I've been using twitter actively for a couple months now, and goddamn is it busted.
If you block someone, and someone else retweets them, you still see their tweet.
Your timeline doesn't show other people's replies to other people who you're not following. This is sort of understandable, but broken in many ways:
No way to say "show me all of this user's tweets no matter what" (you have to manually view their timeline), despite the fact people'll will obviously want this for some small number of really important people they follow
Because people say generally useful things in replies, and there's no way to say "show all this users tweets", sometimes they'll prefix a dot (".") at the beginning of the message to prevent the normal suppression so that some of their replies are publically visible. However, this doesn't work some of the time (I think it doesn't if it's a true reply (one that enables their threading), and does work if it's only a manual reply)
If someone I follow mentions me, it should show up in my main feed, not only in mentions. It doesn't show up in my feed if their tweet is a reply to somone I don't follow.
When somebody asks a public question, it would be nice to see all the replies to it. (Remember on moderated Usenet groups where the etiquette was to collect responses and post a follow-up summarizing them? Good times.) The conversation thing shows a line, not a tree, so I'm not sure what it does when there are multiple replies. But it also misses replies that aren't true replies. The solution is simple: be able to see the "mentions" tab for other people (note that you can just search for @whoever, which will give similar (same?) results), but why not just give me the tab?
Once you are following enough people, it doesn't make sense to add everyone who is even slightly interesting. What matters is how what they post will affect your feed (their signal-to-noise ratio, basically). So you go to their profile and look at their timeline, but that shows you *all* posts. Since replies to people not on your follow list won't show up, that may not at all resemble what you'd actually see (or it might, depending on how many replies they do and how their follow list matches yours). So you have to scan through, guestimating how many are replies to people you follow.
Nothing about the way tweets behave (like the above examples) is documented, and they're hard to discover since there's no way to check what's going on, to e.g. determine to whom your tweets are visible--how your stuff looks to other people.
I'm sure there's other stuff affecting me that I just don't know about yet, plus I'm sure there's stuff that's busted but that I don't use.
I encountered all of this stuff within a week or two of using twitter actively, although it's taken me longer to realize just what was going on in all cases.
Ugh. Just finished spending a couple hours cleaning up some malware that got on my machine this morning ("XP Security 2011"). Seemingly from something on the onion avclub site while running the most recent update of Firefox 3. Probably something on their ad network. If you run firefox 3 you might want to stay away from avclub until the next FF3 update.
In other words, works for modern player piano, which I'm sure is a well-explored realm of 20th-century composition already, and made far, far easier by modern technology where you don't have to cut holes in paper, just program in MIDI, and you don't actually even need one of the physical pianos (*I* don't have one), so maybe it's kind of lame to even try this. But hey.
#1 probably exceeds the limits of a real mechnical piano briefly with the fast stuff from 1:18 to 1:29 (I hadn't bothered to do any research on the plausible limitations when I wrote it) and 4:15-4:30 but most of the rest is plausible. (The crazy fast bit of #2 at 0:47 peaks at 12 notes per second on any given key, which appears to be right around the limits of feasibility for physical pianos, but only for high velocities/loud notes, so it might be tonally implausible. On the other hand, the shifting from 0:47 to 0:53 is actually moving from a chromatic sound to an all-white-key-sound, where I chose all-white-keys over some other major scale purely for the visual aesthetic purposes even though that doesn't actually, y'know, happen without a real piano doing this, which I don't have.)
I wrote these on Sunday but wasn't going to release them until I got a better piano sample set up, but then I decided I don't care, since these are just sketches. I'll probably explore this stuff further and make some more polished (but still weird and experimental pieces), and I'll do those with a better virtual piano (this one has 30MB of samples, but in fact I have one with 500MB), and probably writing my own authoring software, because programming this through Reaper's MIDI editor makes it way impossible to do a lot of velocity-based stuff I'd like to do, and maybe some interesting mixes where half of what's played is mathematically determined and half is authored (this is what the 1:41-2:10 of #1 is exploring, various automatic or semi-automatic "expansions" of the the same hand-authored theme).
#16: I had planned to put in a "real" melody by working out a little melodic snippet, recording it, and moving on to the next one. So first I cheated and created loops for most of the backing parts. But then when I was working on the melody I wasn't coming up with anything I liked, so I went back to fully improvised. But this time, I edited together a single solo out of 4 separate takes. (2 minutes, 3 MB, 5 "tracks") A couple of the edits produce obviously odd jumps, but there's probably a lot more edits than you realize (22, to be precise)
Late thursday night (friday morning) at the beginning of February 2011 I suddenly decided to start recording some quick ideas on the guitar, since the collaborative project I've been working on for over a year is mostly done by composing with General MIDI files, and I wanted to play some guitar.
Over the last nine days I've recorded and posted 12 sketches to LJ. The sketches have no mp3 tags describing authoring, and there is no proper html web page.
There is no plan. I may try to keep up an average of one-a-day for a month. Or I may feel like I've run out of ideas next week. Or I might keep doing it for an entire year. I may put them in the public domain. I have no idea. ( This is a low-stress, low-effort engagement.Collapse )
Edit: I mixed this for my own edification, but might be of interest: partial backing track consisting of just the drums and bass, and the distorted guitars in the bridge. The drums and guitar illustrate how the whole thing builds dynamically to the biggest moment of payoff (the end of the bridge).
in past years of doing music sketchbooks, i've often delved into the occasional odd time signature here and there. but the 5+5+5+2 thing I put on youtube last year seems to have marked a turning point of sorts. all four of the "more polished" pieces I mentioned previously that I've been working on for the last year all avoid any simple, standard meter (although each does it in a different way), but I'd thought that's sort of more to do with the "point" of that project than any personal bias.
but if I look back at the 10 things I've "written" in the last week, I see the following time "signatures":
12 (sort of with a hemiola, although i really hear a quarter-note accent all the way through. also the solo playfully does 4 and 5 "polymeters" against it for some of the rising patterns)
8 (coincidentally this one was "total crap")
6,4 (but I'd thought the 6 was a 7)
8 with polyrhythmic 12 (and briefly accelerating sequentially through polyrhythmic 9,10,11 at the beginning); coincidentally this one was "total crap"
(The vast vast majority of western music is, in this notation, in 8 or 6 or 12, although I switched notation for #8, which should really be 6,8 for consistency.)
The only odd numbers missing are 13 and 23+.
If both of the 8s hadn't happened to be "total crap" I would think about trying to cut back on my over-reliance on this, but maybe not.