MusiCoT, a chain-of-thought (CoT) prompting technique for music generation [pdf]
musicot.github.io
musicot.github.io
The trick is going to be surfacing content in the sea of bullshit, though.
You need a whole new paradigm of AI/ML stuff to do what you want.
If so I really disagree, achieving great results with average building blocks is both feasible and I’d say usual - you can perfectly imagine a greatly useful and successful app where any given individual block of code is nothing to write home about.
You can get a great solo of jazz piano over a generated battery filler, you can stitch two recordings by having AI generate the microseconds in the gap, you can produce a melody where AI adds human-like timing micro errors in the synth so doesn’t sound like a robotic rendition, you can rap and generate adlibs as a second voice…
You just described everything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJPERZDfyWc
The entire evolutionary process which resulted in us and all of human invention can be summed as copy w/ blur; fight; repeat.
I bet they thought themselves very smart too.
p.s. which part is the clockwork? the ticker tape with the encoded data, or the part that reads it? whole thing?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfYf_rPWUdY
edit: Probably none of those since rhibosomes were discovered in the 1950s it seems.
But the completely original peaces, written by professionals, aiming to express a feeling, are easily distinguishable from any AI song. AI songs doesn't leave you hanging or waiting, it doesn't know the value of breaking a pattern.
It's Mozart vs Salieri all over again.
Can't speak for OP, but for me personally, I don't mind AI augmented content, as long as it's done well. Eg. I recently played a game called "Slay the Princess", where they very clearly used Claude to write a lot of the dialogue/narration, but that didn't detract from the experience.
On the other hand, I hate it when I open a youtube video and the script is 100% chatgpt slop.
Music -- a lot of it is already made using software. If I enjoy listening to it, I don't care how it was made.
What about you?
A better example of the problem imo is the robot advertised to watch your kids so you can work.
Some people will, but for me, I could never justify spending time and money to learn something an AI could do better than me. I'd constantly feel like I'm wasting my time.
AI is a tool intended on increasing efficiency. The way you describe the act of making art/crafting things seems to come through the lens of efficiency, where you're wasting your time in the struggle of improvement.
The time spent struggling is not time wasted. The struggle is the single most important aspect of learning and improving. Its how lessons learned reach the deep subconscious as if you're walking or writing with a pen. No good musician, painter, sculptor, systems engineer, etc became that way without that deep struggle. If someone says they never struggled, be wary of them.
If we round off every corner in the name of efficiency and the bottom line, all we're left with is toil. We don't benefit from that toil, the people who push for greater and greater efficiency do. No matter how efficient we get, the excesses produced by the efficiencies will be guarded. Food thrown away, excess milk dumped in the dirt, crops burned, profits stowed away.
The AI can only exist via previous struggle. The music produced by AI will only ever be a shadow of Human struggle. It will never truly exceed that struggle. A series of vectors in memory on a graphics card can't know the feeling of a beat as it resounds in ones chest, or the resolution of a chord as the bridge turns around. It can't know the sympathetic emotions of a story told in lyrics. It can't know the nostalgia evoked by a shadow in a painting, or the familiarity of an expression in a face.
Only we as humans can create this, and its sad and disgusting to see these tools used to degrade the human experience for an ounce of profit by people who refuse to allow themselves to understand the struggle of creating art.
Your example is good though, "why raise my children when a robot can do it for me, so I can survive using my energy for someone else".
Exactly why we ask what’s the point of the tool then?
Like I get it, “helps experienced creators become even better yadda yadda” but I’m directly refuting the argument re: target market
I think you might be referring to "Muzak", a particular brand of background music that would sell to businesses to play in stores and elevators.
In my experience, today's AI is more than thrilled to do your extra busy work, one just needs to learn how to ask.
I would love to use a music model that could help me do that.
I’m imagining feeding it my score and then iterating with it to create the final piece I’ve had stuck in my head all this time.
> Please don't use HN primarily for promotion. It's ok to post your own stuff part of the time, but the primary use of the site should be for curiosity.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
(4 subs, 2 weeks) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=musicot.github.io
(3 subs, 1 week/5 subs, 1 month) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=github.com%2Finclusio...
(3 subs 1 week) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=mainfunc.ai
(2 subs, 2 weeks) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=mureka.ai
(4 subs, 3 months) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=trae.ai
(approaching ∞ subs) https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=pingcap.com
And do you think it's better or worse than this: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&page=0&prefix=tr... -- posting a link to their website >2 a day, in 23% of their posts/comments.
As a semi-aside, I feel like semantic tokens in general may end up being a bottleneck on how interesting model outputs can be.
Since you are working in this space, I wonder if you could comment on my pet theories for why this is true: 1. Not enough training data (scores not available for most songs), or 2. Difficulty with tokenization of musical notation vs. audio
That's a really bold statement to make without any references, could you by any chance add some references for us not in the know ?
I assume you will still stand behind the essence of your comment. In that case, it would be better to say "Based on my experience on playing with their models, I have strong reasons to believe that they continuously cheat on benchmarks by training on test datasets." You can then also add that this maps with what you hear from others in the field.
That's like all of them, bro. Don't hate the player, hate the game.