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

Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 92 posts

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#31

Post by semolino »

jrajav wrote: post #25
windowliker wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will caveat my first comment by also noting that I am well versed in computer music history, and read many many papers in CMJ[1] and elsewhere about generative and automatic composition tools such as Emily Howell[2]. I do NOT have a problem with generative, algorithmic and automatic composition in this sense, as an extension of the creative intentions of the human composer, in the right context. See also Autechre[3…

Can I ask what the specific markers / qualifiers are for you to consider (let's call them) 'classical' generative and algorithmic techniques fair game in creative composition, but LLM agent based techniques not so? To me, it seems like the "do it for me" aspect is similar, just at different levels of abstraction.

The main difference is tweakability: With classical generative and algorithmic composition, the human can change parameters in real time and more closely guide the shape of the piece.

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#32

Post by vunderba »

brandonb wrote: post #14
windowliker wrote: post #8

For me, the point of making music is making it myself. If want to have something done for me I could just play someone else's record and pretend like I made it.

Previous generations might have said the same thing about Ableton itself, vs playing a physical instrument. In that regard, AI might become just another power tool for creative expression.

I’ve always said that the more divergent the input is from the resulting output, then the less personal expression you have. For me, in order of moving away from meaningful control in generative models, it goes: “text → code,” “text → picture,” and, at the very bottom, “text → music.”

For me personally, music composition begins and ends with the motif - the melody itself. It’s the part I enjoy the most, and it’s also the part I have the most individual control over since I can sing.

Everybody makes music differently, but if you lack the ability to play an instrument and you also can’t whistle or sing, it’s hard for me to imagine how you’d have any meaningful control over the melody.

How would a non‑musician express an actual melody that they came up with (beyond simple things like instrumentation and general “feelings”) in text? RED RED RED BLUE. (Sorry couldn't resist a Mission Hill reference here.)

With all that out of the way, there's still lots of room for using AI in music. I’ve used it to take some of my existing songs, mostly pianistic in nature, and swap out instrumentation and arrangements just to play around with different soundscapes. It's like BIAB on steroids.

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#33

Post by windowliker »

jrajav wrote: post #25
windowliker wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will caveat my first comment by also noting that I am well versed in computer music history, and read many many papers in CMJ[1] and elsewhere about generative and automatic composition tools such as Emily Howell[2]. I do NOT have a problem with generative, algorithmic and automatic composition in this sense, as an extension of the creative intentions of the human composer, in the right context. See also Autechre[3…

Can I ask what the specific markers / qualifiers are for you to consider (let's call them) 'classical' generative and algorithmic techniques fair game in creative composition, but LLM agent based techniques not so? To me, it seems like the "do it for me" aspect is similar, just at different levels of abstraction.

Firstly, they all came to the use of those techniques after having been through years of work the 'hard way', often being able to play to a conservatoire standard, and had a very extensive grounding in the tradition that came with that. Then they owned* or designed the thing they were asking to 'do it for me' and could modify it at their discretion, effectively making it an integral element of the composition. The prior training was crucial in getting anything good out of any of it IMO (high level reflection based on canon knowledge and deeply considered personal sensibility, etc.)

* I suppose in the early days, running on an mainframe would belie the definition of ownership per se, as it required access and was limited to that specific machine/institution, but then we are talking about a time where personal computing wasn't available.

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#35

Post by windowliker »

semolino wrote: post #31
jrajav wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can I ask what the specific markers / qualifiers are for you to consider (let's call them) 'classical' generative and algorithmic techniques fair game in creative composition, but LLM agent based techniques not so? To me, it seems like the "do it for me" aspect is similar, just at different levels of abstraction.

The main difference is tweakability: With classical generative and algorithmic composition, the human can change parameters in real time and more closely guide the shape of the piece.

This as well. Most 'classical' algorithmic music had an element of expressiveness allowed to the composer in the moment.

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#36

Post by windowliker »

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #26
dyauspitr wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, music generation is solved. You don’t have fine control at this point but people are unable to tell the difference anymore. There are tons of YouTube videos with blind tests between real artists and AI and people have no idea.

The Matrix wants everything solved, doesn't it?

>No alarms and no surprises

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#37

Post by cardanome »

brandonb wrote: post #14
windowliker wrote: post #8

For me, the point of making music is making it myself. If want to have something done for me I could just play someone else's record and pretend like I made it.

Previous generations might have said the same thing about Ableton itself, vs playing a physical instrument. In that regard, AI might become just another power tool for creative expression.

> AI might become just another power tool for creative expression

It is NOT a digital tool to create art. Yes, people used to be snobbish about digital art. Some still are. This doesn't say anything about generative AI because that isn't a tool.

The closest equivalent is hiring someone on fiverr to create music for you and claiming you created the music because you wrote the "prompt".

There is nothing creative about using generative AI. Is is a form of management. The difference is that instead of extracting labor directly your are extracting dead labor from the million of artists whose work was stolen to train the AI.

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#39

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

windowliker wrote: post #8

For me, the point of making music is making it myself. If want to have something done for me I could just play someone else's record and pretend like I made it.

When we recently added MCP to Ardour (a cross-platform FLOSS DAW), the goal wasn't to get the machine to make the music for you, it was to provide alternate ways of interacting with the DAW (particularly for those with visual impairments that make voice control preferable).

Re: Show HN: Ableton Live MCP

#40

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

windowliker wrote: post #22
windowliker wrote: post #8

For me, the point of making music is making it myself. If want to have something done for me I could just play someone else's record and pretend like I made it.

I will caveat my first comment by also noting that I am well versed in computer music history, and read many many papers in CMJ[1] and elsewhere about generative and automatic composition tools such as Emily Howell[2]. I do NOT have a problem with generative, algorithmic and automatic composition in this sense, as an extension of the creative intentions of the human composer, in the right context. See also Autechre[3…

> What we are discussing here is the musical equivalent of a dishwasher.

A dishwasher that may have been taught about Markov chains ...

Post reply on HN