David Cope and the Science of Algorithmic Composition
“To some extent, this match is a defense of the whole human race. Computers play such a huge role in society. They are everywhere. But there is a frontier they must not cross. They must not cross into the area of human creativity. It would threaten the existence of human control in such areas as arts, literature, and music.” 
So said Gary Kasparov, chess grandmaster, one year before he lost to Deep Blue, IBM’s chess-playing supercomputer. Meanwhile, a relatively anonymous professor of music in California had created a computer program capable of composing pieces of music in the style of great composers that most people could not differentiate from authentic compositions. The professor, David Cope, named this program Experiments in Musical Intelligence, or “Emmy”. Since then, Cope and his successive programs have been the objects of both celebration and scorn, challenging the world’s perception of what musical creativity entails.     
Cope’s argument, and the basis for his software, is that creativity is essentially recombinant: consciously or not, all composers plagiarize their progenitors and contemporaries. What makes his (or Emmy’s) work superior to the stilted and awkward compositions of earlier programs are two fundamental insights into the syntax of music. Rather than rely on the traditional divisions of musical notation, Cope developed an analytic musical syntax that goes into what Douglas Hofstadter (of Gödel, Escher, Bach) terms the “tension-resolution status” of a piece, the two forces that underlie all music. Secondly, though the program composes according to formal rules, it also uses heuristics that allow it to sometimes ‘break’ its own rules in innovative ways.
You can listen to a performance of one of Emmy’s Bach Chorale-style compositions here; for more on David Cope, you can visit his website or read this lengthy (but excellent) article.
- Alex Tesar

David Cope and the Science of Algorithmic Composition

“To some extent, this match is a defense of the whole human race. Computers play such a huge role in society. They are everywhere. But there is a frontier they must not cross. They must not cross into the area of human creativity. It would threaten the existence of human control in such areas as arts, literature, and music.”

So said Gary Kasparov, chess grandmaster, one year before he lost to Deep Blue, IBM’s chess-playing supercomputer. Meanwhile, a relatively anonymous professor of music in California had created a computer program capable of composing pieces of music in the style of great composers that most people could not differentiate from authentic compositions. The professor, David Cope, named this program Experiments in Musical Intelligence, or “Emmy”. Since then, Cope and his successive programs have been the objects of both celebration and scorn, challenging the world’s perception of what musical creativity entails.     

Cope’s argument, and the basis for his software, is that creativity is essentially recombinant: consciously or not, all composers plagiarize their progenitors and contemporaries. What makes his (or Emmy’s) work superior to the stilted and awkward compositions of earlier programs are two fundamental insights into the syntax of music. Rather than rely on the traditional divisions of musical notation, Cope developed an analytic musical syntax that goes into what Douglas Hofstadter (of Gödel, Escher, Bach) terms the “tension-resolution status” of a piece, the two forces that underlie all music. Secondly, though the program composes according to formal rules, it also uses heuristics that allow it to sometimes ‘break’ its own rules in innovative ways.

You can listen to a performance of one of Emmy’s Bach Chorale-style compositions here; for more on David Cope, you can visit his website or read this lengthy (but excellent) article.

- Alex Tesar

Notes

  1. klaatu reblogged this from artandsciencejournal
  2. okorogariist reblogged this from scinerds
  3. boredtohunger reblogged this from sassy--shelby
  4. apocalypsesunshine reblogged this from scinerds
  5. thirteen94 reblogged this from flipthecoin
  6. flipthecoin reblogged this from kdntjb
  7. kdntjb reblogged this from yewlltide
  8. mangy-mongrel reblogged this from scinerds
  9. e-x-d-e-e reblogged this from scinerds
  10. rokth-hyde reblogged this from scinerds
  11. tekym reblogged this from stonewalling
  12. witchwoman reblogged this from scinerds
  13. stonewalling reblogged this from scinerds
  14. laikas-owner reblogged this from scinerds
  15. zxcvsdfer4 reblogged this from scinerds
  16. 16th-note reblogged this from atomicslamjam
  17. tarmduffin reblogged this from scinerds
  18. readthisinabritishaccent reblogged this from themadnessofthecosmos
  19. toutes-choses-egales reblogged this from scinerds
  20. lurkingshadow reblogged this from scinerds
  21. higgsupernova reblogged this from scinerds
  22. whereinthewarehouse reblogged this from yewlltide
  23. djsven reblogged this from scinerds
  24. yoshi-brooklynboyzfinest reblogged this from scinerds
  25. themadnessofthecosmos reblogged this from scinerds
  26. xtreemlennykun reblogged this from atomicslamjam