Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Sound Artist Looking For Data for Prject

Hello Science A GoGo List,

My name is Margaret and I am a sound artist. I have been recently asked to create a sound work that connects with "hard science." I want to find and use time-line data from a natural phenomena/theory that is interesting. I want to map the subjects of the data on a midi note scale. I also like the idea of using a scientific theory that uses natural phenomena because there might be an opportunity to use recorded samples of the subjects/phenomena as instrumentation. I recognize that this probably isn't very scientific, believe me, I am not clear myself on my approach! :-) In any case, I am looking for suggestions and perhaps a collaborator.

Hope to hear from members that are interested or have ideas for me. Thanks for your time!

Please feel free to email me directly at:

margaret@margaretnoble.net
Margaret

Hmm well they say everything's made of strings or membranes that vibrate like instrument strings. Maybe you can adjust the frequencies into audible range, superimpose all the different frequencies that'll be happening together, and generate the "sound" of some atom or whatever?

But should people be able to recognize what it is? In that case you better just record something of a sci-fi movie :P

As with kallog, my first thoughts turn to M-theory, i.e. the current edition of string theory, because it's poetically related to music. Imagine, the entirety of existence - the fundamental laws of physics, the randomness of quantum events, the emergent phenomena - all issuing forth as a cosmic symphony composed by ??? and performed by infinitesimal players. It's a magnificently beautiful concept which it would be very fitting to echo in your sound work. Maybe you might compose it in four movements using these themes: laws; randomness; emergence; conclusion. I suppose there are many ways to see it, and you would consider it in terms of your own - perhaps rigidity; flexibility; cosmic child; conclusion (however you see it), for example.

There must be many ways of going about your task, Margaret, so please ignore this stuff if it's off the mark.

Just some ideas re above:
- Laws: confident, unambiguous, symmetrical (baroque)
- Randomness: irregular, unpredictable, dynamic (John Cage!)
- Emergence: mysterious, ethereal, spiritual, emotive (Wagnerian)
- Conclusion: [you decide ]

If you think you need to weave in some data, then how about using some fundamental physical constants in #1
In #2 perhaps a backgound theme of a Geiger counter

Another possibility may be the genetic code. You could make songs of single genes, or groups of genes, or even whole genomes (although those would be hours in length, unless you limited yourself to short ones - viruses and some bacteria). The DNA code has four letters (ATCG), so you may be able to convert combinations of those into some sort of a scale. For example, to code for every key on the piano (i.e. 88 notes in total) you'll need to use 4-letter blocks (44 = 256). There is more possibilities in there than you need, so you could double-code notes, ignore unused combos, or perhaps use those unneeded combos to play cords, etc. You could use 3-letter codes to code for the central part of the keyboard (43 = 64, a little less than the 88 keys on a piano).

I imagine either the above would produce what may be an unpleasant combination of notes, but the possibilities for coding could potentially be endless. Something that may produce a more musical-sounding combination would be a code of 4-letter blocks, with the first two letters coding for notes in a scale (you'd be limited to 16 notes in this case, basically two octaves), and the 3rd for the length of the note (eighth, quarter, half, whole) and the fourth could be used to change the volume or add additional octaves.

For example, a C-scale, 3 letter code could be:
AA = low C
AC = low D
AT = low E
AG = low F
CA = low G
CC = low A
CT = low B
CG = mid C
TA = mid D ... upto GG = high C

And the 3rd letter:
A = 1/8th note
B = 1/4 note
C = 1/2 note
D = whole note

Obviously, you could code any scale - major, minor, etc using this method. Or encode cords instead of notes, etc.

You could even use a more relative scale, which may give something more pleasant. For example an A could be "move one tone down from the current note", B could be "re-play same tone", etc.

Lots of possibilities, and all kinds of genomes, genes, etc can be found in a variety of databases:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/gene
http://www.genome.gov/
http://www.bioscience.org/urllists/genodba.htm
http://www.bmrb.wisc.edu/www/genome.html

Hmm, I may very well play with this myself. Watch out for my upcoming #1 album - Music of the genome.

Or maybe not

Bryan

Bryan has a good idea there, Margaret. It crossed my mind earlier, but after scanning the net I realised someone else (Bryan) would be sure to put it across far better than I.

The more I think about using genes and genomes, the more excited I get (yes, I am quite the nerd). I've even started fiddling with some matlab code to convert DNA sequences into ABCnotation, which I can then import into MuseScore for additional editing.

A really neat idea may be to use the same gene from two (or more) species to write a point/counter-point type composition. By first aligning the DNA sequences, then converting them into notes, an interesting composition that highlights both the similarities and differences could be made.

In thinking about how to make this, I've come to the (tentative) conclusion that simple conversion-to-notes is probably all you would want to do with the gene sequences. Trying to pull note lengths out of the same gene doesn't work too well - my first attempts have lead to nothing more than horrible noise; random notes lasting for random lengths of time. I've been trying to think of ways to "extract" the notes in order to fit them into bars, but to date my success has been limited...

Bryan

My knowledge of both music and genomes is hazy, so at the risk of having to extract boot from mouth...

I suppose you might use a different instrument for each species. They could play their 'segments' perhaps sometimes in parallel, sometimes sequentially. A third instrument, or several other instruments, could provide a backing which could be melodious rather than monotonous, but which could nonetheless draw attention to differences in the genomes. A challenge, apart from translation of code to music, would be composing a suitable background. I imagine the codes would be presented staccato, while the backing would be a contrasting adagio/adagietto.

That's what I had in mind.

I think I'm going to try using the DNA to provide the notes only, while deriving the rhythm myself. I've found a few others who have done this and they have the same problems as I. Their solutions seem to be the same - either use the DNA to code for the rhythm, giving a random-sounding piece that isn't too nice, or they use the DNA to extract notes, and write their own piece from there.

I was thinking of using different instruments, perhaps adjusted by an octave or two, for each species. I already envision and chimp (high-pitched), human (mid-range) and gorilla (base) arrangement as they "discuss" their microcephalin gene...

Bryan

I think the inclusion of Microcephalin would be ideal, assuming you can get the data.

Had to look up Microcephalin. This is the Not-Quite-Science section, not the place to debate the science, but for anyone following the thread, some info:

"The gene Microcephalin (MCPH1) regulates brain size and has evolved under strong positive selection in the human evolutionary lineage. We show that one genetic variant of Microcephalin in modern humans, which arose ~37,000 years ago, increased in frequency too rapidly to be compatible with neutral drift. This indicates that it has spread under strong positive selection, although the exact nature of the selection is unknown. The finding that an important brain gene has continued to evolve adaptively in anatomically modern humans suggests the ongoing evolutionary plasticity of the human brain. It also makes Microcephalin an attractive candidate locus for studying the genetics of human variation in brain-related phenotypes."

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/309/5741/1717 (2005-09-09)

Also:

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/genetics/brain/lahn_2005_aspm_microcephalin_science.html (2005-09-08)
http://www.reproductive-revolution.com/microcephalin.html (2006-11-28)

Hello Margaret
A Sound Artist looking for a Project. When I first read this, I thought .....What a Noble idea, (forgive the pun).

At first sight it is a wonderful idea, as well as unique. To be able to generate Music based upon actual factual scientific data, could grab the attention of musicians world wide.
I must add that there is absolutely no shortage of scientific data to work with. The whole world is based upon data.
Every movement of anything on Earth or in the Universe, whether large or small, can be represented by Data.
Sets of numbers converted to musical notation?

For example, you might go for a country walk, where your walkable area is divided into small grid squares

Everytime you step into new grid square, you get a run of different data.
For example, Your walk to the - North, South, East ,West, or combinations could represent notes above or below middle C
Of course this 'Random Walk' of piano notes, producing sounds do not make for 'nice' music.
That is the problem, there is data everywhere, but its up to you to produce that unique musical composition from scientific data.
And that is very very difficult indeed. Since the human brain instantly rejects strings of random notes.
Its the composer that takes the notes and produces a masterpiece..... that the brain accepts.

At first sight I thought imagingGeek's idea of using strings of DNA was a wonderful idea.
But once you have converted the DNA data into different frequencys, musical notes etc.However you do this.....
You are left with a collection of notes, which when played are an assault upon ones brain. It is you
Margaret that has to produce a masterpiece based upon scientific data? Change too much and you just become
another composer.

Here is an interesting thought, which I believe is true.
The first three or four notes of of any western/european music......They have been used hundreds, if not thousands
of times. There are only so many combinations of three or four notes that are pleasing to the brain.

The notes are the same, its the differences in the timings and the loudness between these first 4 notes, that starts off the melody that runs on into the rest of the musical work.

What I am trying to say is that eventually All the pleasing combinations of notes (lets take 4 pleasing notes) have been used in ALL musical works the world over. And will be repeated and used many times more in dozens of musical works. Used with different timings and different instuments but are often the same 4 or 5 notes.

Still all is not lost., Margaret.
There are a number of Musical Programs on the Net that use a clever algorical program that is supposed to produce "music" from a string of generated random numbers.
There are even random music generators that one can build
Wiki talks about -Algorithmic composition.

Use Google for - 'Randomly generated music'
Wolfram have something here... http://tones.wolfram.com/generate/

I dont suppose you are too interested in the the above sites?
Going to do a bit of research on my own about this, and hope to get back to you in 48 hours.

Also we would all appreciate if you could reply regarding what we have all written so far, are we on the right track?

Certainly those notes will have precious little respect for the human ear but, for the student of genetics, musicality is a secondary consideration. The goal is to produce an audible representation of particular genetic material, comparing species and highlighting differences. Having achieved that, the aforementioned secondary consideration has to be tackled: an accompaniment that provides a salve for potentially sore ears, and an emotionally satisfying experience, while at the same time commenting on the data. Not easy, I'm sure, but well worth a try in my opinion.

An alternative is to compose a tone poem similar to my earlier suggestion, perhaps inserting relevant snippets of data just occasionally.

My first attempts were exactly that - random, grating noise. It can be made better. I've since assigned notes limited to set scales, and in a limited range of octaves (sorry, I don't know how to explain that to non-musical types). As such, even though the order of the notes is not what a human would choose, they do fall into pitches which do go together in basic musical terms.

Its still random-ish, and there are odd jumps between notes, but its a damn sight better than the original racket I was getting.

Bryan

Very interesting, Mike. The variety of instruments is amazing. Thanks for sharing.