Original image
ThinkStock/Erin McCarthy

7 Experimental Adventures in Classical Music

Original image
ThinkStock/Erin McCarthy

Some composers play it safe and write music that makes easy listening. Others like testing the limits. Here are some unique experiments in classical music.

1. Stockhausen’s Helicopter String Quartet

German composer Karlheinz Stockhausen was one of the most controversial composers of the 20th century. Sometimes, he’d write pieces that required three orchestras. Other times, he’d write for helicopters.

Written in the early 1990s, Stockhausen’s Helicopter String Quartet is considered one of the toughest pieces to pull off. It requires a string quartet, four helicopters, and a team of sound designers and engineers. Each member of the quartet occupies one helicopter, playing eerie tremolos that blend with the sound of the spinning rotors.

2. Conlon Nancarrow’s Piano Pieces

It’s impossible for a human to play most of Conon Nancarrow’s piano pieces. So he wrote them for player piano instead. He’d mash together melodies, mix time signatures, and play chords that even a four-handed Horowitz couldn’t touch. As NPR puts it, his music sounds like a “turn of the century roadhouse gone berserk.”

3. Frank Zappa Plays the Bicycle

Before leading the Mothers of Invention to fame, Frank Zappa was writing orchestral scores for low-budget films. In 1963, a 23-year-old Zappa was invited onto The Steve Allen Show to showcase his talents. His instrument of choice? The bicycle. As Zappa said, “I never set out to be weird. It was always other people who called me weird.”

4. Anything by Harry Partch

Look at a piano, and you’ll see that 12 keys make up one octave. American composer Harry Partch wasn’t satisfied with that—he wanted notes between those notes. So instead of settling at 12, Partch divided an octave into 43 pitches. Since no instruments existed that could play that, Partch made some. Using some fine math, he concocted fanciful instruments like the “Quadrangularis Reversum” and the “Chromelodeon.”

5. Malcolm Arnold’s A Grand, Grand Overture, featuring Vacuums and Guns

Malcolm Arnold was a relatively conservative composer who rarely delved into the weird. He wrote the film score for Bridge Over the River Kwai and 1969’s David Copperfield. But in 1959, he took the plunge and wrote A Grand, Grand Overture, featuring solos by three vacuum cleaners, one floor polisher, and four rifles.

6. Anything by John Cage

John Cage was part inventor, part composer, and part philosopher. He was deeply interested in sound—especially sounds that conventional instruments couldn’t make. Some of his coolest pieces are for prepared piano (where he’d place nails, coins, and other objects onto piano strings). One time, he experimented playing an amplified cactus with a feather and even wrote a tune for 12 radios. In 1960, as a guest on the show I’ve Got a Secret, Cage played a tune with a mechanical fish, a vase of roses, a bathtub, and a bottle of wine.

7. Arvo Pärt’s Symphony No. 2, Featuring Rubber Duckies

Most of Arvo Pärt’s music is accessible—meditative, minimal, and bell-like. The Estonian composer’s Symphony No. 2 is a shade darker, though, using children’s toys as background noise. The first movement begins with the nightmarish squeaking of a sea of rubber duckies.

Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva
Man Buys Two Metric Tons of LEGO Bricks; Sorts Them Via Machine Learning
Original image
iStock // Ekaterina Minaeva

Jacques Mattheij made a small, but awesome, mistake. He went on eBay one evening and bid on a bunch of bulk LEGO brick auctions, then went to sleep. Upon waking, he discovered that he was the high bidder on many, and was now the proud owner of two tons of LEGO bricks. (This is about 4400 pounds.) He wrote, "[L]esson 1: if you win almost all bids you are bidding too high."

Mattheij had noticed that bulk, unsorted bricks sell for something like €10/kilogram, whereas sets are roughly €40/kg and rare parts go for up to €100/kg. Much of the value of the bricks is in their sorting. If he could reduce the entropy of these bins of unsorted bricks, he could make a tidy profit. While many people do this work by hand, the problem is enormous—just the kind of challenge for a computer. Mattheij writes:

There are 38000+ shapes and there are 100+ possible shades of color (you can roughly tell how old someone is by asking them what lego colors they remember from their youth).

In the following months, Mattheij built a proof-of-concept sorting system using, of course, LEGO. He broke the problem down into a series of sub-problems (including "feeding LEGO reliably from a hopper is surprisingly hard," one of those facts of nature that will stymie even the best system design). After tinkering with the prototype at length, he expanded the system to a surprisingly complex system of conveyer belts (powered by a home treadmill), various pieces of cabinetry, and "copious quantities of crazy glue."

Here's a video showing the current system running at low speed:

The key part of the system was running the bricks past a camera paired with a computer running a neural net-based image classifier. That allows the computer (when sufficiently trained on brick images) to recognize bricks and thus categorize them by color, shape, or other parameters. Remember that as bricks pass by, they can be in any orientation, can be dirty, can even be stuck to other pieces. So having a flexible software system is key to recognizing—in a fraction of a second—what a given brick is, in order to sort it out. When a match is found, a jet of compressed air pops the piece off the conveyer belt and into a waiting bin.

After much experimentation, Mattheij rewrote the software (several times in fact) to accomplish a variety of basic tasks. At its core, the system takes images from a webcam and feeds them to a neural network to do the classification. Of course, the neural net needs to be "trained" by showing it lots of images, and telling it what those images represent. Mattheij's breakthrough was allowing the machine to effectively train itself, with guidance: Running pieces through allows the system to take its own photos, make a guess, and build on that guess. As long as Mattheij corrects the incorrect guesses, he ends up with a decent (and self-reinforcing) corpus of training data. As the machine continues running, it can rack up more training, allowing it to recognize a broad variety of pieces on the fly.

Here's another video, focusing on how the pieces move on conveyer belts (running at slow speed so puny humans can follow). You can also see the air jets in action:

In an email interview, Mattheij told Mental Floss that the system currently sorts LEGO bricks into more than 50 categories. It can also be run in a color-sorting mode to bin the parts across 12 color groups. (Thus at present you'd likely do a two-pass sort on the bricks: once for shape, then a separate pass for color.) He continues to refine the system, with a focus on making its recognition abilities faster. At some point down the line, he plans to make the software portion open source. You're on your own as far as building conveyer belts, bins, and so forth.

Check out Mattheij's writeup in two parts for more information. It starts with an overview of the story, followed up with a deep dive on the software. He's also tweeting about the project (among other things). And if you look around a bit, you'll find bulk LEGO brick auctions online—it's definitely a thing!

Original image
200 Health Experts Call for Ban on Two Antibacterial Chemicals
Original image

In September 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a ban on antibacterial soap and body wash. But a large collective of scientists and medical professionals says the agency should have done more to stop the spread of harmful chemicals into our bodies and environment, most notably the antimicrobials triclosan and triclocarban. They published their recommendations in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

The 2016 report from the FDA concluded that 19 of the most commonly used antimicrobial ingredients are no more effective than ordinary soap and water, and forbade their use in soap and body wash.

"Customers may think added antimicrobials are a way to reduce infections, but in most products there is no evidence that they do," Ted Schettler, science director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, said in a statement.

Studies have shown that these chemicals may actually do more harm than good. They don't keep us from getting sick, but they can contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, also known as superbugs. Triclosan and triclocarban can also damage our hormones and immune systems.

And while they may no longer be appearing on our bathroom sinks or shower shelves, they're still all around us. They've leached into the environment from years of use. They're also still being added to a staggering array of consumer products, as companies create "antibacterial" clothing, toys, yoga mats, paint, food storage containers, electronics, doorknobs, and countertops.

The authors of the new consensus statement say it's time for that to stop.

"We must develop better alternatives and prevent unneeded exposures to antimicrobial chemicals," Rolf Haden of the University of Arizona said in the statement. Haden researches where mass-produced chemicals wind up in the environment.

The statement notes that many manufacturers have simply replaced the banned chemicals with others. "I was happy that the FDA finally acted to remove these chemicals from soaps," said Arlene Blum, executive director of the Green Science Policy Institute. "But I was dismayed to discover at my local drugstore that most products now contain substitutes that may be worse."

Blum, Haden, Schettler, and their colleagues "urge scientists, governments, chemical and product manufacturers, purchasing organizations, retailers, and consumers" to avoid antimicrobial chemicals outside of medical settings. "Where antimicrobials are necessary," they write, we should "use safer alternatives that are not persistent and pose no risk to humans or ecosystems."

They recommend that manufacturers label any products containing antimicrobial chemicals so that consumers can avoid them, and they call for further research into the impacts of these compounds on us and our planet.