Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Robotics Science

Musical Robots Invade Juilliard 115

Posted by timothy from the that's-a-cruel-thing-to-say dept.
roboRob writes "RoboRecital, a recent concert at the Juilliard School, featured four robot performers: GuitarBot, a self-playing guitar; an automated fifty-seven rank pipe organ; a Yamaha Disklavier, a modern player piano; and ModBots, a collection of robotic percussion instruments. This New York Times article and it this Juilliard Journal article discuss it." This beats the band-in-a-box automaton at Wall Drug by a fair stretch.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Musical Robots Invade Juilliard More

Musical Robots Invade Juilliard

Comments Filter:
  • When will a fembot invade a geeky school??
  • Will Captured! By Robots [capturedbyrobots.com] ever get into Gilliard?

  • Took a while for the guitar to catch up, eh? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by PornMaster ( 749461 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:03PM (#11451059) Homepage
    Since the player piano was invented in 1863 [amica.org], it's curious to be so interested in a robotic guitar in 2005. :)
    • Well, if this robot plays a guitar the way a human does, that's a lot more work than having it play a piano. I mean, with a piano, you just hit each string with its corresponding hammer. That's all mechanical. In playing a guitar, you have to move your fingers into any number of strange positions to press the strings in different places.
      • ... spoken as someone who doesn't play the piano eh?

        There is more to playing than simply hitting the right keys. There is the duration, force, rythm, etc, etc, etc...

        Granted it's been a few years since I played last but from where I was [grade 7 conservatory] it was a lot more than just "hit these notes in 1/4 time".

        Tom
        • Yes, but the piano's action is entirely mechanical, and has therefore been much easier to automate. Some of the great pianists of the day were "recorded" on player-pianos (Rachmaninov, Grainger etc) and consequently modern hi-fi CD recordings are available of them today. It really is amazing how an expressive a piano can be when you think of the things that it can't do (crescendo on a note, vibrato, pitch bend, 1/4 tones etc).
          • What you are describing is a keyboard not a piano.

            That's like saying Violins suck because they can't play good piano solo music or something. Different techniques for different instruments.

            Besides the best part of music [not just piano] isn't just the sweet sweet notes, it's also the performers method/variation. Everyone plays slightly different and getting the performers take on something is equally cool.

            Let's just say given the chance I'd rather see live performances than hi-quality super recordings.

            • I don't see the difference between a piano and a player piano. The latter only had the ability to "record" the pianists work to be played back identically to the original performance. I am not looking at the keyboard aspect of the piano, only the sound production. Once you do a conventional recording of that player piano you have to factor in a whole lot of other factors to make the playback as close to the original as possible.

              In any case, I am not trying to suggest that pianos suck because of what they

    • Yeah, this isn't even a technically impressive robotic guitar, it's just a novelty item of the sort you might see at an exhibition of modern art. The pieces it plays are not anything like what a human can do. I would be much more impressed if someone made a live version of this robotic performance. [archive.org] (download the mpeg2 version, the others suck)

    • Re:Took a while for the guitar to catch up, eh? (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You are missing the point.
      To get a robot slide guitar player that plays in tune is very difficult with mechanical methods. While there were fairground organs with violins, they really were more like hurdy-gurdys. The pitch resolution is in microtones. To do that without electronics would be impossible.
      Even humans find it tricky.
      • I know nothing about robotics, but I know quite a bit about guitar, so it evens out. If you can get your motors to move the slide mechanism accurately enough, a robotic slide guitar is simple. You know the length of the string, and any pitch you want on that string will be played an exact distance from the bottom of that string.
    • And have you heard it?? I just downloaded the MOV file and the music is APPALLING... however I'm not sure whether that's the robot's fault or the composer's... it would be interesting to hear this attempt something like Rodrigo's Concierto.

  • Some assembly required. (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:04PM (#11451063)
    q: How does a robot get to carnagie hall?

    A: Assembly, assembly, assembly.

  • In related news.... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Skidge ( 316075 ) * on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:06PM (#11451074)
    Following the concert, the robots met up and started a Styx cover band [afn.org].
  • Ah, the spirit of Jacques Vaucanson [wikipedia.org] lives on, more than two centuries later.

  • But Philip Glass was the first robot at Juilliard (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Peter Cooper ( 660482 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:11PM (#11451102) Homepage Journal
    When you consider that Philip Glass [philipglass.com] studied at Juilliard for several years, this isn't really that surprising or far out for them. The robots' music was probably less repetitive and more soulful than Glass's compositions of the time ;-) one of which is described as:

    "The player performs "1 + 1" by tapping the table top with his fingers or knuckles. Two rhythmic units, which build the block of "1 + 1", are combined in regular arithmetic progressions."
  • Not Jazzica Simpsons even :'(

    I'm disappointed.

    • They were originally signed to perform, but the robots protested, claiming that Britney and Jessica were "just too artificial". "We gotta draw the line somewhere," GuitarBot was heard to say. "I mean, sure we're just steel and cables and processors and stuff, but those two are just flat-out fake, man!" Spokespeople for Spears and Simpson had no comment.
  • The concept of the Disklavier is at least a decade old, so this part isn't really newsworthy I guess. The idea is that you record how the keys are struck (probably bad english) while someone plays. After that you have almost an excact copy of the performance.

    I really like the concept. You can play interpretations of classic pieces performed by top-notch pianists of today at your dinner party. Even if I would play the piano that well, I would definately have other obligations at said party.

  • Douglas Adams predicted this (Score:4, Funny)

    by kiore ( 734594 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:12PM (#11451116) Homepage Journal
    http://hhgproject.org/entries/shareandenjoy.html [hhgproject.org]

    'At these times of special celebration a choir of over two million robots sing the company song "Share and Enjoy". Unfortunately - again - another of the computing errors for which the company is justly famous means that the robot's voices are exactly a flattened fifth out of tune and the result sounds something like this, only slightly worse.'

    • that all the robot's voices are flattened by the same amount, only special people who have excellent pitch would be bothered, and then only if they were aware of the original key of the piece, or if the piece made typical or extreme use of voice range and sounded unconventional, or if there was an accompaniment in the original key.

      sorry... nerds to the rescue.

  • Why not playing it back from a recording? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Muhammar ( 659468 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:19PM (#11451161)
    The performance would be the same. What is so great about 'self-playing organ'?
  • I'm still not sure I get it. Specifically, I guess I don't get "guitar-bot". As a reasonably accompomplished guitar player myself, I was pretty interested in hearing what the guitar robot could do. Instead of being the fairly organic yet dissonant sounds as the piano and pipe organ pieces were, it sounded like one of those old film strip soundtracks that they used to show in science class or driver's education classes (you remember, think soundtrack to "Blood on the Asphalt"). Then again, the vers

  • Multiple Points of Failure (Score:3, Funny)

    by kurosawdust ( 654754 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:33PM (#11451257)
    The best part about this GuitarBot thing is that if it totally malfunctions and bursts into flame while on stage, people will just think it's part of the act.
  • A friend of mine is a pretty successful pipe organ restorer and he says that for well over a decade modern pipe organs have been set up with MIDI interfaces from the consoles to the actuators that actually control the pipes. Many restoration projects on older pipe organs involve replacing older mechanical or electric consoles with MIDI. So, as far as I can tell, it sounds like there's nothing special going on with this organ. The guy has just replaced the console with a laptop as the MIDI input device.

  • @ the Beall Center (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Binary Boy ( 2407 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @07:57PM (#11451403)
    My girlfriend works at a gallery on the UC Irvine campus called the Beall Center for Art & Technology [uci.edu] and they currently have an installation of some of the LEMUR "robots". Frankly, I was a little disappointed as they are more funky MIDI instrument than robot, but if you're in or near Orange County, CA, go check it out.
  • From now until March 19 they're exhibited at the University of California, Irvine Beall Center for Art + Technology [uci.edu]. Free admissions.
  • Are these the robots that we will be Sending into Iraq? [slashdot.org]

  • Orchestrion (Score:3, Interesting)

    by apikoros ( 774290 ) * on Sunday January 23, 2005 @09:11PM (#11451910)
    Instruments played by machine are hardly new. More impresive than a robot that plays guitar, a robot that plays piano, or "a collection of robotic percussion instruments" would be a robot that plays "a piano, two ranks of organ pipes (flute and violin), mandolin, snare drum, bass drum, timpani, cymbal, and triangle." Now that would be really impressive, especially since you would have to travel all the way to The National Music Museum" [usd.edu] Vermillion, South Dakota to see one that was made in 1913! The machine is called an "Orchestrion" and they were common in the early part of the last century, as the musical accompaniment to a ride on a merry-go-round.

  • When I saw this... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Conspiracy_Of_Doves ( 236787 ) on Sunday January 23, 2005 @09:36PM (#11452045)
    I immediatly thought of this video [animusic.com]

  • This concert raises aesthetic issues that are more interesting than the tech stuff--here's a blip from the composer's program notes [brendanadamson.com]:

    "Automation of acoustic instruments allows a composer to transcend limitations of performer ability and offers new sound possibilities that could not be reproduced by a live performer. While other techniques of computer music may seem more practical, the automated instrument approach retains the richness of the source acoustic instrument and offers the visual interest of liv

    • "What does this mean for musicians?" I'd imagine very little. The subtle nuances that a human can deliver upon an acoustic instrument can easily be captured no matter how minute. Even variations can be programmed so that no two performances however similar are not quite the same. The only thing that springs to mind are those rare occurrences whereby a band or orchestra feed off the enthusiasism given by a live audience. This requires soul, something that cannot thankfully be quantified as yet.
  • In 1999 I decided to write a piece for disklavier. Not being a pianist, I found the human limitations of pianists frustrating sometimes. Having set up a midi file, and borrowing an laptop with a midi interface, I went to a piano shop that generously let me record their disklavier. The piece sounded fine until the crashing climax when its fuse blew and I had to sheepishly go down the road to a handy electronics store.

    That said, an acoustic instrument like a disklavier or midi-controlled pipe organ is a far
  • The only new instrument at the concert was the GuitarBot; the other instruments have been around for quite a long time. I was hoping that a robotic guitar would sound something like a real guitar; instead, it sounded considerably worse than a MIDI guitar. And it's not like it's a new, different sound; it just sounds like complete crap.

    It sounds like whoever designed this robot just got bored of it and decided to abandon the project as soon as it could play notes. This is reminiscent of the attitude that
  • As a musician, I'm not very impressed. This is only slightly better than a stereo system, in that it gives you the real acoustics of the instrument. But what would you be more willing to pay to see? An Eric Clapton show or a robot show? Who would you want playing on your recording? A robot or someone who actually has emotion that they can express through music. So what, I say. Its only someone who played with their Mindstorm set long enough to make it work.
    • You're missing intereaction, besides that very human quality of judging how well a performance is going. Often a performer gives a much more musically enjoyable performance depending on the feedback which only the performer can decide upon. I'm betting a computer could be trained for years trying to pick up on this point and still fail to click. Performances are generally meant to entertain. If we wanted a dry rendition we'd opt for a recording.
    • As a musician myself, I am somewhat impressed, especially by guitarbot (based solely on the description, since the videos aren't loading). An obvious improvement which we have the technology for would be to write software that would let it "jam" with live performers instead of taking MIDI input. It would have to "listen" to the performers playing to determine the key, then improvise solos in that key. THAT would impress me a great deal, even if it is relatively easy to implement.
      • Sure it could jam if programmed correctly. Key, tempo and rhythm can easily be identified. As for soloing, that's just as simple, as the rather poor but many years old Band In A Box does this already. The question should be would you rather have session musicians a la robot, or humans that can create something off the wall but still musical?
  • Do you Applaud? I remember at Bush Gardens, an attraction that featured robotic birds singing and such. The most appaling part was that there was supposed to be audience particiaption (clapping along) applose at the end. Gawd i felt embarasment for everyone there. Am I the only one who isnt' impressed by their "performance?" It's a recording! Don't clap!
  • Anyone also reminded of the book Player Piano by Kurt Vonnegut? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0385 333781/102-5140189-7040143?v=glance [amazon.com]
  • Does this remind anyone else of Pipe Dream [thescreamonline.com]?
  • welcome our new musical robot overlords....
  • My grandad used to roll in from the pub, drunk as a *unt and fire up the old pianola so he could pretend to be playing the piano.. no doubt he'd be equally skillful with a robotic guitar..
  • The self-playing pipe organ is nothing. Any church with an organ installed or updated int he past 15 years has an organ with MIDI capibilities, which will record the actual electric action of the organ. Unimpressed.
  • Guitarbot could have used some of those long, thin metal arms to pick its strings with. Now that would have been worth looking at.
  • As a qualification, let me first point out that I'm a graduate student in music and helped construct several electronic music studios. Automation and programming are important issues in electronic music and the idea of a "perfect perfomance" All of these instruments are variants on the same basic idea of the player piano - recording and reproducing a performance on the same instrument. They are robots only in the limited sense of machines on a car assembly line. All of the instruments in the article can be
    • I don't think the composer is after a "perfect performance," but a suprahuman performance. These instruments extend the capabilities of a live performer in speed and precision. None of the instruments on the concert were used to reproduce a live performance, and guitarbot and modbots do not record.
      • True. The idea of a "perfect performance" is that the composer can finetune details to such an extent that they fully realize their dream for how a piece should sound. Debate about this since the 60s has posited and reposited it as an ideal, but an impossible one to attain. Suprahuman would be following the tradition of most works specifically for player pianos and their ilk, as I believe you point out in another post...
  • It won't be long before we hear about a Disaster Area concert.
  • Doesn't self playing organ lead to blindness?

Slashdot Top Deals

"The great question... which I have not been able to answer... is, `What does woman want?'" -- Sigmund Freud

Close