Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > Music and Musicians Exchange
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Prog created with the help of AI
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Prog created with the help of AI

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Message
Hrychu View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 03 2013
Location: poland?
Status: Offline
Points: 5089
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hrychu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2024 at 09:21
Quote Oh really?!!
Yes. Really.

Quote If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it?
No. Because you're still the composer, mixer, arranger.

Quote Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments?
No.

Quote If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time?
No. As I said, you're still responsible for majority of the the creative decisions. Though here, it's kind of a grey area. It really depends on how much of the track is of your own composition.

Quote If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice?
It depends of what effect it is. But generally, no.

Quote If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine?
Rolling the dice doesn't involve machine learning.

Quote If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
Depends on how much of this is edited and on how big is your creative input.

Quote You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory.
No. I'm not.

Quote On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
I have no clue what you meant actually. It's "inferior" because it replaces the authors conscious creative decisions.
“On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became.”
— Ernest Vong
Back to Top
Hrychu View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 03 2013
Location: poland?
Status: Offline
Points: 5089
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hrychu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2024 at 09:25
This topic is turning into a ragebait. This is my last response to it. ;) Cheers.
“On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became.”
— Ernest Vong
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17805
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 06 2024 at 22:17
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by Hrychu Hrychu wrote:

Claiming authorship for a soulless turd made and more importantly conceived entirely by a machine, with no real intention regarding the majority of creative decisions in the "music" is simply being dishonest with the consumer. 👎
 
Oh really?!! If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it? Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments? If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time? If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice? If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine? If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
 
You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
 
This is all you need to understand what the difference is......

I too from my perspective am done with this thread, I've said my peace.....I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....
Back to Top
I prophesy disaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4739
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I prophesy disaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 02:16
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

If I compose a piece of music
 
This is all you need to understand what the difference is......
 
If the issue is authenticity, then why draw the line at composition? Why not performance as well, or genuine instruments, or an unaltered voice? Drawing the line at composition seems somewhat arbitrary.
 
 
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....
 
Because the music created by AI infringes copyright, or because copyright music is being used to train the AI? If the latter, then I've heard the creators of the AI argue that schools use copyright music under the fair use doctrine to teach their students. Also, if an AI listens to a piece of music, is that really much different to a human listening to the piece of music? And arguing from incredulity that artificial intelligence is not the same as human intelligence is not a valid argument.
 
 

No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Back to Top
I prophesy disaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4739
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I prophesy disaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 06:37
Originally posted by Hrychu Hrychu wrote:

Quote If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it?
No. Because you're still the composer, mixer, arranger.

Quote Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments?
No.

Quote If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time?
No. As I said, you're still responsible for majority of the the creative decisions. Though here, it's kind of a grey area. It really depends on how much of the track is of your own composition.

Quote If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice?
It depends of what effect it is. But generally, no.

Quote If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine?
Rolling the dice doesn't involve machine learning.

Quote If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
Depends on how much of this is edited and on how big is your creative input.

All of the examples above describe tools that enhance music beyond the musician's natural ability to create it. Yet it's machine learning that you regard as dishonest rather than just another tool that enhances music beyond the musician's natural ability to create it.
 
 
Originally posted by Hrychu Hrychu wrote:

Quote You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory.
No. I'm not.

Quote On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
I have no clue what you meant actually. It's "inferior" because it replaces the authors conscious creative decisions.
 
You manage to avoid self-contradiction by having a definition of "inferior" that goes beyond the music itself. You literally need to know that the music you're listening to wasn't created by AI in order to enjoy it... the music itself isn't enough... you need full disclosure.
 
 
No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 12987
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Dark Elf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 09:11
Not a fan. And there is no ambiguity about it. AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity, and I want no part of it. AI music needs to have a disclaimer on it like cigarette cancer warnings.
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
Logan View Drop Down
Forum & Site Admin Group
Forum & Site Admin Group
Avatar
Site Admin

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 35133
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Logan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 10:36
I loathe the prevalence of AI. Death to AI.  Long live the new flesh.
Two tracks per many of my fave acts: A Youtube Playlist
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 13:23
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

Not a fan. And there is no ambiguity about it. AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity, and I want no part of it. AI music needs to have a disclaimer on it like cigarette cancer warnings.

Hi,

Agreed.

There are some precedents, although I think they were human touched up to sound better. Way back when in California there was an experiment done and the music was created by a certain name no one had heard before. Many folks liked it ... until one day they were told it was a machine that created the music, and all of a sudden the music is trash and no one knows about it anymore!

The main thing with AI, I think (and I admit I don't know crap about it), is that it can only do what it has been "taught" or has been added to their "brain" ... and doing small adjustments, like humans can and do, is not likely to happen, and I think this would make the music a bit dry, and not easy to understand, or get into it.

Humans, in most music, have a tendency to smooth out moments, so they make better sense, in terms of continuity. I'm not sure this would happen with AI and that it would work correctly ... and well ... but we don't know ... maybe 50 years from now it will be different ... but are we ready to let go of the human difference in the music? Already synthesizers replace an orchestra and that could be considered a form of AI ... but we are fine with it. I think the lines will get blurred.

I'll tell you what scares me more for the future ... people's ability to learn an instrument and become one with it, and maybe go somewhere with it ... this would make AI a lot more interesting and certainly "better" than most folks learning their instrument in the first 5 or 10 years, I'm guessing.
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
I prophesy disaster View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 31 2017
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 4739
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote I prophesy disaster Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 07 2024 at 14:09
Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity
 
But what difference does this make to the listener of the music? If AI music is audibly inferior to human music, then is this judgement any different to a preference of say Van der Graaf Generator music to Genesis music? It seems to me that AI is being perceived as a threat just like autotune was. But AI isn't a threat because it removes the human element of creativity. It's a threat because it is a substantial way that the rich and powerful can oppress the general population. And the threat is greater when we can't tell the difference than when we can.
 

No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 09 2024 at 13:27
Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

Originally posted by The Dark Elf The Dark Elf wrote:

AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity
 
But what difference does this make to the listener of the music? If AI music is audibly inferior to human music
...

Hi,

Given how folks listen to music, and in a place like this, where the "song" rules, I think it will become impossible to tell a lot about AI. Already I feel like a lot of the stuff listed in the releases of (whenever) that some of the stuff is exactly the same as most of the other ... all of it has the same instruments, only a different sound, and its format is, generally, the same as most commercial music.

In a commercial situation like this, it would be very difficult to find some AI ... I tend to joke that AI is already i nuse by most "prog rock" bands ... since there is too much of the same thing. It was the same thing with the growl thing for a while ... it had become so mechanical as to really make you think about it.

Originally posted by I prophesy disaster I prophesy disaster wrote:

....
But AI isn't a threat because it removes the human element of creativity. 
...
It's a threat because it is a substantial way that the rich and powerful can oppress the general population. And the threat is greater when we can't tell the difference than when we can.

I think it already is a problem and it "removes" that creativity in a different sort ... and it is something I tend to comment on a LOT. The perfect example is the "classic rock" stuff ... after hearing so much the same thing over and over and over again, your ability to find new music details and specially new musics becomes a problem ... you listen to a new band and the first thing that your ear hears is not "recognizable" and is "different" from what you are used to ... and your ability to find new music and materials are a problem.

This was very visible in the many years I have been next to Space Pirate Radio ... started out with some folks not liking it, and slowly it became known and understood, and above all ... it provided a COMPLETE ALTERNATIVE to a lot of "radio" that was already commercial and not with it. 

For all intents and purposes, I consider the "tastes", IN GENERAL, centered on the commercial sound, special for "prog rock" ... and what I find is a denial of the origin of the whole thing that became known as "progressive", and later "prog". In the midst of that there are some folks that have some amazing tastes for music, and their listings and postings are a treat ... you're not likely to find AI in there ... but you will in stiff that is similar and basically the "same" in format, sound and instrumentation.

Prog, btw, is not the only one with the issue ... classical music would likely be more attractive to AI than a lot of rock music, but if the individuality was way out in left field, I seriously doubt that AI would even try to add a note or two. Jazz would make AI seem like someone that didn't know music, or perhaps didn't like it!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
KorgC3 View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: June 24 2024
Location: Netherworld
Status: Offline
Points: 5
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KorgC3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 09 2024 at 22:49
I was following the development of AI for quite a while (even had an associated job some years ago), and I really don't get the AI frenzy as well as the fearmongering that extended from it.
When I installed stable diffusion (and I did so on day one), all I could see is a pattern recognition software with a bare-bones user control, and a lack in internal consistency.
The main problem for me however, is when I see art made by stable diffusion, I see not the person who curated the art, but stable diffusion.
It's not so much because of the mistakes it makes, but the peculiarity of its rendering. There is a certain recognizable pattern to its texture, and it's never ever had fooled me.
Same goes with music software like Suno. A buddy of mine tried to trick me with it, but because I've already engaged with that platform, and I immediately recognized it for what it is.
There is a certain compression, the way the notes overlay upon one another, the occasional clipping, the tuning, and many other small things.
I guess that there is a lot of mediocre art, which makes AI works look good in comparison, but does it makes it outstanding?
Everyone just so decided to pretend that they don't see the obvious difference between a real flower and a plastic reproduction.
I especially loathe those "influences" who have art related jobs, but choose to double down on that frenzy, as if they so suddenly lost all of their experience and human intuition.
And if some corporations are eager to replace human resource with an AI one, so what?
Corporations were already forcing artists to produce art under extreme limitations, ultimately leading to homogenized aesthetics.
AI can imitate certain patterns but its struggles to create truly spontaneous aesthetics. For example Beksiński made a very sudden shift in his direction during the 90s.
Since AI is heavily reliant on a foundational database its struggles with fast changes. Think of it like that: How long it would take for an AI to result in an Anime-like aesthetic if one is forced to rely only on realistic painting and photographies? AI can create nominally "new" aesthetics, which lack the seed of novelty.
And as for programmers, I really don't see an AI replacement of human resource happening anytime soon. Normal people seems to assume that anyone who has/had software/programming related job is a "programmer", which is not true.
There are some people who get into the industry to do automation related tasks, something that can be potentially done slightly faster with a pre-set pattern recognizing AI.
Incompetent programmers exist as-well, and their bloated and dysfunctional code wouldn't be much more optimized if they resorted to a help of an AI.
And mind you, I'm not an enemy of AI. I think it has a its use cases, such as automation of tasks. I personally used vocal separation AI, as the results weren't significantly worse from ones made by slower methods.
I also think that "mechanical" AI-vocalist can be an accessible replacement for VOCALOIDs.

Edited by KorgC3 - July 09 2024 at 23:01
Back to Top
wiz_d_kidd View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 13 2018
Location: EllicottCityMD
Status: Offline
Points: 1419
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote wiz_d_kidd Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 10 2024 at 07:15
Music created by AI sounds like Steely Dan... and vice versa.
“I don’t like country music, but I don’t mean to denigrate those who do. And for those who like country music, denigrate means to ‘put down.'” – Bob Newhart
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 17 2024 at 04:57
Originally posted by wiz_d_kidd wiz_d_kidd wrote:

Music created by AI sounds like Steely Dan... and vice versa.

Hi,

I was thunkin' that you need to go buy a thrill ... AI would have some big issues with Steely Dan, up to and including what it was in the original story and book! Now that was some serious AI ... LOL LOL ... and mechanical, too ... and it didn't talk back! Wink
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
Saperlipopette! View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 20 2010
Location: Tomorrowland
Status: Online
Points: 11383
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Saperlipopette! Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: July 17 2024 at 05:13
Originally posted by Hrychu Hrychu wrote:

This topic is turning into a ragebait. This is my last response to it. ;) Cheers.
I scrolled through these three pages, and I notice one person raging while the rest are discussing politely:)
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 13 2024 at 07:54
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

...
.....I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....

Hi,

Shhhhhsssshhhhh ... the lawyers would be fighting for more AI so the record company appears to have better music than you know! And, as usual, we would spend our money on it, because some goon shows it listed as a top number of an album!

I think a record company is more likely to abuse this than a single person out there ... who, also, would have a hard time getting people to hear it and see it! We see this on new things posted here on PA already ... 
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17294
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 21 2024 at 10:41
Originally posted by Hrychu Hrychu wrote:

... 
Oh really?!! If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it? Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments? If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time? If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice? If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine? If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
 ...

Hi,

I do not think this is AI ... mostly because it would be literally impossible to teach the content of the AI computerized code to include all the emotions and details that you added ... and then put them together which would be an idea YOU CREATED that was not a part of the AI, which would likely put it together differently.

If we're "talking" AI, then we should not be inferring that it will do this or that ... we don't know what was coded into it, and how it will respond according to its own internal rules and decisions.

The mind, and your design and creativity, could be said to be a form of AI, however, it would not be considered so because it is not mechanical ... or as changing and re-considering a lot of things like you normally would to make it smoother ... as you find it while putting it together ... not to mention that tomorrow it will be slightly different and adjusted.
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.