A friend said to me is there a limit to the amount of music that can be made? Well fundamentally it depends on what he means by music because you could change one note and it'd be different. So lets concentrate on melodies. Is there a finite number of melodies?
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-04 5:18
Without a proper definition of music, there is no limit. Humanity lacks a finite definition of music so the possibilities are limitless.
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-04 11:38
>>1
Only the RIAA knows the answer to this question.
There is a limit given constraints such as a 4/4 beat, harmonic tones only, minimum length of 1/32, and a maximum length of the song, but it's not worth considering. Then, once you get to adding different instruments, multiple tracks, different time signatures, the limit is that much further away.
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-11 13:36
There is an infinite number of melodies because there are an infinite number of tempo and time changes.
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-11 22:31
what if everything is quantized though, like energy
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-14 14:59
>>9
What if your face didn't look like an old mans anus?
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-14 21:18
Your friend is right, fundamentally sound can be quantized, hence there is only so many combinations that can be made.
\thread
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-14 21:59
>>11
Can time be quantized?...I DON'T THINK SO, MISTER!!
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-15 17:19
>>12
how about spacetime then >>10
a little rude there, champ
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-18 20:11
There are an infinite amount of tones (a huge number of distinguishable tones that the human ear can perceive) plus music doesn't even have to be tonal anyway, an infinite amount of time signatures, an infinite amount of tempos, and an infinite amount of song structure. Not to mention instrumentation, and there's an infinite amount of combinations of that as well and an essentially infinite amount of tinkering like timbre, portamento/glissando, legato, crescendo/decrescendo.
an infinite amount of time signatures
Almost certainly wrong.
an infinite amount of tempos
Wrong.
an infinite amount of song structure
Highly debatable.
instrumentation, and there's an infinite amount of combinations of that as well
Wrong, and beside the point even if it weren't.
an essentially infinite amount of tinkering like timbre, portamento/glissando, legato, crescendo/decrescendo.
The ``essentially'' makes this a worthless statement.
You need to stop abusing the word ``infinite''.
The number of melodies is infinite but countable, because they can be arbitrarily long. The amount of music that can actually be made is very finite.
Tempo is only speed of the song. Since time has no finite end, or at least, it will continue past our lives, it's effectively infinite. With this, tempo is infinite as far as we are concerned. A tempo can be as slow as 1 beat per hour, or as a fast as 300 beats a second, or further on either end of that spectrum.
Time signatures are dependent on the length of the measure. If the measure continues longer than we live, then the amount of time signatures is endless.
Tones are only the frequency of a sound. Considering that there is an infinite amount of frequencies that are producible, though not an infinite number that are perceptible, there is an infinite amount of tones.
Considering that song structure is partially reliant on length of the song, there is a limitless amount of song structures.
While the instrumentation statement is false, pretty frequently new instruments are made. Look at musical tesla coils. People invent instruments just to see if they can do it. I'm sure one day people will devise rhythms that cause typing on a typical computer keyboard to be musical.
Oh, and by the way, any one of these 'infinite' qualities makes the amount of producible music infinite.
You need to stop using faggot quotes.
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-19 21:44
>>17
How is the instrumentation part false? Give me any song and I can add a tuba to it.
Name:
Anonymous2010-09-19 23:27
>>17
There is, right now, a finite number of instruments. Considering this, if you take any song and add a tuba to it, there's one less combination of instruments that you can use. This has no effect on the the fact that the amount of producible music is infinitesimal.
>>16 it's effectively infinite
If the measure continues longer than we live (Similar bullshit)
The question wasn't if it was effectively infinite, dipshit.
Considering that there is an infinite amount of frequencies that are producible
There isn't an infinite number of frequencies. Not even in principle. You're a fucking idiot.
Oh, and by the way, any one of these 'infinite' qualities makes the amount of producible music infinite.
If any of them were infinite, yes, that would be the case. None of them is, so it isn't.
Very recently a result was proved about drums(or rather, a connected bounded circular region in R^3 with smooth boundary)
If two drums produced the same sounds(in terms of eigentheory), then they would have the same heat diffusion rate.
Hence since there are uncountably many possible diffusion rates, they are uncountably many possible sounds and hence uncountable amount of music possible.
Name:
Anonymous2010-10-05 7:48
There's no limit to music as long as we get innvative musicians like Lady Gaga
Name:
Anonymous2010-10-05 8:05
when it comes to frequency, tone, pitch, and key; yes there is limitation...however, there are infinite number of sequences that can be made and therefore music is infinite by that alone making it one that harmonizes with the souls of all humankind.
Which is why we have yet to exhaust the musical talents even here on Earth with the numerous songs currently available.
>>34
You flunked out of your logic class, didn't you?
Name:
Anonymous2010-10-05 17:12
Well, I don't think we can run out of music.
Supposing X was the number of notes in a song.
Then you would find the number of possible songs as X!.
However, I think that since there is no set length to a song, X would actually be infinate so then you have (infinity)! which is infinate, so you'll never run out of music.