Would like to upload computer synthesized audio

[LDW]

Greetings.

"All performances are accepted except computer synthesized audio... unless... a subjective decision is made by IMSLP administrators to allow synthesized files created by this contributor. Any person wishing to submit synthesized audio under the third exception above must first contact IMSLP administrators..."

I find sequenced piano accompaniments very useful for practice; it would be nice to share the ones I have made for myself.

Happy to submit an example.

[daphnis]

In what way would they be particularly useful that "live" recordings may not? And what piece(s) are we talking about here?

[pml]

Unless its really obscure repertoire (add emphasis on obscure), this is not a desirable option compared to a real performance.

You wouldn’t be Steffen Fahl, by any chance, or a friend of his? It just seems a coincidence to see your post here: there’s a wonderful set of Klengel canons and fugues realisations newly posted on the web that are of considerable merit, and of the minimum quality one would want from these sorts of files.

Cheers, Philip

[LDW]

In what way would they be particularly useful that "live" recordings may not? And what piece(s) are we talking about here?

They would not be MORE useful, but they would be present until someone uploads a live recording.

The pieces I had in mind are viola sonatas. Not everyone has a tame pianist at hand!

Unless its really obscure repertoire (add emphasis on obscure), this is not a desirable option compared to a real performance.

Not compared to, but useful in the absence of, maybe?

You wouldn’t be Steffen Fahl... there’s a wonderful set of Klengel canons and fugues realisations...

Sadly not: I'd like to take credit for the Klengels, but they're nothing to do with me.

[pml]

Hi LDW,

Unless its really obscure repertoire (add emphasis on obscure), this is not a desirable option compared to a real performance.

Not compared to, but useful in the absence of, maybe?

Unfortunately not; we have had some extremely disappointing synthesized recordings of mainstream repertoire uploaded in the past (e.g. Brahms symphonies that sounded like they were being played on an accordion). We (and that’s the plural moderator “we”) came to the view that it did IMSLP no favours at all to have such low quality recordings available, and that it would be better to have no recording at all, rather than an abysmal synth job purporting to be a “recording” of the pieces in question.

I think it’s now your turn to provide us with an example, perhaps, of the typical viola sonatas you would be wanting to upload audio files for (especially as your original post indicated you would be happy to do so).

Privately, the moderators have had a lot of soul-searching about exactly what types of audio are desirable and what ones are not – so to consider your proposal, we really need to have a grounded discussion based on the repertoire and actual audio files, rather than continuing this as a theoretical or philosophical argument.

Regards, Philip

[LDW]

provide us with an example, perhaps, of the typical viola sonatas you would be wanting to upload...

OK. Eccles Sonata in G minor (Klengel). Would you like me to submit the first mvt as an example? If so, where would you like it?

[pml]

Hi LDW,

if you have web hosting of your own, please upload it and provide a link; if that isn’t an option, please add the appropriate work page on the Wiki and submit your audio there.

To prevent any possible confusion I’d like to clarify one comment I made at the start of the thread:

… there’s a wonderful set of Klengel canons and fugues realisations newly posted on the web that are of considerable merit, and of the minimum quality one would want from these sorts of files.

The word “minimum” probably is confusing contextually: I didn’t mean the realisations were of low quality, since I do believe they are of high quality. I was professing my view that any computer synthesized audio uploaded to IMSLP should not be of lower quality than those (i.e. a comparative, not an absolute measure!)

Regards, Philip

[daphnis]

if you have web hosting of your own, please upload it and provide a link; if that isn’t an option, please add the appropriate work page on the Wiki and submit your audio there.

Rather than uploading it to the wiki upon lack of personal web hosting, use a third-party site like megaupload, rapidshare, etc.

[Peterdyson49]

Of course synthesised recordings are a poor substitute for the real thing…. so the question I asked myself before deciding to submit those of my own was ……Are they better than nothing? For those like me whose ability to read a score internally is limited, they are useful if limited in what they offer. As “rehearsal recordings” some of the soloists I have used have found them useful in preparing for the first performance and so perhaps LDW has a useful point and such “rehearsal aids” could be added until a “live recording” makes them obsolete. The policy guidelines (shown below) that have been issued seem highly appropriate but 2(b) does not cover the “music minus one” suggestion whilst 2(c) acknowledges the need only in respect of “obscure” choral works.

Is this a direction that the Library wishes to pursue and thus further clarification is needed perhaps as a new Section 4? Would this text suffice?

4 Synthesised pIano accompaniments as Rehearsal aids?
a) Synthesised piano accompaniments are permitted. They should be labelled as a “Rehearsal Aid” and any missing solo part should be identified.

Submitted to continue the discussion.
Best wishes
Peter Dyson.

Current Policy
1). New compositions
a). If the work is a new composition that has never been recorded, computer realizations are acceptable.
b). Also, if the work requires synthesized audio, a synthetic realization is acceptable.
2). The work is obscure
a). If the work is considered to be common / well-known, computer realizations are not permitted.
b). If there are no recordings of the piece, synthesized recordings are allowed.
c). If the work is a choral composition, a computer realization may be uploaded since it may be of particular use to people learning their part.
3). High-quality recordings
a). This is determined by subjective evaluation.
b). If the recording is clearly low in quality, it will be deleted without discussion, unless it is a personal composition.

[pml]

The policy has a few ambiguities, and the one concerning rehearsal aids for choral works would be one of them. I’m of the view these have no place on IMSLP as there are other sites that specifically focus on this, and they offer a slippery slope towards MIDI files of abysmal quality. That’s my €0.02, anyway.

As for composers offering computer synthesised realisations of their own pieces: that is deliberately excluded from the proscription, so composers like yourself, Peter, can “knock yourself out”, should you wish. ;-)

Regards, PML

[LDW]

Lawks a mercy. I had no idea I was starting such a contentious thread. Sorry!

Anyhow, if you aren't now completely bored of the whole subject, you can download eccles 1 from here:

http://www.humyo.com/PgdQh/eccles%201.mp3?a=JpkL_3uvjUE

If your view of 'low quality' means lacking expression/variation in dynamics, then you won't like it. But I'm b@#*ered if I'm redoing it!

I’m of the view these have no place on IMSLP as there are other sites that specifically focus on this

Yes, but ARE there? Where would you look for the accompaniment to a viola sonata? I had a trawl round before submitting this suggestion, and as far as I could see there is no one obvious central sensible (ie regularly updated!) place where they could go. There may be some obscure places that I haven't found - but the very fact that they are obscure/hard to find makes them unsuitable.

For me, IMSLP is the first place I go to to share PD music, so it seemed an obvious add-on.

I'm indebted to Paul for his ready understanding of what I was trying to achieve, and sensible compromise solution. I hope it will find favour with the IMSLP bigwigs.

Aloha.

[imslp]

I'll quote here what I said in the Moderator-only forum, which most IMSLP admins seem to agree with. (Slightly edited to excerpt it.)

I'm concerned about the amount of time we will have to spend on determining what is good quality. Plus, it could well create bad feelings either between IMSLP and the submitter, or even worse, between IMSLP admins. This is why I am against having a case-by-case determination. Even if a few completely electronic recordings are of good quality, is it worth the cost?

I think we can draw the line that we will forbid all normal commercial MIDI renditions (e.g. Finale, Sibelius), but allow very sophisticated computer-generated music where it is clear the person put a huge amount of effort into it.

We will at this point not consider any arguments based on utility (e.g. practice, etc). At some point in the future we might be able to create a section of IMSLP for specific-use recordings, but our priority is to archive high-quality recordings that normal people would want to listen to.

Of course, we should allow recordings where there is some direct human input (e.g. via electronic piano, or combining different acoustic tracks like SBB).

I will elaborate about the rationale. At the very beginning I was also in the "anything goes" camp. However, after some thinking, it appears to me that that is the way of ruin. The reason is that we must make sure the "IMSLP" name is not associated with lower-quality recordings, or else we are no better than a small YouTube-wannabe with very limited scope. This makes no sense, especially as YouTube really doesn't need to obey copyright laws in many cases, whereas we do. What IMSLP can offer, however, is a community-screened library of (presumably higher quality overall) acoustic recordings, unlike YouTube.

This is also why we should not, at this point, consider special-use arguments. (But see the possible future exception in the quote above.)

And so, I would revise the recording posting requirements as follows (note the absence of any reference to obscurity):

1. All recordings except computer realizations are acceptable. All computer realizations are not acceptable, subject to the exceptions in Sections 2 and 3. For our purposes the following items are not considered computer realizations:
   1. A recording that involves electronically splicing together acoustic tracks is acceptable.
   2. A recording of an electronic instrument (e.g. electronic piano) played by a real person is acceptable.
2. Exceptions for new compositions.
   1. If the work is a new composition that has never been recorded, computer realizations are acceptable.
   2. If the work requires synthesized audio, a synthetic realization is acceptable.
3. Exception for very high quality computer realizations.
   1. A computer realization is acceptable if it is not made by any normal notation software (e.g. all forms of MIDI; Finale, Sibeilus, etc), and
   2. There is clear evidence that extraordinary effort has gone into making the recording a very high quality realization of the underlying work.

[LDW]

I hear what you say.

I don't agree, and I wonder if we aren't perhaps taking ourselves a little too seriously here? I can't help thinking that concern about compromising the IMSLP 'brand' exists more in the minds of mods than in those of users.

However, I subside accordingly.

[KGill]

I wonder if we aren't perhaps taking ourselves a little too seriously here?

How so? IMSLP is a large site with a pretty good reputation, reinforced by major articles about us in the New York Times and elsewhere (see the Press Coverage page on the wiki). Over the years, people have gotten an idea of us as a great source for scores. Ideally, over time we would like to do the same for recordings. But we will accomplish that by hosting decent/good recordings by real people, not a bunch of MIDI realizations. I honestly think it is not in the best interests of IMSLP to allow low-quality CG recordings (apart from our exception made for new compositions).

[gardano]

I find sequenced piano accompaniments very useful for practice; it would be nice to share the ones I have made for myself.

When LDW wrote this, I immediately thought it sounded like a great resource to have around. But given the (very valid) subsequent conversation, perhaps this is an idea that an enterprising person could start a whole different web site around.