Loiterer – Adrift

 

Okay, so this piece is going to take some time to explain because it combines some uncommon experimental composition ideas. So to make things short for those who don’t want to read something long and dry, I will begin by putting this in quick-and-dirty terms:

  1. This is music co-written by my computer. I coded a piece of music that writes itself.
  2. This piece utilizes notes and harmonies unavailable in “normal” music.

Point 1 is particularly oversimplified. So if you’d like a more detailed, accurate representation of what this is, read on.

A few months ago, I released Key West, an algorithmic/microtonal* piece that was composed using the awesome software known as Pure Data. While I really enjoyed how that piece turned out, I wanted to go further with Pure Data and create something that had stronger rhythmic content. Within a few days of completing it, I began putting together a new composition.

I put quite a few hours into it over the next few weeks. The code ended up a lot more complicated than I expected. I liked how it all came together, but upon finishing it… I felt that I couldn’t put it out yet. This was because I actually didn’t understand some of the theory behind what I had done, and didn’t know how I was possibly going to explain it. I was told that to someone who wasn’t already deep into lunatic-fringe musician territory, the explanation I wrote up for Key West was mostly incomprehensible gobbledygook, so I wanted to be sure that I could thoroughly explain this new one before I put it out to the public. I had to do some research to figure out what exactly I had come up with.

 

* Don’t know what these terms mean? Don’t worry, explanations are coming below.

 

MICROTONALITY

 

Like Key West, this piece also experiments with microtonality. Most music that we hear is written in 12edo (equal division of the octave), which splits the octave into 12 notes that the human ear interprets as even jumps in pitch. Key West utilizes a temperament known as 5edo, where the octave is split into 5 notes that the human ear interprets as even jumps in pitch, allowing the utilization of notes that are not found in most music.

12vs5




This song, however, abandons that approach and uses a different kind of system. The composition came to be as a result of my curiosity regarding different ways of splitting up the octave. After trying a bunch of different things, I happened to take the octave and split it up into 16 even divisions… but instead of splitting them up in equal cent intervals (tones that the human ear interprets as even jumps), like with an EDO, I split the octave evenly in hertz (i.e. vibrations per second). This is one of the things that I did that, at the time, I didn’t fully understand, and later got really confused by, so hopefully I can explain.

The human ear interprets frequencies logarithmically. Doubling any frequency will result in an octave harmony. We understand 200hz to be the same note as 100hz except one octave higher. This doubling continues with each iteration of the octave; 400hz, 800hz, 1600hz, et cetera are all perceived as the same note. This means that in a tuning system where every step of the scale is interpreted by the ear as being exactly even, the amount of Hz between each note increases.

12edohzcorrelation

So, as I said before, I derived the scale that I used for this piece in the opposite way. Instead of dividing evenly in cents, I divided the octave evenly into Hz. This means that as the scale increases, the ear interprets the intervals as getting closer together. I later learned that this is known as an otonal scale due to its relation to the overtone series (shout-outs to Dave Ryan and Tom Winspear for helping me figure out what the heck this approach is called).

otoneshz

This particular scale is known as otones16-32. From my research, otonal scales seem to be pretty uncommon. I don’t know why that is. They’re a very logical way to construct mathematically harmonious scales. To my ear, they can be utilized in a way which sounds very consonant, but they also allow for some exotic xenharmonic flavor.


From the 16 available notes in this scale, I chose a set of 7 of them that I thought sounded agreeable together. The ratios† of these notes are:

  • 16/16 aka 1/1 aka unison
  • 18/16 aka 9/8 aka major whole tone
  • 19/16 (doesn’t reduce) aka overtone minor third
  • 22/16 aka 11/8 aka undecimal tritone (11th harmonic)
  • 24/16 aka 3/2 aka perfect fifth
  • 25/16 (doesn’t reduce) aka augmented fifth
  • 28/16 aka 7/4 aka septimal minor seventh
  • 32/16 aka 2/1 aka octave




I found the sound of this scale inspiring (especially when I heard how strange it sounded to build chords with it), so I set out to put together a new algorithmic piece. Like I said earlier, I wanted to be more ambitious and give the thing more structure than my last effort.

 

† “Ratios? What does that mean in this context?” The ratio is what you multiply your base note by to create a particular harmony. For example, say your base note is 100hz. To create a perfect fifth (3/2), you multiply 100*(3/2), yielding 150hz. When 100hz and 150hz are played together, every time that the base note vibrates twice, the harmony vibrates exactly three times in perfect alignment.

 

 

ALGORITHMICALITY

 

An algorithmic composition, in its simplest form, is music that is made by creating and then following a set of rules. The term, however, is more commonly used for music where the artist designs some kind of framework (most often a computer program) that allows the piece to perform itself without intervention from the artist. In this case, I did just that: coded a framework of rules dictating which sounds are generated when by a combination of soundwave generators.

This composition also falls under a closely related musical form known as generative music. A composition is generative if it is unique each time that it is listened to. It needs to be continually reinventing itself in some way. This algorithmic composition is also a generative composition because the computer makes many determinations about the musical output each time that it is played. Every time the program runs and the song is heard, the chord progressions are different, as are the rhythms and notes that the instruments play. Many aspects of the composition are the same each time, but many others are determined by the computer and are unique to every listen.

 

Here are the rules I chose that are the same on every playthrough:

  • The scale utilized
    • 7 notes of otones16-32
    • 1/1, 9/8, 19/16, 5/4, 11/8, 3/2, 25/16, 7/4, 2/1 (as explained above)
    • A base frequency of 200 (roughly halfway between G and Ab in A-440)
  • The overall rhythm and tempo
    • 4/4
    • Backbeat on beat 3
    • 137bpm
  • The intervals that the chord instrument plays
    • Root note, 3 notes up the scale, 5 notes up the scale
  • The instruments and their beginning timbres
    • Drums
      • Kick
      • Snare
      • Hi-hats on both the left and right sides
    • The polyphonic synth which plays the 3-note chords
    • Bass
    • A monophonic, airy sounding “ah” synth
    • A lead “sequencer” that plays in the center, with a 5th harmony that fades in and out
    • A short-tailed secondary lead layer
    • The warbly background synths on the left and right
  • The 17 available chord progressions
  • The overall structure of the piece
    • Fade-in
    • 5 parts
    • A “trigger” occurring at 3 specific points which activates one of the instrument mute sequences
    • A slowdown and fade-out for an ending

 

And here’s what the computer determines on each playthrough:

  • Which chord progressions (of the 17 available) will be used for each of the 5 parts. There are no restrictions on which progressions can be used for each part, so:
    • The computer sometimes makes the piece have unique chord progressions for each part, creating a song structure of ABCDE
    • It is theoretically possible that the computer could choose the same chord progression for all 5 parts, creating AAAAA, though highly unlikely (odds of 1 in 1,419,817)
    • I am not well versed in the theory behind statistics, so I don’t know the reason for this, but the majority of the time, it tends to pick the same chord progression for at least two of the parts
      • Most often, it seems the structure will end up being something like ABCAD, or ABACB
  • Unique melodies and rhythms for each instrument during each of the five parts of the song. That is:
    • A unique drum pattern for each individual drum sound during each part
    • A unique bass line during each part
    • A unique sequencer line for each part
    • A unique short-tailed synth line for each part
    • A unique set of warbly background notes on the left and the right for each part
  • The morphing of the timbre of the instruments
    • What morphs:
      • The overtones that create the timbres
      • The amount and level of frequency and amplitude modulation
    • When this morphing occurs
  • Where and when the instruments pan around in the stereo field
  • When the sequencer harmony fades in and out
  • Which instrument mute sequence (of the 3 available) occurs at each defined trigger point

 

FINAL NOTES / OTHER

 

There is one aspect of the composition that I listed under the “rules I chose” heading that I would actually consider some kind of middle ground: the available chord progressions. While I was working on coding the program, I made a chord progression generator. It automatically created bar-long chord progressions. Each time it would generate a loop, I would listen to it a few times and decide if I liked it or not. If I liked it, I would add it to the list of progressions that the computer could choose from. The ones that were musical nonsense were deleted. About 1/3 of the progressions generated by the algorithm I designed were usable. So in the end, I did choose the chord progressions that were included. But the computer created them in the first place.

On a different note, this method of presentation of the piece raises some art philosophy questions. Is the YouTube video of the piece being played actually the same piece? It’s not truly representative of the generative nature of the song; the YouTube video will be exactly the same every time it is played. It’s a facsimile that only demonstrates one particular runthrough. Eventually I’d like to make the jump over to Max/MSP, an extremely similar visual coding language that allows you to compile your code into a standalone program that anyone can run.

Lastly, all of the sounds you hear in the piece are generated via what is known as waveform synthesis. They are created by adding various combinations of sine waves and white noise‡ to one another. This creates complex waveforms which our ears interpret as different timbres. I could write a post entirely about how the sound generators in this piece work together to create the sounds that you hear, but this post is already long enough. Maybe for my next Pure Data based composition, I will focus my explanation entirely on that aspect of the piece.

 

‡ Sine waves are the most basic, pure waveform (a sinusoidal shape), and white noise is an audio signal that plays all frequencies at equal power (which ends up sounding like a sharp hiss). The audio demonstrations included in this article are all made up of basic sine waves.

 

 

 

Yikes! That’s a lot longer than I expected. Hopefully someone finds this interesting. At the very least, writing this cemented a bunch of this stuff in my brain.

Multitrack Video Series – May 2017

This is the first installment of my new Instagram multipanel-video series. These are quick original compositions that have no restriction on genre or instruments used.

This sentence is a link to my Instagram account. If you like what you see, please feel free to hit that follow button.

(If you don’t have Instagram, you can also subscribe to my YouTube channel. Or you can just come back here each month.)

 

Tone Loc’s Lament – May 10, 2017


Vacation on the Dimensional Cusp – May 11, 2017


Earth – May 16, 2017


Help Computer – May 19, 2017


They Say Time Flies, but with the Way the Airlines Are Going These Days, Maybe Time Should Take the Bus – May 23, 2017


Orbs Were Banned in Europe and Cast into the Chasm After the Incident – May 31, 2017

An-Dron Yekrae – Atalean Spxldror

bandcamp

An-Dron Yekrae – Atalean Spxldror

andronyekrae.bandcamp.com

I am proud to present another new solo album. I think that its origins are worth discussing, as they’re pretty… odd.

One of the main principles that I follow while creating art is that the work must be allowed to flow freely, and that I should follow the art wherever it wants to go. Most of the time when I’m working on my own material, I try to actually get out of the way of the art, let whatever it is show itself, and then mold those raw impulses into a finished product. It feels like channeling something. This album was done that way, and it led me on a few twists and turns throughout its creation process.

Last year, melodies, chord progressions, and bass lines in the style of old jazz standards unexpectedly began popping into my head. Whenever this sort of thing happens, I make sure to capture and transcribe the ideas. After a few weeks of this process, I ended up with 14 complete pieces.

Originally I thought that they should be played in the style of a jazz combo, as would be expected for jazz standards. But I didn’t know how I was going to accomplish that. At this point, I can confidently say that I play drums and bass well, and piano decently… but playing jazz drums, bass, and piano is a different story. And I don’t play any traditional jazz lead instruments at all. My skills in that genre would need a lot of work before I could pull something like that off. So I puzzled over that impasse for a while, and the songs just sat while I worked on other things (like Retail Monkey – ADD/Nihilism and [syzygy] – [visitor] {which was “channeled” in a similar way to this album}).

When I have a project sitting, I can feel its weight in my mind. It takes up space and it makes me anxious. If I wait too long, the inspiration of the project can sometimes leave and never return. It wasn’t long before the incomplete project really began to bother me. I prefer to get things done and move along, but I knew something was not right about the way I was approaching it. So I couldn’t. After some time I realized that my original instrumental vision was definitely not how they were supposed to end up.

I realize how weird this all might sound, but at that point, the answer came to me. The project wanted to be a concept album: songs written by a character, an alien (An-Dron Yekrae) from another world (Atalea), who visited Earth and fell in love with two sounds: classic jazz and synthesizers. He got together some friends and recorded this album, melding those two interests. I don’t know where this idea came from, but it felt like the right answer, so I just shrugged and followed it. Immediately I rediscovered the flow state, and the entirety of the project was tracked within the week. After being stuck for quite a while, it turned back into a naturally flowing process. It was a blast to record all this stuff.

Yeah, like I said, it’s weird. But that’s what this project wanted to be. It was fun working with you, little alien jazz buddy.

Released on Big Name Records. BNR1701
Available on cassette via the Big Name Records Webstore or Bandcamp.
Cassettes were printed in the Big Name print shop.

bnr4-13 bnr4-14 bnr4-15 bnr4-16

 

Retail Monkey – ADD/Nihilism

addncover

Retail Monkey – ADD/Nihilism

retailmonkey.bandcamp.com

I am very pleased to bring you my newest solo album. For fans of The Dillinger Escape Plan, The Locust, Daughters, Converge, and other bands of the mid-2000s era.

This was the first project that I began working on when I finished my current studio space. The recording process took nearly two years to complete. I had also been dreaming of actually recording these songs for almost 10 years by the time that I started working on it.

I would like to put forth a huge thank you to Stephen and Joel for their involvement in the writing process all those years ago.

Info from the Bandcamp:

“Instrumentals written by Stephen Navarrete, Joel Freeman, and Jon Lervold collaboratively over the internet via MIDI-based guitar tab software between 2004 and 2006.

We were teenagers at the time. Since we used TabIt to compose, we were able to write whatever the hell we wanted with no limitations based on how ridiculous or unplayable it seemed to us. We never figured real, recorded versions would exist. After spending another decade making music, it was within reach.

This album was performed, tracked, edited, mixed, and mastered by Jon Lervold at Big Name Recording Studio in Olympia, WA between January 2015 and November 2016. Vocals were written in early 2016.
bigname.org

Interlude 3 was graciously provided for use by the original artist, Publio Delgado. You can find his work here: youtube.com/user/vendidou and here: facebook.com/publiomusic.

Pulling off my Eyelids with a Pair of Pliers contains writing contributions by Alexander Galavodas, Mark Solomon, and Joseph Malicke.

Released on Big Name Records
BNR1700
bignamerecords.com

 

Cassettes can be found on the Bandcamp or on Big Name Records.

bnr3-1-3bnr3-2-3

bnr3-3-3bnr3-4-3

Loiterer – Key West (Pure Data Algorithmic Composition)

A 5edo generative ambient composition made in Pure Data. Every playthrough is unique. This video shows merely one example of what might be generated by the algorithm. No MIDI was used in the patch; all sounds were generated by oscillator matrices I designed in PD.

I made this while on vacation in Key West, FL. The video footage is from the day after I finished the bulk of the composition’s programming.

This piece consists of four note generators, a lead generator, a monophonic sequencer, and a white noise generator, all of which automatically generate their own note choices, durations, and timbres. The overtones on the synths become more exaggerated as time runs on. Each playthrough automatically begins winding down around 3 minutes and finishes by 3:30. The patch can also be set to run indefinitely.

For anyone unfamiliar: “edo” means “equal distribution of the octave.” Almost all Western music is written in 12tet, the system that divides the octave into 12 steps of 100 cents each. This composition divides the octave into 5 steps of 240 cents each.

Genesis 32:12 – Jacob Turns Heel and Hits the Angel with a Folding Chair, Which Pleases God

This song is my entry into the HP TALENT SHOW 2017 contest. The goal of the contest is to create the “most ridiculous/goofiest/best” TabIt song. The rules state that the entry must be less than two minutes long and can use no more than 5 tracks. I decided to write a piece for a bass and drums math-rock duo. Tracks 3, 4, and 5 simulate various effects pedals sent through separate amps. Lately I’ve been experimenting with quarter tones, so I put a few in there.

I’ve been using TabIt for 15 years. It’s been 8 years since I last officially released a tab, as that was when I moved to producing real audio tracks exclusively. Taking part in this was a very nostalgic experience. TabIt and the TabIt community helped make me the musician that I am today.

Pure Data – Endless King Crimson Riff Generator

A few days ago I started learning the visual programming language known as Pure Data. I’ve never programmed anything before (though I have done a lot of html coding in my day), so starting from square one was a bit of a daunting prospect, but it turned out to be really enthralling. My experience as an audio engineer really helps, since it has given me a solid understanding of signal flow.

This is the first patch I have made that I would consider a satisfactory v1.0. It was incredibly fun to design this system and my mind is really reeling with the possibilities of what else can be done with this software. It really makes me want to learn how to program commercial music apps.

Under the hood.
A small section of what’s under the hood. More in the video.

The patch first generates a one-measure riff (reminiscent, to me, of 80’s-era King Crimson) in a random time signature which plays for 8 repeats. Then it plays another newly generated riff in the same time signature. This process repeats 6 more times, for a total of 8 riffs in a given time signature. At that point, it switches to a new time signature and starts the process again. The result of all the riffs together reminds me a lot of some Philip Glass compositions. Not every riff is outstanding, but there are plenty of more-than-usable musical ideas in there!

In this version the non-drum instruments are just sine waves generated by PD, but I am currently modifying it so that they generate MIDI events that can be sent out to a DAW. My larger vision involves incorporating this patch’s functionality into a much larger music generation program. More to come later…

[syzygy] – [visitor]

syzygy-cover-smaller[syzygy] – [visitor]

http://syzygywa.bandcamp.com

My newest solo album. 6 tracks (36 minutes) of impressionist piano. Tracked, edited, mixed, and mastered at Big Name. The album was recorded and mixed entirely analog on the Tascam 388 and TEAC A-1200U tape machines.

CDs and cassettes made in the print shop. The cassette version was mastered straight to tape and has never entered the digital domain.

Physicals can be found on the Bandcamp or at Big Name Records.

bnr-43 bnr-44 bnr-45 bnr-46

 

bnr-40 bnr-41 bnr-42

A God or an Other / The Vatican – The Great Northern (Split)

A God or an Other / The Vatican – The Great Northern (Split)

http://agodoranother.bandcamp.com or http://thevaticangrind.bandcamp.com/

3 tracks (17 minutes) of black metal/hardcore and 6 tracks (17 minutes) of grindcore. All of A God or an Other’s side was tracked, edited, mixed at Big Name. The Vatican instrumentals were recorded at Big Name. Both sides were mastered together at Big Name.

Tapes and CDs manufactured at Big Name in the print shop and available through Bandcamp.