B3'), p2 pitch.Pitch 00:44:46.735 --> 00:44:53.292 align:middle line:84% ('C5'), so a little hard, but not too hard. 00:44:53.292 --> 00:44:54.750 align:middle line:84% You don't need to type the question 00:44:54.750 --> 00:44:58.950 align:middle line:84% marks where to get the interval, interval.Interval (p1, p2). 00:44:58.950 --> 00:45:04.200 align:middle line:90% 00:45:04.200 --> 00:45:07.020 align:middle line:84% Instead of putting in a string, you 00:45:07.020 --> 00:45:09.360 align:middle line:84% can give it two pitches or something. 00:45:09.360 --> 00:45:14.550 align:middle line:84% I'm going to name this variable after what the name should be. 00:45:14.550 --> 00:45:17.760 align:middle line:84% The interval between B3 and C5, what 00:45:17.760 --> 00:45:20.610 align:middle line:84% should I call that, somebody who hasn't already 00:45:20.610 --> 00:45:22.770 align:middle line:90% gotten ahead in the computer? 00:45:22.770 --> 00:45:23.920 align:middle line:90% What is that interval? 00:45:23.920 --> 00:45:27.592 align:middle line:84% Always try to do things in your head the first time? 00:45:27.592 --> 00:45:28.530 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Minor ninth? 00:45:28.530 --> 00:45:30.090 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Minor ninth. 00:45:30.090 --> 00:45:33.870 align:middle line:90% I'll do lowercase m9. 00:45:33.870 --> 00:45:38.040 align:middle line:84% I do like naming things according to their interval, 00:45:38.040 --> 00:45:40.480 align:middle line:84% or according to what they're representing. 00:45:40.480 --> 00:45:44.730 align:middle line:84% It does hit my anal retentive like, everything 00:45:44.730 --> 00:45:47.040 align:middle line:84% must be in order streak, that when we do 00:45:47.040 --> 00:45:50.190 align:middle line:84% have something that should be a major third and it's capital M, 00:45:50.190 --> 00:45:53.010 align:middle line:84% but then, I go capital should only be used for classes. 00:45:53.010 --> 00:45:55.140 align:middle line:84% But sometimes, we have to do that. 00:45:55.140 --> 00:45:55.830 align:middle line:90% OK. 00:45:55.830 --> 00:45:57.420 align:middle line:90% We have-- do we get that? 00:45:57.420 --> 00:45:59.820 align:middle line:90% Yep, [INDISTINCT]. 00:45:59.820 --> 00:46:02.548 align:middle line:84% Minor ninth, how many semitones in a minor ninth? 00:46:02.548 --> 00:46:03.090 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: 15. 00:46:03.090 --> 00:46:05.610 align:middle line:90% 00:46:05.610 --> 00:46:07.255 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: 13. 00:46:07.255 --> 00:46:08.130 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: 13. 00:46:08.130 --> 00:46:10.350 align:middle line:84% So dot semitones will give you the number 00:46:10.350 --> 00:46:16.170 align:middle line:84% of semitones in an interval, which is often quite helpful. 00:46:16.170 --> 00:46:22.000 align:middle line:84% Obviously, m9.name will give you will give you m9, 00:46:22.000 --> 00:46:26.126 align:middle line:84% but m9.simpleName also in snake case. 00:46:26.126 --> 00:46:29.910 align:middle line:90% 00:46:29.910 --> 00:46:32.920 align:middle line:84% When you're dealing with compound intervals, 00:46:32.920 --> 00:46:34.560 align:middle line:84% there is something called simple name 00:46:34.560 --> 00:46:38.073 align:middle line:84% that will be very helpful for working through things. 00:46:38.073 --> 00:46:42.780 align:middle line:90% 00:46:42.780 --> 00:46:45.640 align:middle line:84% Now, there's some slight difference. 00:46:45.640 --> 00:46:48.430 align:middle line:84% Let's come up with another interval. 00:46:48.430 --> 00:46:50.850 align:middle line:90% This one I'll call p8. 00:46:50.850 --> 00:46:53.980 align:middle line:84% I'll just show, so you can do some of these things here. 00:46:53.980 --> 00:46:56.400 align:middle line:84% We can also create an interval from notes, not just 00:46:56.400 --> 00:46:57.450 align:middle line:90% from pitches. 00:46:57.450 --> 00:47:00.270 align:middle line:84% That's probably a mistake in my taxonomy, 00:47:00.270 --> 00:47:04.120 align:middle line:84% meronymy, whatever it is, but it's been there for a while. 00:47:04.120 --> 00:47:09.090 align:middle line:84% So p8 should be C 4 to C 5, good. 00:47:09.090 --> 00:47:12.580 align:middle line:84% The only difference why I'm creating an octave-- 00:47:12.580 --> 00:47:15.000 align:middle line:84% I should have just called it octave, right-- 00:47:15.000 --> 00:47:18.750 align:middle line:84% is that sometimes, that the octave simple name 00:47:18.750 --> 00:47:20.910 align:middle line:90% is perfect unison, p1. 00:47:20.910 --> 00:47:21.550 align:middle line:90% Right? 00:47:21.550 --> 00:47:24.600 align:middle line:84% But sometimes, we care about the difference 00:47:24.600 --> 00:47:27.120 align:middle line:84% between octaves and unisons in a way 00:47:27.120 --> 00:47:30.220 align:middle line:84% that we don't care about seconds and ninths. 00:47:30.220 --> 00:47:34.900 align:middle line:84% So there is something called p8.semiSimpleName-- 00:47:34.900 --> 00:47:37.320 align:middle line:84% I wish I had spent some more time coming up 00:47:37.320 --> 00:47:39.490 align:middle line:84% with it-- which basically, is exactly 00:47:39.490 --> 00:47:42.370 align:middle line:84% the same as a simple name, except that things 00:47:42.370 --> 00:47:46.090 align:middle line:84% that are multiples of octaves get squished down to an octave. 00:47:46.090 --> 00:47:50.230 align:middle line:84% A double octave also becomes an octave in a semi-simple name. 00:47:50.230 --> 00:47:57.800 align:middle line:84% Whereas, the ninths semi-simple name is minor second. 00:47:57.800 --> 00:48:01.990 align:middle line:84% I think there's also things, see if I still have all these 00:48:01.990 --> 00:48:05.740 align:middle line:90% in here, semiSimpleNiceName. 00:48:05.740 --> 00:48:06.940 align:middle line:90% Yeah, OK. 00:48:06.940 --> 00:48:10.720 align:middle line:84% There are all of these things in there. 00:48:10.720 --> 00:48:17.720 align:middle line:84% Great, let's stop typing so much and let's create some aliases. 00:48:17.720 --> 00:48:23.620 align:middle line:84% Alias, let's just do capital I is the interval.Interval class. 00:48:23.620 --> 00:48:26.420 align:middle line:84% Now, we can call I and get new interval 00:48:26.420 --> 00:48:29.110 align:middle line:84% and P equals the pitch.Pitch class. 00:48:29.110 --> 00:48:36.250 align:middle line:84% Not a pitch class, the class pitch inside the module pitch. 00:48:36.250 --> 00:48:38.830 align:middle line:90% That able to be seen? 00:48:38.830 --> 00:48:39.610 align:middle line:90% Great. 00:48:39.610 --> 00:48:43.840 align:middle line:84% So now, we can create a minor third 00:48:43.840 --> 00:48:47.770 align:middle line:84% just like that, just a capital I, parentheses n. 00:48:47.770 --> 00:48:48.890 align:middle line:90% Slow it down? 00:48:48.890 --> 00:48:49.720 align:middle line:90% OK? 00:48:49.720 --> 00:48:51.220 align:middle line:90% Slow down? 00:48:51.220 --> 00:48:52.580 align:middle line:90% Slow down, yes, a little bit. 00:48:52.580 --> 00:48:53.890 align:middle line:90% OK, good. 00:48:53.890 --> 00:48:57.280 align:middle line:84% Great, pause for a second on this. 00:48:57.280 --> 00:49:01.417 align:middle line:84% So far, this is great, except for being 00:49:01.417 --> 00:49:04.000 align:middle line:84% able to get the interval from two pitches, which will probably 00:49:04.000 --> 00:49:06.040 align:middle line:90% be very helpful for you. 00:49:06.040 --> 00:49:08.530 align:middle line:84% There's not too much you can do once you 00:49:08.530 --> 00:49:09.680 align:middle line:90% have an interval object. 00:49:09.680 --> 00:49:15.453 align:middle line:84% So let's start creating some things that you might like. 00:49:15.453 --> 00:49:17.120 align:middle line:84% You don't have to type all these things, 00:49:17.120 --> 00:49:18.860 align:middle line:84% but this is probably a nice one to do. 00:49:18.860 --> 00:49:22.430 align:middle line:84% The interval of a minor third is consonant. 00:49:22.430 --> 00:49:26.090 align:middle line:84% Now, this is probably a mistaken term before I hit Enter, 00:49:26.090 --> 00:49:29.170 align:middle line:84% because all of these things are consonant 00:49:29.170 --> 00:49:31.550 align:middle line:84% in some of the world's traditions, 00:49:31.550 --> 00:49:35.120 align:middle line:84% and not in some of the other world's traditions. 00:49:35.120 --> 00:49:39.290 align:middle line:84% In fact, some of the early proposals of music21 said oh, 00:49:39.290 --> 00:49:42.070 align:middle line:84% and then, you'll be able to have a context objects, which 00:49:42.070 --> 00:49:45.280 align:middle line:84% will be able to affect how these things are. 00:49:45.280 --> 00:49:48.040 align:middle line:84% If you're in 14th century Europe, this will be false. 00:49:48.040 --> 00:49:51.820 align:middle line:84% If you're in some part-- if you're giving it 00:49:51.820 --> 00:49:53.800 align:middle line:84% southern Indian context, it might 00:49:53.800 --> 00:49:56.180 align:middle line:84% be false or depending on what the time is. 00:49:56.180 --> 00:49:59.440 align:middle line:84% And I've never actually fully implemented that. 00:49:59.440 --> 00:50:02.320 align:middle line:84% Right now, unfortunately, this privileges 00:50:02.320 --> 00:50:06.162 align:middle line:84% the western classical music context. 00:50:06.162 --> 00:50:08.870 align:middle line:84% What should this be if it's in a western classical music context? 00:50:08.870 --> 00:50:11.207 align:middle line:84% Minor thirds are consonant or dissonant? 00:50:11.207 --> 00:50:12.040 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Consonant. 00:50:12.040 --> 00:50:13.420 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Consonant. 00:50:13.420 --> 00:50:16.690 align:middle line:84% Good, I programmed something right. 00:50:16.690 --> 00:50:19.550 align:middle line:90% Now, let's try something else. 00:50:19.550 --> 00:50:21.700 align:middle line:84% A major sixth, consonant or dissonant? 00:50:21.700 --> 00:50:22.700 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Consonant. 00:50:22.700 --> 00:50:24.117 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Consonant, good. 00:50:24.117 --> 00:50:27.220 align:middle line:90% 00:50:27.220 --> 00:50:28.490 align:middle line:90% Sorry, I'm just going to-- 00:50:28.490 --> 00:50:29.750 align:middle line:90% I'm typing a lot here. 00:50:29.750 --> 00:50:31.870 align:middle line:84% You can probably assign things variables. 00:50:31.870 --> 00:50:35.590 align:middle line:84% The number of semitones in a major sixth? 00:50:35.590 --> 00:50:37.712 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Nine. 00:50:37.712 --> 00:50:38.920 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Nine, good. 00:50:38.920 --> 00:50:41.935 align:middle line:84% Now, I'm going to create a diminished seventh, I('d7'). 00:50:41.935 --> 00:50:44.710 align:middle line:90% 00:50:44.710 --> 00:50:49.750 align:middle line:84% And the number of semitones in a diminished seventh? 00:50:49.750 --> 00:50:50.837 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: 11. 00:50:50.837 --> 00:50:53.170 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: So I got one guess, get another guess? 00:50:53.170 --> 00:50:54.045 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Is it nine? 00:50:54.045 --> 00:50:58.554 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: 9, so diminished seventh is consonant? 00:50:58.554 --> 00:51:00.000 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: False. 00:51:00.000 --> 00:51:01.000 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: False. 00:51:01.000 --> 00:51:06.940 align:middle line:84% So one of the things built into the music21 ontology that's 00:51:06.940 --> 00:51:11.680 align:middle line:84% different from Dmitri Tymoczko's optic default ontology 00:51:11.680 --> 00:51:14.920 align:middle line:84% is that spelling matters in this case. 00:51:14.920 --> 00:51:17.320 align:middle line:84% A diminished seventh sounds the same 00:51:17.320 --> 00:51:21.370 align:middle line:84% as a major sixth in isolation, but it's not 00:51:21.370 --> 00:51:24.250 align:middle line:90% considered consonant. 00:51:24.250 --> 00:51:25.940 align:middle line:90% That's important to know. 00:51:25.940 --> 00:51:28.768 align:middle line:90% 00:51:28.768 --> 00:51:31.060 align:middle line:84% I think last year, there was a month 00:51:31.060 --> 00:51:34.100 align:middle line:84% that went by without somebody reporting this as a bug 00:51:34.100 --> 00:51:35.670 align:middle line:90% to the music21 list. 00:51:35.670 --> 00:51:38.300 align:middle line:84% But most months, one to two people 00:51:38.300 --> 00:51:40.580 align:middle line:90% put that in, not see that so. 00:51:40.580 --> 00:51:46.640 align:middle line:84% It definitely means that I don't know. 00:51:46.640 --> 00:51:50.040 align:middle line:84% Augmented seventh is not consonant either, 00:51:50.040 --> 00:51:52.070 align:middle line:84% even though an augmented seventh is 00:51:52.070 --> 00:51:57.980 align:middle line:84% another way of saying octave, perfect octave, great, super. 00:51:57.980 --> 00:52:01.890 align:middle line:84% Basically, anything in traditional theory, 00:52:01.890 --> 00:52:03.800 align:middle line:84% in traditional tonal theory, anything 00:52:03.800 --> 00:52:07.070 align:middle line:84% that is marked as diminished or augmented or doubly diminished 00:52:07.070 --> 00:52:11.270 align:middle line:84% or doubly augmented or whatever, is considered dissonant. 00:52:11.270 --> 00:52:17.480 align:middle line:84% Now, the weird one that we can always debate 00:52:17.480 --> 00:52:19.260 align:middle line:90% is the perfect fourth. 00:52:19.260 --> 00:52:21.320 align:middle line:90% Who thinks it's consonance? 00:52:21.320 --> 00:52:23.865 align:middle line:90% Who thinks it's a dissonance? 00:52:23.865 --> 00:52:24.990 align:middle line:90% A lot of people not voting. 00:52:24.990 --> 00:52:28.220 align:middle line:84% I'm glad for either way people voted. 00:52:28.220 --> 00:52:31.830 align:middle line:84% In this case, music21 regards it as not a consonance. 00:52:31.830 --> 00:52:35.240 align:middle line:84% Perfect fourths are generally-- they're the one weird interval. 00:52:35.240 --> 00:52:37.280 align:middle line:84% They're generally considered consonant 00:52:37.280 --> 00:52:41.450 align:middle line:84% when they are melodic, but dissonant when they're 00:52:41.450 --> 00:52:46.610 align:middle line:90% harmonic and above the bass. 00:52:46.610 --> 00:52:49.970 align:middle line:84% Take Medieval Music with me or Spiro. 00:52:49.970 --> 00:52:53.000 align:middle line:84% You can figure out the whole history of how this happened 00:52:53.000 --> 00:52:55.980 align:middle line:84% and why it's in the one weird double position, 00:52:55.980 --> 00:52:58.190 align:middle line:84% but it's the only perfect thing that 00:52:58.190 --> 00:53:02.280 align:middle line:84% is not consonant in some circumstances. 00:53:02.280 --> 00:53:06.140 align:middle line:84% OK, what are some of the things you 00:53:06.140 --> 00:53:08.460 align:middle line:90% might do in the interval class? 00:53:08.460 --> 00:53:09.770 align:middle line:90% Well, let's start with-- 00:53:09.770 --> 00:53:14.540 align:middle line:84% let's create the perfect fifth one, p5. 00:53:14.540 --> 00:53:17.030 align:middle line:84% Hopefully, you've created that, good. 00:53:17.030 --> 00:53:22.305 align:middle line:84% And what we can do is, let's say c4 we'll just call this equals 00:53:22.305 --> 00:53:22.805 align:middle line:90% P('C4'). 00:53:22.805 --> 00:53:25.850 align:middle line:90% 00:53:25.850 --> 00:53:27.920 align:middle line:84% And now, p5 can transposePitch c4. 00:53:27.920 --> 00:53:36.470 align:middle line:90% 00:53:36.470 --> 00:53:39.620 align:middle line:84% So you have a perfect fifth, creating 00:53:39.620 --> 00:53:42.570 align:middle line:84% that as an interval object, storing as p5. 00:53:42.570 --> 00:53:46.370 align:middle line:84% We can create a pitch object, just because of my aliases c4, 00:53:46.370 --> 00:53:47.370 align:middle line:90% start at c4. 00:53:47.370 --> 00:53:53.480 align:middle line:84% Then, p5 can transpose the c4, transpose pitch on c4 00:53:53.480 --> 00:53:57.800 align:middle line:84% and gets a pitch object that's G4. 00:53:57.800 --> 00:54:03.350 align:middle line:84% Now, once you've done that, if we look at C4, 00:54:03.350 --> 00:54:07.760 align:middle line:90% that object is unchanged. 00:54:07.760 --> 00:54:10.160 align:middle line:84% Transpose pitch creates a new pitch 00:54:10.160 --> 00:54:14.930 align:middle line:90% that is not the same pitch. 00:54:14.930 --> 00:54:18.210 align:middle line:84% If you wanted to do something useful with this, 00:54:18.210 --> 00:54:23.400 align:middle line:84% you would probably store it as G4 equals this. 00:54:23.400 --> 00:54:28.180 align:middle line:84% And then, you can do something with your new pitch. 00:54:28.180 --> 00:54:30.930 align:middle line:84% Obviously, if you knew what the pitch was going to be coming in 00:54:30.930 --> 00:54:32.500 align:middle line:84% and what the pitch was going to be coming out, 00:54:32.500 --> 00:54:33.850 align:middle line:90% you wouldn't need to do this. 00:54:33.850 --> 00:54:35.860 align:middle line:84% You can just create your own damn G4. 00:54:35.860 --> 00:54:39.730 align:middle line:90% But this would work in general. 00:54:39.730 --> 00:54:45.450 align:middle line:84% If you do want to transpose in place, 00:54:45.450 --> 00:54:47.728 align:middle line:84% I don't think we've seen this in music21, 00:54:47.728 --> 00:54:50.020 align:middle line:84% but you're going to start seeing it all over the place. 00:54:50.020 --> 00:54:52.630 align:middle line:84% There is a keyword only argument. 00:54:52.630 --> 00:54:56.880 align:middle line:84% That means, you must type this as a keyword, inPlace=True. 00:54:56.880 --> 00:55:02.650 align:middle line:84% c4 will now be transposed and nothing will be returned. 00:55:02.650 --> 00:55:03.970 align:middle line:90% We run it. 00:55:03.970 --> 00:55:09.270 align:middle line:84% But now, c4 is a really terribly named variable, right, 00:55:09.270 --> 00:55:11.000 align:middle line:90% because c4 is now a G4. 00:55:11.000 --> 00:55:13.800 align:middle line:90% 00:55:13.800 --> 00:55:17.590 align:middle line:84% If you're ever doing a demo, remember when we took two notes, 00:55:17.590 --> 00:55:20.730 align:middle line:84% we inserted two notes or removed them from the stream 00:55:20.730 --> 00:55:22.710 align:middle line:84% and then, everything was screwed up. 00:55:22.710 --> 00:55:24.670 align:middle line:84% I always-- I'm going to remember, 00:55:24.670 --> 00:55:30.690 align:middle line:84% learn from that experience and make c4 equal c4 right again. 00:55:30.690 --> 00:55:34.953 align:middle line:84% But sometimes, we want to just have a generic p equals here. 00:55:34.953 --> 00:55:37.620 align:middle line:84% This time, I'll write it out so that we can copy and paste this, 00:55:37.620 --> 00:55:39.630 align:middle line:90% pitch.Pitch ('C4'). 00:55:39.630 --> 00:55:42.160 align:middle line:90% And we still have p5. 00:55:42.160 --> 00:55:45.310 align:middle line:84% Let's just do this for i in range (13). 00:55:45.310 --> 00:55:46.720 align:middle line:90% We don't actually need i. 00:55:46.720 --> 00:55:49.240 align:middle line:84% Some people like to have underscore as a dummy variable. 00:55:49.240 --> 00:55:52.620 align:middle line:84% But we're just going to, for 13 times, let's take the pitch. 00:55:52.620 --> 00:55:57.420 align:middle line:84% And then, since we've just done it, p5.transposePitch(p, 00:55:57.420 --> 00:55:58.470 align:middle line:90% inPlace=True). 00:55:58.470 --> 00:56:14.220 align:middle line:90% 00:56:14.220 --> 00:56:16.620 align:middle line:90% We create a c4. 00:56:16.620 --> 00:56:23.130 align:middle line:84% 13 times, we're going to go through and transpose it. 00:56:23.130 --> 00:56:25.830 align:middle line:90% So what is p now? 00:56:25.830 --> 00:56:26.790 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: C 11. 00:56:26.790 --> 00:56:28.140 align:middle line:90% B sharp 10. 00:56:28.140 --> 00:56:30.390 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: B sharp 10. 00:56:30.390 --> 00:56:33.300 align:middle line:90% Is that what it is? 00:56:33.300 --> 00:56:34.175 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: F sharp 11? 00:56:34.175 --> 00:56:37.620 align:middle line:90% 00:56:37.620 --> 00:56:38.880 align:middle line:90% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: Oops, not c. 00:56:38.880 --> 00:56:41.418 align:middle line:90% What do you call it, p? 00:56:41.418 --> 00:56:46.750 align:middle line:84% F double sharp 11, because if you notice, we were printing 00:56:46.750 --> 00:56:50.640 align:middle line:84% and then transposing is my little trick thing, 00:56:50.640 --> 00:56:54.420 align:middle line:84% just to make sure that we're all following things. 00:56:54.420 --> 00:57:00.690 align:middle line:84% By the way, this is one of the weird reasons why I wanted you 00:57:00.690 --> 00:57:05.160 align:middle line:84% to work, early on, with weird octave numbers like 10 and 11 00:57:05.160 --> 00:57:07.570 align:middle line:84% and negative 2 and things like that. 00:57:07.570 --> 00:57:10.230 align:middle line:84% Because quite often, it is simpler 00:57:10.230 --> 00:57:12.933 align:middle line:84% to do an operation like this, like let's all 00:57:12.933 --> 00:57:14.850 align:middle line:84% go around the circle of fifths and then, we'll 00:57:14.850 --> 00:57:16.530 align:middle line:84% just print the step of it and not 00:57:16.530 --> 00:57:18.130 align:middle line:90% care about the octave number. 00:57:18.130 --> 00:57:20.940 align:middle line:84% And then, in the end, we can bring it back down 00:57:20.940 --> 00:57:22.540 align:middle line:90% a bunch of octaves later. 00:57:22.540 --> 00:57:24.580 align:middle line:84% But sometimes, you're going to end up in there. 00:57:24.580 --> 00:57:26.122 align:middle line:84% And sometimes, you're going to end up 00:57:26.122 --> 00:57:29.110 align:middle line:84% in double sharp territory, triple sharp territory, 00:57:29.110 --> 00:57:32.190 align:middle line:84% before then transposing down back the other way 00:57:32.190 --> 00:57:34.110 align:middle line:90% or doing some other path. 00:57:34.110 --> 00:57:41.730 align:middle line:84% Almost never is F quadruple sharp 22 00:57:41.730 --> 00:57:45.130 align:middle line:84% going to be a useful thing to think about musically. 00:57:45.130 --> 00:57:47.460 align:middle line:84% But sometimes, it's a useful point 00:57:47.460 --> 00:57:50.320 align:middle line:90% in the midpoint of your work. 00:57:50.320 --> 00:57:52.740 align:middle line:84% And by the way, that's how imaginary numbers came out 00:57:52.740 --> 00:57:56.020 align:middle line:84% first, that they were first used to solve, I believe, 00:57:56.020 --> 00:58:00.190 align:middle line:84% quintic equations in a way that made it very easy, 00:58:00.190 --> 00:58:02.980 align:middle line:84% even though they were in the intermediate stages, 00:58:02.980 --> 00:58:06.630 align:middle line:84% even though they were never the answer at the end. 00:58:06.630 --> 00:58:11.610 align:middle line:84% Think of quadruple sharps and octave 22s and stuff as like 00:58:11.610 --> 00:58:12.420 align:middle line:90% that. 00:58:12.420 --> 00:58:17.170 align:middle line:90% OK, so a couple things. 00:58:17.170 --> 00:58:18.345 align:middle line:90% Is c4 still c4? 00:58:18.345 --> 00:58:20.710 align:middle line:90% Whew, yep, good. 00:58:20.710 --> 00:58:25.060 align:middle line:90% You can also transpose-- 00:58:25.060 --> 00:58:26.470 align:middle line:90% do the opposite way. 00:58:26.470 --> 00:58:30.370 align:middle line:84% This is a real sign that Python allows and that other languages, 00:58:30.370 --> 00:58:32.470 align:middle line:90% I haven't been able to do it in. 00:58:32.470 --> 00:58:36.740 align:middle line:84% Instead of taking the interval and saying dot transpose pitch 00:58:36.740 --> 00:58:38.380 align:middle line:84% into pitch, you can take the pitch 00:58:38.380 --> 00:58:40.990 align:middle line:84% and say, transpose that by the interval. 00:58:40.990 --> 00:58:45.430 align:middle line:84% That's sometimes pretty helpful, so music21 object dot transpose 00:58:45.430 --> 00:58:48.130 align:middle line:90% by an interval class. 00:58:48.130 --> 00:58:50.960 align:middle line:84% If you don't care about efficiency, 00:58:50.960 --> 00:58:55.670 align:middle line:84% you can always put in just a string 00:58:55.670 --> 00:58:58.240 align:middle line:84% and it will create an interval for you. 00:58:58.240 --> 00:59:03.010 align:middle line:84% And so, transposing up an augmented 223rd gets you G sharp 00:59:03.010 --> 00:59:04.280 align:middle line:90% 35. 00:59:04.280 --> 00:59:05.560 align:middle line:90% Is that right? 00:59:05.560 --> 00:59:06.190 align:middle line:90% Doesn't matter. 00:59:06.190 --> 00:59:09.190 align:middle line:90% 00:59:09.190 --> 00:59:14.470 align:middle line:84% OK, looking at the time, one or two last things. 00:59:14.470 --> 00:59:20.300 align:middle line:84% If you ever want something when you're working with it, 00:59:20.300 --> 00:59:22.540 align:middle line:84% this is the interval object, again, perfect fifth. 00:59:22.540 --> 00:59:25.660 align:middle line:84% There are things like specifier in here. 00:59:25.660 --> 00:59:32.710 align:middle line:84% You'll be able to do a-- how to do dir on a what do you call it, 00:59:32.710 --> 00:59:37.430 align:middle line:84% on an object to see everything that's in it? 00:59:37.430 --> 00:59:40.970 align:middle line:84% But these are probably the most useful things you'll see, 00:59:40.970 --> 00:59:45.160 align:middle line:84% so how many cents, how many hundredths of a semitone is it? 00:59:45.160 --> 00:59:47.290 align:middle line:84% Yes, you can do microtonal intervals 00:59:47.290 --> 00:59:48.980 align:middle line:90% if you care about such things. 00:59:48.980 --> 00:59:50.390 align:middle line:90% What's the chromatic interval? 00:59:50.390 --> 00:59:51.470 align:middle line:90% What's the complement? 00:59:51.470 --> 00:59:57.012 align:middle line:84% If you have a major sixth the complement is a minor third. 00:59:57.012 --> 00:59:58.720 align:middle line:84% It's the thing that fills out the octave. 00:59:58.720 --> 01:00:01.430 align:middle line:84% Diatonic, is it a skip, is it a step? 01:00:01.430 --> 01:00:03.170 align:middle line:90% Can we reverse the interval? 01:00:03.170 --> 01:00:07.660 align:middle line:84% All these things, you'll find some of these things in here. 01:00:07.660 --> 01:00:10.300 align:middle line:84% But the last thing I want to do is 01:00:10.300 --> 01:00:13.670 align:middle line:84% to think about this spelling, non-spelling thing, 01:00:13.670 --> 01:00:17.540 align:middle line:90% so implicit diatonic we'll say. 01:00:17.540 --> 01:00:21.640 align:middle line:84% Let's create the interval of four semitones. 01:00:21.640 --> 01:00:24.880 align:middle line:84% All I care is that it's an interval of four semitones. 01:00:24.880 --> 01:00:27.140 align:middle line:84% Here's where, what do we call it? 01:00:27.140 --> 01:00:28.660 align:middle line:90% Polyvalent? 01:00:28.660 --> 01:00:33.280 align:middle line:84% Polygamous, whatever we call the interval, it will take-- 01:00:33.280 --> 01:00:34.840 align:middle line:90% that was a joke-- 01:00:34.840 --> 01:00:38.470 align:middle line:84% it will take an integer instead of a string. 01:00:38.470 --> 01:00:40.750 align:middle line:90% We can say the int four. 01:00:40.750 --> 01:00:43.900 align:middle line:84% If I just look at this i4 right now, 01:00:43.900 --> 01:00:48.760 align:middle line:84% it looks like, hey, it's just a cheap way of saying major third. 01:00:48.760 --> 01:00:51.880 align:middle line:84% But it's actually a little bit different from that. 01:00:51.880 --> 01:00:57.970 align:middle line:84% If I take the pitch c double flat-- 01:00:57.970 --> 01:01:02.410 align:middle line:90% so pitch c double flat 4-- 01:01:02.410 --> 01:01:04.622 align:middle line:90% and I'd say, i4.transposePitch. 01:01:04.622 --> 01:01:07.390 align:middle line:90% 01:01:07.390 --> 01:01:11.253 align:middle line:84% Take C double flat 4 and take it up a major third. 01:01:11.253 --> 01:01:12.670 align:middle line:84% I don't care about the accidental. 01:01:12.670 --> 01:01:15.340 align:middle line:84% But what's the step have to be if you're going up 01:01:15.340 --> 01:01:18.140 align:middle line:90% a third from C something? 01:01:18.140 --> 01:01:18.640 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: E. 01:01:18.640 --> 01:01:20.470 align:middle line:84% MICHAEL CUTHBERT: E. So it should be, 01:01:20.470 --> 01:01:22.403 align:middle line:90% what is that, E double flat 4. 01:01:22.403 --> 01:01:25.900 align:middle line:90% 01:01:25.900 --> 01:01:28.340 align:middle line:90% Instead, you get a D4. 01:01:28.340 --> 01:01:32.770 align:middle line:84% So there's something where, if you initiate an interval just 01:01:32.770 --> 01:01:34.850 align:middle line:84% by saying the number of semitones, 01:01:34.850 --> 01:01:41.020 align:middle line:84% you're telling that interval that the diatonic interval, 01:01:41.020 --> 01:01:43.580 align:middle line:90% the major third, is implicit. 01:01:43.580 --> 01:01:46.210 align:middle line:84% That is to say, when you want to know 01:01:46.210 --> 01:01:49.310 align:middle line:84% if it's a major third, yeah, it will be a major third. 01:01:49.310 --> 01:01:52.030 align:middle line:90% But ifor will say no. 01:01:52.030 --> 01:01:54.910 align:middle line:84% Feel free to change this to anything 01:01:54.910 --> 01:02:01.270 align:middle line:84% that is four semitones up that is logical and easy to use. 01:02:01.270 --> 01:02:05.260 align:middle line:84% That's something that people will see in there. 01:02:05.260 --> 01:02:08.440 align:middle line:84% Whereas, if we take the perfect fifth and C, which we created it 01:02:08.440 --> 01:02:12.800 align:middle line:84% with the p5 thing and see if it's an implicit diatonic, 01:02:12.800 --> 01:02:13.910 align:middle line:90% false. 01:02:13.910 --> 01:02:17.180 align:middle line:84% Perfect fifth will always take the one 01:02:17.180 --> 01:02:18.570 align:middle line:90% that we created with the string. 01:02:18.570 --> 01:02:22.530 align:middle line:84% P5 will always make sure that something is a p5. 01:02:22.530 --> 01:02:24.800 align:middle line:84% I'm looking at the time, so I won't demonstrate 01:02:24.800 --> 01:02:27.200 align:middle line:84% the last thing, which is music21 still 01:02:27.200 --> 01:02:28.700 align:middle line:84% has a restriction that it won't go 01:02:28.700 --> 01:02:31.760 align:middle line:84% above quadruple sharps or quadruple flats. 01:02:31.760 --> 01:02:35.630 align:middle line:84% At that point, even the diatonic one will say, 01:02:35.630 --> 01:02:37.670 align:middle line:90% forget what I said. 01:02:37.670 --> 01:02:41.780 align:middle line:84% Let's make it work and round things. 01:02:41.780 --> 01:02:46.380 align:middle line:84% Great, that's all the time that I have. 01:02:46.380 --> 01:02:48.770 align:middle line:84% If you transpose a whole score, you'll 01:02:48.770 --> 01:02:50.910 align:middle line:84% see that the key signatures transpose with you, 01:02:50.910 --> 01:02:52.118 align:middle line:90% which can be kind of helpful. 01:02:52.118 --> 01:02:55.010 align:middle line:90% 01:02:55.010 --> 01:02:57.680 align:middle line:84% I'll post my-- what do you call it-- 01:02:57.680 --> 01:03:02.070 align:middle line:84% the thing where I have that demo to the class. 01:03:02.070 --> 01:03:03.620 align:middle line:90% Great. 01:03:03.620 --> 01:03:13.000 align:middle line:90%