The reading for today was a bit hard for me to understand, I think partially due to my limited knowledge of music theory. While I understand the basics of music and how to read it because of me playing the saxophone for about 10 years, I don’t totally understand the depths of music theory, like knowing which notes or chords can sound good together (I did improv a bit but I did it mostly by ear). It felt like a mathematician was trying to explain how to write music to me, something I am notoriously bad at understanding. I believe the author is trying to explain essentially how to not make “boring” music with the use of computer code as the medium. Rather than having the same looping instrumentals, try to add something more to it, to make it more interesting to listen to. I definitely agree with this point, since most music I enjoy has very good production with varying sounds and extra random sounds added to sort of spice up the composition. However, I also think repetition is not always a bad thing either. For example, in lots of rap or hip-hop songs, there can be a beat that can change very little or not at all through the duration of the song. Perhaps since the instrumentals and production are less of the focus, you can use the same looping beat to put more emphasis on the lyrics. I also believe that repetition can be good in things like video game OSTs, where again, the music is just there to add to the background atmosphere and isn’t necessarily the main focus. Having randomness can add more though, and make a piece more individualistic, and give the opportunity to make your piece sound more unique. Overall, while I found the reading a little hard to understand, I do get the idea the author is trying to put across by not making music too repetitive. While I agree with this in most cases, I don’t think you should outright reject repetitiveness either, because it can also be a good tool in making musical compositions.