Are Generative Patches Random?

The Basics of Modular Synthesis series of videos (47 videos) - bit.ly/modular...
If you just want to buy me a coffee :) - www.buymeacoff...
Consider joining me on Patreon - / omricohen
Patching techniques and ideas that I continue updating - bit.ly/3o1Q3Sg
I'm using DistroKid to distribute my music to Spotify, iTunes, Apple Music, and more. By signing up through this link you will get 7% off and will support this channel - distrokid.com/v...
Consider subscribing - bit.ly/2OljOPN
You can find all of my VCV Rack patches here - patchstorage.c...
And all sorts of extra patches here - www.patreon.co...[tag]=Extra%20Patches
You can get VCV Rack here - vcvrack.com/
You can find all of my stuff here - linktr.ee/omri...
Here are my computers' specs:
Computer: Intel Core i7-7700K CPU @ 4.20GHz, 4200 Mhz, 4 Cores,
8 Logical Processor(s), 32Gb RAM, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
Laptop: Intel Core i7-9700K, 8x 3.6HHz, 12MB L3 Cache, 32Gb RAM, NVIDIA RTX 2060
Here is my case on ModularGrid:
www.modulargri...
#vcvrack #modularsynth #eurorack #synthesis

[@gen-amb]

I have a true mathematics expert friend who was a consultant to lottery corporations for 25 years “keeping their marketing departments from bankrupting them” as he explains. He built them the computers that drew auditably random winning numbers. Most people routinely use the word “random” casually and incorrectly. Randomness itself can not produce music, only noise. But randomness can be harnessed and employed to select combinations and permutations from among a curated set of possibilities. That can produce infinite very musical results. As you say, it’s about the boundaries.

[@macronencer]

"Randomness itself can not produce music, only noise. But randomness can be harnessed and employed to select combinations and permutations from among a curated set of possibilities. That can produce infinite very musical results." I love this! It's accurate and succinct.

[@fnopi]

Best answer.. you should pin it on top omri ;D

[@Barefoot_Joe]

Ask Brian Eno, he literally wrote the book, and the album, the app, probably the T-shirt too xD

[@LarsBjerregaard]

Brian Eno explains it here, live: kzbin.info/www/bejne/maealqOPbJqKl5I He basically has it down to a science, it's all rule and propability based what he's doing. Very much what Omri is talking about as well.

[@macronencer]

This is a clear and well-structured video essay. I think the idea of using the phrase "hard to predict" rather than "unpredictable" was one of the most important points you made. Seeking a fully empirical definition of "random" leads us right down through physics, metaphysics, and finally into philosophy - which is fine for academia, but not so useful for practical creativity. The very question of whether the universe is deterministic is arguably unresolved. I suspect that it *is* deterministic, and the parts that appear random are actually following deterministic rules that we can't perceive yet - but I can't prove that, and it's pretty much a matter of arbitrary faith for me. None of this deep thinking really impacts the way we make music, but it's fun to think about the connections sometimes! I guess one could argue that hardware analogue circuits are "more random" than digital computers, but really this only comes down to our lack of detailed knowledge about what's going on in every atom and electron in every component. It's probably better to relax and have fun :)

[@szysl4k]

This is such an interesting topic, and applicable to most art forms in some way. Por me music is like poetry, it needs some underlaying scaffolding be it in the structure or themes, rimes, etc. The more chaotic a song is the harder it's for me to relate on an emotional level. But I believe organic elements, imperfections, variations and randomness bring alive the music. In screenwriting there's this concept that endings should be unpredictable but logical. I think it really applies here as well.

[@stephenspackman5573]

I think you start at a disadvantage by not having a firm definition of randomness. My favourite definition of randomness is the degree to which you can predict a value *relative to a computational vocabulary* (which typically involves some kind of memory). For example, is drawing a card random? If you have knowledge of what's in a deck of cards, it's somewhat random-it's limited to 52 values. If you don't, it's more random-without that knowledge, you can't know that you won't get the 92 of penguins. If 51 cards have already been drawn, the next draw is not random in the least, *if* you have a memory that can hold 51 values; otherwise it is still random. If the card draw occurs in a film *and you have seen the film before*, not very random at all, and so on. A sample and hold applied to a sine wave-nonrandom if you know both the frequency and the phase of the wave, nonrandom. With no knowledge of these parameters, quite random. With a memory of a few previous results (and their timings) possibly random, possibly not (the maths is interesting). Anyway. The thing that makes this discussion particularly interesting in the context of modular, is that it is the nature of modular synthesis that all the modules speak more or less the same “language”, and you can test the “randomness” of a thing by asking whether you could rebuild it from different modules. Strictly speaking, and looking at mechanical recordings, any (substantive) use of an actual random source precludes this, as does any (substantive) use of quantisation on a continuous signal-you'd not be able to reproduce the *exact* output waveform (not even, in fact, rebuilding the identical patch). On the other hand, human memory is fallible, so another interesting question is whether you can reproduce the subjective experience of a performance. Again, though, the answer is no, not because you can't sometimes re-perform the piece (sometimes, because chaos-in the technical sense-can be deployed to create deliberate macro-scale irreproducibility), but because the listener's mental state is not controlled, so the precise analytical tools brought to bear are not the same. Again, the clearest demonstration of this is when you re-listen to a recording: the very fact that you have heard a performance before allows you to anticipate what was previously a surprise, so your analytic vocabulary has expanded. Or-assuming you are not Indonesian-recall the difference between your first, second and (let's say) tenth experience of gamelan, and how the sense of randomness declines as you learn the idiom. And that brings me to the really interesting thing. We (many of us) used to talking about music in terms of particular abstractions such as key, melody, metre, harmony, but those are just words for a narrow cultural slice of the musical space. Encountering gamelan expanded my space; first hearing the Dr. Who theme expanded my space. But each piece, even one that stretches the listener's boundaries, has its own idiom. Modular is an entire toolkit for stretching those boundaries, and a generative patch is an idiom in itself. That's why (when successful) they are so delightful to those of us who get our principal kicks from learning!

[@The0Stroy]

Only truely random is white noise. I can call Generative Patch - "shaped propability" or "limited randomness".

[@thewolfin]

Omri Cohen is one channel from which I didn't expect to get a philosophy lesson. Nevertheless, I am intrigued, and my almonds are activated.

[@3DPDK]

Technically speaking, unless the system uses linear electronics hardware to generate random values, such as a neutrally biased, open collector transistor which generates electrical "random and linear noise", a digital computer *can not* actually generate a truly random sequence of numbers. It can generate an "apparent" random sequence, but it will eventually repeat that sequence given enough time depending on the complexity and decimal precision of the algorithm used to generate it. VCV is a program that runs within our digital computers, and no digitally based algorithm available can generate a truly random sequence. So in truth, although we perceive a generative patch to be random, it can not be without a physical, linear noise input. P.S. this is shown at 3:09 - that if you know the math of the RNG algorithm you can predict the next number in any digitally produced "random" sequence.

[@GeorgeLocke]

"Random" is a slippery word, but the most important meaning is, "Can I predict what it will do?" The critical point is that the artist is always in control. If you've patched up a "totally random" unpitched S&H pitch sequence on a synth patch, you're not going to get the sound of a dog barking. Some things are predictable, some things aren't. The artist chooses the scope of unpredictable variation, and that choice is the essence of the art.

[@auretvanheerden5716]

Thank you. I have learned so much about generative music via your channel. It has really opened up a new universe of possibilities for my compositions.

[@OmriCohen-Music]

That's amazing! I'm glad you enjoy my work :)

[@DeepAmbientDrone]

This is a beautiful video on this subject, Omri. It's amazing that others also have the same thoughts as oneself. I've asked myself the same question with my own patches. You do use random generators, but you're actually heading towards a specific goal. Even if it's just deciding what kind of music you want to make. The patch is never really completely random, it's influenced by own decisions. Personally, I like the possibility of having things in the patch controlled randomly. The decision of what should happen randomly is my own, but you still have a bit of a feeling that the music has a mind of its own if it's happen. Sometimes you even get surprised when an effect plays unexpectedly, or when notes are triggered in a combination that makes a beautiful melody you would never have thought of yourself. It makes you feel like a listener, even if you are responsible for the music :)

[@exoner6110]

I always struggled with the label "random" for patches, because I often recognized more or less "structures" and repeating "patterns" when listening to them. We should keep in mind that CV in the modular world is a result of algorithms, generating values. Finally CV is the result of math-defined rules , not randomness. I prefer the tag "generative", knowing that it is controlled "randomness". And yes, it's not that easy to hide the "rules" and algorithms in generative patches to let them sound as "random" music. Thank you for sharing this kind of video, Mr. Cohen, meets my mind.

[@XiXora]

Scrolling like a slide show… answering a question… Did I just get tricked into watching a lightning talk? :D Beautifully explained as always. Thanks.

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@jdanielcramer]

For my own Generative patching I’m really interested in the area of Chaos, wherein a similar set of patched modules create a more or less similar musical idea, and also the idea of being a willing participant in improvising some aspect of the patching along with the modular in a sort of symbiotic fashion 🙀

[@GeorgeLocke]

1. Not necessarily random (deterministic chaos) 2. Usually chaotic in technical sense (a non-chaotic example would be non-intermodulating LFO's) 3. No, it doesn't matter

[@sunson4309]

3:54 thats pretty much the laplace`s demon theory coming up on a vcv rack video. very nice

[@AlexReidStudios]

Hey!! That's my answer right there! (the second one) Thanks for considering it :)

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Thanks for that :)

[@dreamdealer]

excellent video, a nice take on the subject.

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Glad you liked it!

[@LarsBjerregaard]

Good one Omri. I like to use the words "semi-random" or "semi-chaotic" to not give people the wrong idea and to be a bit more to the point. The "semi" is the giveaway. Because I think that what we really like is something that is not completely pre-determined, and not something which is completely random either; we like something in between. Something that has a recognizable pattern (predictable) but with an element of surprise/un-predictability/randomness, that keeps our interest, and starts to generate inspiration for something new. In a sense, to some extent it emulates the really good improvisational live musician, who has this down to an artform.

[@UltraD52]

Is tinyvcvpatch your channel?

[@OmriCohen-Music]

No, that's not me...

[@stefankrautz9048]

I watched a video from you where you use Dexter. Its from 3 Years ago, your PC almost freezed from too much Filter and FX Modules. :)

[@Diego_Occhipinti]

I'll be satisfied if it is as random as clouds in the sky. There is certainly randomness, still it remains a cloud in its own right. Or to use Eno's words it is the difference between being an architect or a gardener. Let the seeds grow into their own shapes.

[@000aleph]

VCV as PowerPoint 😉

[@bakedcreations8985]

Music is music is music.

[@denmac5010]

A very interesting question and video indeed. But as a person with limited musical knowledge and as a beginner in VCV Rack, i was wondering if a white noise generator fed through a S&H module would create totally random voltages and frequencies that you could route through the oscillators to produce the random effect that you are trying to produce?

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Well, it depends what you're definition of totally random...

[@dedodan1]

Bravo 👏🏻 Thank you!🙏🏻

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Cheers!

[@Almanacs]

Pretty much agree with your statements here! Thanks for one more amazing teaching, Omri!

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Cheers!

[@krakaka3559]

I know that in C language random() function generates a pseudo-random values and I think the same situation in C++

[@jaysgood10]

I was going to type some random stuff but this came out.

[@mr.kaplanmusic]

Great video, thank you for explaining this concept in detail!

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@chemicalBR0]

I guess most things follow some rules and not just synthesizers, so not a lot of things are truly random (mostly :)

[@fnopi]

controlled randomness i'd say

[@arashabolhasani7596]

Thanks, never thought of the difference between these two!

[@mpingo91]

2:49 Are the long notes in this random sequence just two identical notes glued together? I think I heard something like this in a patch with Turing Machine from some previous episode. it freezes the melody. How to avoid it?

[@turntheknob]

First! Thank you for the video

[@OmriCohen-Music]

Cheers!