34 ms·

So there's several different questions here: * whether machines will be capable of composing some kind of appealing music. This is already possible, and likely

So there's several different questions here: * whether machines will be capable of composing some kind of appealing music. This is already possible, and likely to get better/broader. * whether machines will get so good at this (on demand, no less) they will crowd out contributions that are largely human-crafted. This seems uncertain to me, maybe more likely at the commodity and conceptual ends of the market, maybe less so in craft-niches. * whether music is really a personal experience or a social one -- or, since it's obviously both, to what degree people want both things when.

TranquilMarmot 11y ago
You go to a concert and rather than listening to a live band, it just plays the same song in everybody's head really, really loud so that you can't hear anyone talk.
- dstyrb 11y ago
  Silent Disco?
dstyrb 11y ago
I think this really depends on your definition of appealing. Machines are already capable of _mimicking the aspects of songs which are currently popular_. I highly doubt that a machine could, say, invent a new genre of music that had widespread appeal. The usage of machines in music currently leads to a proliferation of basically glammed out pop rock with pitch perfect voices metronome timed beats and wildly predictable song anatomy. The author mentions that Sinatra's voice has been reconstructed and has released new hits... But isn't 90% of Sinatra's appeal the broken, manly _imperfection_ of his voice? In short, I hypothesize that machines could adequately "fill the void--" ie. play your running music, play your driving music, give you some background tunes to study or code to. But to anyone that actually pays attention to music it will be wildly subpar. Imagine a machine putting off the same lyrical heat as Kendrick Lamar or Ghostface? How can a machine possibly get on a novel level like that when it's basic coding is necessarily to average the means?

TranquilMarmot 11y ago

You go to a concert and rather than listening to a live band, it just plays the same song in everybody's head really, really loud so that you can't hear anyone talk.

dstyrb 11y ago
Silent Disco?

dstyrb 11y ago

I think this really depends on your definition of appealing. Machines are already capable of _mimicking the aspects of songs which are currently popular_. I highly doubt that a machine could, say, invent a new genre of music that had widespread appeal. The usage of machines in music currently leads to a proliferation of basically glammed out pop rock with pitch perfect voices metronome timed beats and wildly predictable song anatomy. The author mentions that Sinatra's voice has been reconstructed and has released new hits... But isn't 90% of Sinatra's appeal the broken, manly _imperfection_ of his voice? In short, I hypothesize that machines could adequately "fill the void--" ie. play your running music, play your driving music, give you some background tunes to study or code to. But to anyone that actually pays attention to music it will be wildly subpar. Imagine a machine putting off the same lyrical heat as Kendrick Lamar or Ghostface? How can a machine possibly get on a novel level like that when it's basic coding is necessarily to average the means?