(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....
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..."
> 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.
> 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.
I generated a 1:20 sample using your prompt "four-on-the-floor downtempo progressive track with soft pads, no vocals" using the audiocraft-webui fork, which allows for longer generation by overlapping generations.
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.
There is an absolutely massive gulf between "free (or fixed list price) and immediate, just use these apps" and "locate a musician, bargain with them, pay, collaborate with them, wait for revisions, eventually get something usable (but not be 100% sure if I own the rights or not)." I wouldn't even know where to start; I'm too far out of my league.
Tackling the latter would likely exceed the entire effort I spent writing my little hobby game in the first place. I don't think it's even close; it was never a serious consideration. Some of these games I write in a single sitting. I do my best to piece background music together using a chord progression app, descriptions of keys and the notes they contain from Google, and premade drum loops and instrument samples. It comes out worse than if a real musician had made it, but getting a real musician was never really an option.
It's the same for the art. I don't have the time or money to pay an artist. They deserve to be paid fairly for their work just like musicians, but I don't have it and it's just a stupid hobby game. But even stupid games need art and music. So, homemade programmer art and music it is. The availability of better tools to help non-musicians hack something together is greatly appreciated. I haven't tried any AI stuff yet but I will next time.
It's not that hard, you find an email and you basically do a cold call. I was doing it in high school off Newgrounds (which is full of royalty free stuff too!)
If your project is small and free, you're not going to land The Eurythmics. But all those people posting their music online hoping to get noticed? Emailing them, even a cold call, immediately tells them you've listened to their stuff and you like it. Honesty is the best approach.
I think OP is onto something.
Edit-
> but not be 100% sure if I own the rights or not).
That's also really easy: stipulate it in writing. Preferably a proper contract but an email agreement is defensible too (IANAL).
Instead of turning to pre-made corporate software, you could just hire me or one of my developer friends? We’ll crank out something fine for you in no time flat. All you have to do is just:
- Find me, which is easy, just become an amateur developer yourself and scour the various places I frequent
- Think of and propose in great detail what you want. We will go back and forth over this, over the course of several days/weeks. Bonus points if we don’t speak the same language.
- Sign some form of agreement, really easy, just read this 5 page document and maybe hire a lawyer if you are unsure. All very easy.
- Fork over the cash
- Get deliverables in a few weeks, hopefully.
Now when you compare that with just firing up some website/app and getting on with your work, is that really better? I’m not seeing why you would just go to gmail.com if I could have just made you a very nice, very special email reader.
I have perfected my craft over thousands of hours you know. You should pay us the respect we deserve.
—
Seriously: cranking out tunes through some prompting vs hiring people through shady channels like reddit? Are you serious?
You give an analogy of software. I suppose I feel that art differs from this in some ways. E.g. originality, creativeness.
Reading many of these responses I'm gathering that perhaps I have too strong a notion of what kind of quality of music might be in demand. While the loops on the original article are impressive given their generative nature, I suppose I felt that there may be a demand for something more (Better sound design, more long term structure), but maybe I'm naive.
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.
Music is abstract. When we talk about visual art we can almost always be on the same page. If I say I need garden gnomes parading around a Bavarian village, the amount of variation between my internal idea and what a visual artist returns will mainly come from the lack of terms I use regarding aesthetic sensibility. Will they return something abstract or neoclassical? I would then be more specific etc...
For music we could present such an image but it would then suggest I'd argue much more possibilities. We could narrow down by genre you would suppose but even then there are too many possibilities: genre's are not as strong categories as are the stylized "era's" of visual art, I would also claim. Moreover, we can "port" a fundamental structure like a melody over all sorts of strains of music. In visual art, any motif is bound to be changed depending on the era and the style we'd put it in, that is, I think that in music, there are elements that are stronger in visual arts and elements that are weaker in music, and vice-versa, with regard to a description we could give in English. It's probably more natural and more possible to ask about what a sort visual representation should be than what a piece of sound should be.
It's interesting how we can generate images I'd argue in stunning faithfulness to some prompts but we don't seem to be very close to the same standard, for some prompts, at generating music.
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.
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. :)
> Have any of you checked out / made offers on music production subreddits? Or other music subreddits? various music production discords? Elsewhere on the internet?
When it's 3 am on a Saturday and I'm in the zone on a passion project, I'm not about to spend the rest of the weekend going back and forth with a music guy on Reddit.
I want a music robot that cranks out music on demand and responds to my every whim, and a real human being isn't going to want to fill that role no matter how impoverished they are.
If I need a background track for something, and I commission someone else, then I believe the standard contract for the commissioned work would still leave copyright with the producer (though not always), and changing it so that I have exclusive rights to the work would potentially make it more expensive.
Add to that, if I don't like something, want it tweaked, want something completely redone, or just flat out change my mind about some direction I provided later, I have to go back to them and negotiate a new contract, or find someone else to do the work. The costs add up over time, and there's an additional benefit to immediate feedback (or cost of delayed feedback, as anyone who has worked on a software project that takes forever to compile/check can attest)
I haven't used the music AI tools yet, but having played around with Dall-E a bit I can say that it's pretty enjoyable to be able to give direction, and bound it, then roll the dice and see how things turn out. I definitely feel some ownership of, and pride in, the resulting creation
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.
> 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.
>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.
Humans are just naturally hard to deal with, especially humans who you never met face-to-face.
As anti-social as it sounds, it's the conclusion that I've reached to after years of working with freelancers/contractors. I've contacted with >50 artists (>300 if "they send me a propose on Upworks" count) and worked with ~10 of them.
Don't get me wrong, I still choose human artists over Stable Diffusion. For now...
> 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
“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.
I think it's about the ability of someone who perhaps has a great idea (imagination) but lacks time, resources or the skills (execution) to make it happen. Of course that a talented producer will create a more compelling song (at least for now) but if the tool is an amplifier it should also boost talented composers - their prompts or inputs to prompts might be much more detailed, more interesting, more creative than those of a neophyte. This of course makes some assumptions but I think the draw for most people is that they can "make" something that sounds cool with almost no effort. My belief is that someone who puts more effort in a GPT and has more expertise can get a lot more out of it as well. I could of course be wrong and GPTs might be the big equalizers, but I doubt it.
I want to do this but I'm scared of the backlash of "you're being exploitative!!!!".
I know the people who say that mean well, but it totally overlooks both how much the culture does (as you say) want to provide their art for projects to use it and create value together, and... reality. Shouting at everyone isn't the way to get them onboard, but shout they do, and it's one country in particular that seems to scream the most.
I'm in the UK and I can't walk down the street without tripping over producers, so maybe the way around the angsty people is finding them in person? Or... we just use AI. The robots solving our social issues is probably a thing.
Hmm, I was there right yesterday. I needed a track to go with a very particular side-project, and I was looking for somebody to arrange/design/sing the vocals. I’m 100% sure that a musician will always do a more musical job than me. The problem is that coaxing the exact work that I need from that musician is going to be a pain (that is to say, expensive and time-consuming), because the piece does not (can not) fall into any set genre (which tend to be cheaper to produce).
I’m not going the AI-route. It’s frankly easier, more fun and it sounds better to compose the music myself, and if the project takes off and makes a dime, hire a pro to improve things later.
This is an insurmountable benefit. Literally the two most important things when it comes to me buying music at scale.
I made a mobile game a while back and composing and licensing music cost me $30,000 for a free to play game. That was the same as 6-months dev salary (devs in Belarus).
If I can save $30,000 and have zero delay, I’m just going to do that 100% of the time.
The only factor that a real musician can beat on is quality. But let me tell you, with zero marginal cost of production, quality will inevitably be better with generative.
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.
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.
I just don’t have a good source of people that are guaranteed to produce something sensible, I have a shortlist of artists I’ve encountered over the years, but it’s indeed a very short list. If I ask someone to create a track and it turns out it’s garbage, I still need to pay them, and I’ve wasted a week of my time.
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.
(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.
> 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.
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);
>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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
>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.
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.
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
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 artéfacts, the low fidelity, the weird sounds, the detuned synths, this model does that very well and it does sound great to me.
(Not the original commenter) I don't know of any death metal examples, but chill-lofi-beats+djent music already exists and it's pretty good. This isn't the only example but it's my personal favorite one:
Depends on the human. If it’s myself, not really. But if it’s well done, yes I would enjoy death metal sonorities in lofi ambiant once in a while. But I admit the prompt is perhaps a bit challenging.
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.
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/theexbandhttps://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?
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.
> 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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
> 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.
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.
> 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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
When it comes to music, the meme at this point is that "discovery is the problem." There is already so much music being made by so many people that the difficult part is connecting listeners to music they enjoy. It's tiring to see endless takes of "finally! we don't need artists anymore! we can just stand on their shoulders by training models on their work and then generate our own art instead!"
There's already so much art being made. Why have so much joy in ignoring all of it and focusing on generative AI instead?
Furthermore, there's another work posted on that FB account that has the caption:
"While I'm concerned about the possible impact on society - especially on the jobs front, I cant help but grin as the edifice of human exceptionalism is shred apart with every passing day."
Is that you? Why the misanthropy? "edifice of human exceptionalism"? As it applies to... making music?
Readit News
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....
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..."
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.
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.
https://sndup.net/njs2/
We may also disagree on how much good stuff there is coming out, but I agree there is a lot of noise.
Tackling the latter would likely exceed the entire effort I spent writing my little hobby game in the first place. I don't think it's even close; it was never a serious consideration. Some of these games I write in a single sitting. I do my best to piece background music together using a chord progression app, descriptions of keys and the notes they contain from Google, and premade drum loops and instrument samples. It comes out worse than if a real musician had made it, but getting a real musician was never really an option.
It's the same for the art. I don't have the time or money to pay an artist. They deserve to be paid fairly for their work just like musicians, but I don't have it and it's just a stupid hobby game. But even stupid games need art and music. So, homemade programmer art and music it is. The availability of better tools to help non-musicians hack something together is greatly appreciated. I haven't tried any AI stuff yet but I will next time.
If your project is small and free, you're not going to land The Eurythmics. But all those people posting their music online hoping to get noticed? Emailing them, even a cold call, immediately tells them you've listened to their stuff and you like it. Honesty is the best approach.
I think OP is onto something.
Edit-
> but not be 100% sure if I own the rights or not).
That's also really easy: stipulate it in writing. Preferably a proper contract but an email agreement is defensible too (IANAL).
- Find me, which is easy, just become an amateur developer yourself and scour the various places I frequent
- Think of and propose in great detail what you want. We will go back and forth over this, over the course of several days/weeks. Bonus points if we don’t speak the same language.
- Sign some form of agreement, really easy, just read this 5 page document and maybe hire a lawyer if you are unsure. All very easy.
- Fork over the cash
- Get deliverables in a few weeks, hopefully.
Now when you compare that with just firing up some website/app and getting on with your work, is that really better? I’m not seeing why you would just go to gmail.com if I could have just made you a very nice, very special email reader.
I have perfected my craft over thousands of hours you know. You should pay us the respect we deserve.
—
Seriously: cranking out tunes through some prompting vs hiring people through shady channels like reddit? Are you serious?
You give an analogy of software. I suppose I feel that art differs from this in some ways. E.g. originality, creativeness.
Reading many of these responses I'm gathering that perhaps I have too strong a notion of what kind of quality of music might be in demand. While the loops on the original article are impressive given their generative nature, I suppose I felt that there may be a demand for something more (Better sound design, more long term structure), but maybe I'm naive.
But thanks for giving me your perspective.
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.
For music we could present such an image but it would then suggest I'd argue much more possibilities. We could narrow down by genre you would suppose but even then there are too many possibilities: genre's are not as strong categories as are the stylized "era's" of visual art, I would also claim. Moreover, we can "port" a fundamental structure like a melody over all sorts of strains of music. In visual art, any motif is bound to be changed depending on the era and the style we'd put it in, that is, I think that in music, there are elements that are stronger in visual arts and elements that are weaker in music, and vice-versa, with regard to a description we could give in English. It's probably more natural and more possible to ask about what a sort visual representation should be than what a piece of sound should be.
It's interesting how we can generate images I'd argue in stunning faithfulness to some prompts but we don't seem to be very close to the same standard, for some prompts, at generating music.
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.
If anyone knows anyone working on that, ping me. :)
When it's 3 am on a Saturday and I'm in the zone on a passion project, I'm not about to spend the rest of the weekend going back and forth with a music guy on Reddit.
I want a music robot that cranks out music on demand and responds to my every whim, and a real human being isn't going to want to fill that role no matter how impoverished they are.
Add to that, if I don't like something, want it tweaked, want something completely redone, or just flat out change my mind about some direction I provided later, I have to go back to them and negotiate a new contract, or find someone else to do the work. The costs add up over time, and there's an additional benefit to immediate feedback (or cost of delayed feedback, as anyone who has worked on a software project that takes forever to compile/check can attest)
I haven't used the music AI tools yet, but having played around with Dall-E a bit I can say that it's pretty enjoyable to be able to give direction, and bound it, then roll the dice and see how things turn out. I definitely feel some ownership of, and pride in, the resulting creation
All things equal, people are happy to support local businesses. The value prop here is far from equal.
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.
> 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.
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.
As anti-social as it sounds, it's the conclusion that I've reached to after years of working with freelancers/contractors. I've contacted with >50 artists (>300 if "they send me a propose on Upworks" count) and worked with ~10 of them.
Don't get me wrong, I still choose human artists over Stable Diffusion. For now...
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
I know the people who say that mean well, but it totally overlooks both how much the culture does (as you say) want to provide their art for projects to use it and create value together, and... reality. Shouting at everyone isn't the way to get them onboard, but shout they do, and it's one country in particular that seems to scream the most.
I'm in the UK and I can't walk down the street without tripping over producers, so maybe the way around the angsty people is finding them in person? Or... we just use AI. The robots solving our social issues is probably a thing.
I’m not going the AI-route. It’s frankly easier, more fun and it sounds better to compose the music myself, and if the project takes off and makes a dime, hire a pro to improve things later.
This is an insurmountable benefit. Literally the two most important things when it comes to me buying music at scale.
I made a mobile game a while back and composing and licensing music cost me $30,000 for a free to play game. That was the same as 6-months dev salary (devs in Belarus).
If I can save $30,000 and have zero delay, I’m just going to do that 100% of the time.
The only factor that a real musician can beat on is quality. But let me tell you, with zero marginal cost of production, quality will inevitably be better with generative.
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.
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.
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.
And no you can't do this already:
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.
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.
Deleted Comment
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
You are probably getting downvoted for your second paragraph which is a 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.
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.
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.)
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.
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.
Can you elaborate on this point? I don't think this has been established to be the case yet.
I’m very impressed.
By contrast OpenAI's JukeBox, which is maybe two years old now, really comes up with fascinating ideas.
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 artéfacts, 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.
Would you expect that to be good if a human did it?
https://youtu.be/-Yeqp2-dF5M
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.
Speak for yourself. I like music if it sounds good, regardless of who made it.
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.
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.
Exploring the latent space of human music. It's a cultural mirror.
Dead Comment
You're totally okay not feeling this angst. But so are the folks who do.
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.
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.
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.
PRECISELY! And I find that magical. Better prompt fidelity, model zoo etc will follow soon.
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.
There's already so much art being made. Why have so much joy in ignoring all of it and focusing on generative AI instead?
Furthermore, there's another work posted on that FB account that has the caption:
"While I'm concerned about the possible impact on society - especially on the jobs front, I cant help but grin as the edifice of human exceptionalism is shred apart with every passing day."
Is that you? Why the misanthropy? "edifice of human exceptionalism"? As it applies to... making music?
Deleted Comment
Deleted Comment