Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple Music Sing

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 316 posts

Re: Apple Music Sing

#101

Post by ShamelessC »

notpushkin wrote: post #75

People will definitely rip no-vocal versions out of there (if they are good quality, that is). I see some pretty neat implications: - Young artists can (illegally) use beats by popular producers. Young producers can listen to various tracks and better understand some techniques that were shadowed by vocals before. - More bootleg remixes of popular tracks. Things that weren't possible by just slicing and sampling the…

If it's realtime, and you are mixing vocals and other separated tracks back together on-the-fly, the actual separations don't need to be _super_ hiqh quality, as the mixing will mask most deficiencies.

The reason I say that is because I suspect they are doing this with a neural net.

Re: Apple Music Sing

#103

Post by GaryPalmer »

imchillyb wrote: post #68
notpushkin wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not explicit, but from the descriptions it seems to suggest it's performing recognition of the audio streams of what's being sung, and even supports dual streams for duets. Just curious: what in the article makes you think that?

Not OP, but... Look at the list of what Apple Sing includes: Adjustable vocals: Users now have control over a song’s vocal levels. They can sing with the original artist vocals, take the lead, or mix it up on millions of songs in the Apple Music catalog. Real-time lyrics: Users can sing along to their favorite songs with animated lyrics that dance to the rhythm of the vocals. Background vocals: Vocal lines sung simul…

Why would you need a dedicated chip for any of that?

Re: Apple Music Sing

#105

Post by racl101 »

sixothree wrote: post #32
joegahona wrote: post #5

Is this akin to karaoke? (The word never appears on the page.) > Apple today announced Apple Music Sing, an exciting new feature that allows users to sing along to their favorite songs with adjustable vocals1 and real-time lyrics. Users can already "sing along to their favorite songs" -- this feels like a wasted opportunity in the first sentence to explain the differentiator. It feels like they're misusing/misunderst…

I had a hard time understanding what they are offering as well and came here to find out. Is this for people in the same room? If so, maybe some vague reference to karaoke is merited. Is it for sharing with other people over the internet? edit: ultimately I could care less (but not by much) about using it; I am just curious about what they offer and how they compete.

Yeah, even if executed well, who is this for?

I know the last thing I want is for some random person to sing the song we're all listening to given that most people can't sing.

I find myself usually telling the kids in the car to pipe down and let the artist sing.

So I'm really interested in understanding the demo for this feature.

Re: Apple Music Sing

#106

Post by hunter2_ »

joegahona wrote: post #5

Is this akin to karaoke? (The word never appears on the page.) > Apple today announced Apple Music Sing, an exciting new feature that allows users to sing along to their favorite songs with adjustable vocals1 and real-time lyrics. Users can already "sing along to their favorite songs" -- this feels like a wasted opportunity in the first sentence to explain the differentiator. It feels like they're misusing/misunderst…

Karaoke is where some other artist performs and records the song, without vocals, in the style of whoever popularized the song.

This Apple feature seems to be where the same popular recording gets used, which has vocals, and then some magic processing reduces the vocals.

There has always been software to sorta-kinda suppress vocals from existing recordings, but it usually ends up sounding like trash (artifacts of all sorts) compared to just having a karaoke band re-perform the song (although the talent and production quality can be dubious with the latter). Presumably the innovation here is not having vocal suppression sound so bad.

Aside: and then there are popular artists who release an instrumental version, or stems from which an instrumental version can be trivially created, but this is so extremely rare as to not even be on-topic for a conversation about broad availability.

Re: Apple Music Sing

#107

Post by JohnBooty »

Not15CharsLong wrote: post #79

Interesting yet very anti-competitive move by Apple. There are lots and lots of existing providers of karaoke tracks: these invest (depending on quality) between several dollars and several hundreds of dollars to record "soundalike" tracks Sales of such tracks do not generate royalties for the original performer, but do pay out to the composer (per track sale and for things like public performance). Apple is now garr…

    There are lots and lots of existing 
    providers of karaoke tracks: 
    these invest (depending on quality) 
    between several dollars and several 
    hundreds of dollars to record "soundalike" 
    tracks
Commercial karaoke establishments will still need to pay for the licensed versions if they want to be legal. That doesn't change.

People who don't want to do that already had tons of options - Adobe Audition and tons of other software can remove/reduce vocals.

So I don't feel like this changes the commercial picture too much? I feel like this will mainly affect at-home singalongs.

Re: Apple Music Sing

#108

Post by notpushkin »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #89
notpushkin wrote: post #75

People will definitely rip no-vocal versions out of there (if they are good quality, that is). I see some pretty neat implications: - Young artists can (illegally) use beats by popular producers. Young producers can listen to various tracks and better understand some techniques that were shadowed by vocals before. - More bootleg remixes of popular tracks. Things that weren't possible by just slicing and sampling the…

Perhaps that is why it's not available on Mac. Of course people can still rip it off an iPhone/iPad through the "analog hole" via the Lightning to 3.5mm adapter

Or just using a jailbreak? (unless Apple Music uses some hardware DRM)

Re: Apple Music Sing

#109

Post by bombcar »

CharlesW wrote: post #99
jrochkind1 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I came here with that question, why don't they call this karaoke? Wondered if "karaoke" is trademarked? (or patented?!) It doesn't seem to me likely that they didn't think their audience would know the word "karaoke" at this point, but I don't know.

> …why don't they call this karaoke? One notable difference is that with Apple Music Sing you're singing to the original track instead of an instrumental reproduction.

Some "karaoke versions" of songs you can find are literally the same recording with the audio unmixed. Carefully listening can pick up some of the vocals from the other microphones.

Re: Apple Music Sing

#110

Post by jahewson »

pilsetnieks wrote: post #8

> and can be enjoyed on iPhone, iPad, and the new Apple TV 4K But the old Apple TV 4K is not powerful enough for displaying text on a TV, even though any old iPhone is? I get that they want to push device and service adoption but they should pick a lane, either push users to upgrade devices, or push to sign up to paid services. Pushing for both at the same time is greedy.

It’s just marketing copy. They’re reminding everybody that there’s a new Apple TV 4K, not that this feature won’t work on the old one.
Post reply on HN