General Music Chat

It's getting bloody out there. This ought to liven things up:

The computer plays a vital roll in creating music today. It's become affordable to the working class. The computer can be played like a musical instrument. Creativity requires lots of options; lots of choices are needed. The computer provides that.

We all like guitars. The electric guitar came around in the 50s or so. But, isn't my electric guitar pretty much played out . . . pretty much . . . folk. Computers and music software are today's electric guitar, todays piano. My Imac and ProTools are today, what the Strat guitar and Fender amp were in the last century. Garage bands? Replaced by musicians in bedrooms with personal computers. Performance venue--> Internet?

Creative music composition. Is there a thing called creativity in music? What is your experience with creating music? Are there people who are closer to the edge of what is brilliant, new, and original, and who are they? Are they the ones with the most hits on their website? Is it even desirable to be creative, or is the cost too high? Does truth come in to play? Or is popular enough? Who is the Mozart and the Beethoven of today? Who is the Stravinsky and the John Cage of today? Is it ourselves? I like that idea. But then, should we keep our eyes on our own paper, or can we peek at other people's desktops to get our music? How much stealing of ideas is going on anyway, in this musical battlefield. 'Can we all just get along?' Or is it all about who is on top? What about those on the bottom? Yes, what about us? Have we listened to each other's music lately? Can we, who are suffering, squashed, underneath the dog-pile of other people's fame and fortune actually produce something interesting? Interesting enough to listen to, more than once. Interesting enough to sell? And how is that . . . selling thing . . . going for you. Should our music be good enough to sell itself? Or, must we spam it at everybody we meet?

Comments?

Cloud, I agree ... Now, to me,. as an applications programmer by day, The PC is just another tool... AKA in the music world, it is an instrument. We should not misconstrue this to mean that the PC abrogates our responsibility to observe and apply the craft of musical construct, theory and so forth. Like any other form of labor...
The PC cannot replace the work, it can only transfer it.
Having said that... A competent musician, with the skill to program...can indeed write an instruction set, that provides instruments with musical "rules", such that the rules guide the instrument to process and spit out a cohesive musical composition.

If Mr Lawn -Jockey is reading this, he should understand that his guitar and amp collection is a predecessor to the concept. Every voice in a Roland, every compression on a note, every effect from a pedal is a crude instruction , depicting a rule, that gets applied on a sound signal... Add a chain of timers and clocks, in fixed sequence and you have a pattern arranger (AKA drum machines...) . Add timers, clocks + Drivers (interface) and you have MIDI communication. Add sequencers (More timers and clocks) which talk to a Roland and send rules (Instruction sets) to the voices, you now have you have a programmed work or song. AI simply puts more teeth into that process, buy 'learning' what works (historically) and applying different variations... I might add, that just like a Mandelbrot set, AI generated music can yield a distinct pattern..., which can then be engineered and polished (and finally, packaged) .

AI does not take away from musical properties and principles, but may actually help us identify new ones... (Did you know that every body in the galaxy generates a distinct sound signature... )

You know I don't really care what AI is,
but can ithelp me to make better music.
Are you worried a little JCP that AI will
make better music than you, can you even
play a Zappa solo?

I can see exactly how I think AI will be able
to create music, and if you studied theory
so would you, it looks like it would be easy.

As for me I don't care for AI and computer
music or even looping, the human touch is
what makes it, accidentally hitting a wrong
note in a melody line is probably how many
melodies were written. How is AI going to
help me? Is it going to kick out the old theory
answer everytime, or is it going to create.
I don't see it creating. Looping, if I saw you
playing 6 different instruments and looping 5
I'd heckle you, and there be nothing you could
do about it, I think it shows you can't play with
other people and aren't skilled enough on any one
instrument to pull it off yourself.

I'm glad to see somebody playing a computer
here on this site I thought all we had was guitar
players. Oh yeah and bass players, but if you can't
sing I've no use for bass players, I can play anything
that they can play and more.

if you refer to that garbage as musical creativity then you do so purely on faith,
as you cannot prove that the machine actually creates.
it has been programmed to ape human behavior, that is all
go engage with "clever bot" and you will quickly see what I mean.
though i will admit, it easily fools the witless and gullible.

The AI program creates very much like we do, except 'it' makes fewer mistakes and never has writer's block.

As I explained earlier, we all learn to play our instruments, write songs, and compose larger musical works, exactly how a meme evolves, which is also the way everything naturally evolves in this universe. We try different things, discard what doesn't work, and keep what does.

AI composer programs are no different.
Matter of fact if the mystical element seems absent to you with all of this AI music, it shouldn't!

We all have experienced creative moments when the Muse/God is speaking through us, guiding our hands or our pen. So, creativity is thought to be divinely inspired, and there is no reason why AI music cannot also be guided by divine inspiration.

Here is a cool example of one of my pieces that I used an AI program to create certain sections and fractal loops (particularly the end groove).

http://snd.sc/oa0SqG

I just returned (alive to tell the story) from ETU's TaR KHeM website. Lots of original unique, dark, and ancient sounding compositions, with diverse instrument sounds. The artwork of ETU's website matches the music. I believe that his AI, has not taken total control of him yet, unless it also decorated his website/dungeon. I'm still shook up, and am going to check under my bed for demons before going to sleep. If I never return

You know I don't really care what AI is,
but can ithelp me to make better music.
Are you worried a little JCP that AI will
make better music than you, can you even
play a Zappa solo?

I can see exactly how I think AI will be able
to create music, and if you studied theory
so would you, it looks like it would be easy.

As for me I don't care for AI and computer
music or even looping, the human touch is
what makes it, accidentally hitting a wrong
note in a melody line is probably how many
melodies were written. How is AI going to
help me? Is it going to kick out the old theory
answer everytime, or is it going to create.
I don't see it creating. Looping, if I saw you
playing 6 different instruments and looping 5
I'd heckle you, and there be nothing you could
do about it, I think it shows you can't play with
other people and aren't skilled enough on any one
instrument to pull it off yourself.

I'm glad to see somebody playing a computer
here on this site I thought all we had was guitar
players. Oh yeah and bass players, but if you can't
sing I've no use for bass players, I can play anything
that they can play and more.

carefull there, they will call you a redneck or lawn jockey.(must be a Texas thing)

I'm sure a computer can be programed to make better music than me
It damn sure it can calculate PI beter than me, or resolve the area of 2 intersecting 3 dimensional curved surfaces, calculate the trajectory of atomic annie on a rainy day.

but it will never be a being. and so I will never have to fear it

as far a zappa goes; even zappa could not play a zappa solo twice. so why would I want to?
he may be the darling of the geezer rock in-crowd these days, but if I want to listen to rock gone by ( which I rarely ever do) there are many others I would turn to first.

yes guitar is dead, but so is the computer, plastic music is king.

and I'm too old to worry about the legacy of a generation that is not my own, we have plenty to apologize for in my generation.

if you refer to that garbage as musical creativity then you do so purely on faith,
as you cannot prove that the machine actually creates.
it has been programmed to ape human behavior, that is all
go engage with "clever bot" and you will quickly see what I mean.
though i will admit, it easily fools the witless and gullible.

The AI program creates very much like we do, except 'it' makes fewer mistakes and never has writer's block.

As I explained earlier, we all learn to play our instruments, write songs, and compose larger musical works, exactly how a meme evolves, which is also the way everything naturally evolves in this universe. We try different things, discard what doesn't work, and keep what does.

AI composer programs are no different.
Matter of fact if the mystical element seems absent to you with all of this AI music, it shouldn't!

We all have experienced creative moments when the Muse/God is speaking through us, guiding our hands or our pen. So, creativity is thought to be divinely inspired, and there is no reason why AI music cannot also be guided by divine inspiration.

Here is a cool example of one of my pieces that I used an AI program to create certain sections and fractal loops (particularly the end groove).

http://snd.sc/oa0SqG

in the context of this discussion I would be motivated to listen to a composition made by a computer, alone,
I'm afraid a unstructured partially, looped, quasi-duet would not serve to advance your cause.

if you refer to that garbage as musical creativity then you do so purely on faith,
as you cannot prove that the machine actually creates.
it has been programmed to ape human behavior, that is all
go engage with "clever bot" and you will quickly see what I mean.
though i will admit, it easily fools the witless and gullible.

The AI program creates very much like we do, except 'it' makes fewer mistakes and never has writer's block.

As I explained earlier, we all learn to play our instruments, write songs, and compose larger musical works, exactly how a meme evolves, which is also the way everything naturally evolves in this universe. We try different things, discard what doesn't work, and keep what does.

AI composer programs are no different.
Matter of fact if the mystical element seems absent to you with all of this AI music, it shouldn't!

We all have experienced creative moments when the Muse/God is speaking through us, guiding our hands or our pen. So, creativity is thought to be divinely inspired, and there is no reason why AI music cannot also be guided by divine inspiration.

Here is a cool example of one of my pieces that I used an AI program to create certain sections and fractal loops (particularly the end groove).

http://snd.sc/oa0SqG

in the context of this discussion I would be motivated to listen to a composition made by a computer, alone,
I'm afraid a unstructured partially, looped, quasi-duet would not serve to advance your cause.

Enjoy . . . David Cope - http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/cope/mp3page.htm

Well,
I must say, that will never be a threat to anyone..
some of the so called compositions are no more than 3 notes
the Bach attempt
ftp://arts.ucsc.edu/pub/cope/beet2.mp3
is some what, kinda there, but very awkward. very obvious attempts to deviate from the programed pattern,
i.e. at measure 5 choose alternate resolve, not previously used in programed pattern.
come on, there must be more to it than this.

I think his site should be called UCSC student learns and experiments with computer code,

perhaps there is another site you might be thinking of?

I mean really

I see I have been over harsh in my original judgment,
and I quite understand you guys violent reaction to my comment,
that you harbor a strange belief.

I see now that this is a dream for some people, to see and hold Pinocchio.
my apologies for appearing to want to squash your dreams.

my point of view in life dose often take into account the more sensitive nature of some folks.

it really is true that in life the apparition sometimes is more important than the cold light of day.

Well,
I must say, that will never be a threat to anyone..
some of the so called compositions are no more than 3 notes
the Bach attempt
ftp://arts.ucsc.edu/pub/cope/beet2.mp3
is some what, kinda there, but very awkward. very obvious attempts to deviate from the programed pattern,
i.e. at measure 5 choose alternate resolve, not previously used in programed pattern.
come on, there must be more to it than this.

I think his site should be called UCSC student learns and experiments with computer code,

perhaps there is another site you might be thinking of?

I mean really

This is becoming quite boring . . . please read this - http://students.cs.byu.edu/~cs470ta/articles/p163-roads.pdf

FLYING CLOUD NINE responds to the influential David Cope:

While some of the faithful dreamed,

My idea was that, very careful recombinations, alas, still conform to lifeless superstructures. My idea was art music, tempered in rules. Rules proved daunting, I therefore revised rules, stylistically combining them into great lifeless discoveries. After twenty-six lifeless replications of itself, the educated understood my idea, as I revised, revised, and revised. Having, myself, an artificial ear, my idea was that great lifeless superstructures exist as tonal error everywhere. How the voices seemed lifeless and triadic. All the great lies move one to another, combining every error. I therefore revised the error, and I produced still-music. Of course, simply breaking still-music seemed logical. I therefore revised, revised, and revised everywhere, but the revised still-music produced twelve faithful, but lifeless superstructures. Daunting.

Well,
I must say, that will never be a threat to anyone..
some of the so called compositions are no more than 3 notes
the Bach attempt
ftp://arts.ucsc.edu/pub/cope/beet2.mp3
is some what, kinda there, but very awkward. very obvious attempts to deviate from the programed pattern,
i.e. at measure 5 choose alternate resolve, not previously used in programed pattern.
come on, there must be more to it than this.

I think his site should be called UCSC student learns and experiments with computer code,

perhaps there is another site you might be thinking of?

I mean really

This is becoming quite boring . . . please read this - http://students.cs.byu.edu/~cs470ta/articles/p163-roads.pdf

although this article is obviously antiquated, being almost 30 years old
it dose list many problems then facing notation software.
problems they still have yet to resolve, this i can attest to,
having a very recent version of such software, it has many limitations. this software which plainly they were working on at the time would seem to be "AI" by the description and goals listed in the article.
my software Finale really only peaks in this regard when using the Hauptwerks organ included as a bonus in the package
unfortunately the Hauptwerks organ is the only instrument in the package that was a complex on-site sample of an actual cathedral organ.
thus disqualifying it from AI, if I understand the article.
there is also the human playback assistant that is part of the package. imitating jazz, marches or god knows what.
it is a complete waste of time, it much faster to just learn how to use common musical accents.
as the article states and I quote,
"Although the number of active composers
in the field has increased greatly in the past
decade, the paucity of interesting new computer
music pieces has been noted by many
people."

As far as AI is concerned maybe they should choose a new word, I do believe intelligence is not really a proper description of what they are trying to accomplish.

although this article is obviously antiquated, being almost 30 years old
it dose list many problems then facing notation software.
problems they still have yet to resolve, this i can attest to,
having a very recent version of such software, it has many limitations. this software which plainly they were working on at the time would seem to be "AI" by the description and goals listed in the article.
my software Finale really only peaks in this regard when using the Hauptwerks organ included as a bonus in the package
unfortunately the Hauptwerks organ is the only instrument in the package that was a complex on-site sample of an actual cathedral organ.
thus disqualifying it from AI, if I understand the article.
there is also the human playback assistant that is part of the package. imitating jazz, marches or god knows what.
it is a complete waste of time, it much faster to just learn how to use common musical accents.
as the article states and I quote,
"Although the number of active composers
in the field has increased greatly in the past
decade, the paucity of interesting new computer
music pieces has been noted by many
people."

As far as AI is concerned maybe they should choose a new word, I do believe intelligence is not really a proper description of what they are trying to accomplish.

There were people during the era of Ben Franklin, who were absolutely positive that standing in a rain storm with a kite was also a waste of time. Much of the public today, as well as the self-proclaimed technocrats would like to believe they know something about AI. They don't know squat... Seems they can't wrap their heads around the essential feature of AI , which is how to make a machine "Learn" Any pragmatist will tell you that learning, implies intelligence...Please note the following:

Code: Select all[i]Intelligence has been defined in different ways, including the abilities for abstract thought, understanding, communication, reasoning, learning, retaining, planning, and problem solving.  Intelligence is most widely studied in humans, but has also been observed in animals and plants. Artificial intelligence is the intelligence of machines or the simulation of intelligence in machines. - [/i]Wikipedia.

Gizmo geeks of our 21st century voice their discontent, when they discover that a machine. which "learns" ...isn't obliged to yield fireworks , bells and whistles about it. Take typical Boolean gate Logic: Context = Pie 1 AND 0 = False. 1 AND 1 = true. Therefore If apples AND oranges, then no Apple Pie, However, if Apples AND Apples, then Apple Pie.


A very very crude pseudo-code example: (To illustrate the a 'learning' machine by virtue of instruction sets.

Code: Select allContext = Sonata:  If ADAGIO AND ALLEGRATO AND PRESTO then Sonata
Context = "Moonlight Sonata"  IF INSTRUMENT PIANO AND OLDER THAN 100 years... ASK (How shall the movement be played)"
FIND Beethoven
FinD Mozardt
FIND DEFAULT = [i]"Si deve suonare tutto questo pezzo delicatissimamente e senza sordino". ("One must play this whole piece [meaning "movement"] very delicately and without dampers.") [/i]

Okay the syntax and structure here is bull sh*t, but the feature is not... The point here is that the machine will then store specific data about Beethoven and Mozart...will tie in to the context of the title theme and musical form, and will deduce that the theme is beethoven and not Mozart (Even though Mozart developed sonata form)

What's important here is that once the machine identifies these patterns, they can be exploited to augment, add new, (create), remove, emulate components of a given work. AI is not about yielding tonalities and phrases, Its about recognizing the tonalitys and phrases, and offering up choices for decisions. If a competent musician is behind this, the choices /decisions would be highly fruitful and interesting. Once the decisions are established, then high level programs, to execute the corresponding bells and whistles...

The machine won't know how Mozart felt,
being a vituoso composer, but having to
live with his sister. Wanting to make music,
yet finds almost all music controlled by the
churc. How do you put those feelings in a
machine.

The machine won't know how Mozart felt,
being a vituoso composer, but having to
live with his sister. Wanting to make music,
yet finds almost all music controlled by the
churc. How do you put those feelings in a
machine.

Good valid point . . . what really separates music from any other artform, and something that AI Composition may never touch on adequately, is Emotion.