#1
Referring specifically to music, but possibly other areas such as art, architecture and science, I would argue that there is nothing purely original, no "I" to whom to attach full compositional credit given it arises somewhat mysteriously from our subconscious by way of exposure to the world, other artists, etc. How do we recognize our influences?

People are passionate about ownership and credit, but really what is original? Is a series of notes yours?

What about a process or structure?

Here is a Slate article by Chris Wilson about Composer David Heck and his computer algorithm called "Emmy" which produced thousands of beautiful compositions.

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/music_box/2010/05/ill_be_bach.html

Is Cope a plagiarist? At one time Mozart was accused of the same...

http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/culturebox/2002/02/wolfgang_amadeus_copycat.html

Again from Slate, by Adam Baer.

Whether a computer is writing music or it's out-right "borrowed" from other composers, there's no doubt less-than-subtle similarity between certain pieces of music. Opeth and Ne Obliviscaris, two of my favorite bands, have each borrowed a little bit from Mahavishnu Orchestra, another favorite of mine. It's not quite rip-off artistry, but it's there. I can feel it.

But what constitutes plagiarism? When is it "okay" to use another's ideas? And what types of ideas are okay to use?

If I write a 12-barre blues, whose idea was that? What if I use a flat 7? These decidedly unoriginal elements are used constantly in music, and no one argues that they are stolen. But what about a riff? A chord progression?

According to Wilson (quoting Cope also):

'"We don't start with a blank slate," he said. "In fact, what we do in our brains is take all the music we've heard in our life, segregate out what we don't like, and try to replicate [the music we like] while making it our own." What separates great composers from the rest of us, he says, is the ability to accurately compile that database, remember it, and manipulate it into new patterns." (Wilson, Slate, "I'll be Bach.")

In other words, we take it in and process it and then reorganize it into something unique.
"Virtually no one who is taught Relativity continues to read the Bible."

#2
Chris got you that mad huh
Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#3
Yes.
Quote by neidnarb11890
the chinese take-out place my family always ordered from gave you chopsticks, so as a kid it was fun to try & eat with chopsticks
now i just use a fork, 'cuz nothing is fun anymore & i just want to shovel food into my mouth to fill the void
#4
I took an entire class on this shit this past semester (it fit my schedule nicely; don't think for a second I enjoy this stuff)

This debate is irrelevant and pointless because we'll never get a concrete answer.

Who cares if something is original or not? All I care about is whether or not something is "good"; this of course, is subject to personal taste and opinions.
#5
Who was Jesus before Jesus
Quote by DisarmGoliath
Facesitting is a violation of freedom of speech, because how can you speak when you have an ass covering your face?
#6
Quote by Cardbored
Who was Jesus before Jesus


Je suis.

Je sus.

Jesus.
Quote by neidnarb11890
the chinese take-out place my family always ordered from gave you chopsticks, so as a kid it was fun to try & eat with chopsticks
now i just use a fork, 'cuz nothing is fun anymore & i just want to shovel food into my mouth to fill the void
#9
I personally believe this thread is primitive and archaic


Gozd in gora poj,
silen ženimo hrup,
uboga gmajna, le vpup, le vkup,
le vkup, le vkup z menoj,
staro pravdo v mrak tulimo,
da se pretulimo skozi to zimo
#10
Quote by H4T3BR33D3R
Chris got you that mad huh


I feel like this was overlooked

This thread should have ended here

sick burn m8
ayy lmao
#11
Quote by chookiecookie
I feel like this was overlooked

This thread should have ended here

sick burn m8


Quote by zgr0826
My culture is worthless and absolutely inferior to the almighty Leaf.


Quote by JustRooster
I incurred the wrath of the Association of White Knights. Specifically the Parent's Basement branch of service.
#12
Quote by JamSessionFreak
I personally believe this thread is primitive and archaic


i don't know why i feel so dry
#13
Ne Obliviscaris that demo


Original is pretty much impossible until universities/etc do away with having to base so much stuff on cites. Securing private property thru publish/copyright-tm-patent/etc is the best means at the moment though, just so you gain some benefit/royalty from when your work is improved-upon.

Maybe when everything's optimal and whatnot we can do away with that, but until then, its the best protection for the little guy as well (assuming he has a good, reputable lawyer oversee his stuff before he goes 'public')


Blatant plaigiarism compared to 'influenced by' is pretty easy to spot and judge out to the "perspicacious" (Rossenrot, 2015). e.g. The hack Dennis Leary -- not only stealing from Bill Hicks' work -- but also watering it down. (though this comparison has been pointed out by many fans of standup, so consider this my informal cite to that FACT.......)
.
Last edited by Fat Lard at May 19, 2015,
#14
as if music and the other arts have to be 'original'
it's all just coming back
it's all coming back

it's all coming back to me
#15
But then you have your bosses like Elon Musk who free up their paradigmatic patents to the competition as well, for the greater good
.
#17
Originality is overrated. People should pay more attention to crafting good music in a style instead of trying to forge a totally new one. Plagiarism in music is such a non-issue.
Check out my band Disturbed
Last edited by StewieSwan at May 19, 2015,
#18
There is a limited number of notes and scales that can be used in music. It's not surprising that some songs will sound like others despite the writer having no intention of copying.
RPD - Finger Pickin' Good
#19
Quote by rpd
There is a limited number of notes and scales that can be used in music. It's not surprising that some songs will sound like others despite the writer having no intention of copying.


When you think about it in terms of factorials, the universe should die before we explore every last possible permutation of music.

Say you want to do a simple riff based on a 7 note major scale. Real simple, 4 note riff. That's 7x7x7x7 (7!). 2401 possible combinations if you're allowed to repeat notes. If you can't repeat, it's 840 possible combinations. For a 4 note riff on a 7 note scale.

Yeah. Now expand that to all possible combinations of notes. A piano has 88 keys. If you want to do a 4 note sequence on a piano (excluding the mechanics of hand movements), that's 88x88x88x88. That's 59,969,536 possible combinations.

It's kind of like how every new shuffle of a deck of cards is a completely new sequence that has never existed before in all of history, because there are 52x51x50...etc possible ways to arrange the cards. I think we have a while to go before the physical constraints of music dictate that we start doing things over again.
#21
Quote by Not a Les Paul
Say you want to do a simple riff based on a 7 note major scale. Real simple, 4 note riff. That's 7x7x7x7 (7!). 2401 possible combinations if you're allowed to repeat notes. If you can't repeat, it's 840 possible combinations. For a 4 note riff on a 7 note scale.

I wasn't gonna reply to this thread 'cause it's kinda dumb, but I'm just gonna butt in and correct your math.

7! is not 7 × 7 × 7 × 7. That's 7^(4).

7! = 7 × 6 × 5 × 4 × 3 × 2 × 1


Also, combinations are calculated as nCr, not n × n-1 × n-2 × n-3, [...].
n = 7
r = 4
nCr = 35


There would 35 possible combinations in a four note riff that doesn't repeat notes.

EDIT: After reading your post again, I might have taken it too literally and I think I've realised that you meant permutations and not combinations (the difference with permutations is that a different order presents a different possibility). In this case, your answer of 840 would have been correct.

n=7
r = 4
nPr = 840
Free Ali
Last edited by chrismendiola at May 23, 2015,
#23
We need more math threads.

Maybe a good old 0.999...=1 could spice things up
WHAT A
HORRIBLE
NIGHT TO
HAVE A
CURSE.
#24
Quote by Not a Les Paul
When you think about it in terms of factorials, the universe should die before we explore every last possible permutation of music.


Except that's nonsense. There are several factors at work against the admittedly high number you're pimping, not the least of which is the fact that of those combinations a significant percentage of them will sound like shit and not be recognized as anything but unpleasant noise by anyone.
“Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.”
Charles Darwin
Last edited by Arby911 at May 23, 2015,
#25
Quote by ElMaco
We need more math threads.

Maybe a good old 0.999...=1 could spice things up

I gotchu.
Free Ali