There have been many "unplayable by humans" compositions for the Player Piano dating back 100 years. IMHO, they sound very unnatural and not something I'd listen to more than once for a curiosity. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

That said, this robot band is way better than Chuck E' Cheese's. Add in a holographic singer, and would be a huge success in Japan.

This reminds me of player piano rolls.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

My favorite Nancarrow study: http://videosift.com/video/Conlon-Nancarrow-Study-for-Player-Piano-No-6



-The guy was fascinating man..his body of work is small & insanely obsessive-compulsively impressive-

My favorite Nancarrow study: http://videosift.com/video/Conlon-Nancarrow-Study-for-Player-Piano-No-6 ^chingalera:

Thanks for this. Inspiration for the next sift!
YAH!
http://videosift.com/video/Conlon-Nancarrow-Study-for-Player-Piano-No-7

My favorite Nancarrow study: http://videosift.com/video/Conlon-Nancarrow-Study-for-Player-Piano-No-6

Cocaine for player pianos is a hell of a drug.

Thanks for this. Inspiration for the next sift!

YAH!
http://videosift.com/video/Conlon-Nancarrow-Study-for-Player-Piano-No-7

>> ^My_design:

This is the exact problem with thinking today, we don't allow kids to grow up. We have mothers calling in to their child's employer because he dared to give a negative review. We have employees that feel they are entitled to the same pay rate as their manager because they work 40 hours a week. Loving parents protecting their child?! Your child is 27! He/she isn't a child they're an adult! If they have a handicap that prevents them from being able to work and provide for themselves then they should be able to retain coverage. Outside of that the best and only reason I could see paying $3600 a year per enrolled "Adult/Child" would be if the current uninsured medical expenses for 19-27 year olds drastically outweighed the costs for the new program. But I haven't seen any statistics relating to that. Yes 30% of 19-27 year old adults do not have insurance. But how much is that fact costing us each year and how much would it cost us each year if we insured each and every one of them?
The $3600 is a government estimate for 2013, and since the government does their estimating with chickens pecking at player pianos I sincerely doubt the costs will be in line.
If the premiums are being paid anyway why don't the parents just pay for their kids insurance?
I fully expect that if Obamacare goes into effect that I will lose my employer provided insurance. If by some act of God I do not lose my coverage then I fully expect that my rates will drastically increase and my family coverage plan will become even more expensive as people load on their precious 22 year old "kids" to the program. So this means that my family will pay even more for my daughters insurance because someone else can't put a foot of common sense up their kids ass.
>> ^bareboards2:
You do understand that insurance premiums are being paid, don't you?
This isn't a freebie giveaway. It is allowing loving parents to protect their children.
What the hell is wrong with you?

>> ^My_design:
Maybe since you can now cover a child under healthcare until 27 we should change the legal drinking age to 27 as well. How about claiming them as an exemption on taxes until 27 and being considered underage inregards to sexual relationships until 27 as well.




You think allowing family members to be covered by your health insurance is coddling?? Are you also expecting families to kick their college graduates out of the house upon graduation? How about giving them a few years to find a good job with benefits before you disown them? Seems a bit more humane. Those jobs aren't as easy to find as they used to be.

You also said you expect to lose your coverage due to "Obamacare". Really? I'd love to hear how you figure that will happen.

This is the exact problem with thinking today, we don't allow kids to grow up. We have mothers calling in to their child's employer because he dared to give a negative review. We have employees that feel they are entitled to the same pay rate as their manager because they work 40 hours a week. Loving parents protecting their child?! Your child is 27! He/she isn't a child they're an adult! If they have a handicap that prevents them from being able to work and provide for themselves then they should be able to retain coverage. Outside of that the best and only reason I could see paying $3600 a year per enrolled "Adult/Child" would be if the current uninsured medical expenses for 19-27 year olds drastically outweighed the costs for the new program. But I haven't seen any statistics relating to that. Yes 30% of 19-27 year old adults do not have insurance. But how much is that fact costing us each year and how much would it cost us each year if we insured each and every one of them?
The $3600 is a government estimate for 2013, and since the government does their estimating with chickens pecking at player pianos I sincerely doubt the costs will be in line.

If the premiums are being paid anyway why don't the parents just pay for their kids insurance?
I fully expect that if Obamacare goes into effect that I will lose my employer provided insurance. If by some act of God I do not lose my coverage then I fully expect that my rates will drastically increase and my family coverage plan will become even more expensive as people load on their precious 22 year old "kids" to the program. So this means that my family will pay even more for my daughters insurance because someone else can't put a foot of common sense up their kids ass.

>> ^bareboards2:

You do understand that insurance premiums are being paid, don't you?
This isn't a freebie giveaway. It is allowing loving parents to protect their children.
What the hell is wrong with you?

>> ^My_design:
Maybe since you can now cover a child under healthcare until 27 we should change the legal drinking age to 27 as well. How about claiming them as an exemption on taxes until 27 and being considered underage inregards to sexual relationships until 27 as well.

>> ^MilkmanDan:

I want to see this on one of those player pianos with the holes-in-paper feeding...
Edit: Then again, there might be more hole than paper there near the finale.


Close: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gaMX_NTLRw

I don't know if anyone makes that style player piano these days. Yamaha makes their Disklavier pianos. But I think if I was to invest into a nice grand piano, I would want to get a Bösendorfer CEUS system... heck just a Bösendorfer itself would be grand... Although in the CEUS system at least, I think somebody actually needs to sit down and play it first for it to be recorded.

>> ^MilkmanDan:

I want to see this on one of those player pianos with the holes-in-paper feeding...
Edit: Then again, there might be more hole than paper there near the finale.

I want to see this on one of those player pianos with the holes-in-paper feeding...

Edit: Then again, there might be more hole than paper there near the finale.

You know IMHO I think the whole 'arts' label is crutching the LEMUR's possibility into breaking mainstream radio play

How about posting this into ARTS? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo0H8ztju78, it's the premiere of all-robotic version of George Antheil's infamous Dada piece for 16 player pianos and percussion orchestra which is far more Art then the lovely obscure techno beats of the video I sifted! thankyouverymuchandhaveniceday!

*Runs off quickly*

Just goes ta' show ya, they ain't quite to the soul part of the computer/human thingy....like a player piano roll, this is groovy for what it is.....(Hell yeah I want one!!!), but will never replace the real deal.....oh and, whoever invented this...."Way Ta masturbate To jazz, my insect brither!"