1 00:00:00,050 --> 00:00:01,670 The following content is provided 2 00:00:01,670 --> 00:00:03,820 under a Creative Commons license. 3 00:00:03,820 --> 00:00:06,540 Your support will help MIT OpenCourseWare continue 4 00:00:06,540 --> 00:00:10,130 to offer high quality educational resources for free. 5 00:00:10,130 --> 00:00:12,700 To make a donation or to view additional materials 6 00:00:12,700 --> 00:00:18,295 from hundreds of MIT courses, visit MIT OpenCourseWare 7 00:00:18,295 --> 00:00:20,796 at ocw.mit.edu. 8 00:00:20,796 --> 00:00:21,720 PROFESSOR: Okay. 9 00:00:21,720 --> 00:00:25,020 So this is our second session with Phil 10 00:00:25,020 --> 00:00:26,550 [? Scarf, ?] please welcome him. 11 00:00:29,370 --> 00:00:32,630 So we're going to have our presentations based 12 00:00:32,630 --> 00:00:36,210 on the design assignment that Phil came up with. 13 00:00:36,210 --> 00:00:37,740 So who would like to go for first? 14 00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:47,755 There you go. 15 00:00:47,755 --> 00:00:48,255 Thank you. 16 00:00:57,470 --> 00:00:59,550 PHIL SCARF: Can you tell us your design? 17 00:00:59,550 --> 00:01:02,600 STUDENT 1: So we chose a raga. 18 00:01:02,600 --> 00:01:05,740 We decided on the notes C, Db, F, G and Bb. 19 00:01:13,870 --> 00:01:16,900 And we went with a more traditional, 20 00:01:16,900 --> 00:01:23,580 where you start out slow and you slowly expand the range. 21 00:01:23,580 --> 00:01:25,635 And then you add in more players and then 22 00:01:25,635 --> 00:01:29,750 you play a melody line together and then alternate whoever 23 00:01:29,750 --> 00:01:31,870 is improvising. 24 00:01:31,870 --> 00:01:36,092 And then we did a little bit of extrapolation 25 00:01:36,092 --> 00:01:38,873 halfway through by changing one of the notes 26 00:01:38,873 --> 00:01:42,040 in the raga actually. 27 00:01:42,040 --> 00:01:44,760 And just for a little different style and then we go back. 28 00:02:16,477 --> 00:05:32,108 [MUSIC PLAYING] 29 00:05:32,108 --> 00:05:35,170 PHIL SCARF: That was very impressive. 30 00:05:35,170 --> 00:05:38,750 So let me just ask the performers. 31 00:05:38,750 --> 00:05:42,240 Did that performance go the way you envisioned it going? 32 00:05:42,240 --> 00:05:44,070 Since we're improvising, you never 33 00:05:44,070 --> 00:05:46,319 know what's going to happen when you improvise, right? 34 00:05:46,319 --> 00:05:48,740 So I'm just curious if that's the way 35 00:05:48,740 --> 00:05:52,037 you had planned for it to go, or you thought that anything 36 00:05:52,037 --> 00:05:53,120 might have been different. 37 00:05:53,120 --> 00:05:54,455 STUDENT 1: So when I was describing it 38 00:05:54,455 --> 00:05:56,012 I said there was a section where we 39 00:05:56,012 --> 00:05:58,310 change one of the notes in the raga. 40 00:05:58,310 --> 00:05:59,154 That didn't happen. 41 00:06:02,607 --> 00:06:05,148 At the end, we had the option of going into that or stopping. 42 00:06:09,900 --> 00:06:12,430 PHIL SCARF: Anything else? 43 00:06:12,430 --> 00:06:16,300 STUDENT 2: So we sort of knew vaguely what different sections 44 00:06:16,300 --> 00:06:17,940 were going to be like, and sort of what 45 00:06:17,940 --> 00:06:20,992 we would try and do with them. 46 00:06:20,992 --> 00:06:23,700 But that was completely different -- like, we tried, 47 00:06:23,700 --> 00:06:26,670 we run through it a couple of times before, today. 48 00:06:26,670 --> 00:06:30,630 That was kind of different to what we'd done before. 49 00:06:30,630 --> 00:06:32,632 PHIL SCARF: That's improvisation. 50 00:06:32,632 --> 00:06:33,590 It should be different. 51 00:06:33,590 --> 00:06:34,610 That's actually the point. 52 00:06:34,610 --> 00:06:35,270 It should be different. 53 00:06:35,270 --> 00:06:36,840 If you start doing the same thing over and over again, 54 00:06:36,840 --> 00:06:38,990 it's no longer improvisation, right? 55 00:06:38,990 --> 00:06:39,670 So that's great. 56 00:06:39,670 --> 00:06:40,944 Good. 57 00:06:40,944 --> 00:06:42,360 So any comments from anybody else? 58 00:06:46,930 --> 00:06:47,915 Any thoughts? 59 00:06:47,915 --> 00:06:49,540 STUDENT 3: There were a couple of times 60 00:06:49,540 --> 00:06:53,020 when you played in unison, and I didn't really 61 00:06:53,020 --> 00:06:56,066 see any cues into those sections. 62 00:06:56,066 --> 00:06:59,090 I was just wondering if you were all improvising, how did you 63 00:06:59,090 --> 00:07:03,316 move from improvisational section to unison section? 64 00:07:03,316 --> 00:07:05,796 STUDENT 4: We have this one particular melody, 65 00:07:05,796 --> 00:07:11,403 so when one person started, we could recognize that melody. 66 00:07:11,403 --> 00:07:13,236 Or one person began it, we would go into it. 67 00:07:13,236 --> 00:07:14,972 And there was a couple times we repeated it, 68 00:07:14,972 --> 00:07:16,708 so one person would get to the end of it 69 00:07:16,708 --> 00:07:18,692 and then we'd go straight into it again. 70 00:07:25,209 --> 00:07:26,500 PHIL SCARF: Any other comments? 71 00:07:31,033 --> 00:07:32,491 PROFESSOR: I'll just say, I thought 72 00:07:32,491 --> 00:07:36,915 it worked very well as a composed improvisation. 73 00:07:36,915 --> 00:07:39,060 I thought the framework was well thought out. 74 00:07:39,060 --> 00:07:41,390 And the realization through improvisation 75 00:07:41,390 --> 00:07:43,007 made a lot of sense. 76 00:07:43,007 --> 00:07:43,981 Very good. 77 00:07:46,903 --> 00:07:49,270 PHIL SCARF: I think you really captured the frameworks 78 00:07:49,270 --> 00:07:50,896 very well. 79 00:07:50,896 --> 00:07:52,520 Why don't you want to tell us about it? 80 00:07:52,520 --> 00:07:55,100 Because everybody needs to know. 81 00:07:55,100 --> 00:08:04,773 STUDENT 4: So basically we came up with our own scale 82 00:08:04,773 --> 00:08:07,270 to base the improvisation on. 83 00:08:07,270 --> 00:08:13,220 And we decided to look into the range and note density 84 00:08:13,220 --> 00:08:15,340 frameworks at first. 85 00:08:15,340 --> 00:08:18,330 So we're each starting in different parts 86 00:08:18,330 --> 00:08:22,580 of our register, which is maybe different than what 87 00:08:22,580 --> 00:08:26,024 would be done traditionally, perhaps. 88 00:08:26,024 --> 00:08:30,315 But then we'll move out and expand, 89 00:08:30,315 --> 00:08:32,898 which is pretty similar to some of the stuff that happens with 90 00:08:32,898 --> 00:08:35,844 [INAUDIBLE]. 91 00:08:35,844 --> 00:08:40,480 And then we'll also be moving from pretty simple melodies 92 00:08:40,480 --> 00:08:45,135 and pretty simple [INAUDIBLE] to more complicated things 93 00:08:45,135 --> 00:08:48,320 that come up and we'll try to then [INAUDIBLE]. 94 00:08:48,320 --> 00:08:50,280 It won't start with a [INAUDIBLE] rhythm, 95 00:08:50,280 --> 00:08:53,220 but then we'll try to get into a rhythmic groove later on. 96 00:08:56,562 --> 00:08:59,020 STUDENT 6: One more thing, I'm going to start with a drone, 97 00:08:59,020 --> 00:09:02,004 to imitate the tambura, and we're 98 00:09:02,004 --> 00:09:03,795 going to add ornamentation to the melodies, 99 00:09:03,795 --> 00:09:05,290 to imitate [INAUDIBLE]. 100 00:09:05,290 --> 00:09:09,696 PHIL SCARF: OK, sounds good. 101 00:09:09,696 --> 00:12:24,994 [MUSIC PLAYING] 102 00:12:24,994 --> 00:12:25,702 PHIL SCARF: Nice. 103 00:12:33,350 --> 00:12:35,490 So any thoughts about that piece? 104 00:12:40,990 --> 00:12:44,590 So did the performance went the way you expected? 105 00:12:44,590 --> 00:12:48,184 Did you do anything different that you were thinking about? 106 00:12:48,184 --> 00:12:51,076 STUDENT 6: I'd say in general, the note density and range 107 00:12:51,076 --> 00:12:53,970 [INAUDIBLE]. 108 00:12:53,970 --> 00:12:59,089 We were hoping to get a motif in there, but I don't think -- 109 00:12:59,089 --> 00:13:02,071 STUDENT 5: We were going to just let it develop organically. 110 00:13:02,071 --> 00:13:06,050 But we just kind of played off each other. 111 00:13:06,050 --> 00:13:10,879 STUDENT 6: And the rhythm wasn't 3-3-2 like we were predicting, 112 00:13:10,879 --> 00:13:13,750 it did settle. 113 00:13:13,750 --> 00:13:17,540 PHIL SCARF: Yeah, it did become rhythmic, about halfway 114 00:13:17,540 --> 00:13:19,680 through. 115 00:13:19,680 --> 00:13:20,470 Yeah, good. 116 00:13:20,470 --> 00:13:21,166 Anything else? 117 00:13:27,680 --> 00:13:29,450 [INAUDIBLE] 118 00:13:29,450 --> 00:13:30,950 STUDENT 5: Yeah, a little bit, yeah. 119 00:13:30,950 --> 00:13:32,782 PROFESSOR: And then you jump right on. 120 00:13:32,782 --> 00:13:35,028 STUDENT 6: Well yeah, I used the bass to really -- 121 00:13:37,097 --> 00:13:38,930 PROFESSOR: But that was very good listening, 122 00:13:38,930 --> 00:13:41,590 because it didn't take more than a second or two 123 00:13:41,590 --> 00:13:44,440 to really coalesce. 124 00:13:44,440 --> 00:13:45,980 And how about the ending? 125 00:13:45,980 --> 00:13:48,900 Had that been thought about? 126 00:13:48,900 --> 00:13:51,120 STUDENT 5: We planned to just bring 127 00:13:51,120 --> 00:13:53,618 the range back in, basically, to where 128 00:13:53,618 --> 00:13:55,034 we had been in the beginning. 129 00:13:58,810 --> 00:14:01,790 That fade-out, literally fade out. 130 00:14:06,162 --> 00:14:07,680 PHIL SCARF: That worked out great. 131 00:14:07,680 --> 00:14:09,030 Anybody else have any comments? 132 00:14:09,030 --> 00:14:10,155 Any thoughts, observations? 133 00:14:15,940 --> 00:14:16,680 Yeah. 134 00:14:16,680 --> 00:14:18,880 STUDENT 7: Well in the beginning, 135 00:14:18,880 --> 00:14:21,020 I thought the piano player was going 136 00:14:21,020 --> 00:14:24,023 to drone on for the entire song, and just sort of be a drone. 137 00:14:24,023 --> 00:14:25,564 And I was waiting for him to come in, 138 00:14:25,564 --> 00:14:28,916 and finally I felt relieved when he 139 00:14:28,916 --> 00:14:31,642 came in and built on the violin. 140 00:14:34,369 --> 00:14:35,035 PHIL SCARF: Yeah 141 00:14:35,035 --> 00:14:37,810 STUDENT 6: Yeah, we didn't have any unison melodies planned, 142 00:14:37,810 --> 00:14:40,880 so I didn't want it to be really dense too early. 143 00:14:43,070 --> 00:14:45,320 PHIL SCARF: I mean, I thought that was nice, you know? 144 00:14:45,320 --> 00:14:48,770 Because we had one solo voice with a kind of accompaniment, 145 00:14:48,770 --> 00:14:51,840 and then it became more of a duet. 146 00:14:51,840 --> 00:14:56,068 So there was an element of progression there. 147 00:14:56,068 --> 00:14:58,036 STUDENT 6: Another thing we didn't anticipate, 148 00:14:58,036 --> 00:15:02,464 Austin focused on the mid-upper part of the scale, 149 00:15:02,464 --> 00:15:05,270 and I was just doing the first three or four notes. 150 00:15:17,107 --> 00:15:18,190 PHIL SCARF: Anything else? 151 00:15:22,350 --> 00:15:24,110 Cool. 152 00:15:24,110 --> 00:15:24,610 OK. 153 00:15:24,610 --> 00:15:25,294 Next group. 154 00:15:25,294 --> 00:15:27,710 STUDENT 8: So I actually didn't come up with my own scale. 155 00:15:27,710 --> 00:15:29,863 I just decided to use the D Dorian mode. 156 00:15:32,689 --> 00:15:35,990 It's a little bit more humble for me to play around with. 157 00:15:35,990 --> 00:15:43,222 My vision is around the piano to form a sort of drone, in low D. 158 00:15:43,222 --> 00:15:47,667 And use that, and also drone, and then as a little bit goes 159 00:15:47,667 --> 00:15:54,563 on, build up into a [INAUDIBLE] [INAUDIBLE] necessary. 160 00:15:54,563 --> 00:15:57,509 It starts at [INAUDIBLE] but then 161 00:15:57,509 --> 00:16:01,487 I do have a melodic motif that I was going to center it around. 162 00:16:10,541 --> 00:16:12,540 PHIL SCARF: Can I just ask, is the melodic thing 163 00:16:12,540 --> 00:16:15,270 a raga or scale idea? 164 00:16:15,270 --> 00:16:18,380 STUDENT 8: I just came up with something on the guitar. 165 00:16:18,380 --> 00:16:20,380 PHIL SCARF: So are there any specific frameworks 166 00:16:20,380 --> 00:16:24,170 from the set of 12 that we're using here? 167 00:16:24,170 --> 00:16:27,916 STUDENT 8: I was looking at -- I can't remember -- 168 00:16:27,916 --> 00:16:30,411 there were two [INAUDIBLE] I was looking at. 169 00:16:30,411 --> 00:16:32,910 Looking at a little bit no density. 170 00:16:32,910 --> 00:16:37,030 Kind of applying it towards the [INAUDIBLE] notes, or the lower 171 00:16:37,030 --> 00:16:37,530 end. 172 00:16:37,530 --> 00:16:40,347 So the drone has a little bit of freedom, 173 00:16:40,347 --> 00:16:42,430 in terms of picking up, as he wants to [INAUDIBLE] 174 00:16:42,430 --> 00:16:45,554 tremolo, rhythmic framework, I guess. 175 00:16:45,554 --> 00:16:46,970 PHIL SCARF: So is the note density 176 00:16:46,970 --> 00:16:49,640 going to change throughout the piece? 177 00:16:49,640 --> 00:16:50,290 Or not? 178 00:16:50,290 --> 00:16:51,290 Yes. 179 00:16:51,290 --> 00:16:53,324 Do you have a view of how that would change? 180 00:16:53,324 --> 00:16:54,740 Or is that going to be improvised? 181 00:16:54,740 --> 00:16:57,720 STUDENT 8: I envisioned it as starting out slow, building up, 182 00:16:57,720 --> 00:17:01,256 more dense, little faster, slowing down towards the end. 183 00:17:05,585 --> 00:17:10,520 And the other one I was looking at was using the framework, 184 00:17:10,520 --> 00:17:17,370 the little melody, I guess, and working that around -- 185 00:17:17,370 --> 00:17:18,977 I can't remember what it was called -- 186 00:17:18,977 --> 00:17:20,560 PHIL SCARF: Oh, the [INAUDIBLE] maybe? 187 00:17:20,560 --> 00:17:21,435 That's what you mean? 188 00:17:21,435 --> 00:17:22,099 Melodic motif. 189 00:17:22,099 --> 00:17:22,599 Yeah. 190 00:17:22,599 --> 00:17:24,879 Yeah. 191 00:17:24,879 --> 00:17:25,379 Good. 192 00:17:31,716 --> 00:18:08,070 [MUSIC PLAYING] 193 00:20:51,892 --> 00:20:52,600 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 194 00:20:56,337 --> 00:20:56,920 That was good. 195 00:21:00,290 --> 00:21:01,130 I like that amp. 196 00:21:01,130 --> 00:21:02,345 That's pretty convenient. 197 00:21:21,010 --> 00:21:23,240 So any comments from the performers? 198 00:21:23,240 --> 00:21:27,100 I'm particularly interested in what the collaborators may 199 00:21:27,100 --> 00:21:28,850 think about this, since they didn't have 200 00:21:28,850 --> 00:21:34,944 much notice before playing the piece. 201 00:21:34,944 --> 00:21:36,527 STUDENT 9: I didn't have any idea what 202 00:21:36,527 --> 00:21:37,818 it would be like going into it. 203 00:21:37,818 --> 00:21:40,080 But having the framework really set 204 00:21:40,080 --> 00:21:42,405 an expectation of gradually increasing 205 00:21:42,405 --> 00:21:44,265 note density and the range. 206 00:21:44,265 --> 00:21:45,985 And having the motif definitely helps. 207 00:21:45,985 --> 00:21:47,470 PHIL SCARF: That motif was cool. 208 00:21:47,470 --> 00:21:50,280 And the way that it was used was good. 209 00:21:50,280 --> 00:21:53,465 STUDENT 10: I think it was just enough to provide 210 00:21:53,465 --> 00:21:57,730 a cool little phrase to work on. 211 00:21:57,730 --> 00:22:00,470 STUDENT 8: That was one of the visions I had. 212 00:22:00,470 --> 00:22:01,660 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 213 00:22:01,660 --> 00:22:03,390 That was great. 214 00:22:03,390 --> 00:22:07,136 The first group that's used the [? chellan ?] framework, 215 00:22:07,136 --> 00:22:09,434 so that's good. 216 00:22:09,434 --> 00:22:10,225 Any other comments? 217 00:22:10,225 --> 00:22:13,152 What about the designer? 218 00:22:13,152 --> 00:22:16,700 Do you have any comments about how this went? 219 00:22:16,700 --> 00:22:19,330 STUDENT 8: I just didn't know what to expect going into it. 220 00:22:19,330 --> 00:22:23,730 Because again, I just sort of did this myself, yesterday. 221 00:22:23,730 --> 00:22:26,900 And I didn't know what the performers 222 00:22:26,900 --> 00:22:28,280 would think going into this. 223 00:22:28,280 --> 00:22:35,140 And from the outset, I knew, I guess the piano 224 00:22:35,140 --> 00:22:38,550 sort of provided the rhythmic background, I guess. 225 00:22:38,550 --> 00:22:40,610 And set the overall tone. 226 00:22:40,610 --> 00:22:43,300 And then I came in with some free time 227 00:22:43,300 --> 00:22:44,790 before I settled into the motif. 228 00:22:44,790 --> 00:22:46,806 And then everybody settled around that, as well. 229 00:22:49,799 --> 00:22:51,590 PHIL SCARF: Anybody else have any thoughts? 230 00:22:51,590 --> 00:22:52,760 Observations, comments? 231 00:22:55,749 --> 00:22:57,290 STUDENT 7: I really liked that motif. 232 00:22:57,290 --> 00:22:59,040 It really brought it all together. 233 00:22:59,040 --> 00:23:02,850 And I think it gave the collaborators 234 00:23:02,850 --> 00:23:05,450 a really solid base to start from. 235 00:23:05,450 --> 00:23:08,325 And build off of. 236 00:23:08,325 --> 00:23:11,250 Seems like a cool way improvise and make a framework. 237 00:23:11,250 --> 00:23:13,602 Just start with a tiny motif and then see 238 00:23:13,602 --> 00:23:15,247 where you can take it from there. 239 00:23:15,247 --> 00:23:16,080 PHIL SCARF: Exactly. 240 00:23:16,080 --> 00:23:18,970 And then, the listener also gravitates towards that, 241 00:23:18,970 --> 00:23:19,570 as well. 242 00:23:19,570 --> 00:23:23,810 Every time it comes back, it's familiar material. 243 00:23:23,810 --> 00:23:28,170 In fact, I think that kind of illustrates one 244 00:23:28,170 --> 00:23:31,350 of the attractive elements of Indian classical music 245 00:23:31,350 --> 00:23:33,370 is use of [? chellan ?]. 246 00:23:33,370 --> 00:23:35,630 Even if it's something you haven't heard before, 247 00:23:35,630 --> 00:23:37,710 by the time you finish hearing it, 248 00:23:37,710 --> 00:23:40,334 you've heard the [? chellan, ?] some of the key phrases, you've 249 00:23:40,334 --> 00:23:44,000 heard them so many times, it become familiar. 250 00:23:44,000 --> 00:23:46,930 So like this motif, by the time we finished, 251 00:23:46,930 --> 00:23:48,320 it sounds like a familiar piece. 252 00:23:48,320 --> 00:23:50,111 Even though none of us had heard it before, 253 00:23:50,111 --> 00:23:51,355 except perhaps, the composer. 254 00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:55,060 So it's nice. 255 00:23:55,060 --> 00:23:57,689 Any other thoughts? 256 00:23:57,689 --> 00:23:58,730 So what's your framework? 257 00:23:58,730 --> 00:24:00,540 Can you tell us about your framework? 258 00:24:00,540 --> 00:24:05,400 STUDENT 11: OK, so basically, we based off a [INAUDIBLE] 259 00:24:05,400 --> 00:24:12,270 in terms of -- we have a motif that we start out with. 260 00:24:12,270 --> 00:24:16,670 And then we're going late on build on it 261 00:24:16,670 --> 00:24:18,240 by adding some chords. 262 00:24:18,240 --> 00:24:20,262 And then while one person plays the melody, 263 00:24:20,262 --> 00:24:22,230 the other person will improvise on it, instead. 264 00:24:28,066 --> 00:24:31,000 STUDENT 12: We had wanted a beat to feed us. 265 00:24:40,780 --> 00:24:42,111 He'll learn it. 266 00:24:42,111 --> 00:24:42,736 STUDENT 11: OK. 267 00:24:42,736 --> 00:24:47,150 You'll get the melody after we play it. 268 00:24:47,150 --> 00:24:50,588 So basically, us two will play it, 269 00:24:50,588 --> 00:24:57,012 and then you can come in after four times or something. 270 00:24:57,012 --> 00:24:58,470 And then we'll take turns improving 271 00:24:58,470 --> 00:25:12,876 while one person drones on a D. 272 00:25:12,876 --> 00:28:18,760 [MUSIC PLAYING] 273 00:28:18,760 --> 00:28:20,970 PHIL SCARF: So any thoughts? 274 00:28:20,970 --> 00:28:22,280 How did you think it went? 275 00:28:22,280 --> 00:28:24,200 STUDENT 11: I think it went pretty well. 276 00:28:24,200 --> 00:28:26,476 I think originally we were supposed to play the melody 277 00:28:26,476 --> 00:28:28,059 and then harmonize a little bit to it. 278 00:28:28,059 --> 00:28:29,970 And then kind of stretch up from that melody. 279 00:28:29,970 --> 00:28:32,095 But in the end, we just started improvising instead 280 00:28:32,095 --> 00:28:35,770 so I guess that worked out. 281 00:28:35,770 --> 00:28:37,830 PHIL SCARF: But there was harmony introduced 282 00:28:37,830 --> 00:28:41,100 as the improvisation evolved, too. 283 00:28:41,100 --> 00:28:43,910 It's coo. 284 00:28:43,910 --> 00:28:45,910 Any other comments or thoughts? 285 00:28:45,910 --> 00:28:47,785 How about the flutist? 286 00:28:47,785 --> 00:28:49,910 STUDENT 1: I was playing in F natural for too long. 287 00:28:53,830 --> 00:28:57,750 I was like there's probably not an F# in this scale 288 00:28:57,750 --> 00:29:02,150 if there's a Bb, [INAUDIBLE] really confused. 289 00:29:02,150 --> 00:29:02,650 [INAUDIBLE] 290 00:29:10,040 --> 00:29:13,288 PHIL SCARF: Anybody else, have any comments? 291 00:29:13,288 --> 00:29:15,276 STUDENT 2: I thought it was pretty cool how 292 00:29:15,276 --> 00:29:20,743 the rhythmic moment of the melody 293 00:29:20,743 --> 00:29:22,731 became stronger almost, throughout. 294 00:29:25,720 --> 00:29:27,955 It was like a little more free in the beginning, 295 00:29:27,955 --> 00:29:30,672 maybe, when you decided to push time. 296 00:29:30,672 --> 00:29:36,600 [INAUDIBLE] almost like a very driving. 297 00:29:39,564 --> 00:29:41,046 PHIL SCARF: That's true. 298 00:29:41,046 --> 00:29:44,030 Good observation. 299 00:29:44,030 --> 00:29:47,730 It was very effective, too. 300 00:29:47,730 --> 00:29:49,952 PROFESSOR: So that's the second one that did that. 301 00:29:49,952 --> 00:29:53,848 Where it evolved into the rhythmic spectrum. 302 00:29:53,848 --> 00:29:57,340 It's an interesting way to do it. 303 00:29:57,340 --> 00:30:00,576 STUDENT 13: So this is D Mixolydian 304 00:30:00,576 --> 00:30:03,470 rather than picking a new scale. 305 00:30:03,470 --> 00:30:07,290 And [INAUDIBLE] Jamie is going to set up 306 00:30:07,290 --> 00:30:10,930 a low drone at the beginning. 307 00:30:10,930 --> 00:30:14,320 And once Jamie has this low drone, 308 00:30:14,320 --> 00:30:19,307 the flute and trumpet come in on vibrato type lines. 309 00:30:19,307 --> 00:30:20,890 And then the flute and trumpet explore 310 00:30:20,890 --> 00:30:21,973 the different [INAUDIBLE]. 311 00:30:21,973 --> 00:30:25,785 So I tried it in a low range, [INAUDIBLE] Flute 312 00:30:25,785 --> 00:30:28,340 is going to start with low note density 313 00:30:28,340 --> 00:30:30,032 and gradually increase density. 314 00:30:35,440 --> 00:30:40,880 Also Jamie is going to gradually adopt a rhythmic progression 315 00:30:40,880 --> 00:30:44,380 and eventually start playing [? jala. ?] And I think you 316 00:30:44,380 --> 00:30:47,450 said the [? jala ?] will be in different rhythmic groups, 317 00:30:47,450 --> 00:30:50,490 so that we also have a little bit of [? livhari ?], 318 00:30:50,490 --> 00:30:52,860 or rhythm play. 319 00:30:52,860 --> 00:30:55,100 And that will go on for a minute or two. 320 00:30:55,100 --> 00:30:56,766 We don't really have specifics of what's 321 00:30:56,766 --> 00:30:59,360 going to happen in there, it's just to improvise. 322 00:30:59,360 --> 00:31:03,004 And at the end, I drop out, flute drops out, 323 00:31:03,004 --> 00:31:05,170 and then Jamie just sort of continues with the drone 324 00:31:05,170 --> 00:31:06,414 and fades out. 325 00:31:06,414 --> 00:33:35,662 [MUSIC PLAYING] 326 00:33:35,662 --> 00:33:36,370 PHIL SCARF: Nice. 327 00:33:40,753 --> 00:33:43,326 So do we have any thoughts from the performers? 328 00:33:46,820 --> 00:33:48,820 STUDENT 7: I thought it went pretty well. 329 00:33:48,820 --> 00:33:50,910 We just sort of set up the framework last night 330 00:33:50,910 --> 00:33:52,284 and just ran through it once. 331 00:33:52,284 --> 00:33:54,450 We were like, alright, we'll do something like that. 332 00:33:54,450 --> 00:33:57,540 So it turned out similar manner. 333 00:33:57,540 --> 00:34:00,926 Had sort of the same feel. 334 00:34:00,926 --> 00:34:03,501 I think it went well. 335 00:34:03,501 --> 00:34:05,850 STUDENT 13: I don't think it sounded quite as Hindustani 336 00:34:05,850 --> 00:34:08,560 as a raja, but was totally using the framework. 337 00:34:08,560 --> 00:34:10,790 Like it had the same idea, and it 338 00:34:10,790 --> 00:34:13,540 was easy to communicate with someone 339 00:34:13,540 --> 00:34:18,052 who just heard the framework today, what to do. 340 00:34:18,052 --> 00:34:20,280 PROFESSOR: I like the rhythmic of the banjo. 341 00:34:20,280 --> 00:34:25,429 You really sounded almost like a mix between a tabla 342 00:34:25,429 --> 00:34:27,996 and something, I'm not quite what else. 343 00:34:27,996 --> 00:34:30,750 STUDENT 7: Yeah, I almost wanted to play it on my lap. 344 00:34:30,750 --> 00:34:31,889 PHIL SCARF: Maybe more like a [? surod, ?] 345 00:34:31,889 --> 00:34:33,763 actually it's a little like it's [? surod, ?] 346 00:34:33,763 --> 00:34:39,510 which is played with a pick and it's got more of an attack. 347 00:34:39,510 --> 00:34:42,050 Cool. 348 00:34:42,050 --> 00:34:43,414 How about the flutist? 349 00:34:43,414 --> 00:34:44,830 Because this is the first time you 350 00:34:44,830 --> 00:34:46,854 had been introduced to the piece. 351 00:34:46,854 --> 00:34:49,035 Any comments? 352 00:34:49,035 --> 00:34:52,089 STUDENT 1: I liked it, it was easy to follow. 353 00:34:52,089 --> 00:34:54,005 [INAUDIBLE] set up the right image [INAUDIBLE] 354 00:34:59,074 --> 00:35:00,740 PROFESSOR: You're a utility [INAUDIBLE], 355 00:35:00,740 --> 00:35:02,239 we bring you in whenever we need it. 356 00:35:04,810 --> 00:35:06,092 Thank you for that. 357 00:35:06,092 --> 00:35:07,800 PHIL SCARF: I was going to say, I thought 358 00:35:07,800 --> 00:35:11,320 it was cool because the way you used the frameworks, 359 00:35:11,320 --> 00:35:14,770 you had assigned different frameworks to different people, 360 00:35:14,770 --> 00:35:16,440 which was interesting. 361 00:35:16,440 --> 00:35:19,370 First time, I think, we did that today. 362 00:35:19,370 --> 00:35:20,722 So that was cool. 363 00:35:20,722 --> 00:35:21,460 Good idea. 364 00:35:24,860 --> 00:35:26,360 STUDENT 7: I really liked playing it 365 00:35:26,360 --> 00:35:30,102 because it sort of fit my instrument very well. 366 00:35:30,102 --> 00:35:32,730 I could do like the slower bluegrass picking, 367 00:35:32,730 --> 00:35:36,492 and just leave that D open the entire time pretty much, 368 00:35:36,492 --> 00:35:37,700 and that leaves a nice drone. 369 00:35:40,465 --> 00:35:43,432 That makes it easy to play around on the top three strings 370 00:35:43,432 --> 00:35:45,939 and it was a lot of fun. 371 00:35:45,939 --> 00:35:48,230 STUDENT 13: Actually, the reason we split up frameworks 372 00:35:48,230 --> 00:35:52,040 is the first time we decided what to do, Sarah 373 00:35:52,040 --> 00:35:54,290 and I were both just like, yeah, we can both do range, 374 00:35:54,290 --> 00:35:55,810 we can both do note density. 375 00:35:55,810 --> 00:35:58,260 And then we ended up running through the piece once, 376 00:35:58,260 --> 00:36:00,420 and I focused more on range, and she focused more 377 00:36:00,420 --> 00:36:01,410 on the note density. 378 00:36:01,410 --> 00:36:03,750 So we said, well, why not just make that the framework 379 00:36:03,750 --> 00:36:04,250 instead? 380 00:36:04,250 --> 00:36:05,833 PHIL SCARF: Yeah, that's a great idea. 381 00:36:05,833 --> 00:36:07,880 That is a very cool idea. 382 00:36:07,880 --> 00:36:08,380 Excellent. 383 00:36:13,787 --> 00:36:15,870 STUDENT 10: At the risk of overworking the flutes, 384 00:36:15,870 --> 00:36:20,742 can I ask one of you guys to -- alright, cool. 385 00:36:26,121 --> 00:36:29,180 So like most of the other groups, 386 00:36:29,180 --> 00:36:36,150 the frameworks we ended up using are range and note density 387 00:36:36,150 --> 00:36:37,840 again. 388 00:36:37,840 --> 00:36:40,310 So I was going to start toward the lower end of the range 389 00:36:40,310 --> 00:36:41,434 and then gradually work up. 390 00:36:41,434 --> 00:36:45,265 And then vice versa for the oboe. 391 00:36:45,265 --> 00:36:46,890 So I guess rhythmic progression is just 392 00:36:46,890 --> 00:36:50,190 like a natural part of that, as well. 393 00:36:50,190 --> 00:36:54,074 So we are thinking of playing in concert G natural minor. 394 00:36:58,320 --> 00:37:01,500 Yeah, so we're going to start off just alternating, 395 00:37:01,500 --> 00:37:04,897 with one person doing a drone on the concert G. 396 00:37:04,897 --> 00:37:07,355 And then the other person just kind of soloing off of that. 397 00:37:07,355 --> 00:37:09,809 And then just interchanging a few times. 398 00:37:09,809 --> 00:37:11,350 Maybe two or three times or whatever. 399 00:37:11,350 --> 00:37:15,830 And then, just gradually working into playing together. 400 00:37:15,830 --> 00:37:16,830 PHIL SCARF: That's cool. 401 00:37:16,830 --> 00:37:19,455 And did you have a specific idea about the rhythmic progression 402 00:37:19,455 --> 00:37:21,250 and how that would work? 403 00:37:21,250 --> 00:37:26,290 STUDENT 10: Just in the vague sense of gradually speeding up. 404 00:37:26,290 --> 00:37:28,850 Starting off with slower, sustained whole notes 405 00:37:28,850 --> 00:37:33,995 and working to faster rhythms. 406 00:37:33,995 --> 00:37:36,470 We kind of wanted to work some [? chellan ?] in there, 407 00:37:36,470 --> 00:37:38,140 as well. 408 00:37:38,140 --> 00:37:40,968 We don't have any kind of set phrase we wanted to repeat. 409 00:37:40,968 --> 00:37:42,634 I guess it's something we kind of wanted 410 00:37:42,634 --> 00:37:43,906 to figure out as we go. 411 00:37:43,906 --> 00:37:45,910 If we find something worth holding on to, 412 00:37:45,910 --> 00:37:46,980 then we'll do that. 413 00:37:54,700 --> 00:40:22,462 [MUSIC PLAYING] 414 00:40:22,462 --> 00:40:23,170 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 415 00:40:27,641 --> 00:40:28,140 Nice. 416 00:40:28,140 --> 00:40:31,480 PROFESSOR: So you're just coming into this cold, right? 417 00:40:31,480 --> 00:40:34,528 So I noticed, you were watching him. 418 00:40:34,528 --> 00:40:36,830 Had you determined that you would watch each other 419 00:40:36,830 --> 00:40:42,590 and do those phrases toward the end in synchrony? 420 00:40:42,590 --> 00:40:44,299 STUDENT 2: That was just based off his -- 421 00:40:44,299 --> 00:40:46,715 he said that he wanted to do something with [? chellan, ?] 422 00:40:46,715 --> 00:40:52,480 so I was trying to pick up some very distinctive phrases 423 00:40:52,480 --> 00:40:56,320 and see whether I can put them into different ranges. 424 00:40:56,320 --> 00:40:59,041 And so I picked out a couple, and just tried 425 00:40:59,041 --> 00:41:02,190 to repeat them and then put them in different notes 426 00:41:02,190 --> 00:41:05,180 with the same rhythm. 427 00:41:05,180 --> 00:41:07,802 But by and large, most of it was just like, oh, 428 00:41:07,802 --> 00:41:09,490 that sounds nice. 429 00:41:09,490 --> 00:41:11,740 PROFESSOR: Well I personally thought it was very good, 430 00:41:11,740 --> 00:41:13,865 the way it worked out, and very interesting the way 431 00:41:13,865 --> 00:41:15,300 it all synchronized. 432 00:41:15,300 --> 00:41:17,350 I mean, it was like you planned it. 433 00:41:17,350 --> 00:41:18,850 Which obviously, you didn't. 434 00:41:21,519 --> 00:41:24,060 STUDENT 10: Yeah, one problem we ran into when Ben and I were 435 00:41:24,060 --> 00:41:27,424 rehearsing was just, when we got toward the end each time, 436 00:41:27,424 --> 00:41:29,266 and we tried to make the rhythm go faster, 437 00:41:29,266 --> 00:41:32,830 it kind of became more difficult to play in synchrony. 438 00:41:32,830 --> 00:41:35,645 Because there's just so much loudness going on. 439 00:41:39,590 --> 00:41:41,215 PHIL SCARF: Anybody else have comments? 440 00:41:45,340 --> 00:41:46,840 STUDENT 7: You could really tell you 441 00:41:46,840 --> 00:41:50,640 could find that [? challen ?] motif, 442 00:41:50,640 --> 00:41:52,600 you repeated and played off of. 443 00:41:52,600 --> 00:41:55,050 I think it worked out nicely. 444 00:41:58,139 --> 00:41:59,180 PHIL SCARF: Anybody else? 445 00:42:02,765 --> 00:42:05,098 PROFESSOR: I was just thinking, it would be interesting. 446 00:42:05,098 --> 00:42:08,610 We can do this through the magic of taping, 447 00:42:08,610 --> 00:42:12,510 to play all these exactly in sequence. 448 00:42:12,510 --> 00:42:14,800 And then hear them as a unified suite. 449 00:42:14,800 --> 00:42:20,008 Which we could do through the mystery of taping. 450 00:42:20,008 --> 00:42:24,200 [INAUDIBLE] It was very interesting 451 00:42:24,200 --> 00:42:30,482 how we started with a slower idea doing some things. 452 00:42:30,482 --> 00:42:33,095 Then we got more rhythmicized as we got to the middle. 453 00:42:33,095 --> 00:42:35,950 Then we had this as the ending. 454 00:42:35,950 --> 00:42:38,202 Well, your thing just before that and then this thing 455 00:42:38,202 --> 00:42:39,701 at the end, which is very different. 456 00:42:45,377 --> 00:42:46,085 PHIL SCARF: Cool. 457 00:42:49,584 --> 00:42:50,500 Thank you. 458 00:42:50,500 --> 00:42:52,960 So what I thought is, maybe, as a group, 459 00:42:52,960 --> 00:42:55,570 we can try some of the frameworks that 460 00:42:55,570 --> 00:43:00,150 didn't get selected for today's assignment. 461 00:43:00,150 --> 00:43:03,286 So I was thinking, why don't we do -- 462 00:43:03,286 --> 00:43:06,210 I forget what I called it, the constrained range. 463 00:43:09,500 --> 00:43:10,470 Confined range, OK. 464 00:43:10,470 --> 00:43:12,940 So there's one called [? tans ?] confined range. 465 00:43:12,940 --> 00:43:16,510 And then we have the expanding and contracting [? tans. ?] 466 00:43:16,510 --> 00:43:19,680 So maybe we can try those. 467 00:43:23,330 --> 00:43:28,880 And actually, why don't we as a group figure out a a design? 468 00:43:28,880 --> 00:43:30,760 Why should I say what the design is? 469 00:43:30,760 --> 00:43:32,660 Let's use those frameworks. 470 00:43:32,660 --> 00:43:34,640 And who wants to volunteer, who wants 471 00:43:34,640 --> 00:43:38,180 to give us an idea of how we can start? 472 00:43:38,180 --> 00:43:39,870 Or how to use the frameworks? 473 00:43:47,820 --> 00:43:50,864 I see an elbow going up. 474 00:43:50,864 --> 00:43:52,510 You got to be careful. 475 00:43:52,510 --> 00:43:57,500 It's like you're at an auction, and if you 476 00:43:57,500 --> 00:44:00,068 do something like that, you just bought it, you know? 477 00:44:05,307 --> 00:44:06,890 OK, well I know you guys been thinking 478 00:44:06,890 --> 00:44:07,889 about these for a while. 479 00:44:07,889 --> 00:44:09,722 Yes, go ahead. 480 00:44:09,722 --> 00:44:12,305 STUDENT 7: Normally with range, we start low and then go high, 481 00:44:12,305 --> 00:44:14,221 why don't we start high and slowly incorporate 482 00:44:14,221 --> 00:44:15,040 the low notes? 483 00:44:15,040 --> 00:44:16,370 PHIL SCARF: That's fine. 484 00:44:16,370 --> 00:44:17,210 That's cool. 485 00:44:17,210 --> 00:44:18,600 And so that takes care of range. 486 00:44:18,600 --> 00:44:25,150 But who can think of what to do with this confined range idea? 487 00:44:25,150 --> 00:44:26,780 And then expanding and contracting. 488 00:44:26,780 --> 00:44:29,830 What could we do with those two things? 489 00:44:29,830 --> 00:44:31,410 When you say start high and move low, 490 00:44:31,410 --> 00:44:35,180 did you mean we have the confined range times? 491 00:44:35,180 --> 00:44:35,710 OK. 492 00:44:35,710 --> 00:44:38,480 So the confined range times, we'll start high. 493 00:44:38,480 --> 00:44:41,344 And then what are we going to do? 494 00:44:41,344 --> 00:44:42,760 STUDENT 7: Expand them slowly out? 495 00:44:42,760 --> 00:44:44,000 PHIL SCARF: So expanding. 496 00:44:44,000 --> 00:44:44,500 OK. 497 00:44:44,500 --> 00:44:44,830 Right. 498 00:44:44,830 --> 00:44:47,246 So expanding more down, because we're going to start high. 499 00:44:47,246 --> 00:44:48,970 So expanding them down. 500 00:44:48,970 --> 00:44:51,650 And when we do the expanding and contracting, 501 00:44:51,650 --> 00:44:53,180 these are more like linear. 502 00:44:53,180 --> 00:44:55,510 So you're kind of going up and down, 503 00:44:55,510 --> 00:44:57,450 progressively up and down. 504 00:44:57,450 --> 00:45:01,330 So you would make the point, if you're expanding downwards, 505 00:45:01,330 --> 00:45:04,340 you'll say you'll start here, and go down and back up. 506 00:45:04,340 --> 00:45:05,970 And then go down, farther and back up, 507 00:45:05,970 --> 00:45:07,178 and then farther and back up. 508 00:45:07,178 --> 00:45:10,420 Every time, you go progressively farther and farther. 509 00:45:10,420 --> 00:45:12,300 And then, is that it? 510 00:45:12,300 --> 00:45:14,570 Or anybody else have anything else to add? 511 00:45:14,570 --> 00:45:16,028 STUDENT 13: Maybe when we contract, 512 00:45:16,028 --> 00:45:21,352 we can contract the top note, so that the top end of the range 513 00:45:21,352 --> 00:45:22,060 is getting lower. 514 00:45:22,060 --> 00:45:24,610 And then we can track down to the bottom tonic. 515 00:45:24,610 --> 00:45:26,270 PHIL SCARF: That is a killer idea. 516 00:45:26,270 --> 00:45:27,680 I love that. 517 00:45:27,680 --> 00:45:28,540 OK. 518 00:45:28,540 --> 00:45:29,350 So that's good. 519 00:45:29,350 --> 00:45:33,640 And then, anything else? 520 00:45:36,500 --> 00:45:38,170 I think that's enough. 521 00:45:38,170 --> 00:45:40,090 So I think we can play with that. 522 00:45:40,090 --> 00:45:42,579 So let's just review this one more time, 523 00:45:42,579 --> 00:45:43,870 make sure I got this right, OK? 524 00:45:43,870 --> 00:45:46,161 I'm going to try to summarize what I think we're doing. 525 00:45:46,161 --> 00:45:48,750 So we're starting with a constrained range 526 00:45:48,750 --> 00:45:50,910 or confined range [? tans, ?] which 527 00:45:50,910 --> 00:45:53,589 are fast lines, as opposed to these slow lines which 528 00:45:53,589 --> 00:45:54,880 everybody's been starting with. 529 00:45:54,880 --> 00:45:57,440 So we're starting something fast. 530 00:45:57,440 --> 00:45:59,600 But you've got to pick just a few notes. 531 00:45:59,600 --> 00:46:02,030 Like three or four notes, and just stick with those notes 532 00:46:02,030 --> 00:46:04,990 and just keep going fast passages using those notes. 533 00:46:04,990 --> 00:46:06,660 And then after a while, we're going 534 00:46:06,660 --> 00:46:08,540 to start doing expanding and contracting, 535 00:46:08,540 --> 00:46:13,110 expanding [? tans. ?] Expanding downwards, 536 00:46:13,110 --> 00:46:14,800 progressively farther downwards. 537 00:46:14,800 --> 00:46:20,040 And then start doing it but reducing the upper part 538 00:46:20,040 --> 00:46:25,030 of the range, and then wind up with some probably confined 539 00:46:25,030 --> 00:46:28,170 range, constrained range [? tan ?] at the bottom. 540 00:46:28,170 --> 00:46:29,850 Yeah. 541 00:46:29,850 --> 00:46:30,490 OK. 542 00:46:30,490 --> 00:46:32,390 Great. 543 00:46:32,390 --> 00:46:35,140 So any questions or anything about? 544 00:46:35,140 --> 00:46:37,218 Does that reflect what you guys want to do? 545 00:46:37,218 --> 00:46:40,430 STUDENT 13: Do you want to pick a mode or the key? 546 00:46:40,430 --> 00:46:42,520 PHIL SCARF: That's a great question. 547 00:46:42,520 --> 00:46:44,080 I am tempted to say no. 548 00:46:44,080 --> 00:46:45,737 Because everybody's doing that. 549 00:46:45,737 --> 00:46:47,570 So I think we should do something different. 550 00:46:47,570 --> 00:46:51,301 My two cents is no. 551 00:46:51,301 --> 00:46:51,800 No. 552 00:46:54,490 --> 00:46:56,207 That's just my two cents. 553 00:46:56,207 --> 00:46:58,040 Because everybody seems to be still worrying 554 00:46:58,040 --> 00:46:59,569 about the modes and the scales. 555 00:46:59,569 --> 00:47:01,360 STUDENT 13: But there's like a dozen of us. 556 00:47:01,360 --> 00:47:03,760 Won't it -- 557 00:47:03,760 --> 00:47:04,470 PHIL SCARF: OK. 558 00:47:04,470 --> 00:47:05,990 You guys, feel free to override me. 559 00:47:05,990 --> 00:47:08,156 My two cents is I wouldn't get too worried about it. 560 00:47:08,156 --> 00:47:11,070 But if you want to pick a starting note maybe. 561 00:47:11,070 --> 00:47:13,675 That might be good. 562 00:47:13,675 --> 00:47:14,800 STUDENT 4: We can try both. 563 00:47:14,800 --> 00:47:15,633 We can try it twice. 564 00:47:18,804 --> 00:47:19,762 We could just try both. 565 00:47:19,762 --> 00:47:21,490 We could just try it as you say first, 566 00:47:21,490 --> 00:47:23,902 and then see what it sounds like. 567 00:47:23,902 --> 00:47:24,610 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 568 00:47:24,610 --> 00:47:26,440 Because, hey, we can always do it again. 569 00:47:26,440 --> 00:47:31,470 So let's try it without overly defining this too much. 570 00:47:31,470 --> 00:47:32,470 And see how it goes. 571 00:47:32,470 --> 00:47:33,720 And then we can talk about it, and see 572 00:47:33,720 --> 00:47:35,220 if it's something we want to change. 573 00:47:35,220 --> 00:47:36,580 How about that? 574 00:47:36,580 --> 00:47:38,540 All right. 575 00:47:38,540 --> 00:47:42,861 So I'm going to let you guys start -- 576 00:47:42,861 --> 00:47:43,860 maybe I won't even play. 577 00:47:43,860 --> 00:47:45,776 I'll let you guys play, why do I need to play? 578 00:47:50,900 --> 00:47:53,778 Is everybody ready? 579 00:47:53,778 --> 00:47:54,742 OK. 580 00:47:54,742 --> 00:48:34,055 [MUSIC PLAYING] 581 00:50:24,060 --> 00:50:25,680 PHIL SCARF: Cool. 582 00:50:25,680 --> 00:50:26,180 OK. 583 00:50:26,180 --> 00:50:27,470 That was nice. 584 00:50:27,470 --> 00:50:30,130 So any thoughts about this? 585 00:50:33,210 --> 00:50:35,857 STUDENT 13: One thing I noticed, is by the time we ended, 586 00:50:35,857 --> 00:50:37,940 I think, most people already done the contracting, 587 00:50:37,940 --> 00:50:39,071 and I hadn't. 588 00:50:39,071 --> 00:50:42,250 And it was just very difficult to listen to other people, 589 00:50:42,250 --> 00:50:45,710 to figure about what kind of range they were in. 590 00:50:45,710 --> 00:50:49,890 Since everyone was in a different part of their range. 591 00:50:49,890 --> 00:50:53,164 I couldn't just listen to the sax and be like, oh yeah, 592 00:50:53,164 --> 00:50:54,580 he's in the low part of his range. 593 00:50:54,580 --> 00:50:57,565 Because listening to the flute or the banjo would like 594 00:50:57,565 --> 00:51:00,298 get me sort of confused about what range everyone was in. 595 00:51:06,710 --> 00:51:08,710 PHIL SCARF: Well there's so many people playing. 596 00:51:08,710 --> 00:51:12,300 It's pretty thick with everybody playing. 597 00:51:12,300 --> 00:51:15,260 You know, the thing, in Indian classical music, of course, 598 00:51:15,260 --> 00:51:18,770 normally there would be one lead performer, 599 00:51:18,770 --> 00:51:20,430 one lead melodic performer. 600 00:51:20,430 --> 00:51:23,580 There might be two if it's like a duel under your duet 601 00:51:23,580 --> 00:51:26,090 kind of program. 602 00:51:26,090 --> 00:51:30,520 There would typically be an accompanist or even two, 603 00:51:30,520 --> 00:51:36,790 but they would be playing a much more secondary role, usually. 604 00:51:36,790 --> 00:51:40,450 So we wouldn't have this kind of size ensemble. 605 00:51:40,450 --> 00:51:41,160 Wouldn't happen. 606 00:51:41,160 --> 00:51:44,170 So these frameworks, really, we can certainly 607 00:51:44,170 --> 00:51:46,930 apply them to a large ensemble. 608 00:51:46,930 --> 00:51:50,950 Traditionally, it wouldn't be like this. 609 00:51:50,950 --> 00:51:52,750 Any other comments or thoughts? 610 00:51:56,110 --> 00:51:58,230 STUDENT 12: I felt like we sort of ended up 611 00:51:58,230 --> 00:52:06,558 finding a modal center, but we had 612 00:52:06,558 --> 00:52:10,094 some type of tonal center of some sort. 613 00:52:10,094 --> 00:52:12,165 I don't know. 614 00:52:12,165 --> 00:52:13,790 PHIL SCARF: Yeah, I think you're right. 615 00:52:13,790 --> 00:52:15,280 It's sort of emerged. 616 00:52:15,280 --> 00:52:18,109 PROFESSOR: I thought you all started on one. 617 00:52:18,109 --> 00:52:20,608 Sounded to me like you were all, I don't know what that note 618 00:52:20,608 --> 00:52:24,840 was, but -- anybody else notice that? 619 00:52:28,568 --> 00:52:31,150 I mean, after all that discussion. 620 00:52:31,150 --> 00:52:34,150 Everybody just intuitively said, okay, we're going to do over, 621 00:52:34,150 --> 00:52:36,650 and that was pretty interesting. 622 00:52:36,650 --> 00:52:40,360 And again, I was the only non-playing observer, 623 00:52:40,360 --> 00:52:48,821 but in addition to this concept, of the range increasing and all 624 00:52:48,821 --> 00:52:51,490 that kind of thing, contracting, you're 625 00:52:51,490 --> 00:52:53,700 also dealing with texture. 626 00:52:53,700 --> 00:52:55,330 So the whole thing could be looked 627 00:52:55,330 --> 00:52:58,072 at as an exercise in texture. 628 00:52:58,072 --> 00:53:00,280 Particularly in the beginning part and the last part, 629 00:53:00,280 --> 00:53:01,880 as I was hearing. 630 00:53:01,880 --> 00:53:03,080 Which is interesting. 631 00:53:03,080 --> 00:53:10,930 Which means that your specific contributions, 632 00:53:10,930 --> 00:53:14,290 it's the overall that's more important. 633 00:53:14,290 --> 00:53:15,412 To me, anyway. 634 00:53:15,412 --> 00:53:17,036 I don't know what you think about that. 635 00:53:26,820 --> 00:53:30,360 PHIL SCARF: I don't know, with so many people playing, 636 00:53:30,360 --> 00:53:32,304 everyone has their own contribution. 637 00:53:32,304 --> 00:53:33,220 Everybody's listening. 638 00:53:33,220 --> 00:53:34,969 And there's so much going on, it's hard -- 639 00:53:34,969 --> 00:53:37,770 some people are probably trying to pick out maybe what one 640 00:53:37,770 --> 00:53:40,228 person is doing, or maybe others are kind of trying to hear 641 00:53:40,228 --> 00:53:42,762 the overall sound. 642 00:53:42,762 --> 00:53:44,470 When you have so many people improvising, 643 00:53:44,470 --> 00:53:48,241 it's challenging to figure out how to fit in. 644 00:53:48,241 --> 00:53:48,740 Yes. 645 00:53:48,740 --> 00:53:50,652 STUDENT 12: I thought speaking of fitting in. 646 00:53:50,652 --> 00:53:53,042 I think this was the first time in this class, 647 00:53:53,042 --> 00:53:57,310 for me, at least, that I wasn't trying to fill a space. 648 00:53:57,310 --> 00:53:59,240 I was just like, oh, I'm just going to go. 649 00:53:59,240 --> 00:54:03,920 Because we had talked about having that type of texture. 650 00:54:03,920 --> 00:54:06,930 And I think, most of the time when you improvise, somebody 651 00:54:06,930 --> 00:54:09,757 starts something, and then somebody else comes in and is 652 00:54:09,757 --> 00:54:11,340 trying to fill a space that they left. 653 00:54:11,340 --> 00:54:14,280 And this was different because we were just, like, 654 00:54:14,280 --> 00:54:16,730 who cares about each other's space, 655 00:54:16,730 --> 00:54:18,710 and just went all over it. 656 00:54:18,710 --> 00:54:19,420 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 657 00:54:19,420 --> 00:54:20,968 That's right. 658 00:54:20,968 --> 00:54:23,384 STUDENT 7: I think one thing that really would have helped 659 00:54:23,384 --> 00:54:25,856 is if we'd trickled in at the beginning, 660 00:54:25,856 --> 00:54:29,494 that way we could have sort of set a -- 661 00:54:29,494 --> 00:54:31,440 STUDENT 12: I liked it, I mean, we've 662 00:54:31,440 --> 00:54:34,920 never sounded like that before. 663 00:54:34,920 --> 00:54:36,600 PROFESSOR: The effect was pretty strong. 664 00:54:40,050 --> 00:54:42,910 STUDENT 7: I feel like we did sort of start funneling in. 665 00:54:42,910 --> 00:54:45,595 The beginning just started as chaos, 666 00:54:45,595 --> 00:54:47,220 everyone was doing something different. 667 00:54:47,220 --> 00:54:51,240 We did start to funnel in towards the end. 668 00:54:51,240 --> 00:54:53,582 We might have been funneling in to two or three 669 00:54:53,582 --> 00:54:57,762 different places, but we were funneling. 670 00:54:57,762 --> 00:54:58,640 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 671 00:54:58,640 --> 00:55:01,800 You know, part of improvisation can be chaos. 672 00:55:04,865 --> 00:55:05,855 It doesn't have to be. 673 00:55:05,855 --> 00:55:09,320 But it can be. 674 00:55:09,320 --> 00:55:11,260 So that's part of the game, you know? 675 00:55:11,260 --> 00:55:13,580 If it goes into chaos, then where's it go from there, 676 00:55:13,580 --> 00:55:14,080 you know? 677 00:55:14,080 --> 00:55:16,050 Does something start to gel? 678 00:55:16,050 --> 00:55:16,955 Or come together? 679 00:55:19,620 --> 00:55:22,800 Improvisation, especially when you're doing with a group, 680 00:55:22,800 --> 00:55:25,134 it has a life of its own, you know? 681 00:55:25,134 --> 00:55:26,800 And everybody's kind of going with that. 682 00:55:30,380 --> 00:55:31,480 Anything else? 683 00:55:31,480 --> 00:55:32,080 What else? 684 00:55:37,200 --> 00:55:37,720 OK. 685 00:55:37,720 --> 00:55:38,620 Cool. 686 00:55:38,620 --> 00:55:42,550 So let's try something different. 687 00:55:42,550 --> 00:55:51,300 Let's try -- OK, I'll take ideas. 688 00:55:51,300 --> 00:55:53,430 Ideas about how to set up an improvisation. 689 00:55:57,170 --> 00:56:02,250 Let's say we want to use the constrained range, 690 00:56:02,250 --> 00:56:06,400 I want to do this constrained range, confined range. 691 00:56:06,400 --> 00:56:07,020 OK. 692 00:56:07,020 --> 00:56:09,710 We use the confined range idea. 693 00:56:09,710 --> 00:56:11,890 But this time we're going to extrapolate it. 694 00:56:11,890 --> 00:56:14,470 And instead of picking notes that are close together, 695 00:56:14,470 --> 00:56:17,250 pick three or four notes that are far apart. 696 00:56:17,250 --> 00:56:18,520 And use that. 697 00:56:18,520 --> 00:56:20,820 But I also want to change this density. 698 00:56:20,820 --> 00:56:24,110 So that's it's not continuous high, like everybody 699 00:56:24,110 --> 00:56:25,200 playing all the time. 700 00:56:25,200 --> 00:56:30,060 So I want to solicit some ideas about how we should do that. 701 00:56:30,060 --> 00:56:33,075 How can we make it thinner? 702 00:56:33,075 --> 00:56:38,425 STUDENT 7: We could designate people 703 00:56:38,425 --> 00:56:42,760 who would be more drone, lower, longer pitches. 704 00:56:42,760 --> 00:56:46,170 And who would be higher, melodic type instruments. 705 00:56:48,356 --> 00:56:50,480 That way we can sort of differentiate between that, 706 00:56:50,480 --> 00:56:53,176 and not everyone's trying to do melody. 707 00:56:53,176 --> 00:56:53,800 PHIL SCARF: OK. 708 00:56:53,800 --> 00:56:54,840 That's a cool idea. 709 00:56:54,840 --> 00:56:58,270 So by default, people would be droning. 710 00:56:58,270 --> 00:57:02,840 And then those who are going to play the so-called lead part 711 00:57:02,840 --> 00:57:05,950 would emerge. 712 00:57:05,950 --> 00:57:06,780 OK. 713 00:57:06,780 --> 00:57:07,960 Yes? 714 00:57:07,960 --> 00:57:13,739 STUDENT 2: We could maybe have a shifting window of maybe two 715 00:57:13,739 --> 00:57:19,907 or three people at a time, who are out there trying to make 716 00:57:19,907 --> 00:57:25,991 a new motif, or kind of -- even for the people who are just 717 00:57:25,991 --> 00:57:27,699 droning, they might be playing something. 718 00:57:27,699 --> 00:57:31,595 But maybe designate a moving group of people. 719 00:57:31,595 --> 00:57:33,543 Not any one, but like. 720 00:57:33,543 --> 00:57:38,959 You know, Ben can experiment more, I guess. 721 00:57:38,959 --> 00:57:41,500 PHIL SCARF: Playing the lead -- we'll call it lead and drone. 722 00:57:41,500 --> 00:57:43,260 Just to differentiate the roles, right? 723 00:57:43,260 --> 00:57:46,060 So having small groups of two or three people at a time 724 00:57:46,060 --> 00:57:47,091 playing the lead. 725 00:57:47,091 --> 00:57:47,590 Right. 726 00:57:47,590 --> 00:57:48,090 Yeah. 727 00:57:48,090 --> 00:57:49,520 That's a good idea. 728 00:57:49,520 --> 00:57:53,130 So any thoughts about how do we implement that? 729 00:57:53,130 --> 00:57:54,630 How are we going to know who's going 730 00:57:54,630 --> 00:57:56,760 to play the lead part at any given time? 731 00:57:56,760 --> 00:57:57,720 Any ideas? 732 00:57:57,720 --> 00:58:00,600 STUDENT 2: You can just start with first two or three, 733 00:58:00,600 --> 00:58:03,014 and then when one drops out, the next person -- 734 00:58:03,014 --> 00:58:04,180 PHIL SCARF: OK, that's fine. 735 00:58:04,180 --> 00:58:04,679 Cool. 736 00:58:04,679 --> 00:58:05,850 So we'll start with three. 737 00:58:05,850 --> 00:58:08,552 When the first person drops out, the next person adds in. 738 00:58:08,552 --> 00:58:10,510 That person drops out, the next person adds in. 739 00:58:10,510 --> 00:58:13,230 And we work our way across the room, how about that? 740 00:58:13,230 --> 00:58:14,215 OK. 741 00:58:14,215 --> 00:58:14,715 Great. 742 00:58:22,190 --> 00:58:23,680 This is for the lead part. 743 00:58:23,680 --> 00:58:26,500 By default, everyone's going to be droning, more or less 744 00:58:26,500 --> 00:58:27,305 all the time. 745 00:58:27,305 --> 00:58:29,430 And then when it's your turn to play the lead part, 746 00:58:29,430 --> 00:58:31,180 you jump out, you emerge out of that, 747 00:58:31,180 --> 00:58:32,850 and you go into the lead part. 748 00:58:32,850 --> 00:58:36,640 And I was just thinking also, maybe 749 00:58:36,640 --> 00:58:40,400 we should put in one more element here. 750 00:58:40,400 --> 00:58:41,870 Like a note density element. 751 00:58:43,990 --> 00:58:44,490 Yeah. 752 00:58:44,490 --> 00:58:46,460 Everybody's going to pick like three or four notes, which 753 00:58:46,460 --> 00:58:47,793 don't have to be the same notes. 754 00:58:49,559 --> 00:58:51,100 You can pick whatever notes you want. 755 00:58:51,100 --> 00:58:52,933 And you could base it on what the people are 756 00:58:52,933 --> 00:58:54,280 playing who played before you. 757 00:58:54,280 --> 00:58:55,230 Or not. 758 00:58:55,230 --> 00:58:57,450 It's up to you. 759 00:58:57,450 --> 00:58:59,070 But let's do this. 760 00:58:59,070 --> 00:59:02,630 Let's start it at a very high density, 761 00:59:02,630 --> 00:59:05,761 and work our way to a low density. 762 00:59:05,761 --> 00:59:06,260 OK? 763 00:59:06,260 --> 00:59:09,400 But still, the notes should be rapid. 764 00:59:09,400 --> 00:59:13,850 So to achieve a low density with rapid notes, what 765 00:59:13,850 --> 00:59:16,280 you have to do is maybe play a few notes and stop. 766 00:59:16,280 --> 00:59:17,620 Play a few notes and stop. 767 00:59:17,620 --> 00:59:21,260 So that it's not as dense, but when you play the notes, 768 00:59:21,260 --> 00:59:24,410 you're playing rapid lines. 769 00:59:24,410 --> 00:59:28,180 So let's not play sustained -- the lead players should not be 770 00:59:28,180 --> 00:59:30,630 playing sustained notes. 771 00:59:30,630 --> 00:59:33,200 It's only the droners who are playing sustained. 772 00:59:33,200 --> 00:59:35,850 And let's do the drone -- let's pick a note. 773 00:59:35,850 --> 00:59:38,120 Who wants to pick a note for the drone? 774 00:59:38,120 --> 00:59:40,130 A tonic? 775 00:59:40,130 --> 00:59:41,570 F. OK. 776 00:59:41,570 --> 00:59:43,030 Cool. 777 00:59:43,030 --> 00:59:44,100 So let's start. 778 00:59:44,100 --> 00:59:47,240 And we're going to start over here and work our way around. 779 00:59:47,240 --> 00:59:50,030 Three people at a time. 780 00:59:50,030 --> 00:59:51,069 OK. 781 00:59:51,069 --> 00:59:51,860 Is everybody ready? 782 00:59:54,854 --> 01:03:53,820 [MUSIC PLAYING] 783 01:03:53,820 --> 01:03:54,570 PHIL SCARF: Right. 784 01:03:54,570 --> 01:03:55,069 Good. 785 01:03:55,069 --> 01:03:56,150 So comments? 786 01:04:03,710 --> 01:04:05,180 How well do you think we followed 787 01:04:05,180 --> 01:04:06,630 the framework, or the design? 788 01:04:12,486 --> 01:04:14,150 STUDENT 7: We followed it pretty well. 789 01:04:14,150 --> 01:04:16,460 It seemed like we were keeping to the groups of three. 790 01:04:16,460 --> 01:04:17,168 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 791 01:04:17,168 --> 01:04:18,900 We were keeping to the groups of three. 792 01:04:18,900 --> 01:04:19,450 That's true. 793 01:04:19,450 --> 01:04:23,357 I was kind of helping that along. 794 01:04:23,357 --> 01:04:24,940 Because sometimes it was getting hazy. 795 01:04:24,940 --> 01:04:25,717 But yeah. 796 01:04:25,717 --> 01:04:27,925 STUDENT 13: I didn't hear the change in note density, 797 01:04:27,925 --> 01:04:28,800 I guess? 798 01:04:28,800 --> 01:04:29,508 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 799 01:04:29,508 --> 01:04:32,070 The change in note density didn't really seem to happen. 800 01:04:32,070 --> 01:04:33,280 It wasn't too obvious. 801 01:04:33,280 --> 01:04:36,840 Maybe a little bit, but it wasn't nearly as pronounced 802 01:04:36,840 --> 01:04:38,090 as I was hoping it would be. 803 01:04:38,090 --> 01:04:39,121 STUDENT 12: I guess I wasn't sure 804 01:04:39,121 --> 01:04:41,190 exactly what that meant when you described it. 805 01:04:41,190 --> 01:04:41,898 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 806 01:04:41,898 --> 01:04:45,890 Well I'll try demonstrating that with my reed -- aw man, 807 01:04:45,890 --> 01:04:47,160 I'll tell you, this weather. 808 01:04:47,160 --> 01:04:50,410 When it's cold and it's dry in here, the reed dries up. 809 01:04:50,410 --> 01:04:53,225 While we're talking I'll try to get this resolved. 810 01:04:53,225 --> 01:04:55,600 Picking three or four notes and only playing those notes. 811 01:04:55,600 --> 01:04:58,590 I was hearing like scales and different things going on, 812 01:04:58,590 --> 01:05:01,650 which wasn't really part of the design. 813 01:05:01,650 --> 01:05:03,640 So that was the other observation I had. 814 01:05:09,026 --> 01:05:10,401 STUDENT 7: I thought we were just 815 01:05:10,401 --> 01:05:13,240 supposed to start with three notes and then build out. 816 01:05:13,240 --> 01:05:15,190 PHIL SCARF: Oh. 817 01:05:15,190 --> 01:05:17,110 That's not what I had in mind. 818 01:05:17,110 --> 01:05:20,920 But that's certainly a possibility. 819 01:05:20,920 --> 01:05:27,229 But it wasn't what I was trying to communicate. 820 01:05:27,229 --> 01:05:28,770 PROFESSOR: If I could just interject. 821 01:05:28,770 --> 01:05:32,718 It's almost the most difficult thing, is just [INAUDIBLE] 822 01:05:32,718 --> 01:05:34,622 a reduced parameter. 823 01:05:34,622 --> 01:05:37,954 So three or four notes, that's really hard. 824 01:05:37,954 --> 01:05:42,650 Because our inclination always is to expand. 825 01:05:42,650 --> 01:05:44,530 So the idea of staying with this limited 826 01:05:44,530 --> 01:05:46,949 whatever it is, range or density or something, 827 01:05:46,949 --> 01:05:48,490 it's one of the hardest things to do. 828 01:05:48,490 --> 01:05:50,284 So just something to keep in mind. 829 01:05:50,284 --> 01:05:52,450 We'll probably try to work on that as we go forward. 830 01:05:52,450 --> 01:05:53,541 PHIL SCARF: I agree. 831 01:05:53,541 --> 01:05:54,040 That's true. 832 01:05:54,040 --> 01:05:55,620 It's a very natural tendency. 833 01:05:55,620 --> 01:05:59,130 Once you start with whatever the parameter is, 834 01:05:59,130 --> 01:06:03,170 you try to build something. 835 01:06:03,170 --> 01:06:03,970 OK. 836 01:06:03,970 --> 01:06:08,930 So for example, I'm going to pick three notes 837 01:06:08,930 --> 01:06:12,470 and just play some rapid lines with just three notes. 838 01:06:31,150 --> 01:06:32,720 So that's pretty high density. 839 01:06:32,720 --> 01:06:35,160 To go to lower density without reducing the speed, 840 01:06:35,160 --> 01:06:36,630 you just leave space. 841 01:06:36,630 --> 01:06:37,130 So. 842 01:06:47,700 --> 01:06:52,784 And you could reduce the density without changing the speed. 843 01:06:52,784 --> 01:06:54,700 So that's more like what I was thinking about. 844 01:06:57,510 --> 01:06:59,360 So I don't know if we want to try it again. 845 01:06:59,360 --> 01:07:03,774 Maybe try it again with that in mind and see what we can do. 846 01:07:03,774 --> 01:07:07,770 PROFESSOR: So just time-wise, we have room for one more. 847 01:07:07,770 --> 01:07:08,520 PHIL SCARF: OK. 848 01:07:08,520 --> 01:07:09,020 That's cool. 849 01:07:09,020 --> 01:07:10,830 So we'll do this. 850 01:07:10,830 --> 01:07:12,684 So we'll do the same basic thing, 851 01:07:12,684 --> 01:07:14,100 with everybody droning by default. 852 01:07:14,100 --> 01:07:16,640 And then we'll have our window of three. 853 01:07:16,640 --> 01:07:20,597 And I may just do the same thing. 854 01:07:20,597 --> 01:07:21,430 So let's just start. 855 01:07:23,950 --> 01:07:27,760 Yeah, still on the F. 856 01:07:27,760 --> 01:10:22,202 [MUSIC PLAYING] 857 01:10:22,202 --> 01:10:24,160 PHIL SCARF: Still have a couple minutes, right? 858 01:10:24,160 --> 01:10:24,868 OK, any comments? 859 01:10:31,060 --> 01:10:31,950 That was much better. 860 01:10:31,950 --> 01:10:33,695 Much closer to what we were trying to do. 861 01:10:33,695 --> 01:10:34,195 Yes. 862 01:10:34,195 --> 01:10:34,695 Good. 863 01:10:38,720 --> 01:10:41,950 So how did that feel? 864 01:10:41,950 --> 01:10:46,070 Start to compare the last two, from the performer's point 865 01:10:46,070 --> 01:10:46,670 of view. 866 01:10:46,670 --> 01:10:48,128 How did it feel the play those two? 867 01:10:55,324 --> 01:10:56,490 STUDENT 7: It's interesting. 868 01:10:56,490 --> 01:10:58,610 Because we look at it on a micro scale. 869 01:10:58,610 --> 01:11:00,450 Each individual person is playing 870 01:11:00,450 --> 01:11:03,828 this random, chaotic assortment of just three notes. 871 01:11:03,828 --> 01:11:06,036 And when you look on the macro level, 872 01:11:06,036 --> 01:11:07,494 when everyone was playing together, 873 01:11:07,494 --> 01:11:11,306 it actually sort of made sense. 874 01:11:11,306 --> 01:11:12,012 I don't know. 875 01:11:12,012 --> 01:11:13,970 But if you just listen to each individual part, 876 01:11:13,970 --> 01:11:18,630 it really didn't make sense, it was just sort of random. 877 01:11:18,630 --> 01:11:21,030 PHIL SCARF: OK. 878 01:11:21,030 --> 01:11:23,090 Anything else? 879 01:11:23,090 --> 01:11:24,390 Other comments? 880 01:11:24,390 --> 01:11:27,324 STUDENT 1: I feel like high density is also 881 01:11:27,324 --> 01:11:30,132 just as restricting as like low density. 882 01:11:35,360 --> 01:11:37,186 There's only certain things that you 883 01:11:37,186 --> 01:11:41,834 can play if you're forced to play fast. 884 01:11:41,834 --> 01:11:44,497 There's certain things when you're forced to play slow. 885 01:11:44,497 --> 01:11:46,080 But you're restricted to those things. 886 01:11:49,632 --> 01:11:51,590 PHIL SCARF: As opposed to having a full pallet, 887 01:11:51,590 --> 01:11:52,435 of all possibilities. 888 01:11:52,435 --> 01:11:52,900 STUDENT 1: I didn't mean restricted as a bad thing. 889 01:11:52,900 --> 01:11:55,576 I meant, it's just definitely more constraint 890 01:11:55,576 --> 01:11:56,243 than I expected. 891 01:11:56,243 --> 01:11:56,950 PHIL SCARF: Yeah. 892 01:11:56,950 --> 01:11:58,790 You have to work within certain limitations, 893 01:11:58,790 --> 01:12:04,350 and it generates a certain thing. 894 01:12:04,350 --> 01:12:07,850 And, you know, these kind of concepts -- 895 01:12:07,850 --> 01:12:09,910 it's great to think about it ahead of time. 896 01:12:09,910 --> 01:12:12,090 And have this design worked out, and then try 897 01:12:12,090 --> 01:12:13,310 to implement the design. 898 01:12:13,310 --> 01:12:19,150 But you can also spontaneously just play, and use these ideas 899 01:12:19,150 --> 01:12:20,990 as you go. 900 01:12:20,990 --> 01:12:24,070 And let the framework, or let the whole design 901 01:12:24,070 --> 01:12:29,070 itself kind of evolve spontaneously. 902 01:12:29,070 --> 01:12:31,570 It doesn't have to be something that you've 903 01:12:31,570 --> 01:12:33,920 planned out before hand. 904 01:12:33,920 --> 01:12:35,420 PROFESSOR: The one thing I would say 905 01:12:35,420 --> 01:12:39,386 is I thought everybody, comparing the two, 906 01:12:39,386 --> 01:12:41,318 is the second one, everybody was listening 907 01:12:41,318 --> 01:12:43,250 much more closely than I thought. 908 01:12:43,250 --> 01:12:45,070 Which is why I think it worked out better. 909 01:12:45,070 --> 01:12:46,570 Because you got to listen as much as 910 01:12:46,570 --> 01:12:49,320 you make your individual contributions.