I For One Welcome Our New Robot Vocal Cords: Radical Computer Music
thequietus.com
thequietus.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qPBM69nThkM
Now, that's one example of what human vocal cords (with various degrees computer augmentation) are capable of. While the things discussed in the article may be interesting... the reference to vocal cords seems somewhat misplaced?
[edit: I should perhaps clarify/highlight that the above video does not feature drum machines etc -- "only" sampling, looping and "warping". Easier to follow, is this video I like to call "I was hip-hop before ducks":
"Helping him drive it are three iPads, two of which control the Beardytron and one that uses apps for extra noises. He also has keyboards, Native Instruments Guitar Rig, and Rob Papen’s delay as part of the setup."
http://www.djtechtools.com/2012/12/12/the-beardytron-5000-mk...
[edit2: Although according to his TED talk, it only reuses noises he puts in, so I guess it's an open question if he's moved to include "external" samples or not...
http://www.ted.com/talks/beardyman_the_polyphonic_me.html ]
[edit: apparently that article wasn't submitted to hn, as I'm guessing it's a good fit, now it is:
It did, however, introduce me to http://yaxu.org/tidal/ which is going to force me to finally learn Haskell.
I like the idea of procedural music being created automatically, but I believe that the end result still need to inspire and transport the listener. I have no doubts that we will be able to make some pretty convincing stuff in the future, and it probably won't be a lot worse than what's already playing in the charts.
In the end though, I think we seek out music or art that puts us in the mindset or emotional state of the artist. Forging a connection of shared experience.
If the music tugged at all the right heartstrings, but you knew it wasn't made by a human, could you feel that depth of connection?
I do think this is a false dichotomy of sorts. (Right turn of phrase?) The music may have been made by a machine, but humans made the machine. What ultimately is the difference between music “made” by a violin being directly played, verses a synthesizer reconstructing songs based on what a programmer did beforehand? It’s just a matter of degree. It might be more productive in discussions to look at the “artist” verses “committee” angle instead.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kanNN4RPrOf (NSFW, in most workplaces -- two dancers in underwear.)
So I pretend there is free will, and therefore the same "product" can mean different things to me depending on what the creator tried to convey. To give a silly example, I somewhat liked the song "I kissed a girl", but now that I know a dude wrote it, I don't anymore. I would fully agree that this is totally arbitrary; but I don't tell others what to like, I just have my own reasons for (not) liking things. And when AI happens I will be convinced that humans partly made it to escape themselves and their responsibility, and so I'll be with the luddites, pouting :P
"What is true is already so.
Owning up to it doesn't make it worse.
Not being open about it doesn't make it go away.
And because it's true, it is what is there to be interacted with.
Anything untrue isn't there to be lived.
People can stand what is true,
for they are already enduring it."
—Eugene Gendlin
So in the meantime I accept that my desire to do or not do a lot of things is irrational which also implies I pretend there even is such a "thing" as "me", separate from everything else, for which there is no rational basis either. When you say "accept irrational beliefs", I think that presumes a baseline of pure rationality which I doubt any human ever achieved. So while I loved that quote and thank you for it, I also have to say that it might go both ways :)
Like babies? (Well, most of the time.)
Does it have intention? Is there any way to distinguish a sound file with intention from one without? Are the bits the wrong color?
There is a way of distinguishing a musician that plays "automatically" from a musician that plays with its heart. Every musician knows that the best performance is made when he/she is sincere.
Plus, you're talking about the "bits", that is the "form" but i'm talking about the content. You can have a machine spray some paint with some constrained rules on a canvas and reproduce the style of famous painters. But it will never have its own style, its own intention. No original and new message to communicate.
It's true today's algorithms might not be completely original, but then again neither are most humans. And this isn't a strict limitation, computers could learn to experiment with new patterns, or generalize further than mere imitation.
Edit: I should say, I do think that a lot of electronic music should be considered craft rather than art. But not all of it.