mandolarian wrote: Not sure I'm ready for automated artistry. But, willing to find out.
This is an interesting philosophical debate actually. Is a photographer an artist for example? He/she does not technically create anything new. Or what about a painter who paints a portrait? The object of the portrait is pre-existing. The painter emulates and stylizes it. Is it inauthentic in some way because of this?
I think a lot of "art" is involved with ascribing meaning to effectively random data as explained in my previous pontification.
At least in KS we give you dice (literally and figuratively) to play with to explore a potential space that is probably provably larger than the known universe already. Someone better at math can prove or disproove me if they like.
Better than selecting a sylenth patch and programming a 3 +3 +2 mono-tone bass groove at 128bpm with a step sequencer and claiming an artistic epiphany IMHO...


