RE: CONSTRAINT OF RANDOMNESS

["Brian Hamlin" <brian.hamlin@blueyonder.co.uk>]

Most people's interest in musc has little to do with music & more to do
with fashion/peer pressure/ artist's apparent association with
listener's concerns etc. Don't you ever suspect that only other musos
LISTEN to MUSIC?
I've been to recent Mannring/Lawson gigs & the Cambridge Loop festival,
and suspect these events were populated by bass players, loopers and
Brides of the Loop.

My suspicion is that MOST people, don't even LISTEN to music.


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Firman [mailto:maf@mlswebworks.com] 
Sent: 03 December 2004 15:54
To: Loopers-Delight@loopers-delight.com
Subject: Re: CONSTRAINT OF RANDOMNESS



This is correct but it changes the question to: Does the human ear/brain
prefer more or less information? Judging from what usually turns out to
be the most popular music (sells the best, is most requested, has the
largest audience - and this is independent of genre, by the way), I 
would
posit that we (because of our conditioning, our wiring, whatever) 
prefer music with
only small amounts of information.

On Dec 3, 2004, at 9:46 AM, burnett@pobox.com wrote:

> Regarding Rick's long and interesting discussion on looping, exact
> copies,
> and small randomness "livening up" a repetitive pattern: as I remember
> things, one tenet of information theory (as I learned it) is that the 
> more
> of the content of a message that you are able to predict, the less
> information that message contains. So predictability is inversely
> correlated with information. So even slight variations in a repetitive
> sequence raise the level of information.
>
> hmm,
> Steve B
> Phasmatodea    http://www.phasmatodea.net/
> Subscape Annex http://www.subscapeannex.com/
>
>
--
| Michael A. Firman
| maf@mlswebworks.com
| http://www.mlswebworks.com