The second I feel is that people would still be interested in AI music in a meaningful way. I think AI music has a following now because it's interesting and novel, and that gives it a story, but once it's mainstream, that story is boring and people will go back to seeking real culturally relevant music.
Sure the music on TikTok/IG and friends could be generated, but I am not sure I care too much. Those platforms are almost entirely vapid, void of authenticity already, the music being fake too doesn't detract that much.
Case in point, I enjoy some shit. No way AI will replace lo-fi recorded-in-underground-bunker limited-cassette-tape-release atmospheric black metal / noise.
I mean it might, but here's a take from a different angle: art is not just the end result, it's the process and the story behind it. Nobody objectively gives a shit about a selfie from the early 1500's, but because of its provenance the Mona Lisa is considered one of the most valuable pieces of art out there. Nobody gives a shit about a database row with an ID, timestamp, user ID and the text "just setting up my twttr", but because it's the first tweet and it's put on a trading platform and it might appreciate in value, someone spent $2.5M on it.
You slag of TikTok because every generation will slag off whatever the following generation(s) do, that's normal. But the generation following you see that differently, and in two decades they will still reference some of the more iconic clips they've seen. I mean I do it with really bad movie voiceovers from nearly 20 years ago, as well as terrible porn intros. It's part of culture.
Anyway, there will be a place for AI generated anything alongside the handcrafted stuff. Like how there is still a market for handcrafted goods alongside the mass producing machines. Or hand-drawn art in the age of digital. Or physical valuables in the age of electronic money and cryptocurrencies.
It did not.
I was at a Chinese restaurant, around a year and a half ago, and realized that the music they played was a sort of “ersatz” music. It was familiar tunes, like Scarborough Fair, or Hotel California, slightly modified, and strung together. Vocals were basically wordless humming.
There is an entire industry, based on musicians, providing “stock music,” and it’s been around for a long time. Sort of a musical equivalent of Shutterstock. Some of this music is quite good. Most is fairly boring.
Music is way too connected to our emotions to be reliably synthesized. AI would need to advance to be able to produce emotions and creativity, before it would threaten the music industry.
Also, there’s always the “tabloid” aspect of the industry. There are artists that may be fairly unremarkable musicians, but generate a lot of press coverage. Unless the world of Questionable Content becomes real, I can’t see any Star headlines of AIs beating up paparazzi.
I'd have agreed 10 years ago, but I swear every time someone drives past with their stereo bumping, it's "robot music" (as I smart-assedly refer to heavily quantized/autotuned vocals). I guess it will probably still die out eventually, but that fad has been a lot longer-lived than I'd expected.
Obviously, this overlooks the shared experience element of music, but that's not so relevant in the case of online music we consume solo.
Saying people will not be interested in AI music is like saying people will not be interested in movies with CGI.
These were productions from the artists behind the KLF to expose how formulaic chart hits were. So I would not be surprised if we see AI produce top 40 hits sometime in the future. However, I would be very surprised if AI could replace the vast majority of music that is out there.
Of course you're right, but I'll tell you what next.
Redefine 'dominate'. All that has happened is we've shown mass media, mass popularity, is better suited to the unreal. Humans need not apply here.
'Mass' anything, then gets less interesting as it is self-evidently a dead-end. And not 'everybody', but significant numbers of people, pursue something else, perhaps things that are unlikeable in an interesting way. The differences will always be less 'addictive' than the 'mass' stuff, but will overperform in other, definable ways.
As someone who has deleted Twitter and Facebook I think I'm correct in this notion that the most addictive, most 'mass' media sources are not 'good' in any normal human sense other than manipulation of that very instinct in all its forms…
If I go to a techno club, I would soooo love to see what an AI can do to make me move my feet more.
But if I listen to some mellow song with lyrics maybe I want to feel the touch of a human artist and his emotions.
I would also love to listen to AI generated music with lyrics, but it would generate different emotions (not worse, just different).
AI generated art will just open another type of experiences, but it will never replace human art.
https://www.hpl.hp.com/techreports/2005/HPL-2005-88.html
In fact, before that - i saw a talk on this while i was a student, and i finished university in 2003, i think.
The guy who did this work went on to get the computer to do production, but i don't know how that panned out.
THE FUTURE: Your phone will have an exploratory music feature. You dial in all sorts of weights... genre, tempo, density, melody, etc. You'll crank out a custom instrumental playlist at the tap of a button. This will probably make for great study/work music.
When it eventually overshadows normal instrumental music it's going to be a giant bummer for anyone hoping to make money doing it. Artists are going to have a lot of soul searching to do.
I absolutely doubt that any AI will ever produce something I genuinely like. Maybe some features in isolation, hopefully not multiple genre features in some unholy mish mash...
I just don't see it.
This agent would enjoy the moving crowds in a much more authentic way than a human DJ would.
I can't find it now, but there was a wearable project (I believe earrings?) which gave quantitative feedback about how a music audience were moving.
Leving aside arguments about qualia, couldn't we just make the "crowd moving" metric part of the objective function?
It's not clear this is healthier.
The film "Be Kind, Rewind" is kind of a "mise en abîme" in that regards, shot by Gondry and featuring characters that show the same kind of cinematic craftiness.
Making of Star Guitar
Another of Gondry's videos that did a similar thing was Daft Punk - Around the World (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKYPYj2XX80) where each of the different types of "people" represented different sounds in the source track.
If you look closely at the Star Guitar video, you can find "clipping artefacts" where the fragments are pieced together or fade in and out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s1oWf07FRCw
From Wikipedia: The music video shows a speeded up view from the driver's cab of a train journey from London Victoria to Brighton Station.
- Dancer In The Dark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XnGv2gwk8As
- Cigarettes After Sex https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIKTnnsL9CU
We are improving some stuff though: - Better communication of what's include when you upgrade your project -> DONE - Explain pricing on other pages as well, like home page -> TODO
"k. (Klesh Remix)"
"Cigarettes After Sex"
EDIT: Ok, there's text at the bottom that I missed, with some cursory information and a link to http://taggartbonham.me/ . It says:
Built with OpenAI's Jukebox and NVIDIA's StyleGAN2.
Watch another or contact me
My guess is that this is using this repo for making the visual part https://github.com/mikaelalafriz/lucid-sonic-dreams
Ive heard music synthesized by neural nets made by different people, this doesn't sound like that. It may be over-fitting.
Also, watching multiple videos, all the music is similar. There is this one tune thats in every single one of them.
This is my favorite so far, especially the lyrics :D Had to leave the office, to not disturb anyone with my laughter. https://soundcloud.com/openai_audio/classic-pop-in-the-style...
I do wonder, though, whether it's just over-fits, and takes the original music with some minor tweaks.
Another interesting point would be to know if this music could be sold cheaply without legal troubles (or even distributed royalty free). Most of the music I heard is pretty neat, I could image using them in YouTube videos, or as podcast jingles.
I've read that people with Trypophobia can often have similar reactions to these GAN type generated images. You may want to look into seeing if you have a mild case of it.
Lets say I want to train the AI on classical art pictures and see what it can generate by itself.
It starts from the basics and takes you to some complex scenarios. It's focused primarily on Keras, which is a very to use library to start from.
The book covers a lot ML on images, so moving from there to generative art should be "easy" once you grasp the fundamentals.
I don't know however how feasible is to do ML on Macs, it might be a breeze or impossible, I genuinely have no idea :-)
Me when I saw the video: Whew, this is much less timeline-scary than I was afraid it would be.
I think maybe the GAN overfitted to these particular songs?
Or it found 2 attractors in the space of all music videos :)
All unlisted and without ads... Presumably uploaded with the API...
Thats tens of TB's of free storage provided by Youtube there... With no ads... Do you not run a risk of a ban for that?
The difference between simulating music and using formalisms to make discoveries about it seems like a matter of intent. As in, what's the difference between a horizon, a window viewing one, and a picture of one? The existence of an observer makes them related, and the position of the observer makes them different. That difference is probably analogous to what simulated music is to intentional music. The existence of a listener makes it music, and the relationship of the listener makes it different.
These AI generated images are like cancelling-noise to images we already associate meaning with. Which is seems analogous to 1/f fractal or Perlin noise at a certain level of abstraction. Not to dismiss or attempt to trivialize the accomplishment at all, but when people create tech that is overwhelming to the senses like that, sometimes a new frame of reference can help.
Luckily the video IDs can be found at https://www.thismusicvideodoesnotexist.com/assets/urls.json
List of videos:
https://youtube.com/watch?v=Spu3eiOEJ-M
https://youtube.com/watch?v=BE2lZ-Ti1Wc
https://youtube.com/watch?v=lHpcYPfjiLs
https://youtube.com/watch?v=6w2WXRFJpAE
https://youtube.com/watch?v=jPBgu-IO6TI
https://youtube.com/watch?v=g4px8cFR3gc
https://youtube.com/watch?v=whD78YCQXoo
https://youtube.com/watch?v=4iN9738uASY
https://youtube.com/watch?v=2tSa701EftM
https://youtube.com/watch?v=hjinBNYEkb8
https://youtube.com/watch?v=jckJS8RNMbw
https://youtube.com/watch?v=gq5EQtSiJiE
https://youtube.com/watch?v=zhV3ecScgrA
https://youtube.com/watch?v=wVnt_CX0C64[0] https://tympanikaudio.bandcamp.com/track/nypox
I'm guessing it's generating a GAN on frames, and navigating around it (at random?) synchronized to the music, like the transition animations at https://www.thisfuckeduphomerdoesnotexist.com/ , I'm curious if there's something else to it
Complete list https://thisxdoesnotexist.com/