Depends on one's musical tastes.

 

Ryck - So you are saying the A.I can imitate the billions of people's idiosyncrasies based on how they feel at that point in time?? For example, their mother just died 5mins before they walked on stage, someone shouted at them and they hit a wrong note for the first time in thirty years - and - RANDOMLY, they phrased it ahead, behind, or randomly decided to chordally substitute because it 'felt' right - A fucking machine does not FEEL.... that is so BULLSHIT. Imitate billions of people's idiosyncrasies and feelings? The moment you do that you STILL have to tell it when and how - WHY? because it is not human. That may be the silliest thing I have heard. You are smarter than that.

Ryck you usually think outside of the square. An A.I is INSIDE the square. It has to be in order to mimic. It's like that old movie "War games" where the A.I loses because it cannot understand that in Tic Tac Toe, nobody can win once they learn how to play it. Winning in this case is being human and the A.I making music more human. That is something a machine can only ever imitate and not completely, and a human it can NEVER be.

P.S. - By the way, one thing the machines still cannot grasp is the second set of musical dynamics. There are two primaries (there's more) - Volume and Intensity. It can do volume dynamics but it has no idea how to create intensity spontaneously from "Every possible set of Feelings" - Something can be soft or loud and still be intense at a myriad of levels and if it is required spontaneously, you'd still have to tell the machine "now" and "how" and "what"... Sheesh...

 

Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2023

Well, you take it to the most complex aspect of the matter. Beyond whether it seems to you as silly or idiotic as one might think (you are entitled to your opinion). I have the philosophy that our brain is a kind of highly complex AI and that everything is based on information; I already mentioned it once here. Emotions manifest through information, so, I'm about to go on stage to give my best, and they call me to tell me that my mother passed away. There is information that someone is giving me, and that information goes to my brain, processes it, and creates that feeling of melancholy. Then my brain is adrift, looking for information that can help me in that moment, so, I go on stage and make a mistake while playing. Now, I present another scenario in this situation; they call me on the phone and say, "Rick, your mother sapesiconte ofrazshen," goodbye. What??? I will say, and I hang up. My mind will be searching in my brain for that information, what the heck is "sapesiconte ofrazshen," and I will be worried thinking about whether what was told to me is something bad or good, or what the heck is happening because it's not in my brain.

Something similar happens with AI; if you ask it something that is in its database, it will tell you or perform some process; otherwise, it will ask you to provide more information, just like a human would. I believe that AI is currently very, very far from processing as much information as a human would—we are extremely complex. However, I do believe in the possibility, I mean, I think it can be possible because everything, absolutely everything in the universe, is information.

By the way, what do you mean that machines cannot create intensity? Have you tried voice cloning or the Synthesizer V program? It can provide that intensity.

 

HUMANS ARE COMPLEX !!!

No two human beings are 100% identical not even 'identical twins'. We are all unique. This in itself is why it is impossible and deep down, you know it. A machine would have to possess the ability to become a human being. Until that day, it is still, a machine.

 

It was said a computer would never be powerful enough to beat a world champion at chess. However that theory never lasted very long. If memory serves it was Deep Blue that beat Karpov or Kasparov (don't quote me on that, as it was from memory)

By the same token, I think that same will apply to music in time! A song, melody, feel, swing etc will all be replicated then randomized to form something else using AI.

The REAL worry though is, once AI gets smarter than us and can think for itself beyond the realms of its programming, we become redundant

I use to use Technics SL1200 turntables to make mixes. They took me hours and hours to perfect just one mix containing 5 songs. Now in Ableton, I can do the same thing in a matter of a few minutes! That said, I STILL keep my eye in (none of that Serato automation crap either)

I want technology to help me, not to replace me!

 

You take it to a deeper stage each time, where I have nothing to hold onto or base on other than philosophical pondering. That's why I said earlier, "it's a philosophical thought," based on the limitations of AI compared to humans. Let's go chronologically through the conversation. I told you that AI could create random music; in fact, there are already VSTs that generate random melodies and rhythms. Now, you can tell me they might be rubbish, okay, but they exist. In fact, we could mention a bunch of "musicians" who make "crappy" music according to our tastes. But then you delve deeper and talk about feelings and how our life influences playing or composing. So, while I believe AI could become increasingly complex, you take it to something more distant. I'm left only to speculate, and I told you that, for me, everything is information, just like a PC stores information; we do too. Just as if your hard drive breaks or malfunctions, it can't find the information, the same happens to us. If something happens in our heads, we can even lose our memory. We are a kind of computer or AI, extremely, but too advanced (again, a philosophical viewpoint). And now you add biology, well, I can't imagine how AI could do that, although 3D printers already exist. You know what I believe in general. That humans are capable of creating everything they set out to do, and they have been doing so since their existence. Humans sought to simplify their work and succeeded in building machines, cars, satellites, and AI. I wouldn't be surprised if in a very distant future, they could create a replica of themselves. Whether it's good or bad is already a matter of perspective

 

Very good example

 

Did you read my comment?
I'm clearly not speaking about people who play an instrument.
Less about people who place no boundaries.
Read what I said again.
I clearly speak about copy / paste / mix music.
Ai will replace it.

 

Actually you do not acknowledge the simple point that a machine is a machine and without humans, until A.I is completely self-sufficient and not needing humans, they are subservient and cannot be close to human. THAT SIMPLE. If they no longer need humans, do the simplest of math. It's not rocket science. If a machine is truly Artificially Intelligent and they do not need us to do anything we do then?... We become unnecessary because that is exactly how a machine is programmed to think, remove the unnecessary.

Not deep, it is SIMPLE. If someone lets them become self-sufficient and better so nothing we do is considered anything but obsolete, then that person is as stupid as they come.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Dec 11, 2023

OLY I indicated what if you play/record yourself (THEN loop it)... same principle, different approach.

 

What no one has brought up and most likely havent even occured to most of you yet, wich makes the entire question even harder to answer than it already is.

A.I, Algorithm, any kind of manmade software that reads and writes is better andfaster, than man is at certain tasks is because we wanted it that way.

Thinking of this entire topic in ways of we vs them doesn't even fit in here.

Do you know how a computer actually works? Do you know why it works? And why it work the way it does?
Because millions of human beings spent several millions of hours in total to build everything that allows for chatbot to even exists in the first place.

Humans are A.I, to the very core, when your calculator calculates a number it shows you the result instantly because mankind made it that way, not because it is smart, what is impressive is how a human being can figure out how to actually create a calculator, through all of it's limitations
it somehow is capable of creating everything you use today.

The real question op is asking is, is it any idea to keep making art or will someone make something that will be able to create something
that is better than what I can create? That question is even harder to answer because depending on how I answer it, I am still not sure people will understand what I'm actually saying.


Go look up any famous painting, find the most realistic-looking one, and ask yourself, how did a human being paint that with his/her hand?
You will keep looking at the picture and the question will come back over and over again.

Look at another picture made by A.I, the picture looks exactly like the one you looked at before.
See? You are not impressed any longer.

the way we are thinking about the entire subject is wrong IMO.

We know A.I is good at mimicking humans, it was built to do nothing else, everything that
generative AI spits out today is based on work done by other human beings and in this regard it sooner or later outperforms us because once it has the information and the question is pretty straight forward and within certain playing field it will be able to perform the solution over and over again much faster, this has been the case since computers was invented more or less.

Every bit of text chatgpt reads you comes from different sources, already written by a human being, most of what AI do is based on previous work, there are very few instances where AI has been used succefully where it didnt base its output on previous work, those times were inside very simple and straight forward thinking dimensions, there isnt enough evidence that wasnt just smart algorithm work done by the creators of said AI to get it to work in just that instance.

Now I have to go tho. so this is it for now.

 

Last edited: Dec 11, 2023

That is the core of my entire points on this thread.
Without humans it never existed. Without humans telling it what to do it does nothing. If it could we're in trouble and to answer the replacement theory at the beginning of the thread if it does, that is plain stupid by the humans who let that occur. If it replaces human music that is as dumb as it gets. Kanye already admitted he's a shit musician on an instrument so it's already started.

There's a huge difference between a performer and a sequenced music programmer. Some can do both or either. Those who can do both know the difference. The issues arise when the music programmers who cannot play an instrument call themselves a musician. They're not. They're a MIDI sequencing programmer.

 

The humas are extreme complicated systems, science will need a few more decades to fulfill the empty spaces, if that is possible. So AI will follow that too. Ai will be an usefull tool, in many fields of arts and science. But what is hard for me is to imaging that an AI, will be ready to create a life, because there are songs and compositions that are alive.

Also, most of "consumers" dont think twice about the procedure, or the origin of what they consume. If tha AI, has learnt by human inputs, who cares about that. The question is AI is close to create art at the same level as humans do? Is going to be the same for all the arts? What makes music different than paint, or video composing? Are we blind to see? are we in love with the medium we choose for our work and think this is not going to happen to music? ...

There are two vision here too, one as AI human conducted as tool, and the other as AI superdope independent and own creator.

On the other hand, I can imagine a big music company, creating a band formed by AI avatar members, with their own meechandasing, their own concerts, their own social media and so on, with AI generated music, etc. In this case a digital music band assited by humans using AI tools. (GorAillaz style)

But one step further, one super complex quantum whatever technology AI, that has his own artistic criteria, and find ways of meaningfull dialogue with other AI or humans, is still possible on an hipotetical far horizon.

So the debate is between how far is AI, and if it is possible in the future. Only one vote for the Yes! The other options very close.

Keep digging!

 

If there's no jobs, who is going to pay for their AI art, music and writing

 

Lots of differing opinons some of us will embrace the new medium some will not
Ai will be used by each of us in different forms of music in the future
best not to over think it trust your creativity

 

Wait, are you going off track? Because there is a big difference between 'replacing' humans and replacing tasks. As I mentioned earlier, we were talking about how AI can replace certain tasks, and it's already doing so. If I understood correctly, for example, Oly mentioned basic tasks like copying and mixing a file or creating lyrics for a song based on another, and AI can already do that. Then I mentioned that AI could create music randomly, and we discussed things that already happen to some extent and have a very likely scenario in the near future. But then you added 'feelings,' 'human complexity influenced by lived circumstances,' and to make it more complicated, you brought in biology and replication.

Well, as I said, initially I mentioned that AI could replace certain tasks, not humans. And then, when you take it to a more complex level, like replacing humans or imitating all their work, I said we are very, very far from that. In a philosophical scenario, it might be possible to create a replica, not an exact replica.

Open ChatGPT and try this: 'Help me with these lyrics because I'm stuck. A man is about to go on stage to perform.' Then the AI might write something like 'Juan is about to go on stage to play on a sunny day.' But then you say, 'No, look, Juan is sad; can you add some nostalgia?' And it might come up with something like 'Juan will go on stage on a sunny day, even though he's not going through the best time of his life.' And tell it to make it more poetic, and it might say something like 'Juan, who usually spends every night staring at the stars, will go up to give his best with a soul full of anguish, but his music can overcome his pain.' Give it a try; AI can already do that.

 

humans like hand made and things made by humans ... things make with A.i. has no value at all. A.i. has no soul and life... has nothing to express... it just a sham.. nobody will pay a dime for a A.i. crap song.. well some will..if some humans can dance and listen to
Taylor Swift.. well those can yes.. they listen to anything that is on the "TOPs" as usual... good music is never on the tops.. ever..

 

I think that's very likely to happen

I know a lot of people who pay to listen to crappy music, made solely for the purpose of commercializing a product, and they even focus on the image, meaning zero soul, zero creativity. Why wouldn't they do the same with AI? In that case, they are two soulless products.

 

the real joke is, humans are invented by A.I.

 

True and I agree, however, the one thing that will forever remain is the individuality/uniqueness of a human singer/artist. There's only one Elton John.. you get my point. Will some programmed Ai become the next Elton John? Maybe.. but my point remains.. there's only one Elton.