It's a fun inspiration tool. I'm a bagpiper and I have yet to hear AI spit out a playable pipe part. I can, however, transcribe the piece and rewrite the part so that it can be reproduced by a human.
Same with every media title that asks a question... the answer is always no. Just like with AI-generated art, people will tell the difference and it will, at best, be a cheap solution for low-budget endeavors.
I certainly agree that the answer is no. But I do think that even today's AI models are good enough that many people can't tell the difference. For example, some output from Udio received an honorable mention in a competition for cinematic music recently (and in case you're wondering, the judges were quite competent).
@@EricGalluzzo Personalization of music, democratize the expression. Then the efficient sentiment gathering gives the artists so much to work on for the collective enjoyment of great hits.
This is a very logical take. I created a AI Story writer and I tell people it is basically a glorified grammar checker. Basically, it can only 'help' humans and must be 'guided' by humans to be useful. This is why Microsoft call its products "Copilot"
Yes. A software architect friend of mine likes to say that in any system, the AI model can recommendations, but you always have to keep the (knowledgeable) human in the loop to accept one of the recommendations - or know when not to accept any of them and do something else.
@@EricGalluzzo Because I spent the last two years working on this stuff (and wrote two books on the subject) I have put way more time thinking about it than I probably should have... The thing that AI cannot do (in my opinion) is have "desire". This may seem like a small thing, but, it honestly is a key thing that (again in my opinion) makes us "human". It is the unquantifiable "desire" that drives our decisions that results in the "Art" that we create. Computer equations can never have "desire". They are always, in the end, responding to some human instruction (therefore the "desire" of the human).
You know, I bet the developers are taking your remarks and making changes already. For 100$ a month a pro will have all the tools. Click and drag and paint. Composing will change to the point of absurdity.
Well - I think composing will change, but at this point it's hard to tell exactly what the changes will be. And depending on what the AI tools offer, maybe it will be money well spent!
@@EricGalluzzo I grew up during the time drum machines started to come out (remember LINN Drum and Roland 808?) . People were like "it is the end of 'real' music..."
@@adefwebserver Yep - I think every new technology has people worrying it's going to take their jobs. I mentioned that in my previous video. I seem to recall sample libraries had the same problem - "you won't hire orchestras anymore!" But anyone who can does - the real thing just sounds so much better, and it's so much more rewarding to have real people play and enjoy your music, and get feedback, and all that other stuff that goes along with real live musicians.
Artists are using it already to generate ideas and then simply go and replay/recreate the prompt output.
It's a fun inspiration tool. I'm a bagpiper and I have yet to hear AI spit out a playable pipe part. I can, however, transcribe the piece and rewrite the part so that it can be reproduced by a human.
I just think AI will be a great co-composer
Same with every media title that asks a question... the answer is always no. Just like with AI-generated art, people will tell the difference and it will, at best, be a cheap solution for low-budget endeavors.
I certainly agree that the answer is no. But I do think that even today's AI models are good enough that many people can't tell the difference. For example, some output from Udio received an honorable mention in a competition for cinematic music recently (and in case you're wondering, the judges were quite competent).
Great insights! We still need human composers.
It's never about AI music vs. composers and singers. It's about the changes that need to happen.
I tend to agree with the first part - but what do you mean by "the changes that need to happen?"
@@EricGalluzzo Personalization of music, democratize the expression. Then the efficient sentiment gathering gives the artists so much to work on for the collective enjoyment of great hits.
This is a very logical take. I created a AI Story writer and I tell people it is basically a glorified grammar checker. Basically, it can only 'help' humans and must be 'guided' by humans to be useful. This is why Microsoft call its products "Copilot"
Yes. A software architect friend of mine likes to say that in any system, the AI model can recommendations, but you always have to keep the (knowledgeable) human in the loop to accept one of the recommendations - or know when not to accept any of them and do something else.
@@EricGalluzzo Because I spent the last two years working on this stuff (and wrote two books on the subject) I have put way more time thinking about it than I probably should have... The thing that AI cannot do (in my opinion) is have "desire". This may seem like a small thing, but, it honestly is a key thing that (again in my opinion) makes us "human". It is the unquantifiable "desire" that drives our decisions that results in the "Art" that we create. Computer equations can never have "desire". They are always, in the end, responding to some human instruction (therefore the "desire" of the human).
You know, I bet the developers are taking your remarks and making changes already. For 100$ a month a pro will have all the tools. Click and drag and paint. Composing will change to the point of absurdity.
Well - I think composing will change, but at this point it's hard to tell exactly what the changes will be. And depending on what the AI tools offer, maybe it will be money well spent!
@@EricGalluzzo I grew up during the time drum machines started to come out (remember LINN Drum and Roland 808?) . People were like "it is the end of 'real' music..."
@@adefwebserver Yep - I think every new technology has people worrying it's going to take their jobs. I mentioned that in my previous video. I seem to recall sample libraries had the same problem - "you won't hire orchestras anymore!" But anyone who can does - the real thing just sounds so much better, and it's so much more rewarding to have real people play and enjoy your music, and get feedback, and all that other stuff that goes along with real live musicians.