"AI is going to have a profound impact on your business and your art"
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
Why does the ability to describe the creative process matter if it sounds good? Could an AI that manages to create consistently beautiful works or art or music adopt the persona of the artist who shuns all media inquiries?
An artificially intelligent "Banksy", if you will
An artificially intelligent "Banksy", if you will
... space is the place ...
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
If it sounds good to whom? I bet the generative things we have now sound good to some twit.
'describe the creative process' is an interesting construction...
I must define fulfilling the creative process as a function of mind, that is to say individuated mind. Sendy said "point of view", I said history, opinion, knowledge, ie., experience responding in real time to another sentient being's point of view. Right now this is science fiction, while people form conferences and generate functions for themselves talking about it like we're on the cusp of it. No, my bullshit filter was alerted.
I'm watching a BBC program, The Real History of Science Fiction: ep.1 Robots.
'describe the creative process' is an interesting construction...
I must define fulfilling the creative process as a function of mind, that is to say individuated mind. Sendy said "point of view", I said history, opinion, knowledge, ie., experience responding in real time to another sentient being's point of view. Right now this is science fiction, while people form conferences and generate functions for themselves talking about it like we're on the cusp of it. No, my bullshit filter was alerted.
I'm watching a BBC program, The Real History of Science Fiction: ep.1 Robots.
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
I just realised that my question didn't quite work the way it was intended because an AI can only qualify as "intelligent" if it is able to converse with a human without being detected, and that would include the ability to describe the artistic process.
Still, much like Deep Blue's famous victory against chess grandmaster Gary Kasparov, the ability to bluff (or decline to comment) is also important. In that sense, quite a lot of artists can't really describe why their art works the way it does and this is one of the reasons it's called "art' and not "science" - if it was science, consistently amazing paintings would be produced by following a set process or formula.
Peace,
Andy.
Still, much like Deep Blue's famous victory against chess grandmaster Gary Kasparov, the ability to bluff (or decline to comment) is also important. In that sense, quite a lot of artists can't really describe why their art works the way it does and this is one of the reasons it's called "art' and not "science" - if it was science, consistently amazing paintings would be produced by following a set process or formula.
Peace,
Andy.
... space is the place ...
- KVRAF
- 5948 posts since 19 Jun, 2008 from Melbourne, Australia
5 to 10 years away ... as always ... yeah, it's B.S.talking about it like we're on the cusp of it.
... space is the place ...
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1222 posts since 2 Dec, 2008 from Finland
jancivil, to me a 'convincing recording' would constitute of the sound, the composition and the performance.
Both ZenPunk and Sendy mentioned the Deep Blue chess computer, but I don't think it's a good example of a computer's power. Gasparov won many of the games in the two matches it played against it, and even more ended in a mutual draw. It won the matches by brute force, it was able to calculate several hundred million moves within seconds, and by the time Gasparov had made his move, the computer already had calculated a myriad of possibilities. And the man who beat Gasparov, Vladimir Kramnik, was beaten by a computer that had two Intel Core 2 processors -- the programming was much more advanced than that of the Deep Blue.
But that's chess.
Have you people heard of the Iamus computer cluster?
It runs on 352 AMD processors with less than a terabyte of memory and in reference to certain other thread, it runs on Debian GNU/Linux, the amateur's choice for computer music. ;-) But computer clusters like that aren't out of the reach of people today, say, out of the reach of film music studios. It's expensive, but it's not quantum computing.
Anyway, it churned out an album that is lauded as the first to be composed by a computer and performed by humans. Music like this (and apparantly it makes tunes like this in a second):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uttrOg2AN5Q
That little snippet at around 4:10 is just magnificent. Actually, it's very much like the music I would expect to hear from jancivil. Here's a link to their Youtube channel.
Obviously, it only composes and doesn't perform, but I would suspect that adding the ability to use Kontakt libraries (some of which are the very best the world today has to offer in terms of emulating real instruments) to their fullness would indeed be a much more trivial task than that of having it compose the music. As in that video, it's clearly challenging music to play for the musicians, but I can't see that since it can compose that kind of stuff, why couldn't it command a sound library just the same (the performance articulations, etc).
Out of Iamus also came Melomics, which too is a very interesting project. It adds some of that performance capability but still focuses on producing scores instead of recordings. In fact, millions of royalty free scores. (That link is to a Wikipedia page, here's a link to their website with music samples.)
Because of Iamus alone, I would say that artificial intelligence in terms of composing high quality music is here already. I for one couldn't tell by just listening to that music that it was composed by a computer and not a human. Perhaps the performance part isn't there yet, but in ten years time? Why not?
This Wikipedia page is also interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_and_ ... telligence
Among Melomics and others, it also lists a certain Reaper extension as an example of AI used in assistance of music composition. It clearly has useful applications.
Both ZenPunk and Sendy mentioned the Deep Blue chess computer, but I don't think it's a good example of a computer's power. Gasparov won many of the games in the two matches it played against it, and even more ended in a mutual draw. It won the matches by brute force, it was able to calculate several hundred million moves within seconds, and by the time Gasparov had made his move, the computer already had calculated a myriad of possibilities. And the man who beat Gasparov, Vladimir Kramnik, was beaten by a computer that had two Intel Core 2 processors -- the programming was much more advanced than that of the Deep Blue.
But that's chess.
Have you people heard of the Iamus computer cluster?
It runs on 352 AMD processors with less than a terabyte of memory and in reference to certain other thread, it runs on Debian GNU/Linux, the amateur's choice for computer music. ;-) But computer clusters like that aren't out of the reach of people today, say, out of the reach of film music studios. It's expensive, but it's not quantum computing.
Anyway, it churned out an album that is lauded as the first to be composed by a computer and performed by humans. Music like this (and apparantly it makes tunes like this in a second):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uttrOg2AN5Q
That little snippet at around 4:10 is just magnificent. Actually, it's very much like the music I would expect to hear from jancivil. Here's a link to their Youtube channel.
Obviously, it only composes and doesn't perform, but I would suspect that adding the ability to use Kontakt libraries (some of which are the very best the world today has to offer in terms of emulating real instruments) to their fullness would indeed be a much more trivial task than that of having it compose the music. As in that video, it's clearly challenging music to play for the musicians, but I can't see that since it can compose that kind of stuff, why couldn't it command a sound library just the same (the performance articulations, etc).
Out of Iamus also came Melomics, which too is a very interesting project. It adds some of that performance capability but still focuses on producing scores instead of recordings. In fact, millions of royalty free scores. (That link is to a Wikipedia page, here's a link to their website with music samples.)
Because of Iamus alone, I would say that artificial intelligence in terms of composing high quality music is here already. I for one couldn't tell by just listening to that music that it was composed by a computer and not a human. Perhaps the performance part isn't there yet, but in ten years time? Why not?
This Wikipedia page is also interesting: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_and_ ... telligence
Among Melomics and others, it also lists a certain Reaper extension as an example of AI used in assistance of music composition. It clearly has useful applications.
-
- addled muppet weed
- 105862 posts since 26 Jan, 2003 from through the looking glass
- KVRAF
- 25053 posts since 20 Oct, 2007 from gonesville
I think it's complete shite, it's exactly what I would expect a non-mind to 'do'.ras.s wrote:That little snippet at around 4:10 is just magnificent.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ECKuInl ... 01&index=7
ras.s wrote: Because of Iamus alone, I would say that artificial intelligence in terms of composing high quality music is here already.
Artificial cluelessness. Artificial non-thought. "In a second", RIGHT.
I wanted to vomit. I never say this, but we're going to have to agree to disagree. For me, you've absolutely proved my point with that shit.
I couldn't tell a human didn't compose that, but it would be a very confused and incompetent musician that believes that atonal music is just the ticket to get away with that incompetence and lack of intelligence, as though the audience is an easy mark for that particular con. My 'dodecaphonic' exercises there present levels of opinion and humor, humanity and an actual understanding of the models I'm speaking of. Careful weighing of timbre. Thought.
Serial dodecaphony, if that is the basis for that piece of crap, is not a trivial endeavor.
I feel violated.
Last edited by jancivil on Mon Jun 23, 2014 2:18 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- KVRAF
- 7359 posts since 9 Jan, 2003 from Saint Louis MO
There are already so many people churning out music that AI won't bring anything new in terms of competition. On the other hand, I look forward to jamming with AI "band members."
I'd rather listen to good music written by an AI than bad music written by a committee, the way a lot of pop tends to be now.
I'd rather listen to good music written by an AI than bad music written by a committee, the way a lot of pop tends to be now.
-
- KVRian
- Topic Starter
- 1222 posts since 2 Dec, 2008 from Finland
Well what's complete shite and what's half shite and what's a quarter of shite.. It all comes down to how one reacts to it. I guess I could call anything avantgardist, contemporary classical or zappaesque if not complete, then half shite. But that's me. I find it interesting but can't listen to stuff like that for long -- and that's me.
The reason I chose that track as the example from the album was because of the title of the tune being a reference to its origins and because it had three performers instead of being a solo instrumental. It's worthy to note though that it's said to be the first tune coming out of that computer. That is, if it does have AI, it probably should better itself as time goes on -- and even if it doesn't, it was two years ago, meaning that there's been time to make it better by programming it further.
And you may say that your dodecaphonic exercises are special in the way you describe them, but they are special to you because of those things and because they are coming out of you. To someone listening, they might as well be awful cacophony and feel violated for having listened to them. I'm not saying they are awful crap and full of cacophony, but I'm sure you understand it all comes down to how one reacts.
And this is good read on reactions to Iamus: http://philipball.blogspot.fi/2012/07/i ... iamus.html Can you see yourself in the last paragraph?
That page also leads to Al Biles Virtual Quintet whose basically a one guy jamming on a trumpet alongside a software he made interacting with him (he gigs regularly).
Also anyone interested, check out that Melomics website. It's the same thing, but not "contemporary classical" (or whatever that kind of music in the video is called). There's some samples right there and if you login with a Google account, there's more.
Apparantly they got a smartphone app going on too, playing music for different situations like for leaving home or being stuck in a traffic jam. I think that really questions how we 'use' music -- it's able to make and choose music for situations, sort of like having a real life movie soundtrack going on in the background, without deciding on the playlist yourself. I think music we listen to effects us and if the music is made by program, how will it effect us? If current popular music is "mind numbing", can computers make music to uplift us and challenge us intellectually?
I'm not really a proponent of this stuff, but I'm interested in the current status of technology and the cultural implications of new technology. I might as well live into the 2050s or even -60s, so..
The reason I chose that track as the example from the album was because of the title of the tune being a reference to its origins and because it had three performers instead of being a solo instrumental. It's worthy to note though that it's said to be the first tune coming out of that computer. That is, if it does have AI, it probably should better itself as time goes on -- and even if it doesn't, it was two years ago, meaning that there's been time to make it better by programming it further.
And you may say that your dodecaphonic exercises are special in the way you describe them, but they are special to you because of those things and because they are coming out of you. To someone listening, they might as well be awful cacophony and feel violated for having listened to them. I'm not saying they are awful crap and full of cacophony, but I'm sure you understand it all comes down to how one reacts.
And this is good read on reactions to Iamus: http://philipball.blogspot.fi/2012/07/i ... iamus.html Can you see yourself in the last paragraph?
That page also leads to Al Biles Virtual Quintet whose basically a one guy jamming on a trumpet alongside a software he made interacting with him (he gigs regularly).
Also anyone interested, check out that Melomics website. It's the same thing, but not "contemporary classical" (or whatever that kind of music in the video is called). There's some samples right there and if you login with a Google account, there's more.
Apparantly they got a smartphone app going on too, playing music for different situations like for leaving home or being stuck in a traffic jam. I think that really questions how we 'use' music -- it's able to make and choose music for situations, sort of like having a real life movie soundtrack going on in the background, without deciding on the playlist yourself. I think music we listen to effects us and if the music is made by program, how will it effect us? If current popular music is "mind numbing", can computers make music to uplift us and challenge us intellectually?
I'm not really a proponent of this stuff, but I'm interested in the current status of technology and the cultural implications of new technology. I might as well live into the 2050s or even -60s, so..
-
- KVRian
- 548 posts since 5 Feb, 2004
I heard a rumor (probably complete bullshit) that the large facility the NSA is building is primarily for development of research into building a quantum computer. If this turns out to be true, I'm not sure I'm for it or against it.
-
Winstontaneous Winstontaneous https://www.kvraudio.com/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=98336
- KVRAF
- 2351 posts since 15 Feb, 2006 from Berkeley, CA
Well, it being a quantum computer, the proper response is to be for it, against it, and a superposed state of (not) being for and against it.rcat wrote:I heard a rumor (probably complete bullshit) that the large facility the NSA is building is primarily for development of research into building a quantum computer. If this turns out to be true, I'm not sure I'm for it or against it.
Methinks a Celeron with 256MB would suffice for that task. Wake me up when it's all over, indeed.jancivil wrote:Maybe you could build an avicii on a Pentium 4 machine with 500MB RAM.
-
- KVRian
- 1145 posts since 29 Jun, 2012
Thank goodness I bought this album as a youth and heeded it's message.
now machines make music, while the man makes plans...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ImzYq2htVk
now machines make music, while the man makes plans...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ImzYq2htVk