MazeHatter comments on Programming-like activities? - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (76)
Music. It's pretty much all math. Every part of it. When you try to learn a riff, and you play it, and it sounds like you think it should, interesting things happen.
Music theory is, in part, math. Music is art. There is only a tenuous connection between the two. I've known people who could teach all the underlying math, without being able to carry a tune or play a chord, and I've known an accomplished flutist who struggled to pass a music theory course because it touched on logarithms.
Music is like the art of math. The playing of musical instruments is art, but the writing of it and the instrument design and the understanding of how those instruments operate is all math. Music can be created without art, but music cannot be created without math; not even in the slightest aspect of it. It is the only major form of classical arts to which that claim can be prescribed. A drum requires a calculation to generate reverberation to make itself heard. A scale must be calculated from its underlying frequencies. Strings must be measured in length, thickness, and tension to determine their resonance. The hole spacing and size of wind instruments must be calculated. Even something as simple as humming while alternating between high and low is a binary expression of either volume or frequency. It is only over the course of several millennia that we have developed the ability to teach an artistically gifted person to generate music without learning a bit of math. But that person still owes their artistic creations to the mathematicians of history. The connection is not at all tenuous. It is a very clear case of cause and effect.
By tenuous I mean that many great musicians and singers never learned much math and never needed to. Not sure how much math Stradivari knew, either. But I guess it all depends on how we define "math".
ADBOC
"Music cannot be created without math" is true only in the same grossly misleading sense as "you can't catch a ball without finding an approximate solution to a differential equation".
That is not the same. A complex set of equations are not required to calculate how to make an object to throw at people, nor is it required to make a glove or to figure out where to place your hands to catch the ball, but generating resonance at a given volume and frequency is a very hard thing to do. Stradivari may not have been a great mathematician, but he still had to carefully measure, and set to very exacting specifications each one of his instruments. He had to follow the calculations even if he did not know those calculations. In the time of ancient Greece, before those calculations were completed, it did require a mathematician to devise a musical instrument more complex than a drum. This is why many cultures never got past the stage of drums and horns before the more complex instruments were imported from Europe. These equations can be used by those unfamiliar with them, but they can't be created without someone learning those equations in the first place in the same sense that computer software cannot be created without engineering.
What? This doesn't sound like you're describing folk music at all.
Folk music is a very wide-open term. The origins of it are mostly unknown in most parts of the world, but traditional folk music was usually quite simple. There were only very simple changes in pitch; often binary or ternary or none at all. These are simple enough to where a person could intuitively grasp the calculations in their head (by counting the tempo and arrangement of percussive hits); even if they could not express them in written form. Later forms of folk music were derived from western classical music which definitely did require a lot of complex calculation.
Whether it's simply a rhythm, or playing a melody, or adding a harmony, every part about playing music engages the math part of the brain.
That doesn't mean you need to understand calculus to play. It's simply addition and basic translations, but it's a constant barrage of adding things and subtracting things.
If it's a piano or guitar, or even a voice, you have to know that do re me fa, is whole step - whole step - half step. The fretboard or keyboard is a large numerical puzzle. It's right in front of you, and what makes a good singers is someone who mentally works in that musical puzzle. Adding steps and half steps. You never really add past 12, because you can start over then. You don't need an advanced mathematics degree to solve the puzzle, but your brain is doing (simple) math constantly.
Not only that, but music is, since the beginning of time, the essential example of how to train your brain, to do without doing. The brain patterns of jazz musicians in performance resemble those of meditating monks.
The idea that the connection is tenuous may suggest you don't play music. If you've never made a beat before, try this:
openmusicgallery.appspot.com/drums.htm
Now keep in mind, this is just telling the program when to play a beat. If a human were to try to play these beats, they'd be doing math the entire time (not differential equations, but still math). Making sure beats are evenly placed is just counting. Once you've done it enough, you don't literally need to count "1,2,3,4" but I know many professional drummers that do exactly this, and are nearly flawless because of it.
I'm a professional musician, I also do creative coding for artists. One interesting tension is that some artists don't think that music is art. I agree with them 99% of the time. You can get paid a few hundred bucks to play Lynryd Skynrd song, which ends up being paint by numbers.
Music on the whole is just paint by numbers. Occasionally it breaks into the realm of genuine art. In any case, like programming, I find that it is merely a vehicle for expressing things.
That's what I was going to say, too. But it probably lacks "objective and unforgiving", depending on how narrowly the OP meant it.
Playing in time, and in key are pretty objective. You want unforgiving, try to sing the Star Spangled Banner out of tune at some event.