[HN Gopher] MusicGen: Simple and controllable music generation
___________________________________________________________________
MusicGen: Simple and controllable music generation
Author : og_kalu
Score : 323 points
Date : 2023-06-10 16:29 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (ai.honu.io)
(TXT) w3m dump (ai.honu.io)
| muglug wrote:
| For the most part the new samples still sound like melodic
| nonsense -- in all but one of the examples the melody doesn't fit
| properly with the chords underneath. It really does feel like the
| output of a music blender.
|
| The style transfer is the most interesting bit IMO, as you get a
| sense of how it hears the source examples.
|
| For example, when transferring the opening to the Bach Toccata
| all the new samples miss out the same passing note (the fifth
| note in the sequence). To a human ear that note is important, and
| could easily have been incorporated into the new samples, but it
| seemingly doesn't activate enough neurons for MusicGen to care.
| Tenoke wrote:
| I was playing with it yesterday and it's not bad. I'd much rather
| use it for e.g. YouTube videos than risk getting copyright
| claimed for using something that already exists.
| cubefox wrote:
| Surely cherrypicked, but holy cow. Where will this end? Can you
| imagine what the HN front page will spit out in a few years?
| civilitty wrote:
| _> Can you imagine what the HN front page will spit out in a
| few years?_
|
| A profitable startup? That might be asking too much though
| FpUser wrote:
| IS it me or I just simply do not hear any real music in the
| "examples". I tried quite a few and would not want to use any for
| listening.
| bratao wrote:
| Meta is truly on fire with the ML releases, outpacing Google and
| friends. Kudos to them! I'm genuinely thrilled about the
| potential release of LLaMA2.
| seydor wrote:
| Lecun is rushing everything out the door before they are forced
| to say "Yes Senator" again
| blululu wrote:
| Possibly. FAIR has always been doing great work and making it
| public though (PyTorch is so big that we forget about it
| sometimes). Sadly 'we sell ads' is going to remain the case
| unless product people ask users to pony up some cash to use
| this tech. To be fair, I would totally chuck some cash to
| play with something like this and I can easily imagine a
| world in which this technology is used to power some bizarre
| social experiences like an online drum circle or some such.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| psycedelicAI wrote:
| But it's meta......
| pkaye wrote:
| That Riffusion output is causing me both laughter and pain. The
| pain is from laughing causing pressure of a surgical scar on my
| abdomen.
| xfour wrote:
| Pretty good at transcribing the text, but the outputted music
| feels for lack of a better word "safe". For example the kicking
| beat is way to generic and soft.
| [deleted]
| lucis wrote:
| I wonder if any of those services can generate editable output
| for a software like Ableton or Logic Pro.
|
| Seems to be more useful as an "assistant" for music producers,
| similar to how Copilot operates.
| JakeAl wrote:
| Well it's good for unlicensed YouTube music I guess.
| AxEy wrote:
| (This is not meant to be an anti-ai-generated-art rant. It's
| coming whether we like it or not. But some of the motives in this
| thread confuse me.)
|
| Music producer here with an honest question to those saying "this
| will provide me with a simple soundtrack/background music for
| $PROJECT"
|
| Have any of you checked out / made offers on music production
| subreddits? Or other music subreddits? various music production
| discords? Elsewhere on the internet?
|
| If so, could you say what your experience has been?
|
| I ask because the music production scene is like...ridiculously
| saturated, and it's almost a meme in the producer community how
| hard it is to make even a buck producing. I suspect that there
| are a significant number of producers who would be happy to take
| your "prompt" for a small fee. Yes, I understand 1) free and 2)
| immediate is convenient, but isn't 1) relatively inexpensive and
| 2) whatever advantage intent in construction gives good too?
|
| I'm willing to admit that I'm missing something here, but I'd
| love it if someone could enlighten me.
|
| While I'm asking follow ups, to all the folks who love digging
| for new music _so much_ that they 're considering turning to
| prompting AIs, I'd be seriously surprised if you've really
| checked out all the stuff that is coming out from new producers
| (again, reddit, soundcloud, etc). Another meme in the producer
| community is how one spends hundreds/thousands of hours
| perfecting ones craft, and dozens of hours working on a track,
| only for that track to get like 5 plays on soundcloud and
| negligible engagement elsewhere. Are music consumers _really_
| that desperate for new tunes? Frankly a lot of us just aren 't
| seeing it....
| 1337biz wrote:
| Problem is minimal viable expectations and how fast these ar
| filled. In 90% of Reddit you will get flamed for offering money
| for anything. Wouldn't even touch my mind to go there.
| Folcon wrote:
| Personally I think you underestimate access, I've on several
| occasions while developing small games wanted to collaborate
| with someone who has a musical bent to put something together.
|
| The problem I feel is that I have an expectation of being able
| to front the cost of engaging someone to work on a project with
| me.
|
| Working out navigating a working relationship on a smaller
| project seems fraught with issues.
|
| I'm rarely inclined to spend dozens of hours listening to
| soundcloud when I have other things to work on.
|
| I mean yes people create interesting music, perhaps it's a
| search problem? Knowing someone creates the kinds of music I'm
| interested in would help. But as someone making things, I'm
| trying to find someone who I can collaborate with who has an
| overlapping interest in what I make. Solving for that is not
| straightforward.
|
| I've had much more luck with graphical art than music.
|
| So yes, even though these systems are fundamentally worse, I
| can at least "collaborate" with them on producing something.
| Going from zero to one can be enough.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| My first reaction to this wasn't "cool I can make the novel
| music I desperately crave", more along the lines of "this thing
| is making some wacky sounds that I'd love to see a producer
| craft into something more". Because I definitely agree with you
| that there's an abundance of fantastic music to check out, and
| realistically I'll never be able to check out even half of it
| throughout my lifetime.
|
| The guys in Infected Mushroom will have a field day with this
| stuff. Their whole thing is finding weird ways to create new
| sounds you never heard before.
|
| Just another instrument, really.
| AxEy wrote:
| Honestly what I'm most excited about is how this technology
| can be used, not to arrange parts or even loops but rather in
| new plugins (VSTs) that implement novel approaches to digital
| synthesis. Think of all the awesome sounds.
|
| If anyone knows anyone working on _that_ , ping me. :)
| etrautmann wrote:
| Another framing of this is not based on demand. Presumably most
| creativity and art creation isn't to fulfill a need or demand
| from anyone other than the producer. This could allow the
| creator and even users to feel some sense of originality and
| creativity.
| AxEy wrote:
| I get that. It was not those purposes that I wanted to
| question, but rather just the one near the top of my
| question, namely demand.
| thorum wrote:
| "Melody conditioning" as shown in the article seems both
| immediately useful and something that's harder to find a human
| to do for you at the same level of quality.
| redox99 wrote:
| > I'm willing to admit that I'm missing something here, but I'd
| love it if someone could enlighten me.
|
| It's basically the same as with Midjourney. Before Midjourney
| I'd have to spend quite some time organizing with some human,
| explaining what I want, licensing terms, etc only to have to
| wait a significant amount of time for an image that I may not
| like.
|
| With MidJourney for just a very small amount of money I can
| instantly get images that are exactly what I want, iterating
| extremely quickly. Just the fact that I don't have to deal with
| another human saves a massive amount of time.
|
| TL;DR
|
| 1) Faster
|
| 2) Cheaper
|
| 3) Often closer to what you want, because you quickly iterate
| and can get hundreds of variations
| bityard wrote:
| It's not that there isn't enough electronic music being made,
| it's that every new track that lands on soundcloud is a drop in
| the ocean of mediocrity. There is _too_ much, and 99.9% is just
| boring to listen to, because it sounds like everything else. I
| listen to a LOT of electronic music (and have, since the mid
| 90's) and just don't have the patience anymore to sit through
| hours of average material to find one or two truly inspired
| artists.
|
| I doubt I would turn to AI much for anything other than
| background noise while focusing on work. In fact, that sounds
| like a perfect use case for me. "Dear GPT, please compose a
| four-on-the-floor downtempo progressive track with soft pads,
| no vocals, and zero goddamned fake vinyl noise that runs for
| two hours straight..."
| wwweston wrote:
| > It's not that there isn't enough electronic music being
| made, it's that every new track that lands on soundcloud is a
| drop in the ocean of mediocrity. There is _too_ much, and
| 99.9% is just boring to listen to, because it sounds like
| everything else.
|
| To the extent that sounding like everything else is a
| problem, how is ML generated music not going to have it?
|
| And in general this isn't going to be a qualitative
| improvement in experience. ML algorithms for recommendation
| are searching the preference space in much the same way ML
| generation would, they're just doing it over existing stuff.
| If you really find 99.9% of existing material boring you're
| probably going to find a similar order of generated material
| boring.
|
| Though I suspect 99.9% is hyperbole. My rate of "this is
| listenable and interesting and I'd like to come back " on
| Soundcloud is better than 1 in 25 on the worst day and better
| than 1 in a dozen on most, and the rate is often north of 1
| in 6 for curated platforms like Pandora. It's never been
| easier to discover good new music to listen to with not much
| in the way of effort.
| pmoriarty wrote:
| _" To the extent that sounding like everything else is a
| problem, how is ML generated music not going to have it?"_
|
| AI generated art has explored all sorts of weird spaces
| that few humans have touched.
|
| It's not difficult to make computers create unusual,
| original, bizarre work. The difficulty comes in making it
| both original and enjoyable/interesting.
|
| Also consider that AI-generated music is often going to
| actually be a collaboration between a human and an AI. The
| human will be acting at least as a curator, because not
| everything created by AI is going to be pleasing, so some
| selection and catering to human taste will be required.
| mjr00 wrote:
| > The human will be acting at least as a curator, because
| not everything created by AI is going to be pleasing, so
| some selection and catering to human taste will be
| required.
|
| Yes, and keep in mind humans are _already doing this!_ It
| 's very common to do tweaking of knobs on a synth/VST
| while recording and create a 10-20 minute audio file,
| commonly called a bass jam or mud pie, then select the
| best bits to use in a song. And of course, people use
| randomization tools to tweak the knobs for them. IMO use
| of AI to support this type of workflow is _far_ more
| promising than going directly to the finished product.
| mjr00 wrote:
| > It's not that there isn't enough electronic music being
| made, it's that every new track that lands on soundcloud is a
| drop in the ocean of mediocrity. There is _too_ much to
| listen to, and 99.9% is just boring to listen to, because it
| sounds like everything else.
|
| Yep. this is why I don't feel like AI used in this manner
| moves the needle for music: people only actively listen to
| the best 0.1% of music anyway. The ability to create music
| that is firmly in the other 99.9%, as this stuff very clearly
| is, just means that the ocean of mediocrity has more water
| dumped into it.
| AxEy wrote:
| It was not super discerning listeners (like it sounds like
| you are) that I meant to address in that second question.
| Sorry if that was not clear. Rather it had sounded from some
| of the comments that people were desperate for original tunes
| (and maybe not necessarily the most highly produced). But I
| didn't point to a specific comment, so maybe that's my fault.
|
| We may also disagree on how much good stuff there is coming
| out, but I agree there is a lot of noise.
| comfypotato wrote:
| Free and immediate. You answered your own question.
|
| All things equal, people are happy to support local businesses.
| The value prop here is far from equal.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| the simple answer is that your motivations for being an artist
| need to change to be exclusively personal fulfillment. because
| that was true for the pre-AI world, as you essentially
| described, and its true-er for this current-AI world.
|
| the real meme is about how artists have always been grasping
| for financial respect in every market condition ever, and yet
| nothing has changed. people were never going to commission you,
| they were never going to book you. While they do appreciate the
| content. But for the few that would ever actually try to
| commission something, they encountered friction after friction
| after friction and collectively artists have been disinterested
| in solving. Because they're starving and preoccupied with
| fighting for scraps and modicums of respect at all.
|
| The world's has now solved many of these frictions.
|
| The frictions were:
|
| 1 hoping they found the right artist to begin with
|
| 2 hoping that artist is reliable and has any work ethic or
| structure in their life
|
| 3 not bruising that artists ego in however communication style
| is preferred
|
| 4 dealing with how completely segregated many artists are from
| contract negotiations and any aspect of the business world, but
| needing to secure rights properly
|
| 5 ego in securing rights properly without the artist
| overplaying their hand
|
| 6 waiting for the commission
|
| 7 revisions
|
| 8 circle back to 1
|
| 9 if you ever get past part 8, you have the issue of whether
| your new license can be used in an unforeseen way and medium in
| the future
|
| getting burned in altruistic commissions of living artists is
| simply over now. all these frictions are solved with the free
| and immediate way.
| mjr00 wrote:
| > the simple answer is that your motivations for being an
| artist need to change to be exclusively personal fulfillment.
| because that was true for the pre-AI world, as you
| essentially described, and its true-er for this current-AI
| world.
|
| > the real meme is about how artists have always been
| grasping for financial respect in every market condition
| ever, and yet nothing has changed. people were never going to
| commission you, they were never going to book you. While they
| do appreciate the content. But for the few that would ever
| actually try to commission something, they encountered
| friction after friction after friction and collectively
| artists have been disinterested in solving. Because they're
| starving and preoccupied with fighting for scraps and
| modicums of respect at all.
|
| For anyone trying to make money off of music, they should
| have already been aware that most of the effort in making a
| living is the non-music work. Once your music reaches an
| acceptable level of quality it's more about finding and
| managing your fanbase, industry connections, getting booked
| at the right shows, promotion and marketing, maintaining
| professionalism, etc. than anything else. Which this
| particular AI doesn't help with.
|
| An extreme example is Fred Again, who came out of nowhere and
| is now one of the biggest names in electronic music. His
| music isn't bad, but it's nothing revolutionary. As it turns
| out, though, he grew up in one of the richest neighborhoods
| in England, with Brian Eno as a neighbor, and went to the
| most expensive private school in London.
|
| So no, AI music generation doesn't change anything here. It's
| similar to the startup mistake technical people make of
| focusing on picking the right tech stack instead of focusing
| on sales and finding product-market fit. The software/music
| is only about 10% of the challenge of making a successful
| business/career.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| absolutely, great contributions.
|
| I did want to clarify that I was posting from an angle
| about those us who need music produced for our products,
| but were never going to commission it.
|
| I think its important to understand that user story because
| a lot of artists don't seem able to empathize with it.
| People are excited because they were never going to
| commission artists, and were also turned off from stock
| music licensing websites too.
| AxEy wrote:
| >the simple answer is that your motivations for being an
| artist need to change to be exclusively personal fulfillment.
|
| Mine are and the same goes for most of the artist I indicate.
| The point wasn't that they were in it for the money, although
| many dream of being able to at least one day pay the rent
| with it (or maybe just groceries).
|
| The rest of your response makes sense (although I think much
| of it could be said for all of hiring someone to do work).
| Anyway, thank you for providing your perspective.
| seydor wrote:
| It s also a matter of ease of use. this is faster than
| searching or asking anyone online
| theptip wrote:
| I think the promise that has already been demonstrated with
| language is that you can iterate really quickly. "Make it a bit
| more upbeat, ok try more synthwave, ok scratch that try darker
| electro, ok this is better make the bassline more pronounced?
| Great that's what I was imagining"
|
| I don't think it's going to displace a dedicated composer that
| gets the medium they are scoring for any time soon. But then
| that's not what your comp was initially.
|
| TLDR there are cases where "good enough" is going to be
| provided by generative music in the medium term. Unlikely for
| this to be anywhere adjacent to music connoisseurs.
| oerpli wrote:
| Also pretty bad. Might get somewhere in a few years but currently
| this is only noise.
| andrewstuart wrote:
| Can someone explain the significance of this and how I might use
| it?
| skilled wrote:
| Except for the 2 min lowfi demo, I found the examples to be
| pretty bad. Sounds like the music is being played in a cardboard
| box in your garage's corner.
| malux85 wrote:
| Just like the first generated AI images were full of blurry
| artefacts,
|
| Then 2 months later, they weren't.
|
| You've got to start somewhere.
| mmaunder wrote:
| This is incredible!! For all the "AI is stealing our music"
| naysayers here consider that all art is derivative or it lacks
| context and makes it nonsensical, and artists learn too.
| ddmichael wrote:
| You either don't understand music or law, or both.
| dang wrote:
| Can you please make your substantive points without personal
| swipes?
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor.
| ..
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
| [deleted]
| beefman wrote:
| > a piano and cello duet playing a sad chambers music
|
| No such thing as chambers music or a music. Maybe "a sad piano
| and cello duet" or "sad piano and cello chamber music" would be a
| better prompt.
| obiefernandez wrote:
| Music is already one of the most extremely devalued art forms
| given how oversupplied it is. Boggles the mind to think of the
| consequences of technology like this reaching quality levels
| where the differences between it and professionally produced
| music are imperceptible.
| rjh29 wrote:
| One consequence is bespoke music that changes dynamically, e.g.
| in games.
|
| There's also a relative dearth of royalty free music for
| independent content creators to use. AI would enable them to
| produce better content on a limited budget.
|
| People who enjoy creating music from scratch will be unaffected
| - recognition and financial rewards are tiny already for most.
| Zetobal wrote:
| [flagged]
| istjohn wrote:
| I downvoted because your comment is unnecessarily passive
| agressive and combative.
| Zetobal wrote:
| Is it? He stated something as a fact and I want him to take
| the viewpoint of other persons than himself and think about
| it. :)
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| If there is a viewpoint you want people to think about,
| it would be much more productive to just state what it
| is.
| Zetobal wrote:
| No, I don't want to influence him it's way easier to see
| the prejudice of other people if you let them think for
| themselves.
| usaar333 wrote:
| If anything, the consequences seem minimal because it is so
| oversupplied.
| obiefernandez wrote:
| This comment made me realize that I should have said the
| consequences for me and people like me who are trying to
| break through new artists.
|
| https://soundcloud.com/obie for reference
| sureglymop wrote:
| The drum and bass is genuinely amazing! Wow.
| moffkalast wrote:
| > Audiocraft requires Python 3.9, PyTorch 2.0.0, and a GPU with
| at least 16 GB of memory
|
| I sleep. And these are only 1-3.3B param models, that makes no
| sense.
| [deleted]
| cutler wrote:
| Music died in the late 80s when the DJ supplanted the musician
| and sampling replaced originality. This is just part of the same
| trend.
| whynotmaybe wrote:
| Technology killed the video star that killed the radio star
| mkaic wrote:
| which killed the stage star!
| speedgoose wrote:
| I installed it and everything went surprisingly fine and easily.
| It used about 8GB or VRAM max on a nvidia A30 and takes about 30s
| to generate 10s of audio. The max duration seems to be 30s in the
| frontend but the quality is a lot lower.
|
| Mixing genres do not really work and the model doesn't seem to be
| trained on band names. However it does perform well to create
| music using existing styles.
|
| I generated some Eurovision crap and minimalist techno that were
| very much believable. But mixing death metal with lofi ambient
| isn't the best, nor the epic progressive rock guitar solo I
| asked.
|
| I think the examples on the website are cherry picked but with
| some experience in prompt engineering and many tentatives, it
| should be possible to generate great samples.
|
| It's also excellent at generating boards of Canada like music.
| The audio artefacts, the low fidelity, the weird sounds, the
| detuned synths, this model does that very well and it does sound
| great to me.
|
| Thanks a lot to the authors.
| rifty wrote:
| Style transfer is pretty cool tool as someone who likes to play
| around with sound design. It will be a lot of fun to drop this on
| parallel channels and blend it together into choruses and new
| instruments.
|
| Right now the generation still sounds a lot like loop packs
| smashed together anyone could technically make. But it is
| practical for anyone who really only cares for that style of
| sound but do not themselves have the familiarity to do it. Now
| they can just say what they want and hit regenerate, skipping the
| latent feedback cycle of iterating with humans or sifting through
| song snippets.
|
| My opinion on this style of content is that ai generation is
| simply accelerating us to the inevitable end of generic digital
| content, it isn't really changing it. It just happens to be also
| the optimal interface for discovering and not just generation.
| bottlepalm wrote:
| (and now for the rare take that isn't your typical cynical/jaded
| internet comment)
|
| Wow this is more than good enough to use for background music in
| video games, stores, commercials, etc..
|
| You really could have super dynamic music in a video game for
| instance that changes based on the time of day, environment,
| situation, mood, etc.. all combined.
|
| Combine it with a LLM DJ and you could get some fun radio
| stations.
| jsheard wrote:
| > You really could have super dynamic music in a video game for
| instance that changes based on the time of day, environment,
| situation, mood, etc.. all combined.
|
| Games can and do already do this, dynamic sequencing of music
| from a pool of stems has been common practice for a while.
| Maybe this could let you do it cheaper, and AI could go more
| granular by creating new stems on the fly, but the onus is
| still on the AI developers to show something which hits as hard
| as someone like Mick Gordons dynamic compositions.
|
| Infinite variety is of little value if the infinite space is
| full of infinitely boring, uninspired content.
| bottlepalm wrote:
| Like I said, cynical/jaded internet commenter - I don't need
| Mick Gordon's dynamic compositions, I just need some
| background music for my game that's good enough.
|
| And no you can't do this already: const
| musicSpeed = inFightSequence ? 'intense' : 'chill';
| const musicPrompt = `drum and bass beat with ${musicSpeed}
| percussions`; playMusic(musicPrompt);
| jsheard wrote:
| I wish you luck with your game which constantly oscillates
| between https://youtu.be/dLkFh9Kn8AU?t=60 and
| https://youtu.be/gQktj-WkgEo?t=75 because you didn't put
| any thought into the music beyond telling the computer to
| make "chill DnB" and "intense DnB".
| bottlepalm wrote:
| Are you deflecting by attacking my simple example instead
| of defending your 'this has already been done before'
| point? If you're wrong just say you're wrong.
| jsheard wrote:
| When Animal Crossing blends between a different
| composition for every hour of the in-game clock, with
| variants for different weather conditions, is that not
| changing based on "time of day, environment, situation,
| mood, etc"? When Doom dynamically ramps the intensity of
| the music along with the intensity of combat, and inserts
| perfectly synchonized stings in time with the players
| actions is that not reacting to the situation? That's
| what I mean by this already having been done, just not
| with AI.
|
| AI has the potential to consider more variables than is
| feasible with the current process, but my question is "at
| what cost". Would Doom be better if the music were
| slightly different depending on which weapon you were
| holding, if the trade-off is that instead of Mick Gordons
| work it was a computer generating what may as well be
| royalty free elevator music? Probably not.
|
| Making more content for less money is only a net positive
| if the content is actually _good._
| lukevp wrote:
| Why do you think AI music will sound like elevator music
| forever, when it's already generating English text and
| code at such a high level? It's quite possible that 10
| years from now, Mick Gordon will sound passe when
| compared to the dynamic AI generated music. Maybe not,
| but definitely possible. There's a lot of money to be
| made with better generation of music, and it's going to
| be an area of exploration for sure.
| jsheard wrote:
| Well, I would say that AIs ability to generate
| objectively correct text or correct code doesn't have
| much bearing on its ability to create worthwhile art,
| those are almost polar opposite goals. There is no
| objective metric for what constitutes good art that you
| can train an AI towards, the closest thing we've come up
| with is teaching it that the samples of art in the
| training set are "objectively correct" so that it will
| try to make something similar. Better models achive
| higher fidelity but are stuck forever imitating rather
| than exploring new or less common ideas.
|
| Image generation AI is the most mature form of _artistic_
| generative AI, and the trend there has been towards
| introducing _more_ human influence into the process to
| help guide the AI into creating something actually
| worthwhile. If the goal is to embed an unsupervised AI
| into a game engine and have it create consistently high
| quality and interesting music based on the current game
| state, with no human operator in the middle to curate and
| guide the process, we 've got a hell of a long way to go.
| wholinator2 wrote:
| I dunno man, if it output those tracks with a smooth
| transition and some volume matching i think most game
| developers would call that a success.
| jerpint wrote:
| Can't wait for soulless 24/7 grocery store robot music /s
| LegitShady wrote:
| >Wow this is more than good enough to use for background music
| in video games, stores, commercials, etc..
|
| Hard disagree, and lack of copyright due to not being produced
| by a human becomes an issue for many video games, commercials,
| etc.
|
| >You really could have super dynamic music in a video game for
| instance that changes based on the time of day, environment,
| situation, mood, etc.. all combined.
|
| You don't need this IA for that at all.
|
| >Combine it with a LLM DJ and you could get some fun radio
| stations.
|
| You could also not, and you wouldn't know until it failed to
| produce anything interesting. A whole radio station filled with
| grocery store background music? oh wow I can't wait for the
| fun.
|
| and you're not likely to make any money doing it, so what's the
| point aside from showing the human portion of music is missing
| in everything you suggested.
| cypress66 wrote:
| > Wow this is more than good enough to use for background music
| in video games, stores, commercials, etc..
|
| I spent like 6 hours yesterday playing with this. It's really
| cool, but not that good yet.
|
| I'd say it's like the original stable diffusion (without any of
| the finetunes and improvements). Very cool, but not 100% there
| yet.
| ramoz wrote:
| my first gen is good enough to be an actual song (rap beat)
| rubicon33 wrote:
| Maybe I'm just getting older but I feel like the quality of both
| music and film has seriously declined over the last 5-10 years.
| Maybe the good stuff is still out there but lost in a sea of
| average garbage that has surfaced to the top.
|
| Something tells me AI isn't going to rescue us either. I just
| sampled a bunch of these generated tracks and they immediately
| remind me of the average, mediocre, soul-lacking content that
| most music and film is today.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| You are getting older. Every generation thinks the same, that
| media is getting worse, discounting the survivorship bias that
| occurs when they look back on their favorite music and
| discarding all of the bad music that was present back then.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| Society is more unhealthy, people are dying sooner, and there
| are more broken families than decades ago. So we might be
| right for once!
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Sources on these? Society has been far better than 100
| years ago. And broken families? Or people marrying early
| due to societal pressure and not being able to divorce back
| then (whether legally or societally), who are now finally
| able to do so. The divorce rate is actually going down
| simply because people are marrying when they want to, not
| when society pressures them to.
| thomashop wrote:
| Can you provide some sources? Last time I looked into
| statistics on these topics I found the opposite to be true.
|
| The brothers Rosling have a nice talk about how all the big
| stats are improving globally (gender equality, education,
| health, extreme poverty, life expectation)
|
| https://youtu.be/Sm5xF-UYgdg
| abraae wrote:
| All the stats that we self-interested humans care about
| anyway.
|
| The stats on the planet we live in are bad and getting
| worse. There is 30% more carbon dioxide in the air now
| than when I was born.
|
| All the improvements in gender equality mean nothing
| compared to that and the trend behind it.
| thomashop wrote:
| The parent I responded to was not talking about climate
| change. Sure that's a whole different debate
| SeanLuke wrote:
| This is no doubt true, but there are a number of studies
| which suggest that, at least in the case of music, things
| really _have_ gotten rather worse over the last two decades,
| thanks to corporatization and consolidation of the production
| model.
| polytely wrote:
| This is only if you listen to the most mainstream, general
| audience top 40 pop content-sludge.
|
| There is an overwhelming amount of good music out there.
| Pick an album top 50 list from 2022, for example fantano's,
| or pitchfork, check out bandcamp's staff picks, listen to
| other musicians that are on the same label as your
| favourite band, keep an eye on things like NPR Tiny Desk,
| KEXP, la blogotheque on YouTube.
|
| Just start listening. You are almost guaranteed to stumble
| upon something you like. It won't come to you
| algorithmically but the effort required is really low.
|
| My favourite new album I discovered last year was Immanuel
| Wilkin's The 7th Hand [1], I stumbled upon it by going
| through a top 20 jazz albums of 2022 list to see if I had
| missed anything, and it immediately jumped out at me as
| being exactly the shit I'm into.
|
| 1: https://youtube.com/watch?v=141y8ikOsyE
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| I'm sure you can come up with metrics by which any given
| period of music was 'worse' than the one before.
| ddmichael wrote:
| That's very interesting, any sources?
| reducesuffering wrote:
| There are more bedroom indie music producers than ever. EDM
| and "rap" are better than ever with many many good artists
| to choose from. One of the biggest breakout rap artist
| right now was just a random 20 year old working with other
| random bedroom producers just a couple years ago.
| djur wrote:
| The research on this topic that I'm aware of fails to
| account for the fact that the top 40/100 lists are less
| representative of what people are actually listening to
| than they used to be. If Drake can drop an album and have
| every song on it chart on the Hot 100 for a week or two,
| that's going to influence the analysis. That simply wasn't
| possible before music downloads/streaming. You can see the
| impact on the chart records -- artists from the past decade
| dominate.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_Hot_100_cha
| r...
|
| ETA: And "worse" in these studies tends to be defined in
| terms of measurable qualities where contemporary pop music
| most differs from "classical" music.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| I don't understand this view. Heavily commercialised music
| has almost never been all that great anyway. Except very
| occasionally. Most of it is LCD garbage. Maybe the garbage
| has become even more garbage, I don't know. But why judge
| an art form by the boring average.
|
| There's so much great new music being made every year, new
| genres and ideas, etc. Film music seems better than ever
| recently. Especially for TV series. Lots of new styles
| emerging there too, see Mac Quayle for instance.
|
| The really good, modern music was almost always on the
| fringes, and there's more of it now than ever before.
|
| There might also be more garbage, but there's no need to
| listen to it.
| skrebbel wrote:
| Sounds to me like you've simply stopped trying.
|
| When I was 20 I was a music snob into Aphex Twin and weird IDM.
| I thought all pop at the time was crap, like you seem to. But
| then I heard, I mean like really heard, "Bye Bye Bye" by *NSYNC
| and seriously that is a good song!
|
| I'm 40 now and I think it got way better even since then. Pop
| is so varied now! I really don't think music as quirky and
| weird as, say, Billie Eilish would've made it to the top of the
| charts in the 90s. I'd say that music like hers (and many
| charting artists of her generation) is a testament to how broad
| and compelling pop music has become.
|
| My generation thought their parents' music was shit, my
| parents' generation thought _their_ parents ' music was shit,
| and so on, all the way until at least the invention of Jazz.
| But the average Gen-Z'er thinks all the music is great! They
| invent new genres for every song, they wear Metallica t-shirts
| in 2023, and they mix 80s disco with 00's Brit rock like it's
| just what people do.
|
| And don't forget there's an endless long tail of music out
| there. There are _so many good musicians_ and plenty of them
| have a sufficiently fancy label deal to be on Spotify and the
| likes. And otherwise they 're still on Soundcloud, Bandcamp and
| YouTube. It's worth a deep dive!
| bluefishinit wrote:
| > hey invent new genres for every song, they wear Metallica
| t-shirts in 2023, and they mix 80s disco with 00's Brit rock
| like it's just what people do.
|
| If this appeals to you, it's worth checking out Japanese
| music from the Showa era to present. They've long mixed
| styles in a way other music markets have not. You can hear
| city pop songs from the 80s with metal guitar solos, jazz
| progressions a samba beat and synths, all in the same song.
| [deleted]
| te_chris wrote:
| Recently discovered city pop thanks to an NTS special. So
| dope
| skrebbel wrote:
| Hey wow cool! Got any representative sample to recommend?
| jimbokun wrote:
| I haven't been able to find it in years, but I remember an
| Onion headline saying "Music and movies were best when you, the
| reader, were 12 years old."
| rjh29 wrote:
| You sound old.
| visarga wrote:
| > remind me of the average, mediocre, soul-lacking content
|
| This model is just the equivalent of GPT-2 for music. It's not
| the GPT-4 yet. Music is trailing a few years from language.
| Used to be that language was about 5 years behind vision. Now
| language is the top.
| chpatrick wrote:
| There was always garbage, you just don't remember it.
| [deleted]
| steve76 wrote:
| [dead]
| api wrote:
| You really have to dig for good music these days. The record
| industry is a zombie at this point and no longer does the job
| of discovering good music. It just churns out utterly formulaic
| pop that might as well be the output of a music generator like
| this.
| esskay wrote:
| Theres loads of good music out there, it's just become
| extremely hard to find unless you're all in on scouring niche
| subreddits and soundcloud.
| taude wrote:
| This is why I paid extra for services like Tidal and Roon.
| Their music recommendations are just better than any AI-driven
| stuff. Need actually human experts to curate playlists and
| such. I feel like the alg-based stuff is just a race to the
| middle.
| _sys49152 wrote:
| [dead]
| surfingdino wrote:
| The quality of what gets promoted and tops the charts has
| declined, but there is a lot of good music produced today.
| ssnistfajen wrote:
| Good music/films that survived through decades or centuries of
| history are a prime example of survivorship bias.
|
| It has been easier than ever for any individual to create
| content of any type, and there will always be gems.
|
| AI isn't meant to "rescue" you from this problem, at least not
| in the present stage. You are looking for a mission that was
| never claimed.
| InCityDreams wrote:
| You're getting older. I'm 62 and moving air always inspires me.
| The shit my children listen to annoys me as much as the shit I
| listened to that annoyed my parents.
| delusional wrote:
| There's plenty of really good creative music. If you only watch
| Marvel and Top 20 hits you won't know it, but there's plenty of
| good stuff out there. I've really enjoyed the last couple of
| Bon Iver releases and my favorite artist, The Tallest Man On
| Earth, just released his new album Henry st. Containing some
| super personal tracks.
|
| The music is fantastic if you just look a little.
| brucethemoose2 wrote:
| A flood of garbage film/music has always existed, we just don't
| remember it because its uninteresting.
|
| However, I think modern rec algorithms (like the Netflix home
| page) are recommending more mediocre stuff than the old system,
| and the streaming boom did produce an abnormal glut of junk.
|
| Anyway I think AI is going to spawn a music remixing/game
| modding/tv extending renaissance. They perform much better when
| pointing them at a good source (as you can see with the melody
| conditioning samples, and other stuff like sd img2img and
| finetuned llms).
| amanaplanacanal wrote:
| It was a smaller flood though, when it required lots of money
| to record an album / make a movie. Gatekeepers kept most of
| it out. Now anybody can do it, so there is both a lot more
| chaff to sort through, and an outpouring of creativity.
| the_only_law wrote:
| I won't speak to music, as I listen to a lot of stuff, enough
| to know there is good stuff out there being made.
|
| But for movies and TV? Where do I find the good stuff? It
| seems Hollywood is creatively bankrupt and just milking
| people off boring franchises and cheap nostalgia through
| crappy remakes and sequels. My eyes rolled to the back of my
| head when I saw an ad for a show called "how I met your
| father" on Hulu.
| brucethemoose2 wrote:
| Use 3rd party discovery services.
|
| Reelgood is a good one, sort by IMDB score (which is
| somehow still kinda working as a metric) or the reelgood
| score which is a popularity among enthusiasts kinda
| ranking. You will find tvs gems streaming services
| criminally and inexplicably never recommend.
|
| But "old school" recommendations from TV /movie buffs (like
| the tvtropes community or various forums) are still a good
| source.
| fancy_pantser wrote:
| Having a good time woth Trakt for discovery and rating. It
| has a very active app/plugin/webhook ecosystem and I've
| gotten some great recommendations from it by scrobbling via
| Plex and following a few people with similar preferences on
| there.
| polytely wrote:
| just follow writers and creators you like, note which
| actors have good taste, follow them from project to
| project.
| jimbokun wrote:
| I don't know what you like, but "Prestige TV" seems to be
| where writers, directors, and actors wanting to do
| something other than another retread from some studio's IP
| backlog, end up.
| berberous wrote:
| For TV, hard to go wrong with an HBO series. Most recently,
| Succession was excellent.
| ssnistfajen wrote:
| Indie films, international films, etc.
|
| Mainstream entertainment has always converged to
| mediocrity.
| Cyph0n wrote:
| Those "boring franchises" are what bankroll the passion
| projects, artsy festival bound movies, and experimental
| content.
|
| As far as content goes, there has been a ton of excellent
| stuff just this year across movies, TV, and anime. One
| "organic" way to start is to look for recent recommendation
| threads on Reddit for a movie or show you really like.
| wholinator2 wrote:
| See, I've seen this stated many places but never
| explained. How exactly does the money made by derivative
| bullshit go into valuable, passionate, art projects and
| not either directly into pockets or into the next billion
| dollar derivative bullshit thing?
|
| Generally, the bullshit costs way more to produce and
| market and advertise. And at least on paper, a
| significant amount of the money made is only recuperating
| costs for the 3 hours of incredibly CGI it took to make a
| 3rd 'ant man' or a 4th 'jurassic park'. The majority of
| actual indie art films cost ridiculously less than that
| because they're filming a movie, not a commercial.
|
| Anyways, my opinions aside, are there any articles with
| cited money trails that prove that billion dollar
| blockbusters actually fund valuable art and not just
| executives yahts?
| johaugum wrote:
| > But for movies and TV? Where do I find the good stuff?
|
| There's a trove of incredible foreign movies and TV shows
| out there. Scandinavian and Asian (Korean in particular)
| content has a really good hit to miss ratio for me.
|
| For examples, check out international film festival
| nominations and winners.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| Counterexample: https://on.soundcloud.com/d6rX9goHHrSH3sQY9
|
| I agree with you. When gwern investigated AI folk music in
| 2019, I realized it could generate a wonderful variety of
| music, full of soul. Be sure to listen to several tracks before
| making up your mind. My favorite is "crossing the channel",
| since I think GPT made a mistake at the beginning, and then
| generated the most reasonable sounding not-mistake, which
| turned out to sound so cool.
|
| My goal was strong, memorable melodies. Star Wars, not Marvel.
| GPT can come surprisingly close, if the input data format is
| right. Unfortunately I don't think anyone except gwern has
| noticed that the input format is crucial:
| https://gwern.net/gpt-2-music
| pests wrote:
| Where in your gwern link is the input format being crucial
| discussed? I couldn't find it.
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| I don't know if gwern realized how powerful his model was.
| His examples are underwhelming, because you have to prompt
| it in a certain way to get it to generate chords. He was
| showing me samples and they were neat, but boring.
|
| One day he posted something that sounded pretty amazing,
| and I was blown away. "More like that, please." It had
| chords in it.
|
| He didn't pursue it past that. I did. So it's possible that
| no one is aware of how crucial the input format actually is
| to the success of the music that I was able to produce.
|
| (And "produce" is a fair description here -- choosing the
| instruments was really important, and the model didn't do
| it. It wasn't as easy as press a button. It felt like I was
| suddenly a 15x music producer, since I made all those
| tracks in one night. Such is the power of ML.)
| wholinator2 wrote:
| Do you have a write up anywhere with samples? I'd love to
| hear some of the better examples you have. I agree that
| most of what's out there is underwhelming
| sillysaurusx wrote:
| All of them are here:
| https://on.soundcloud.com/d6rX9goHHrSH3sQY9
|
| Unfortunately I didn't do a writeup (which gwern has
| given me a hard time about over the years, and he's quite
| right!), so I have nothing to offer beyond those songs as
| a finished product. Maybe one day I'll try to resurrect
| it for devs.
| anlaw wrote:
| It's not just you; pop music compositions with key changes that
| add complexity have all but vanished since the early 00s:
| https://flowingdata.com/2022/11/22/decline-of-key-changes-in...
|
| Automation tools and fine grained computed metrics have rounded
| off the edges of emotional experiences. See Bobby Kotick about
| taking the fun out of games:
| https://www.escapistmagazine.com/bobby-kotick-wants-to-take-...
|
| Him saying that is around the time the music compositions start
| becoming similar. The mentality was not constrained to games.
|
| Nothing is allowed to be it's own thing anymore. It has to be
| hypernormalized to have enough reach a billionaire CEO can
| profit from.
|
| MBA-ification of reality.
| kevinventullo wrote:
| If MBA's played any significant role in the development of
| Zelda:TOTK, I might have to change my opinion about them.
| rubicon33 wrote:
| Thats honestly what it feels like. It feels like all music
| and film has regressed toward some boring mean. There's not
| enough range, emotion, and difference to find tracks that
| really stand out from the crowd.
|
| Music especially just feels flat. Maybe that's just the style
| now, and I'm old and can't appreciate it.
|
| Honestly, gaming is in a similar rut although not quite as
| bad thanks to VR.
| djur wrote:
| I disagree that key changes in popular music are a great
| measure of complexity. For many years a key change near the
| end of the song was an easy way to give the sense of a
| climax. The article your link is based on gives a good
| summary of it:
|
| > The act of shifting a song's key up either a half step or a
| whole step (i.e. one or two notes on the keyboard) near the
| end of the song, was the most popular key change for decades.
| In fact, 52 percent of key changes found in number one hits
| between 1958 and 1990 employ this change. You can hear it on
| "My Girl," "I Wanna Dance With Somebody," and "Livin' on a
| Prayer," among many others.
|
| To me, this just reflects one set of songwriters' cliches
| being replaced by another. Not necessarily better or worse.
| anlaw wrote:
| I never said they were a great measure. Another tool in the
| toolkit. Or it was anyway.
| wholinator2 wrote:
| While i do agree generally about key changes, i think the
| point is that it's just an example of something that sounds
| _interesting_. It's not just key changes, but all the
| little chances that an actual artist takes during creation,
| the things that sound good to some and bad to others are
| exactly what makes art, art. The change being witnessed
| isn't the loss of key changes, but the loss of everything
| that sounds different or interesting, in favor of a sound
| that is generally palatable to everyone precisely because
| it does not contain anything interesting.
| ryandrake wrote:
| How about time signature changes, then? Not too many
| popular songs experiment much anymore. What was the last
| popular hit with a really odd meter (or various meters)?
| I know, not everyone can be Rush, but it's pretty vanilla
| today.
| mensetmanusman wrote:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=TJ6Mzvh3XCc
|
| This is a great song for contemplating loss of a loved one.
|
| I'm not sure AI music will ever reach these heights because it
| will have trouble understanding death.
| erwincoumans wrote:
| I've tried MusicLM and other Google AI music tools and they
| sounded very low quality/lo-fi. Seems Facebook isn't much better?
| tumult wrote:
| I don't understand what's motivating certain types of people to
| continue working on these types of AI practical implementation
| projects. There's nothing good for the world this (type of AI in
| particular) will offer.
|
| Maybe someone will say this will let people who aren't musicians
| express themselves by creating music. That's not true. It's as
| true as hiring a musician to make a song for you, given a
| description. And nobody would say that the person who hired the
| musician was expressing themself.
| seydor wrote:
| of course there is a lot of good. Not just elevator music, this
| could be used to make music samples for DJs .
|
| And every tech advance has side effects , usually in unforeseen
| ways
| tumult wrote:
| There's already an endless supply of elevator music and
| things to sample.
| seydor wrote:
| not for free
| tumult wrote:
| Actually, yes, for free.
| LegitShady wrote:
| "we need to publish/produce to survive, and look at all this
| data music represents"
| TrackerFF wrote:
| Muzak generation.
|
| This kind of automated "filler" music has been around for
| decades, and is usually used for exactly that - filler. It's
| pretty much the stock photos of music.
|
| And that could be a good thing - suddenly content-creators
| don't have to spend money or energy on purchasing that kind of
| stuff.
|
| If you've ever seen youtube automation videos - typically those
| "TOP N" list vids, they always contain some kind of muzak-style
| soundtracks.
| ChatGTP wrote:
| Greed and nerd revenge.
| panosfilianos wrote:
| Let's say that ebooks now include metadata for soundtrack
| generation as you read them. Something like this model
| generates it real time based on the users reading speed etc.
|
| That'd be pretty cool for example.
| tumult wrote:
| That does sound cool, but you don't need a purely generative
| AI to do this. Dealing with a reader who jumps around, re-
| reads paragraphs, flips back a few pages for a moment, etc.
| in a coherent way seems like the more difficult and
| interesting problem.
| meltedcapacitor wrote:
| Sounds like the "is DJing an art form" debate. :o)
|
| Unlike classic "hiring a musician", here it's practical to
| "hire" the (robot) musician 10000 times with a feedback loop
| between the model and the prompt writer, iterating and picking
| the best output(s)... which looks like a similar process to
| other exercises considered art forms.
| arrosenberg wrote:
| > Maybe someone will say this will let people who aren't
| musicians express themselves by creating music.
|
| I'd say it lets me, a non-musician, create generic tracks for
| other projects that need music, but don't need the Lord of the
| Rings soundtrack.
|
| If you want the insane soundtrack, you still need an artist, as
| this project demonstrates.
| tumult wrote:
| There's already an endless supply of free and royalty free
| music in every style. While an AI can now also generate that
| for you as well, it was not necessary to create the AI to
| meet your goal and requirement.
| arrosenberg wrote:
| So whats the issue? I can create exactly what I want
| instead of what is available.
| jimbokun wrote:
| How will we still have artists skilled enough to compose Lord
| of the Rings soundtrack, if they never get to work on lesser
| pieces to develop?
| arrosenberg wrote:
| Musicianship already isn't a profitable enterprise for
| most, and yet kids continue to learn piano and get good
| enough to go to Julliard. I doubt that will change.
| [deleted]
| 52-6F-62 wrote:
| Exactly.
|
| What happened to automatic the _boring_ things?
|
| Instead they seem to be all in on washing out any hope in
| creativity and pointing people to put all their hope in minting
| and munging "code".
|
| It's so myopic and short sighted it hurts my soul. I don't
| understand at all. All that money, all that knowledge and
| talent... and this and stupid headsets strapped to peoples
| faces is the game? God dammit.
| lelandfe wrote:
| I mean this is shockingly good. The longer "lofi" example at the
| bottom sounds like it could have been a Boards of Canada demo.
|
| I'm very impressed.
| rvz wrote:
| And here's the code:
| https://github.com/facebookresearch/audiocraft just so you know
| for the weights specifically:
|
| _" The weights in this repository are released under the CC-BY-
| NC 4.0 license as found in the LICENSE_weights file."_
|
| Combine it with AI voices and voice cloning and so begins the
| further devaluation of musicians and artists.
|
| Might as well accelerate it and see what happens. What could
| possibly go wrong?
| seydor wrote:
| But how is GenA going to prompt this thing? how will they know
| what "80s music" is about and all.
|
| In other news, goodbye Youtube audio library, this is pretty good
|
| At 3.3B parameters this should be running locally, right Meta?
| (Yes it does, instructions on github)
|
| I 'm not sure I've seen any MIDI LLMs , wouldn't that be more fun
| to do ?
| toasternz wrote:
| Music is hard to describe well without using artist names or
| references to specific songs. There isn't an alternative way to
| really describe things - "Airy EDM with tropical feel" doesn't
| cut it.
|
| This space will belong to scrappy shadowy decentralised
| organisations who let you type "give me a filtered french disco
| song using mizell brothers era johnny hammond jazz funk samples,
| lil uzi rapping, with a thundercat bassline and crooning"
| _sys49152 wrote:
| [dead]
| cwillu wrote:
| Would be interesting to see how well it can handle modulations:
| "play john lennon's "imagine" in a minor key"
| cutler wrote:
| As if the current music scene hasn't already plummed the depths
| of banality. At this rate the stars of the 70s and 80s will be in
| business until they expire.
| ben_w wrote:
| So, CC-BY-NC licensed model weights, and they've made sure to
| license the training data. And some jurisdictions are saying that
| copyright cannot be claimed on the output of such models.
|
| Oh, to be a fly on the wall in RIAA corporate offices...
|
| Sans schadenfreude, I think this (depending on inference speed)
| could be perfect for dynamic content in games (including IRL
| games: LARP, escape rooms, table top games, etc.)
| yyyk wrote:
| >Oh, to be a fly on the wall in RIAA corporate offices...
|
| In all likelihood, they're ok with events. Games were never
| anywhere near their main revenue stream. Now the labour costs
| on what they're actually selling are dropping to zero. RIAA's
| future:
|
| 1) Use AI to fake a band.
|
| 2) Use AI to write music (maybe even lyrics). Don't really care
| if the AI is any good.
|
| 3) Distribute output widely, note that copyright still applies
| to the output.
|
| 4) Use media to generate hype (the critical step). This depends
| only on platform control/relations, and they have that.
|
| 5) Yea, other people could technically generate same quality
| dreck with AI, but it won't be (and legally can't be) exactly
| like the hyped dreck. Others can replicate nearly everything
| except the hype.
|
| 6) Since the costs are near zero just about every sale is pure
| profit.
|
| Basically, since Music can be replicated, they'll sell hype and
| belonging to a fan group instead.
| LegitShady wrote:
| Then they'll quickly be replaced because nothing about that
| is special - the RIAA exists because they were positioned to
| guard intellectual property that gave them a monopology on IP
| that was culturally significant.
|
| Making and marketing an AI band isn't even interesting.
| Someone will be doing it on twitch and youtube an anime
| vtuber ensemble before the RIAA even figure out any portion
| of it. The media hype is because of celebrity, and AI
| generated stuff can't be celebrity.
| seydor wrote:
| Well , a lot of artists have sued other artists for
| plagiarizing. Now MusicGen will be called to testify in court
| and show is composing method. And if it can't prove innocence,
| it will be put in jail
| finger wrote:
| I can't find any requirements. Can you run it locally on a
| consumer GPU?
| odyssey7 wrote:
| Infinite music is interesting from the angle that the music that
| we value is connected to our cultural and social experience. How
| can we cherish a song that has never been heard before and will
| never be heard again, which means it is deprived of social
| context that would give it meaning?
|
| One answer would be to create music that shares its roots with
| music that the listener already knows. This music could be
| enjoyable, but you can't exactly sing along to a melody you're
| hearing for the first and last time, so it has more limited
| engagement potential. This is an approach to composition that you
| learn when you study chord progressions and other elements in
| music theory, and it's what I'm sensing when I listen to the
| MusicGen outputs.
|
| To draw from greater cultural context, you can incorporate folk
| and popular melodies that are widely known. Musicians love this
| trick. "Immature artists copy, great artists steal." MusicGen
| seems capable of doing this, too.
|
| To promote a novel melody as something that listeners deeply
| cherish, or to innovate at the level of the theory, the social
| context has to be built up around the content after it's
| generated. E.g., when introducing a new song on the radio, a
| common trick is to play it between songs that are already
| popular; building up co-occurrences with songs that already have
| cultural significance. My challenge to Meta would be: can you use
| your platform to transform some of the model's novel outputs into
| familiar popular music? It would be an important cultural
| milestone if an AI-generated melody became a familiar tune that
| would be played in the cafe, recognized, and enjoyed.
| visarga wrote:
| > It would be an important cultural milestone if an AI-
| generated melody became a familiar tune that would be played in
| the cafe, recognized, and enjoyed
|
| New generative music benchmark - popularity.
| yantrams wrote:
| I'm just weirded about the fact that conversation about something
| AS EPIC AS THIS is so boring and rudderless here on hacker news
| of all places.
|
| I mean like YESTERDAY I did not have this superpower to summon
| something as majestic as say https://fb.watch/l4ssOD40M4/ with a
| simple 'A quirky and skronky Aphex twin sample that just hits
| you'
|
| Edits:
|
| I woke up to this news delivered from Yann Lecun himself in the
| morning on facebook[1] and my gaped mouth can still be found for
| onlookers to witness I suppose!
|
| LIKE THIS IS IT FOLKS!
|
| Edit 2
|
| All those back in my days muzzak folks lamenting about the
| quality of contemporary music can fuck right off because you
| clearly havent explored enough of the modern music landscape.
|
| Dont you dare blaspheme saying modern music has stagnated or some
| drivel like that. It is outright offensive to folks who are
| pushing the boundaries like say for example The Ex from
| Netherlands https://www.facebook.com/theexband
| https://www.theex.nl/news.html
|
| Just because you and the other soulless people you fraternize
| with are ignorant of all the innovative stuff thats going on, we
| have to suffer through your opinion on the state of pop culture?
| jimbokun wrote:
| Because we like music for the fun of making it, and the shared
| emotional connection felt with the artist (whether it's real or
| not, knowing a human wrote and performed a piece allows you to
| imagine this connection).
|
| I don't know what the point of machine generated music is. Just
| destroying one of the few remaining ways for people to make a
| living doing something creative, I guess.
|
| The promise of automation was to have machines do the things we
| don't want to do, so humans could have more time to do things
| we enjoy.
|
| Instead, we are automating the things humans enjoy, and still
| leaving humans to figure out how to feed, house and clothe
| ourselves through the sweat of our brow.
| cutler wrote:
| You said it for me. Muzak lives on.
| bluefishinit wrote:
| > I don't know what the point of machine generated music is.
|
| One point is that music fans can now make their own music. I
| think it's great that people can express themselves and it's
| not limited to those who put in 10k+ hours to master a single
| instrument. More people creating is a good thing.
| waboremo wrote:
| The idea that creating music has had a huge technical
| barrier is laughable. It has not existed for ~20 years.
| Artists like Tinashe have learned to produce music
| themselves with programs like ableton, not a lick of
| mastering instruments or graduating from this and that art
| school. Just a general sense of what sounds good to you.
| Unlike visual art, there's no mechanical barrier either, no
| mastering of techniques. You can genuinely fiddle around
| with knobs and buttons and create something that sounds
| great to you - soundcloud is filled with these.
|
| So there isn't going to be an increased level of profound
| self expressions because of this. Quite the opposite, more
| pure noise for the purpose of farming ad revenue.
|
| What's worse, and an aspect many proponents of AI
| generations ignore, is that by ushering people into this
| specific channel of caring more about prompts than all
| else, we are doing a real disservice to potential people
| who could have become serious masters of their realm. After
| all, "why learn how that music program works when I can
| just generate it?"
| boredemployee wrote:
| >> After all, "why learn how that music program works
| when I can just generate it?"
|
| That's how many of my friends in the music biz are
| thinking right now.
|
| Also the same applies to Code and anything that could be
| generated by AI. I honestly lost the joy of learning a
| programming language with the advent of GPT.
|
| The future is dark.
| jerpint wrote:
| For me GPT allows me to explore more ideas quickly, and
| can help you learn languages more efficiently. More
| importantly, you don't have to use it
| Tao3300 wrote:
| That probably is a good thing, but the road to mastery is a
| _great_ thing. I can 't describe to you the feeling of
| being in the zone while making music, but I'll try.
|
| Things will erode and decay, things will come into being,
| things will change. This flux is so constant that in truth
| there hardly are any _things_ , just the changes; for as
| soon as you step in the river a second time, neither you
| nor the river are the same as you were. Epictetus, maybe?
| One of those guys.
|
| Likewise, music is inherently fleeting, yet it still makes
| sense. You can't hold music, yet there's still a sense of
| it being a thing that exists. Yet when it stops, it still
| somehow hasn't ceased to exist. The act of musical
| performance, even at a basic level, especially with others,
| brings us one step closer to something fundamental about
| the universe than other forms of expression.
|
| Like I said elsewhere, if you could ask the machine to pray
| or meditate, it wouldn't be fulfilling for anyone. It would
| be hollow.
| tarr11 wrote:
| This feels like a straw man to me. We are continuing to
| automate feeding, housing and clothing ourselves as well.
| These two things are not mutually exclusive.
|
| I would like to make music, video games and movies, too, and
| AI lets me do that. I don't need millions of dollars or years
| of training to make something creative anymore.
| logarhythmic wrote:
| > I don't need millions of dollars or years of training to
| make something creative anymore.
|
| You never did... You just needed to get creative.
| Kye wrote:
| You can go a long way with LMMS or Ardour and free sample
| packs. Most big sample production companies provide
| royalty-free samplers. The free stuff from Sonniss (GDC
| freebies) and Black Octopus Sound could last an entire
| career. Throw in the free Komplete Start (or Helm and
| Surge if you prefer open source) and you have all your
| synthesis needs covered: https://www.native-
| instruments.com/en/products/komplete/bund...
| Kye wrote:
| Yep. The way commissioners react when I deliver the files and
| they hear what I made for them for the first time tells me AI
| has a long way to go. I'm not sure it can replace that human
| connection. There's plenty of solid, cheap, and sometimes
| even free library music out there if you just want music of
| some sort for a project, and no generative music I've heard
| comes close to it.
| visarga wrote:
| > I don't know what the point of machine generated music is.
|
| Exploring the latent space of human music. It's a cultural
| mirror.
| grugagag wrote:
| But at the risk of aligning mirrors to other mirrors and
| hollowing out the essence of it. Computers have been
| essential to the evolution of modern music, AI won't evolve
| it anywhere because it needs to mirror the human work, and
| without people to do that it's a sad dead end. But I doubt
| people will stop learning instuments and stop making music
| the old way because it is too fun and meaningful to do
| that. But there's a possibility it will shift in magnitude
| in either direction. Hope to go the way chess did and not
| press a button and a few faders and call it music.
| lyu07282 wrote:
| > The promise of automation was to have machines do the
| things we don't want to do, so humans could have more time to
| do things we enjoy.
|
| But why exactly should that happen? By which mechanism? Every
| single company automates in order to increase their
| monopolies and profit, to generate more shareholder value.
| There exists no other mechanism, so obviously we will never
| do anything other than that.
| Tao3300 wrote:
| > Because we like music for the fun of making it, and the
| shared emotional connection felt with the artist... I don't
| know what the point of machine generated music is.
|
| Bingo.
|
| This is a fun toy, but in terms _what it means_ , you may as
| well ask an AI to pray. It's completely hollow in terms of
| the actual experience.
|
| This could make suitable filler for idle games, ads,
| aquariums, and elevators. Not much else. Perhaps at best, a
| producer could use this to fill in the instrumentation behind
| a singer, but I have a feeling it's not there yet.
|
| > The promise of automation was to have machines do the
| things we don't want to do, so humans could have more time to
| do things we enjoy... Instead, we are automating the things
| humans enjoy.
|
| Damn. Never looked at it that way. It's still enjoyable to do
| these things, but perhaps less lucrative. I don't know, do
| professional musicians like arranging elevator music? I'm
| strictly an amateur who has never made a dime performing, so
| I really don't know if that would be joyful, soul-crushing,
| or somewhere in between. I just know what it means to me, and
| like I said, you may as well ask the machine to pray for all
| I think this amounts to.
| visarga wrote:
| > but in terms what it means , you may as well ask an AI to
| pray
|
| The generative process is based on a combination of
| learning and randomness. The random part doesn't mean
| anything, but it's clear that it is far from just random
| notes. Do you think human music always starts from a
| meaning? It's just lucky accidents that sound good. We even
| retrofit explanations post facto to our actions, we can
| certainly compose music first and assign a meaning later.
|
| Around 150 years ago classical music had a big dilemma -
| should music be related to concrete things or abstract?
| Should we put a story to music? So everyone wanted to know
| "what was the program?" (program==original author's
| meaning) sometimes composers would just hide it in order to
| instigate people to use their imaginations. It didn't
| matter what meaning the author originally assigned to it,
| better to try to hear it with beginners ears.
| Tao3300 wrote:
| You've misunderstood. I'm not talking about the meaning
| of the inputs and outputs of a creative process. I'm
| talking about the very experience of doing the thing.
| Hence the prayer comparison.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| > _Because we like music for the fun of making it, and the
| shared emotional connection felt with the artist (whether it
| 's real or not, knowing a human wrote and performed a piece
| allows you to imagine this connection)._
|
| Speak for yourself. I like music if it sounds good,
| regardless of who made it.
| lfmunoz4 wrote:
| [dead]
| electroly wrote:
| > we are automating the things humans enjoy, and still
| leaving humans to figure out how to feed, house and clothe
| ourselves through the sweat of our brow.
|
| Have you been to a farm before? Have you seen a textile
| factory? Have you seen a construction site? How could you,
| with a straight face, suggest we are not automating those
| things? There are _vastly_ more people working on automation
| in those fields than are working on AI-generated music.
| Automation in agriculture, construction, and textiles are
| _massive_ industries. There are a lot of people in the world
| working on a lot of things.
| cheschire wrote:
| It's not rudderless, there's just a large amount of angst
| surrounding AI/ML ranging from "more ways to feed the copyright
| trolls" to "what should I raise my kids to do for a starter
| career?" and a lot of interpolated points in between.
|
| You're totally okay not feeling this angst. But so are the
| folks who do.
| wooque wrote:
| Because that doesn't sound a bit like Aphex Twin and sounds
| like some generic filler music.
| [deleted]
| LegitShady wrote:
| because it doesn't sound like aphex twin, isn't particularly
| quirky, isn't skronky, and doesn't just hit me.
|
| It sounds like output not resembling what you requested, and
| you're celebrating because for some random reason this
| particular prompt didn't sound totally horrible today. But it
| isn't intentionally making music, and it isn't particularly
| interesting music either. It's basically baby's first drum
| machine sort of stuff.
| fullshark wrote:
| Writing about music is like dancing about architecture
| [deleted]
| tomjakubowski wrote:
| that's cool but also sounds nothing like aphex twin. sort of
| four tet-ish maybe
| yantrams wrote:
| Agree. I'm still blown away by the fact that we can summon
| this level of coherent output with text. Absolute black magic
| sorcery that!
| enricozb wrote:
| Reminds me of his "Change" off of "26 mixes for cash":
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecHLSoJeAAA
|
| However, that's from a sampled drum beat. I generally agree
| though that this generated snippet doesn't remind me of Aphex
| Twin much at all.
| kristaps wrote:
| Eh, could fit into a busier "Acrid avid jam shred", I think
| blensor wrote:
| I may get down voted for this but it somehow reminds me of
| this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fboNTcjJ8bo
| devin wrote:
| I think it's really neat, but I also kind of go "meh". I've
| been into generative music stuff for a long time, but whenever
| I get to the end of the project I go "meh", and I don't really
| feel any different about this.
|
| As I've watched the evolution of music generation with LLMs I
| feel like I just keep hearing drivel at greater fidelity. If
| you like it then by all means listen to it, but this is average
| or below. In some ways I think I prefer the more chaotic less
| coherent predecessors. They're a bit more interesting to my
| ear.
|
| And as other posters have said: that doesn't really sound like
| Aphex Twin to me at all.
| solumunus wrote:
| That is straight garbage.
| moonchrome wrote:
| I get the same feeling every time I buy into the AI hype and
| try it for myself.
|
| On stuff like art it's hard to judge objectively, but in
| things like code it's much simpler. Don't get me wrong there
| are cases where I find generative AI useful - but the hype
| machine and the unedited whole solutions are just straight
| garbage.
| wholinator2 wrote:
| If I'm being honest, i have to agree. This is like, the least
| interesting sound I've heard today. It's just a beat, like i
| bet some things could sound cool eventually but it's just
| ridiculously generic and kinda derivative. As well i can tell
| it's ai generated, it's got the same kind of stilted, just
| holding on to tempo, that most voice generation sounds like.
| Like it's mere moments away from entirely falling apart into
| machine screeching and creepy whisper sounds. Maybe there's
| better examples but being introduced with this clip has
| really put me off the whole idea
| paddw wrote:
| Every week now there is a new AI thing and we are all worn out
| from trying to continually ascertain what to think about them.
| ddmichael wrote:
| I may as a composer be biased but AI "generating" music is just
| sad. The hypocrisy is that musicians have been suing each other
| for intellectual property reasons, while this thing is being
| trained on everyone's music. The law should catch up on this. I
| get that it's going to improve but for now it's also just
| elevator/supermarket music.
| seydor wrote:
| It can be sad, happy, energetic and all. It's no beethoven but
| there is a market for elevator music.lots of it
| layer8 wrote:
| Elevator music was indeed what came to my mind when listening
| to the examples.
| speedgoose wrote:
| As someone deep into elevator music, I am very excited to
| try this model.
| sebzim4500 wrote:
| I don't necessarily disagree that laws should be updated, but I
| don't get why you used the term 'hypocrisy'?
|
| Surely the musicians suing each other aren't the ones that are
| now planning on training an AI on other people's music?
| esskay wrote:
| It's an artform so its natural for a composer to have the same
| reaction as a painter would to Stable Diffusion for example.
|
| That being said - it's happening, and nothings going to stop it
| regardless of which side of the fence people sit on.
| ddmichael wrote:
| "That being said - it's happening, and nothings going to stop
| it"
|
| Well, the European Union is already working on a legal
| framework for AI. It happened with GDPR and it will happen
| again.
| electroly wrote:
| GDPR has a severely muted effect because Americans are
| still doing the same things they were before. It'll be even
| more ineffectual for AI. Nearly all AI research you hear
| about is being done in the United States. European
| regulations will only stop Europeans from using it, but you
| won't be able to escape it anyway because of how much
| American culture is continuously imported into Europe.
| Meanwhile, the reverse is almost completely not true; very
| little European culture makes it into American culture.
| This will just kneecap European creators and companies. I
| wish Europe the best of luck with this.
| ddmichael wrote:
| "very little European culture makes it into American
| culture"
|
| LOL, I love Americans and America but seriously? Like
| what is already there is not enough :D
| kriro wrote:
| Since we are talking about music, maybe I'm living in a
| European bubble but last time I was in the U.S. people
| were listening to classical music (basically OG Euro
| music), Beatles, ABBA, Elton John or newer stuff like
| anything involving David Guetta whatever. Plenty of
| European music being listened to in my niche (metal) as
| well. Music knows no borders.
| ddmichael wrote:
| That's implementation details. It could be the case that
| no art produced in the EU can be used as training data
| (or similar), not necessarily that EU AI models are
| forbidden from being trained on art. I find the former
| case the most probable.
| wilg wrote:
| Sure, but that's not going to stop it.
| flangola7 wrote:
| I don't see why not
| wilg wrote:
| Most people don't live in the European Union, and I doubt
| EU regulations will actually put an end to anything
| anyway.
| tumult wrote:
| You make it sound like some force of nature is causing this
| to occur. These things exist because people are making them,
| despite there no longer being a healthy reason for doing so.
|
| (I'm not saying there's reason for AI development in general
| to stop, but these generative things that are designed to
| slot neatly into the role of human artists specifically have
| no reason to be developed further beyond proving it was
| possible, and that happened a while ago.)
| BHSPitMonkey wrote:
| Humans creating and sharing new technologies (and ideas,
| and works of art, etc.) across societies _is_ a force of
| nature.
| tumult wrote:
| "Force of nature" generally means some phenomenon of
| physics or some natural disaster outside of human
| control, which is what I meant.
|
| "A big and powerful cool thing" is not what I meant, and
| not what force of nature usually means.
| arcanemachiner wrote:
| The force of nature is that our society will utilize any
| technology before even considering its ramifications.
| "Touchscreens in cars? Let's do it!"
|
| I think you might enjoy Neil Postman's book "Technopoly",
| which discusses the subject of weighing the pros and cons
| of a subject instead of just diving in headfirst every time
| some new technology is developed. His YouTube talks are
| also great.
| tumult wrote:
| I think that's more of an emergent behavior, not a force
| of nature. But I agree that enough people might do stupid
| stuff to create this kind of emergent behavior, which
| seems to be happening now. Like maybe 90% or more of
| people think these art AIs are distasteful, but enough
| people can't stop themselves from filling in the blank
| square where something is possible to create but hasn't
| been created yet, so people keep trying to make it. Even
| though there doesn't seem to be any upside or goal, since
| I've never gotten an explanation of one.
|
| And I think if you're going to create something that has
| a little bit of potential to harm at least a few people,
| you should at least have a decent goal or reason for
| creating it.
| wendyshu wrote:
| Musicians are trained on everyone's music too
| tumult wrote:
| Computers aren't human. Software isn't people.
| flangola7 wrote:
| Define people. Or more specifically, define what make them
| special.
| Riverheart wrote:
| This isn't about specialness, it's about the foundations
| of civil society. People are meat and guts humans.
|
| We're autonomous entities capable of higher reasoning,
| limited in time, attention and talent and eventually die
| allowing new people time to flourish.
|
| We also pay taxes and make silly arguments about software
| and humans being no different from each other because it
| justifies our ability to play with cool toys without
| considering the impact on other people. Corporations
| aren't people though because they aren't cool like AI.
| [deleted]
| tumult wrote:
| Take your PC to the courthouse and tell the judge it's
| liable for damages, not you.
| layer8 wrote:
| But they have tastes and preferences in a way that the models
| lack -- unless, possibly, if you have them retrained
| sufficiently long by a single individual or small group, I
| guess.
| nyolfen wrote:
| > while this thing is being trained on everyone's music.
|
| haha, did you conceptualize music ex nihilo?
| ddmichael wrote:
| We don't need IP cases in courts people, nyolfen resolved
| them all with his unbeatable argument
| nyolfen wrote:
| how is this fundamentally different than what humans do?
| LegitShady wrote:
| because its a computer not a human
| InCityDreams wrote:
| As a music writer, I welcome ai. It gives me more ideas to
| steal.
| [deleted]
| emporas wrote:
| I used MusicGen yesterday to create 50 songs or so. Three of them
| sound pretty good [1][2][3]. MusicGen is definitely the best of
| four models of the presentation. I used the prompts differently
| than the article and i think i got better results.
|
| Suppose there is way to measure cardio beats or electricity
| spikes on the brain, and we configure the machine to generate
| music to increase cardio beats, or decrease them, or similarly
| increase electrical activity of the brain or decrease it. Then
| psychology might be deprecated, mood will be reduced to just a
| music channel.
|
| [1]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/lounge-owl
|
| [2]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/rock-glass-
| shatterin...
|
| [3]https://soundcloud.com/kwstas-pramatias/rock-owl-howling
| layer8 wrote:
| Those three are pretty nice, but I'd say they are only a
| starting point, an inspiration, for creating a good song out of
| those themes.
|
| You are probably getting downvoted for your second paragraph
| which is a bit out there.
| emporas wrote:
| Err, yeah maybe a little bit out there.
|
| Yes of course they are the starting point, a good musician
| may take some samples and transform a music generation to a
| better song for sure. Some artists state that a painting is
| never complete, or a song is never complete. There is always
| room for innovation.
|
| The prompts i used, referenced real songwriters, and the
| model seems to know their songs. The article does not prompt
| it that way. So i guess there may be a little bit of IP
| infringement, but we need that, only for the first bunch.
| Next models will be trained on the best generations of
| previous models.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| People have tried this, they're called binaural beats, and they
| don't seem to work for the most part. I mean, not in the sense
| that you could engineer sound to invoke very specific effects
| in the brain consistently.
| emporas wrote:
| I personally have more than 10 years experience on sitting in
| the cold all day long, with only summer clothes on. Like 0 to
| 5 Celsius, with only shorts on, not even socks. I am winter
| swimmer as well. I do that, because i can think a lot more
| clear in a cold environment, it is good for the brain.
| Granted in Greece there is not that much cold, maybe 1 or 2
| months of 0-5 Celsius.
|
| That can be achieved by putting music on, which speeds up the
| heart pulse. Usually hard rock, metal, thrash metal etc. In
| that case, the body starts sweating a lot, not matter the
| temperature. I combine that, with 5 simple exercises i do all
| day long which are important as well.
|
| My point is that using music, someone can be in charge of his
| heart pulse. But my biggest complaint always was that these
| metal guys, are masters of the guitar, but other kinds of
| music have better taste in rhythm, in melody etc. Using
| programs like that we can evolve it a little bit, to be more
| pleasurable to listen.
|
| I know about about binaural beats, i have tried to listen to
| different hertz for hours on end, they don't work in my
| opinion. At least in my case.
| scns wrote:
| Huberman cited a study proving the effect. Sorry, no link at
| hand.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| There's a real effect, just nothing even remotely close to
| the actual fantastical claims being made about it. It's
| highly doubtful there's some sort of profound way to induce
| arbitrary brain states through audio input alone.
|
| I remember vividly that this was very hyped in some circles
| around 2005 or thereabout, with wild claims that listening
| to some strange white noise for twenty minutes could induce
| full-blown psychedelic trips even in people with no
| psychedelic experience. I even tried a bunch of em, and the
| only clear effect was a mild headache. And I was naive
| enough to think it might work back then, and yet there
| wasn't even really a placebo effect.
| emporas wrote:
| I was thinking of a scenario of mapping our brain
| activity, like reading functions of some module, or a
| birthday party, or a business meeting. From then on, we
| put the machine to generate songs and activate roughly
| the same brain region of the actual life experience. We
| do that once, and generate 10 songs.
|
| The next time that life experience takes place, we listen
| five or ten minutes to the relevant songs before it
| happens. We do that to put ourselves in the mood, as a
| mental preparation tool.
|
| That's all. Not creating worldwide Britney Spears hits,
| or alter our consciousness. Just a mental tool.
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| Oh I see, you're essentially describing what I think of
| as aural contextual clues/associations. Sure, that's very
| real and I've experienced it first hand.
|
| Though I'm sceptical how directed it can really be. There
| are some songs that have a bizarre effect on me for sure.
| Though most of the time it's because I had some strange
| experience involving the combination of said music with
| psychedelic drugs. And now the music can induce echoes of
| that experience. But it's just sort of an association
| that happened by accident.
|
| I guess I could see people using this phenomenon in a
| more deliberate manner. And you certainly seem to be
| doing so. Though it could be that you're just somehow
| more able to than most people.
| emporas wrote:
| That happens in general, many people associate music with
| relevant actions of their life. They listen to songs
| which are more suitable to driving a car, or lounge beats
| to read books.
|
| One scenario is to record some sounds of the event once,
| like the laughter of a child in it's birthday, put it to
| songs, and listen to it before the next time it happens.
|
| One other scenario, is to record the brainwaves of some
| difficult task, like programming, and by listening to
| songs, try to activate the same region of the brain. When
| there is an automatic way to create one song which
| activates an area but not exactly, and another song which
| activates one more area but not exactly, the machine will
| try to figure out how to combine the two songs together
| which will hit the spot. It is essentially a problem of
| combining information, which A.I. statistical engines are
| very good at it.
| marban wrote:
| Time to double down on my Roland synth
| jimnotgym wrote:
| I just got excited at a mention of Summits On The Air and found a
| boring AI article.
|
| It's an amateur radio thing btw...You go up a mountain and make
| use of the good propogation to call other hams. You accrue points
| that are as valuable as HN points are!
| mtlmtlmtlmtl wrote:
| This is still pretty deep in the uncanny valley. None of the rock
| examples for example even sound very much like guitar. One sounds
| more like trance, the others seem more like metal than
| rock(though interestingly trance is a lot more similar to metal
| than you might think. It's just hard to notice at the surface
| level due to very different instruments).
|
| Then again, in this case I don't mind. I'm sure someone like
| Simon Posford could do some really wacky sampling based off of
| this.
|
| Don't see myself using it to make music just for my own listening
| though(not much of a composer). That's still a long ways off.
| bulbosaur123 wrote:
| How do you run AudioCraft on Apple Silicon?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-06-10 23:00 UTC)