Live data from Hacker News

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

deepmind.google

71–80 of 361 posts

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

#71
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But part of the whole point of listening to music is enjoying the expression of the people playing the instrument. Music is much more than just the final output of a machine, it's an expression of the soul. You may be able to create music more easily with this tool, but I guarantee it will be soulless, just like Google. The results certainly will not be better. They will be a hideous amalgam from a computer. Just lis…

The sheer amount of pop music and its pop-ularity contradicts you a bit here. Because one can play live AI generated music just as well, hop around on the beat and prompt the viewers to put their hands in the air - a live performance is (arguably much) more than the music. But I may be wrong, maybe the pop assembly line is not the sign of commoditization I seem to see, and won't gain that much from AI support.

You are right. The pop assembly line is EXACTLY what you describe. However, that does not mean we should create new technology to make that assembly line even MORE efficient! Instead, we should work on changing and dismantling society so that it is LESS efficient.

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

#72
post #49

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…

As a indie game developer, this could plausibly enable me to add decent sounding soundtrack to my games. I couldn't afford to pay a proper artist, and my musical skills are... Limited.. It _is_ just a tool, a new instrument essentially, one that is easier to play than most. People being angry that there is now a new instrument that is much easier to play than the one they spent years to learn come across as entitled…

You are exactly why this is a problem. By creating demand for this soulless music we will be inundated by it everywhere. Also all small musicians will basically have to give up because no-one will even bother to save up to pay them. Absolutely trash mindset.

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

#73
Audio quality is not great yet, but the harmony is ok. Also, there's a video where a beatbox is transformed into a drum loop - the result doesn't match the source perfectly, AI has added some crash (?) and extra shakers.

Also, as I understand you must be able to sing properly to use this tool, so it is only for talented kids, and ordinary kids still have to use a keyboard?

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

#75

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…

Nodoby forbids you to create art for the sake of art however you want, be it by recording instruments, making stuff in FL Studio, mixing meme samples or using AI.

If you want to be competitive in music production industry you have to be somewhat economically effective as in any industry and AI will raise economical effectiveness to the whole new level.

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

#76
post #12
post #3

Replace "Transforming" with "Disrupting" and the story feels more real. Frankly, I love music. That is why I'd prefer if Google did not mingle in this bussiness. Creatives already have a hard time making any sort of living from their talent, and AI generated "elevator music" will not make that situation any better.

Earning money by making music is a power law, that is, only a few people will make a lot of money while many will earn almost nothing. This is partially due to the required skills. If a system could lower the barrier to entry, then you could also make an argument that a music AI makes it a more level playing field.

Looking at EDM, the sheer amount of bedroom musicians capable of producing that poped up since the 90s is part of the reason why it has become so hard to make any money from your art. There is simply too much music out there to actually be able to find the gems you like. Lowering the barrier for entry will only worsen this effect.

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

#77
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Growing pains. Remember how this all started (Google Magenta, circa 2019): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRnbbtqxBEc

It seems most (or all?) AI music projects aim at producing audio? Why not output MIDI instead, and let the artist manipulate that? I for one would gladly buy a VST instrument that would generate a constant stream of MIDI ideas, chordings, voicings, variations, from a few seconds of singing or whistling or clapping. It seems the technology is here to build it, yet (AFAIK) it doesn't exist. Why?

That sounds almost like Scaler: https://www.scalerplugin.com/

I mostly use it as a database of chord progressions, but it can do quite a bit more.

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

#78
post #12
post #3

Replace "Transforming" with "Disrupting" and the story feels more real. Frankly, I love music. That is why I'd prefer if Google did not mingle in this bussiness. Creatives already have a hard time making any sort of living from their talent, and AI generated "elevator music" will not make that situation any better.

Earning money by making music is a power law, that is, only a few people will make a lot of money while many will earn almost nothing. This is partially due to the required skills. If a system could lower the barrier to entry, then you could also make an argument that a music AI makes it a more level playing field.

No. Smaller creators of art gain their markets through uniqueness not through how easy it is to create. If music is a commodity that does not require a personality or skillset to produce, then the individuality of artists becomes irrelevant. Whoever has the means of production to pump out as much as possible as quickly as possible and as cheaply as possible while investing in as much advertising as possible with as many connections as possible, will be the only people that matter. Allowing AI to take over labour for us means that the people who make money from these products are only the people who own the servers. Under capitalism, the capitalists own the means of production and hoard most of the fruits of the labouring class, who are only able to make money by selling themselves. In moving straight from capitalism to an age of AI technofuedilism, we remove even labour and skill as a means of making money for the masses. The only means of making money is owning a server farm. This means wealth continuously flows into the hands of a few tech companies. Even smaller capitalists will be paying their dues to the server owners that control the entire economy. No small man will have a place in any industry.

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

#79

Wow, AI really will democratize music creating. This is an awesome way for people to translate their ideas to music without needing to be privileged enough to get violin or guitar lessons. I see a future where we all make our own music and share it freely with family and friends. This means less listening to manufactured pop songs written by suits with the sole aim of making a profit. This will still happen of course…

No. Smaller creators of art gain their markets through uniqueness not through how easy it is to create. If music is a commodity that does not require a personality or skillset to produce, then the individuality of artists becomes irrelevant. Whoever has the means of production to pump out as much as possible as quickly as possible and as cheaply as possible while investing in as much advertising as possible with as many connections as possible, will be the only people that matter. Allowing AI to take over labour for us means that the people who make money from these products are only the people who own the servers. Under capitalism, the capitalists own the means of production and hoard most of the fruits of the labouring class, who are only able to make money by selling themselves. In moving straight from capitalism to an age of AI technofuedilism, we remove even labour and skill as a means of making money for the masses. The only means of making money is owning a server farm. This means wealth continuously flows into the hands of a few tech companies. Even smaller capitalists will be paying their dues to the server owners that control the entire economy. No small man will have a place in any industry.

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

#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. Pointless!
Post reply on HN