Jump to content

Phil O'Keefe

Administrators
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    85,666

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    263

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Phil O'Keefe

    Musicians algorithmically generate "every possible melody" and release them to the public domain

    in Phil O'Keefe: In The Studio Trenches

    Posted

     

    Here's a TEDx talk that one of the two guys behind this (a coder, a musician and a lawyer) gave on the subject:

     

     

    While I think his heart is in the right place, I still think there are some serious flaws with some of his thinking.

    He's arguing that melodies are nothing more than math, and that melodies have always existed, and as such they have limited to no copyright due to being "facts."

    He further argues that the limited number of notes (first he says only eight, then expands that to twelve to include the sharps and flats in a single octave, then acknowledges later that it could conceivably be expanded to include the entire piano keyboard, as well as all possible rhythms) means that there are a much more limited amount of possible melodies than there are words / sentences / paragraphs.

    There's a problem with that argument IMO. Practically everything can be represented mathematically. The entire universe is basically math. According to physicists, there is only a finite amount of ways that matter / atoms can be arranged. Everything is finite. Extend the universe far enough, and everything - including you and I - repeats eventually, and in an infinite amount of variations thereof. Literally everything must have infinite repeats and permutations in the infinite universe that many physicists think exists... and that doesn't even begin to take into account the possibility of the multiverse... So if melodies are finite and thus must "run out" and repeat eventually, so does everything else - and therefore IMO nothing could be subject to copyrights if you follow his logic to its logical conclusion. 

     

     

     

     

    • Like 1

    Musicians algorithmically generate "every possible melody" and release them to the public domain

    in Phil O'Keefe: In The Studio Trenches

    Posted

    27 minutes ago, NOS68 said:

    I see this as opening a big of worms better left closed and will likely cause more trouble than it solves.

     

    And it may not even accomplish what they were trying to achieve - the end of lawsuits over copyright claims. That will still have to be adjudicated by the courts, and unless I miss my guess, that is going to be one big long-lasting can of very expensive litigious legal worms, and they are going to be crawling around for several years, if not longer.

    Here's something else to consider: If they generated every possible melody in a one-octave range, how do they know that their own copyright claims don't infringe upon previously filed claims for lesser-known compositions? That is only one of the possible issues that they may not have considered going into this - they themselves may be sued for infringement and false copyright ownership claims. They have no right to make a claim for the same melodies that are already covered by copyrights owned by other parties.

    And furthermore, this - if allowed to stand - would create a new world of musical haves and have-nots; with only those with previously registered copyrights being allowed legal protection, while everyone else going forward would be prevented from obtaining similar protections for their own compositions.  

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

    Musicians algorithmically generate "every possible melody" and release them to the public domain

    in Phil O'Keefe: In The Studio Trenches

    Posted

    My daughter just texted me the link to this article and asked me what I thought. Unfortunately, I can not repeat what I said in reply without breaking the site rules... while their intent (attempting to prevent musicians from getting sued) may be admirable, it also could possibly stop songwriters from exercising their own creativity and writing their own new songs, and remove another one of the major income streams that many musicians rely upon to make a living.

    https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/wxepzw/musicians-algorithmically-generate-every-possible-melody-release-them-to-public-domain

    What's next? Algorithmically writing every possible book and magazine article, artificially creating every possible movie and TV script, algorithmically creating every painting and photo and releasing all of those things to the public domain? Sorry.... I do not like this one bit because I think it could have considerable unexpected negative consequences for the arts. 

    I'd love to hear your thoughts on the subject - pro or con. :snax: 

     

     

    • Like 1

    Pignose G40V Questions & Observations

    in Amps

    Posted

    5 hours ago, WRGKMC said:

    I mention all of this because most manufacturers post the SPL level in their web pages.  If you own a speaker that's say, 94dB you can double the perceived loudness of that amp by getting a 97dB speaker. 

     

    Not to quibble, but an increase of 10dB(A) SPL is generally considered to result in a doubling of perceived loudness, not 3dB. 

    http://www.sounddeadsteel.com/what-is-a-decibel.html

    A 3dB increase in SPL (sound pressure level) will result from a doubling of power (or a 3dB increase in speaker sensitivity / efficiency), and will result in a doubling of sound energy (and reduces the allowable exposure time by 1/2, as per the 3dB rule), but it won't result in a doubling of perceived volume.

    A 100W amp isn't perceived by humans as being "twice as loud" as a 50W amp, given the same speakers... it's only 3dB louder, not 10dB. 

    To quote myself... :0

    So let's assume we have a speaker with a sensitivity of 90dB @ 1W / 1m and a power handling capacity of up to 100W. If we power that speaker with 1W of power, it will generate 90dB when measured at a distance of 1 meter. If we double that power to 2W, the SPL measurement will increase to 93dB. If we increase the power to 10W, then the SPL measurement will increase to 100dB, which is "twice the perceived loudness" when compared to 1W. So it actually takes ten times more power to give us a perceived doubling of volume level. 

    https://www.harmonycentral.com/articles/guitar-and-bass-amps/wattage-speaker-efficiency-and-amplifier-loudness-r195/

    While a 3dB increase in speaker sensitivity will result in a noticeable increase in perceived volume, he'd need a speaker with a 10dB greater sensitivity rating vs. his current one in order to result in a doubling of perceived volume from the same amplifier. 

     

    Pignose G40V Questions & Observations

    in Amps

    Posted

    21 minutes ago, Acidhouse said:

    A question I have is should the amp with the 2 watt fuse be swapped out for a fast blow 3 watt?  

     

    Does the back of the amp specify the fuse type and rating? If so (and it should...), stick with that!

    You can try contacting Pignose - they might have some information on the amps, including any changes that were implemented in their circuits over their production run. 

    https://pignoseamps.com/contact/

     

     

    Fernandes Serial Number look up

    in Electric Guitars

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Adultintraining said:

    So I bought this Fernandes tele. Freakin love it! Sounds beautiful! However, I need to know how old this bad boy is.Since everyone says the older ones had serial numbers, but on the neck plate, I’m a little confused.. Mines on the headstock? Help if you can guys/gals. Appreciate it!

    We'd need more information to have any chance of telling you how old your guitar is. Pictures would also be helpful. :) 

    BTW, welcome to Harmony Central. :wave:

     

    Is anybody still here?

    in Effects and Processors

    Posted

    6 hours ago, SmoggyTwinkles said:

    I've been looking for a semi-hollow for like 10 years, used to have a Peerless made Casino that was amazing but had to sell when I was in a bind in my late 20's (time has FLOWN eh?).

     

    I've got an '01 Peerless Casino and it's one of my favorite guitars. I love that thing! Yeah - time keeps on marching on... 

     

    Quote

    For some reason this Dot just caught my attention.  Didn't have a price on it but it was in really great shape, played great acoustically, took it to the counter and asked how much (they go for $550 new in Canada) and he says "how about $335?". 

     

    Canadian? Sounds like a deal! And it looks great too - very nice. Thanks for the picture. 

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...