'Mixing revolution' ...

[mevla]

We all know you meant "melda-dramatic", of course!

Hmmm, ahem, prepare the snare roll ...

Wait to see and hear MeldaDramaticMB !



On the MFreeFXBundle Melda web site page the current satisfied users that are quoted are ill.Gates and Mr.Bill. Funny.

[Liquid lino]

Sounds like some form of auto mixing AI, with a plug on every track and bus, and knowledge of genres and instruments and how to build a good mix automatically.

[Frankie.T]

Sounds like some form of auto mixing AI, with a plug on every track and bus, and knowledge of genres and instruments and how to build a good mix automatically.

That's my thought too.
But i hope for something different tbh, also because every ai-like plugin i tried at the best is just an average product but mostly they are just bad

[mevla]

Despite the (more or less funny) jokes I can make, I have a high respect for what Vojtech did so far in developing the plugins, the framework, offering so many creative options (that I still have to explore and use fully).

I do not know any AI mixing plugin although I'd say that the core of their existence is to do 'things' instead of the user. Eg. not so many creative options.

If Vojtech goes down that route, limiting options in favour of an 'AI' approach, I'd still be open to a good convincing talk about the benefits but somewhere I'd be a bit 'sad' that so much tool creativity as we see and use today is put aside.

[spencerlee]

I have to agree with mevia. I think AI mixing would be hopeless. Mixing is ideas and listening plus years and years of experience. The more you have computers making music without the user the worse it will sound.
Musical ideas come from ideas and mistakes.
I mix music and have done for 50 years. What I have learnt and the mistakes I have made is used on every mix I do.
AI cant know that.
The mixing revolution is you learning your craft not being done by a robot.
Spencer

[Lairyboy]

No disrespect, but to AI your 50 years of experience is 'insignificant' in the experience of the 'world of mixing'. AI can 'consume' huge amounts of the 'world of mixing' in very little time and given the right feedback loops can form models of what 'good' mixing is. This would not necessarily be the end product, and would allow users to make artistic choices within the presented mix. If you break the problem down into its basic blocks, mixing is making each track sound 'good' and then ensuring they can be heard amongst other tracks.
A lot of the real problem with mixing is down to sound choice, arrangement and recording techniques, for which AI in the mixing realm will never be able to fix.

[spencerlee]

Bullshit. You don't understand mixing.
Spencer

[Lairyboy]

Rude.
Whereas you clearly do. "Mixing is ideas and listening plus years and years of experience"

[Burillo]

I have to agree with mevia. I think AI mixing would be hopeless. Mixing is ideas and listening plus years and years of experience. The more you have computers making music without the user the worse it will sound.
Musical ideas come from ideas and mistakes.
I mix music and have done for 50 years. What I have learnt and the mistakes I have made is used on every mix I do.
AI cant know that.
The mixing revolution is you learning your craft not being done by a robot.
Spencer

I always find it funny how people who don't understand AI tools try to explain how they're worthless, and use a bunch of vague, general statements and cliches to justify their view.

I'm a software developer by trade. contrary to what might seem obvious, coding is actually also a creative endeavor - it doesn't play by the same rules art does, but there is a fair amount of art to writing good, maintainable code. good code does read like poetry to those who can read it.

can AI tools replicate human coders? well, no, obviously they can't. but here's the thing: they don't have to. all an AI tool has to do in order to be useful, is to save me keystrokes in some way. I'm already using AI-powered code completion and code suggestion engines, because they do work very well for certain things, and this is just the start. there's going to be an explosion of ChatGPT-based tools in the near future, so that programmers would have to write even less code for solving common problems.

and this is what people like you don't understand: AI tools do not attempt to "replace creativity". that's not what they're for. they're there to enable you to work faster by taking on the mundane details that you spend the most time on doing, so that you, human, can focus on doing what you do best: being creative. no one is trying to "replace humans" - that's just a side-effect of mixing becoming easier.

honestly, it mostly sounds like you're bitter about having spent 50 years learning the craft and come up the hard way, so now you think everyone has to go through the same, otherwise the art is somehow worse for having relied on some AI mixing engine to level the volume or some shit. please don't be like that.

[spencerlee]

No I love new technology. I am currently finishing a plugin that will work on transients. New Technology. It will be up to download tomorrow.
I recentlly uploaded my new Mastering EQ.
I am not scared of were it is but I see AI being quoted everywhere where in fact most of it is algorythmic. Macros and code analysis etc is wonderfull. But in mixing 1db on one thing effects everything and you have be able to hear this to know what to do elsewhere.
I have always worked with new technology. I in fact recorded a large part of the Sample library for The Fairlight.
And at 75 I am still coming up with new ideas for Tech.
Spencer

[Burillo]

I am not scared of were it is but I see AI being quoted everywhere where in fact most of it is algorythmic. Macros and code analysis etc is wonderfull. But in mixing 1db on one thing effects everything and you have be able to hear this to know what to do elsewhere.

why are you only using these narrowly defined examples instead of focusing on a broader point? do you think there's literally nothing else for an AI mixing engine to do and make judgements on?

[spencerlee]

I understand that AI can do all sorts of processes. But it cannot read the emotional impact a software move does.

[Burillo]

I understand that AI can do all sorts of processes. But it cannot read the emotional impact a software move does.

first of all, it doesn't have to, so I don't see your point.

more importantly, even with that, you're wrong. AI is actually pretty adept at finding hidden patterns in data it is fed, so it is entirely plausible that AI can "learn" what makes emotional impact and learn to reproduce it without even necessarily understanding that it does so. AI generated images already do have an emotional impact, for having learned to replicate it from human artists - all without having an understanding of what makes emotional impact. there's no reason a music mixing AI can't do the same thing.

[spencerlee]

We will have to wait and see how AI will affect music. I don't hold much hope for it. But I don't know if I will be around to see the result.
I have only the Kick Drum preset to finish for my Transient Plugin. This is not AI but my settings from my ears.
Spencer

[MirkoVanHauten]

The mixing revolution can be anything you want. It's all in your imagination anyways And if one day something is released, just don't expect more than a Ozone or Neutron clone and you won't be disappointed.