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

Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

deepmind.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 361 posts

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#101

Post by chpatrick »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #95
stefanos82 wrote: post #61

After a lot of thinking, I have come to a conclusion that expresses me personally, so feel free to disagree if you like: The human being was not created to be deprived of the right to express his feelings through fine arts. From the moment you deprive me of the right to express myself as I feel through external as well as internal stimuli and you want to replace me with an insensitive mechanism that neither feels nor…

You are not being deprived of any rights. You just don't have them exclusively. Make music, or don't. Up to you. Either way, there will be machines also making music. So, what?

How are people going to become professional musicians if it stops being a career?

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#102

Post by checker659 »

stefanos82 wrote: post #61

After a lot of thinking, I have come to a conclusion that expresses me personally, so feel free to disagree if you like: The human being was not created to be deprived of the right to express his feelings through fine arts. From the moment you deprive me of the right to express myself as I feel through external as well as internal stimuli and you want to replace me with an insensitive mechanism that neither feels nor…

This tool will help people who're not musically trained to express themselves musically.

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#103

Post by mavamaarten »

ppsreejith wrote: post #99

Not sure I agree with the negative opinions in this thread. Surely, having an additional option to listen to the song you want to is a good thing? It's not like the choice to listen to human artists is taken away. Furthermore, a lot more people can now express themselves through music that were previously unable to.

Right? The only thing I fear for is the amount of generic AI generated trash that will be spawned among good music. But I'm super excited about this honestly, I only play guitar and have a musical mind but am absolutely horrible at production tools. Something like this could totally let me create a real production of what I imagine/hum/sing, which would otherwise be impossible.

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#104

Post by [deleted] »

chpatrick wrote: post #101
jillesvangurp wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not being deprived of any rights. You just don't have them exclusively. Make music, or don't. Up to you. Either way, there will be machines also making music. So, what?

How are people going to become professional musicians if it stops being a career?

[deleted]

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#105

Post by progbits »

chpatrick wrote: post #101
jillesvangurp wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are not being deprived of any rights. You just don't have them exclusively. Make music, or don't. Up to you. Either way, there will be machines also making music. So, what?

How are people going to become professional musicians if it stops being a career?

Plenty of people make music for fun while having other careers. A lot of the masterpiece painters did it for passion and lived in poverty (I'm not saying that is good, but clearly a career is not necessary for great results).

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#106

Post by coldtea »

seydor wrote: post #82

Wonder where the human fits in this new landscape. Composer? no. Performer? no. Music artist is more like a conductor now. Thankfully audience doesn't care because they need to worship a human in the end, so she 'll be receiving all the money anyway. The problem with these new BigTech companies is that they are accustomed to subjugating everyone. They deal with users and content, not with artists and creations. This…

>Composer? no. Performer? no.

Not even audience, since few care for music with any real passion anymore among the masses (not even teens).

It became a niche, or something you put in the background. As for "popular" concerts and festivals, they are more like country fairs...

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#107

Post by tchaffee »

stefanos82 wrote: post #61

After a lot of thinking, I have come to a conclusion that expresses me personally, so feel free to disagree if you like: The human being was not created to be deprived of the right to express his feelings through fine arts. From the moment you deprive me of the right to express myself as I feel through external as well as internal stimuli and you want to replace me with an insensitive mechanism that neither feels nor…

I like playing video games with a computer. I also like playing music with a computer.

I've learned far quicker playing chess against an AI than I would have playing against humans. And yet I still really enjoy playing against humans too. In fact the experience playing against humans is richer thanks to a deeper understanding of the game that came from AI.

Your argument is along the same lines as arguing electric guitar is lifeless when compared to the non-machine acoustic version. When what really matters is who is operating the machine. AI is just another tool. It will be used in insensitive mechanical ways and in ways that deeply enrich our lives.

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#108

Post by Musikstueck »

What we do as humans is to push against a wall of mist of a unlimited search space.

Doesn't matter if it is music, drawing or scientific discoveries.

What an Artist does is pushing the boundaries.

Having tools like ths allows much more people to push and not 'just' the artists who mastered certain skills.

I can write very good software, do i care if my family suddenly can also write softwre thanks to ai? Honestly no. My goal was never to write code but always to create something which adds value to my life or to others.

I would not have thought that we will achieve this level so fast but yes writing code and using certain tools will be not necessary in the near future.

But hopefully we will have more time to learn all of those skills for the sake of having fun learning them.

I have a very good sense of what music sounds good to me and what art looks good to me. Should i be not allowed to create my own art even if its through tools like SD, Midjourney and co?

don't be that type of person

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#109

Post by coldtea »

criddell wrote: post #90
bambax wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right that pure formal perfection is not the only component in art; art has to mean something. But quality has always been a very important aspect of popularity in art as well as in music (see: Renaissance sculptors & painters, Baroque and Classical composers, etc.) Great art is when a unique, profound emotion or insight is expressed with great execution. AI helps with the last part; real artists should still…

> But quality has always been a very important aspect But what is quality? I used to think it was just degree of goodness , then I read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and now I have no idea what it is (or what it isn’t).

It doesn't have to be something that you can objectively measure to exist and people to be able to recognize it (even if not perfectly) - which is the whole point of Z.A.M.M. by the way.

Re: Google's advanced music generation model and two new AI experiments

#110

Post by Juliate »

ppsreejith wrote: post #99

Not sure I agree with the negative opinions in this thread. Surely, having an additional option to listen to the song you want to is a good thing? It's not like the choice to listen to human artists is taken away. Furthermore, a lot more people can now express themselves through music that were previously unable to.

It's not that the choice is taken away. It's that it is going to be even more buried under an avalanche of industry-normalised, generated crap (crap because generated and industry-normalised).

And second, you express yourself, you said it. If a generator produces something, it's not _your_ expression, per definition. You may still have "constrained" it among myriad of possibilities through your prompt, it is still the production of the generator, not yours.

Example: when I play something on a Mellotron, I cannot claim that I played the flutes or violins recorded there. Those are definitely not mine. What I do play with it, what I sing above it, yes, maybe because I produce/play those, with what I understood of my previous musical education/experience.

That's, fundamentally different.

Post reply on HN