3 ms·

A key question imho is this: will algorithmic music composition ever produce anything else than more or less sophisticated musac, effectively recycling a partic

A key question imho is this: will algorithmic music composition ever produce anything else than more or less sophisticated musac, effectively recycling a particular musical corpus of a particular music tradition? Producing a memorable, emotionally moving piece is not something that is generally reducible to prescription. If the DL based pattern matching is sufficiently intelligent and produces something worthwhile, will it actually feel different to an existing piece? Music perception and appreciation is a deeply human feature (is there a "purpose" to it or is it actually a piece of redundant brain code? https://brianjump.net/2020/11/02/why-does-music-exist/ https://brianjump.net/2020/11/02/why-does-music-exist/) that has both a biological and cultural basis. There is a feedback loop of contemporary musical sounds a young brain is exposed to and the perception machinery and associated innate pleasurable responses. Think of the countless cultural innovations that underpin human music: tunings, scales, rhythms, genres and the deep link to voice and song. None of those has any (ex-ante) algorithmic feel (to the chagrin of Pythagoreans and other ex-post numerologists). Coming up with music feels literally like plucking beautiful sounds from thin air. In any case its a fascinating research domain...

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
> A key question imho is this: will algorithmic music composition ever produce anything else than more or less sophisticated musac, effectively recycling a particular musical corpus of a particular music tradition? A related question is: how many human composers manage do this? It seems that we are fairly OK with a large body of composers "effectively recycling a particular musical corpus".
- streamofdigits 5y ago
  There is indeed a lot of "filler" type production and even the most talented creators are far from always producing unique pieces that touch audiences (let alone endure). But this misses the point: some creators do occasionally hit the magic sweet spot and invent something that makes the rest worthwhile. Heck, some creators invent new genres. A DL type algorithm will not produce a new "classic" except by a "thousand monkeys hitting keyboards" type accident... at least not until we dig far deeper into what makes some music stand-out. And an algorithm as conventionally defined is unlikely to ever produce a new musical style. The true opportunity (as always with algorithms) is the augmentation of creative talent.
  - PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
    I'm not convinced (though I'm also not insisting that you're wrong). Studies of the human creative process that I've read don't provide a lot of support for the idea that there is a magic step here. You probably know the quote: "good artists borrow, great artists steal".

PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago

> A key question imho is this: will algorithmic music composition ever produce anything else than more or less sophisticated musac, effectively recycling a particular musical corpus of a particular music tradition? A related question is: how many human composers manage do this? It seems that we are fairly OK with a large body of composers "effectively recycling a particular musical corpus".

streamofdigits 5y ago
There is indeed a lot of "filler" type production and even the most talented creators are far from always producing unique pieces that touch audiences (let alone endure). But this misses the point: some creators do occasionally hit the magic sweet spot and invent something that makes the rest worthwhile. Heck, some creators invent new genres. A DL type algorithm will not produce a new "classic" except by a "thousand monkeys hitting keyboards" type accident... at least not until we dig far deeper into what makes some music stand-out. And an algorithm as conventionally defined is unlikely to ever produce a new musical style. The true opportunity (as always with algorithms) is the augmentation of creative talent.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  I'm not convinced (though I'm also not insisting that you're wrong). Studies of the human creative process that I've read don't provide a lot of support for the idea that there is a magic step here. You probably know the quote: "good artists borrow, great artists steal".