4 ms·

This. Generating audio en masse is everything that's wrong with LLMs, and people trying to use them this demonstrate a *fundamental misunderstanding of music. T

This. Generating audio en masse is everything that's wrong with LLMs, and people trying to use them this demonstrate a *fundamental misunderstanding of music. The whole attraction of music is separate generators in temporary harmony, whether rhythmic, tonal, timbral. Generating premixed streams of audio ('mixed' implying more than one voice or instrument) completely misses the point how music is constructed in the first place. Anyone advocating this approach is not worth listening to.

ganoushoreilly 2y ago
While I mostly agree with you, we know that music is defined by the listener. Who are we to discern what is or isn't music? Do you have the same opinion of text or code generated by or with the assistance of AI?
- mdp2021 2y ago
  The poster presents criticism against an architectural model. > Who are we to discern what is or isn't music? Hopefully, people with good judgement, potentially capable of evaluating products. The poster is clearly meaning "good music". > Do you have the same opinion of text or code generated by or with the assistance of There you go: the same way we note that some NN generated text is missing crucial qualities (e.g. intelligence), or that some NN generated images are missing crucial qualities (e.g. direction), you can surely admit the possibility that some NN generated sound may be missing relevant crucial qualities to the vetting of a good critic.
  - ganoushoreilly 2y ago
    What is Good music though? That's the whole point. Plenty of people listen to stuff I would consider weird and non music, but to them it is.
    - mdp2021 2y ago
      Well if they call it "good music" because "they like it", that does not form a theory of music; whereas if they call it "good music" because they recognize it as an expression of good artistic form, and they are of promising judgement, than their theory could be translated into a generative architecture.
      - ganoushoreilly 2y ago
        It's up to the listener to apply whatever semantics they need to as justification. There is no purity test for music. The theory is just that theory.
        mdp2021 2y ago
        > The theory is just that theory. Well no, Feyerabend let himself be called an "anarchist" but clearly there is a "more scientific" and "less scientific" - they cannot give you a lecturing appointment at the LSE or elsewhere to just shrug. > the listener ... as justification As justification to what? A producer makes products for different markets: people may sell bars of sugar with appetizers and synthetic flavours, that does not make the product remotely similar to healthy food.
        ganoushoreilly 2y ago
        Dismissing certain musical forms as lacking artistic validity because they don’t adhere to a predefined theory ignores the cultural, emotional, and contextual factors that shape artistic expression. Just as culinary traditions differ across regions and personal tastes vary, music exists in diverse forms that may not conform to classical or academic frameworks but still hold meaning and value for listeners. While food has measurable nutritional values and health impacts even the implied sugary items like candy, still provide some nutritional value, even if overwhelmed by the non nutritional ingredients.
        anigbrowl 2y ago
        You keep arguing about validity but you're missing the point of how music is made. I'm not talking about 'only humans can be music because they alive', it's that music is fundamentally combinatorial, even if you're combining recordings of construction equipment to make industrial noise music. If you're generating the entire thing at once rather than stems or note data, you just have an elevator music generator which inexorably tends toward the lowest common denominator.
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  I think LLMs are great for summary or pastiche text. They do OK with poetry, but obviously this is a pastiche of existing poetry by necessity, since it can't be rooted in human experience (unless you want poems about being a computer, but that's not what most people have in mind. I think they're great for code, although within rather tight limitations in my experience. The problem with LLMs for music (as currently implemented, not inherently) is people keep training them on complete tracks. They're very obviously being trained by people who are not musicians.
peab 2y ago
From the artist perspective, this is correct. But there are lots of applications for music which parallel the applications of ai generated images - things that are more commercial in nature. The media is functional, for use cases such as commercials, or social media type videos, where people just need something for the ambiance and don't want to deal with copyright or anything like that.
xvector 2y ago
I don't really care about those fancy music theory terms. All that really matters is whether users like what the generator generates
bongodongobob 2y ago
I almost never use midi and beyond chord charts, none of the musicians I know write scores. No one is preventing you from creating in the way you like, get off your high horse. Do whatever makes you happy.
- anigbrowl 2y ago
  Nobody mentioned MIDI or scores except you. I don't know what you imagine you are responding to.
mdp2021 2y ago
I am not sure that the internal process could not work through conceiving «temporary harmony[...] rhythmic, tonal, timbral [etc.]». Furthermore, the sound itself is crucial, so perfect calibration of a perfect sound is definitely a part of what can be clearly be sought (when you do not want to leave that to a secondary human process in the workflow).

ganoushoreilly 2y ago

While I mostly agree with you, we know that music is defined by the listener. Who are we to discern what is or isn't music? Do you have the same opinion of text or code generated by or with the assistance of AI?

mdp2021 2y ago
The poster presents criticism against an architectural model. > Who are we to discern what is or isn't music? Hopefully, people with good judgement, potentially capable of evaluating products. The poster is clearly meaning "good music". > Do you have the same opinion of text or code generated by or with the assistance of There you go: the same way we note that some NN generated text is missing crucial qualities (e.g. intelligence), or that some NN generated images are missing crucial qualities (e.g. direction), you can surely admit the possibility that some NN generated sound may be missing relevant crucial qualities to the vetting of a good critic.
- ganoushoreilly 2y ago
  What is Good music though? That's the whole point. Plenty of people listen to stuff I would consider weird and non music, but to them it is.
  - mdp2021 2y ago
    Well if they call it "good music" because "they like it", that does not form a theory of music; whereas if they call it "good music" because they recognize it as an expression of good artistic form, and they are of promising judgement, than their theory could be translated into a generative architecture.
    - ganoushoreilly 2y ago
      It's up to the listener to apply whatever semantics they need to as justification. There is no purity test for music. The theory is just that theory.
      - mdp2021 2y ago
        > The theory is just that theory. Well no, Feyerabend let himself be called an "anarchist" but clearly there is a "more scientific" and "less scientific" - they cannot give you a lecturing appointment at the LSE or elsewhere to just shrug. > the listener ... as justification As justification to what? A producer makes products for different markets: people may sell bars of sugar with appetizers and synthetic flavours, that does not make the product remotely similar to healthy food.
        ganoushoreilly 2y ago
        Dismissing certain musical forms as lacking artistic validity because they don’t adhere to a predefined theory ignores the cultural, emotional, and contextual factors that shape artistic expression. Just as culinary traditions differ across regions and personal tastes vary, music exists in diverse forms that may not conform to classical or academic frameworks but still hold meaning and value for listeners. While food has measurable nutritional values and health impacts even the implied sugary items like candy, still provide some nutritional value, even if overwhelmed by the non nutritional ingredients.
      - anigbrowl 2y ago
        You keep arguing about validity but you're missing the point of how music is made. I'm not talking about 'only humans can be music because they alive', it's that music is fundamentally combinatorial, even if you're combining recordings of construction equipment to make industrial noise music. If you're generating the entire thing at once rather than stems or note data, you just have an elevator music generator which inexorably tends toward the lowest common denominator.
anigbrowl 2y ago
I think LLMs are great for summary or pastiche text. They do OK with poetry, but obviously this is a pastiche of existing poetry by necessity, since it can't be rooted in human experience (unless you want poems about being a computer, but that's not what most people have in mind. I think they're great for code, although within rather tight limitations in my experience. The problem with LLMs for music (as currently implemented, not inherently) is people keep training them on complete tracks. They're very obviously being trained by people who are not musicians.

peab 2y ago

From the artist perspective, this is correct. But there are lots of applications for music which parallel the applications of ai generated images - things that are more commercial in nature. The media is functional, for use cases such as commercials, or social media type videos, where people just need something for the ambiance and don't want to deal with copyright or anything like that.

xvector 2y ago

I don't really care about those fancy music theory terms. All that really matters is whether users like what the generator generates

bongodongobob 2y ago

I almost never use midi and beyond chord charts, none of the musicians I know write scores. No one is preventing you from creating in the way you like, get off your high horse. Do whatever makes you happy.

anigbrowl 2y ago
Nobody mentioned MIDI or scores except you. I don't know what you imagine you are responding to.

mdp2021 2y ago

I am not sure that the internal process could not work through conceiving «temporary harmony[...] rhythmic, tonal, timbral [etc.]». Furthermore, the sound itself is crucial, so perfect calibration of a perfect sound is definitely a part of what can be clearly be sought (when you do not want to leave that to a secondary human process in the workflow).