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

Eleven Music

elevenlabs.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 283 posts

Re: Eleven Music

#71

Post by kingstnap »

feoren wrote: post #36

We imagined a utopian future where robots did our menial work so we were free to be creative. Instead we got a dystopian future where we do more and more menial work so our robots can poorly emulate creativity. It's not too late to turn it around, but that requires recognizing the humanity of 99.9% of people, and the 0.1% who own everything would rather create their own synthetic (subservient) humans than recognize t…

It's only from a position of extreme arrogance that you can complain that machines have not yet done enough for you.

But it's the fun thing about being humans, I suppose. Our insatiable greed means we demand endlessly more.

Re: Eleven Music

#73

Post by blargey »

kingstnap wrote: post #55
bix6 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These feels different than experimenting with a new synth or something though. It’s just feeding a sentence to the model.

I draw a very sharp line: curating the outputs and crafting the sentence is enough to make it art. If neither of those happen, it's just slop. It's actually a bit like photography. A bunch of randomly taken pictures piled together is not art. It needs to be done with purpose and refinement. Basically, in my own opinion, art ≠ a function of technical difficulty. Art = Curation, Refinement, and Taste

Disagree that curation and prompts adds artistry (dense intent reflected in the output) to AI generations.

"Curation" in AI can only surface the curator's local maxima among a tiny and arbitrary grab-bag of seed integers they checked among the space of 2^64 options; it's statistically skewed 99% towards the model's whims rather than anyone's unique intent or taste.

Prompt crafting is likewise terribly low fidelity since it's a constant battle with the model's idiosyncratic interpretation of the text, plus arbitrary perturbations that aren't actually correlated with the writer's supposed intent. And lord spare me the "high quality high resolution ultra detailed photorealistic trending on artstation" type prompts that amount to a zero-intent plea for "more gooder". And when pursuing artistry, using artist names / LORAs are a meta-abandonment of personal direction, abdicating artistic control and responsibility to a model's idea of another artist's idea of what should be done.

Fancier workflows generally only multiply this prompt-and-curate process across regions/iterations, so can't add much because they're multiplying a tiny fraction by a fixed factor.

Re: Eleven Music

#74

Post by kelseyfrog »

fruitworks wrote: post #60
kelseyfrog wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art is a framing device largely independent of the content. It's how we get Fountain[1], Piss Christ[2], Comedian[3], Mother![4], 4’33”[5], and Seedbed[6] to name a few among countless others. To claim that AI content is incapable of being framed as art is nonsense when we have example after example of the diversity of what art can be. Let's remember, bad art is still art. 1. Marcel Duchamp. 1917 2. Andres Serrano. 1…

If that was true, then the development of a new urinal factory would have the same impact on art as the development of a new AI art models. The framing is dependent on the content

Framings require creators; they don't arise spontaneously. Someone could turn a urinal factory into art, but art doesn't validate itself. Belief alone in artistic essentialism doesn’t make it so.

Re: Eleven Music

#75

Post by freedomben »

throwaway1280 wrote: post #40

This is an incredible achievement, but as a musician, I wish this would go die in a fire. I'm a bedroom hobby musician with no dreams of ever making it big, but even so, I'm looking at the hours I'm spending trying to improve my skills and thinking what's the point, really, when I could just type in 'heavy metal guitar solo at 160bpm, A minor' and get something much much better? I know there is value in creating art…

As a fellow (hobbyist) musician, I feel you, but after doing a lot of introspection I realized that it's the art (and the process) that I really like, not (just) the end result (though that is of course a rewarding aspect). For example, jamming out to a kickin' song is fun, even if I'm just covering something. I also realized that my own ability to produce things isn't affected by this (as long as you don't want to make money on it). As someone who loves to play bass but is generally bad at writing bass riffs, I also see some fun potential to use AI to get bass tracks that go along with my main guitar riffs. I can always throw them out and rewrite from scratch later, or just iterate on them to get them where I like them. I do think I'll feel a bit lof a loss of "artistic purity" with doing something like that, but the more I think about it, the biggest reason that might bother me is because I'd feel judged by other musicians :-D

Re: Eleven Music

#76

Post by kingstnap »

fruitworks wrote: post #70
kingstnap wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I draw a very sharp line: curating the outputs and crafting the sentence is enough to make it art. If neither of those happen, it's just slop. It's actually a bit like photography. A bunch of randomly taken pictures piled together is not art. It needs to be done with purpose and refinement. Basically, in my own opinion, art ≠ a function of technical difficulty. Art = Curation, Refinement, and Taste

Curation, refinement and taste is practicially worthless on its own. The technical difficulty of art is the investment that makes it worth considering. So if you are right, then art will pretty much be worthless in the future. You can just iterate over the search space defined by "good taste" and produce an infinite amount of good art for no work.

Curation is not worthless. It's the exact opposite, in the abundance of stuff, it's extremely valuable.

Search is not free, and it can never be free. What happens when search gets easier and easier is that your demands for quality and curation will get higher until all time saved in search efficiency is spent on search breadth.

Re: Eleven Music

#77

Post by omnimus »

fruitworks wrote: post #54
ronsor wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that these models have so many people irritated like there's sand in their pants is enough proof that they're pushing boundaries and making some uncomfortable.

the boundaries of unemployment perhaps

boundaries of copyright

Re: Eleven Music

#78

Post by [deleted] »

sekai wrote: post #58
two-sandwich wrote: post #9

If you consider that Entertainment gives the viewer what they want, and art intends to challenge, none of what's created here is "art". It doesn't push boundaries, create new genres, or satisfy an uncomfortable curiosity. The tech here is fantastic. I love that such things are possible now and they're an exciting frontier in creation. It's very dystopian to feel that the robots are making generic human-music with ind…

> and art intends to challenge, none of what's created here is "art". It doesn't push boundaries, create new genres, or satisfy an uncomfortable curiosity. Art is, above all, subjective. > It's very dystopian to feel that the robots are making generic human-music with indescribably lifeless properties. Painters said the same thing about the camera. Photographers said the same thing about Photoshop.

[deleted]

Re: Eleven Music

#79

Post by viccis »

moritzwarhier wrote: post #51
two-sandwich wrote: post #9

If you consider that Entertainment gives the viewer what they want, and art intends to challenge, none of what's created here is "art". It doesn't push boundaries, create new genres, or satisfy an uncomfortable curiosity. The tech here is fantastic. I love that such things are possible now and they're an exciting frontier in creation. It's very dystopian to feel that the robots are making generic human-music with ind…

> Entertainment gives the viewer what they want, and art intends to challenge This is a fruitless and snobby dichotomy that was attempted so many times in human history, and it makes no sense. There will always be art made for success and/or money, but drawing a line is futile. Händel used to be a bit like a pop musician. And intellectual snobbishness or noble ideas do not make art more valuable. A kid singing Wonder…

>Händel used to be a bit like a pop musician.

Handel was never a "bit like a pop musician." This fundamentally misunderstands how music during his time, mostly funded and enjoyed under religion and wealthy patronage contexts, was listened to. Mostly only the wealthy listened to his works, and those elite audiences were prone to viciously enforcing stylistic norms. The only real way the working class heard his works were in the occasional public concert and occasionally in church. At no point in any of these settings was there a lack of stylistic gatekeeping or snobbery.

I know this kind of nihilistic "everything is good, I guess, good doesn't even mean anything" attitude is popular in some spaces, but this lack of standards or gatekeeping in favor of a tasteless desire for increasing slop production regardless of quality is how we got poptimism and the current state of music. No longer is there any taste making, just taste production via algorithms.

Sometimes we need a bit of snobbery to separate the wheat from the chaff, and being a gatekeeping snob against AI music is what our current day and age needs more of!

Re: Eleven Music

#80

Post by thefaux »

throwaway1280 wrote: post #40

This is an incredible achievement, but as a musician, I wish this would go die in a fire. I'm a bedroom hobby musician with no dreams of ever making it big, but even so, I'm looking at the hours I'm spending trying to improve my skills and thinking what's the point, really, when I could just type in 'heavy metal guitar solo at 160bpm, A minor' and get something much much better? I know there is value in creating art…

I would suggest that instead of feeling demoralized by ai that you instead ask what can you offer musically that an ai cannot. I also would suggest trying to let go of the notion that music is primarily about achieving a certain level of technical proficiency. There are no limits on your growth musically unless you artificially constrain them because you are deluded by a technology to believe that you don't already have what you need inside of you.

Do you regularly play with other people? That is a good way to disabuse yourself of the notion that all that matters is technique.

Post reply on HN