31–40 of 41 posts
Something I’ve noticed when programmers try to break down melodic composition to an algorithm is that they don’t grasp how important the beat or the implied beat is to creating catchy melodic phrases. Good melodies have a question/answer or a phrase/reply relationship with this beat. It’s a conversation. All memorable music has this feature. The kick asks a question and the snare answers. The kick/snare ask a questio…
Sounds worse or on par with most stock/royalty free music. It's interesting that you can actually hear the absence of a soul.
I wonder if you'd have had this impression if you hadn't known that it was algorithmically created. Could be an interesting test to make, a turing test of sorts.
Not AI, at least not for the composition process. It algorithmically combines a library of loops using genre templates: https://napolitano.de/2021/11/12/soundraw-ai-music-creation-...
To defend the website, it can still be argued to be called AI. Rule based methods are still said by some to be a section of AI. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule-based_system I understand that nowadays when we think of AI we imagine deep learning and neural networks, but nowhere on the website does it claim that that is the case. Think of ELIZA for example https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ELIZA One of the earliest chat…
How do Soundraw know for sure the auto-generated music is original and therefore royalty-free? So not close enough to an already released, copyrighted, piece of music.
There are 35 million released songs. Completely original music is a myth. If it doesn't use samples without a proper license, then it's legally OK.
How do Soundraw know for sure the auto-generated music is original and therefore royalty-free? So not close enough to an already released, copyrighted, piece of music.
Not AI, at least not for the composition process. It algorithmically combines a library of loops using genre templates: https://napolitano.de/2021/11/12/soundraw-ai-music-creation-...
These never have options for heavy metal :(
Something I’ve noticed when programmers try to break down melodic composition to an algorithm is that they don’t grasp how important the beat or the implied beat is to creating catchy melodic phrases. Good melodies have a question/answer or a phrase/reply relationship with this beat. It’s a conversation. All memorable music has this feature. The kick asks a question and the snare answers. The kick/snare ask a questio…
Melodies that I hear from programs rarely have coherency from one measure to the next, and definitely not from one section to the next. Let alone coherency with it's supporting or complimentary elements.