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

111–120 of 361 posts

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

#111

Post by bossyTeacher »

echelon wrote: post #30
nervousvarun wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What “privilege” is required to learn to play guitar? Was Jimmy Hendrix privileged? Robert Johnson?

People get caught up in their lives. There are a million things you _wanted_ to do that you'll never get to do. And that's unfair.

How caught up can you get that somehow using your built-in and free instruments (see human voice and hands/feet for percussion) or a cheap $50 guitar/uke is a privilege but having an internet connection and a modern smartphone that can run this kind cutting edge software is not?

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

#112

Post by Musikstueck »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #8

The moment quality in art becomes commodified, what is popular will select on something other than quality. Look what happened to visual art in the earliest 20th century. Any art academy graduate could give you a beautiful painting, but nobody remembers any artists from the 20th century who simply made "beautiful paintings"

Popularity is only relevant for making money;

Previously it was also a way of showing it to others in a way of a filter, also it was so crazy creating new 'styles'.

But this time is over.

We are in a Post art discovery face. I have not really seen (at least not regular) something totally/complelty/utterly new in art.

But thats good. The search space is much deeper now, art is much more accessable.

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

#113

Post by Musikstueck »

Almondsetat wrote: post #33

Will be great for people who have studied composition, for everyone else it will just increase exponentially the amount of garbage circulating around

It might just be a way for me to create my own art.

It would also already work very well for creating background music without bothering artists to do so.

Concentration background music etc.

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

#114

Post by wildrhythms »

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.

...and for the people whose hard work this was trained on without permission or compensation?

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

#115

Post by bossyTeacher »

gardenhedge wrote: post #27
vouaobrasil wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NO, it will lower the barrier for music generation, which is different from CREATION, which implies a creative act.

I think you're looking at this wrong. If I have an idea for a song I my head, I could record myself humming or sining it. While it might represent a thought, feeling or experience it's not going to be very pleasant. With AI, I will be able to transform it into something enjoyable. That is creation and not just generation.

Missing the point. The vast majority of uses for this will be music generation for profit:

const song = generateSong() const royalties = Spotify.Publish(song) Bank.getRoyalties(royalties)

You have to think of this like a typewriter or a word document. It is mostly used for profit. And profit always wins over anything else

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

#116

Post by chpatrick »

progbits wrote: post #105
chpatrick wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

Sure but most renowned artists had the time to become really skilled because they could dedicate all their time to it. If no one wants to pay humans for art any more, how will that happen?

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

#117

Post by quectophoton »

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…

Yeah it depends how you look at it.

Using the "journey metaphor", for some people what matters is the destination; for others what matters is the journey itself; for others what matters is the person doing it; and for others any combination of those.

The target audience for most generative stuff is mostly people who are looking at "the destination".

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

#118

Post by Juliate »

mypastself wrote: post #62
vouaobrasil wrote: post #11

From the article: > Each participating artist has partnered with us and will have a hand in helping us test and learn to shape the future of AI in music. Let me correct that: each participating artist has been given a wad of dirty cash in return for their help in training replacements for mass music. Notice that I said "mass music" -- people will always be able to create by hand, but it's clear that the ultimate goal…

> traditional musicians… will not be able to compete and therefore will not be able to do what they love to survive. Why would anyone owe the musicians a job just because they enjoy doing it? I don’t expect anyone to defend my love of coding when I’m replaced by a future iteration of an LLM. > Music composed by humans could still be better but AI will compete simply because it is cheap and widely available If it’s tr…

> If bland/poor quality art is no longer produced by humans, what’s the loss?

Because even artists often produce bland/poor stuff, sometimes even some that sells well? (or that is recognised several decades/centuries, to be actually great work)

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

#119

Post by wildrhythms »

jamesdhutton wrote: post #80

In "Brave New World," all the music is made by machines. We are approaching that dystopia. For me, much of the pleasure in listening to music lies in appreciating the virtuosity of the musicians. It's like watching a great tennis player or a great dancer. You admire their skill and grace and technical mastery. For me, listening to music made by machines would be like watching robots playing tennis, or robots dancing.…

Unfortunately for many people music is nothing more than 'something to play in the background'.

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

#120

Post by criddell »

Almondsetat wrote: post #96
criddell wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe something entirely unexpected will happen. You never know what can happen when you give people creative tools. Maybe music creation via tools like this will be like using a camera to create images. We don’t think of photographs as shitty paintings, right? It’s a different kind of thing.

> Maybe music creation via tools like this will be like using a camera to create images. Yes, in the sense that most people don’t know how to take photos and they look like crap even with heavy AI retouching

My photos might look like crap but I’m happy to have them.

Maybe something similar will happen with AI-powered music creation?

Post reply on HN