TromboneChat

This is a piece of music composed in about a minute by an AI, presumably with some parameters (sample melody, key, time signature, and a style setting) fed to it before hitting the magic button. That's pretty incredible to me.

Any thoughts on using this to write music for trombone?

For example, I have tons of ideas about melodies and basic "bone" structures for pieces, but zero orchestration or composition chops. I don't think this software is at the level yet where I could give it a midi of a solo trombone part I wrote, with some basic counter melodies and chord ideas, and have it compose the piano accompaniment and help me with the orchestration, but that might be coming soon. I don't know, maybe someone knows of software that fits this idea.

Anyways, does anyone have any thoughts? It would be like a dream to take the ideas I have and get some help with the things I can't do, to achieve the kind of music I have dreamed about playing. Like a collaboration between me and an AI to create something better than either of us individually could do. Very similar to what people are doing with the Stable Diffusion img2img collaboration to generate paintings. You feed the AI a crappy drawing of what you want and a text prompt, it gives you it's own version, you can draw over it and change the text prompt and send it back. Eventually you end up with something like this:



Something like this, but with music. When I first heard about this img2img process (it's bleeding edge tech, released like two weeks ago, and OPEN SOURCE), I couldn't believe it. Do you realize how INSANE that is?? Now imagine singing a melodic line into your smartphone and getting a piece of fleshed out music. And better results if you feed in better original data from you.

Of course people already think this will immediately be taking jobs and ruining music, but not many composers are writing us music as it is. I have composition ideas but no technical ability, so to me this would actually help us get more music for trombone if it could help me flesh out my ideas and fill in the holes in my own ability.

It sounds like the "movie music" you get in stock music collections. The track would have a title like "emotional movie scene"

Its not awful but it's never surprising, even when it changes suddenly.

AI art is way beyond needing a starter drawing. Just text input is creating prize winning art...

A man won an art competition in Colorado using AI-generated art, prompting a debate over what art is

robcat2075 wrote: ↑Sun Sep 04, 2022 10:19 pm It sounds like the "movie music" you get in stock music collections. The track would have a title like "emotional movie scene"

Its not awful but it's never surprising, even when it changes suddenly.

AI art is way beyond needing a starter drawing. Just text input is creating prize winning art...

A man won an art competition in Colorado using AI-generated art, prompting a debate over what art is

I think you missed the point on the starter drawing being a step forward. The guy who won that, if he didn't use one, probably had to take hundreds of tries and seeds to get that image. If he had given it an input like a drawing in addition to a text prompt, you could get that in only a few tries. Imagine the implications for design, and graphic design. "We want a cool looking toaster with the vibe of these old cars". You just use an image of the car and a text prompt that says "toaster, photorealistic".

The input is great because it's less of a guessing game. Being able to do the same with music would be incredible.

Using a program like that is like having the infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters reproducing all the great books. You have to have a way to find which piece of output is good. Having a great set of paints doesn't make you a great painter -- it's just a start.

Adobe ought to make such a capability a plugin filter for Photoshop.

That would solve the problem of people who buy Photoshop thinking it will make them a great artist.

Maybe they have already.

BGuttman wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 5:21 am Using a program like that is like having the infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters reproducing all the great books. You have to have a way to find which piece of output is good. Having a great set of paints doesn't make you a great painter -- it's just a start.

Yes but what I'm suggesting would involve constraining it, just like with the image above. It wouldn't be random. Say I wrote the bones of a piece I want to perform, the entire melody and solo part, and possibly some of the chords. Maybe a simple counter melody to go with the trombone part so that the rests aren't empty. Then I ask the AI to finish the work, but keep my material in it. That would be incredible and I wouldn't need to learn orchestration. I'd be doing the work that is really difficult for the AI (writing surprising or creative melodies) and it would do what I am terrible at (knowing the rules of orchestrating for orchestra, or making things playable on a piano). And if this is possible, you don't need to settle -- I could take the output, constrain the same things and include the parts of the orchestration that are working, and use an updated, edited version of that output to feed back to the AI.

FWIW, they've already done it -- an AI "finished" Schubert's unfinished symphony. It sounds pretty awesome. No it isn't what the composer would have written, but it sounds like him all right.

No one else thinks that this is a potential goldmine to help increase creative output? I am sure this will happen whether we like it or not.

robcat2075 wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 7:25 am Adobe ought to make such a capability a plugin filter for Photoshop.

That would solve the problem of people who buy Photoshop thinking it will make them a great artist.

Maybe they have already.

I'm sure someone is working on it. You already can take your favorite photos, give it to Stable Diffusion and ask it to reimagine the image in the style of Rembrandt. It's ridiculous.

AI can do some stuff, but it isn't genius. Could an AI have come up with this?

For those of you who don't know, this is "Bull's Head" by Pablo Picasso. It's made from a bicycle seat and bicycle handle bars.

I just see another way to end up paying artists less, given the way automation goes in America, at least in late-stage capitalism.

WilliamLang wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 11:26 am I just see another way to end up paying artists less, given the way automation goes in America, at least in late-stage capitalism.

That's it in a nutshell.

Well, at least that seems to be (and has always been) one of the driving forces of mainstream/commercial/popular forms of music, art, film, photography when used for mass consumption or meant to sell products or appeal to the widest base of consumers possible.

(note: I've done enough work as a composer in the commercial side of music to know how it goes)

Usually, the first question you're asked is "Can you write something like this?" or "Can you create music in the style of what this person did for this project?" or "Can you give us something real generic and 'in-the-style' of what people would expect to hear for this type of show?"

etc. etc.

The real big time media-composer have to deal with this on a daily basis, and they're well paid for it in most cases, because they're working for people that have to make a profit on whatever it is they're doing.

So, a lot of media music is re-hashed and re-cycled ideas. There are zillions and zillions of music library pieces of music floating around the world, and many of them all sound the same or are just created by 'composers' trying to copy someone else hoping to get a placement in some media project.

Fact is, an AI program could easily create some acceptable music and replace about 90% of background media music out there. The big time Hollywood people know this, and have to fight to save their jobs.

Some people like to be part of that type of game. Let 'em "have at it".

But, using AI to actually help create some ART?

Hmm.... I, for one, will need further convincing. Even if you load a computer with every musical parameter from every composer throughout the entire history of known music output, you still just have a computer having to sort through data in order to fulfill it's programming.

Something 'pretty' might come out of it. It might have some appeal. But....lasting appeal beyond the immediate? Would it bear repeated hearing? Repeated performances? Something that actually moves real humans in some form or another?

Who knows....and, who really cares. I guess if someone wants to really get into AI in order to make a buck, then that person or creative director would really care.

Maybe 'AI artists' should actually just be called 'creative directors'.

We must differentiate 'AI artists' from actual humans who were 'creative directors with an artistic vision'. There are many examples of artists who employed and directed others in order to help create their artistic vision (ie: Andy Warhol, Hans Zimmer, August Rodin, and many others).

These artists have all 'pumped out' art for public consumption and big sales in their time.

BUT....at least they were actual human beings who came up with an actual artistic idea and just needed a way to 'get it out there'. They were actually very 'hands on' and had a vision in mind and gave their assistants some starting points and parameters to work with. They were the overall producers and directors of the product. Humans creating art for other humans.

Anyways....AI music is kind of like 'paint by numbers'. Not really that original or artistic in the end.

Maybe AI computers will create something to be enjoyed by other AI computes.

Cmillar wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:11 am
BUT....at least they were actual human beings who came up with an actual artistic idea and just needed a way to 'get it out there'. They were actually very 'hands on' and had a vision in mind and gave their assistants some starting points and parameters to work with. They were the overall producers and directors of the product. Humans creating art for other humans.

Anyways....AI music is kind of like 'paint by numbers'. Not really that original or artistic in the end.

Maybe AI computers will create something to be enjoyed by other AI computes.

Is no one reading how I suggested using the AI tool? I am with you, and I think that asking an AI to compose music for trombone would be terrible, at least right now with current tech. But, even now you can write out the entire melody, structure, and chord progressions yourself and ask the AI to help you finish the orchestration. That's how I would use it

I played that example above for my music appreciation class without telling them what it was. This was part of a discussion on “what is music?” I played bird song, pickup truck sounds, some john cage audio collage (Williams something?), a super atonal thing, then this. Their brains were mush by this point. Finished them off with some 4’33”

Thanks Harrison for the excellent example for my lecture!

You realize that if you only play half of 4'33" you have to call it 2'16"

BGuttman wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 6:49 pm You realize that if you only play half of 4'33" you have to call it 2'16"

In the true spirit of TTF gotcha-ism: Cage indicates that the performance may be of any duration.

harrisonreed wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 4:09 pm

Cmillar wrote: ↑Thu Sep 15, 2022 9:11 am
BUT....at least they were actual human beings who came up with an actual artistic idea and just needed a way to 'get it out there'. They were actually very 'hands on' and had a vision in mind and gave their assistants some starting points and parameters to work with. They were the overall producers and directors of the product. Humans creating art for other humans.

Anyways....AI music is kind of like 'paint by numbers'. Not really that original or artistic in the end.

Maybe AI computers will create something to be enjoyed by other AI computes.

Is no one reading how I suggested using the AI tool? I am with you, and I think that asking an AI to compose music for trombone would be terrible, at least right now with current tech. But, even now you can write out the entire melody, structure, and chord progressions yourself and ask the AI to help you finish the orchestration. That's how I would use it

OK. Got your point.

Yes...it's also like someone like a Hollywood film composer sketching out the main theme and giving it to his orchestrators to flush out. (...some of them apparently aren't schooled enough to dare attempt their own orchestrations)

For AI doing everything for a piece of music, it could definitely work for the innocuous background type of library music needed for reality TV shows and many films.

This music is about the simplest thing, it's basically only four bars that repeat itself eternally. It's nothing unique in it. Then there are different common patterns applied to the chords that follows very simple composition roles. There have been lots of compositions done by man on those same chords and using those patterns before. I agree it sounds like something from a movie or videogame. I've never found this kind of music special, it's just something that replace the silence, but of course many people might like it, because of the meditative mood. Yes, AI can write this totally uninteresting stuff for me. The same as when I asked AI to compare a Bach12C, 11C, 7C, 4C and 6 1/2 AL. Yes it compared them with great confidence and it was completely wrong, full of rubbish. It supplied data about the sizes and spoke as if it was a very experienced tromboneplayer, but the data were all wrong and I could not agree less on how AI described the playing characteristics. This music is the same, it's just pieces of rubbish that "someone" wrote and AI picked up and then put together in a package well known. In the future it might be different but at the moment I like this music the same as if it had been made by man, and that means I don't like it very much. It has no finesse, nothing that thrill my mind

/Tom

BGuttman wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 5:21 am Using a program like that is like having the infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters reproducing all the great books. You have to have a way to find which piece of output is good. Having a great set of paints doesn't make you a great painter -- it's just a start.

Actually, having powerful tools is only the start. The essential expertise is in curating and selecting the worthwhile output. The artist's touch and critical judgment allow creativity to bloom.original magic 8 ball

BGuttman wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 5:21 am Using a program like that is like having the infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters reproducing all the great books.

No it's not. Not at all.

WilliamLang wrote: ↑Mon Sep 05, 2022 11:26 am I just see another way to end up paying artists less, given the way automation goes in America, at least in late-stage capitalism.

Or another perspective ...

You're paying a different set of artists: The AI designers, developers, and implementers -- and the AI itself. Unless you want to go in the direction of saying that the type (and level and capabilities) of the sorts of AIs we're talking about can't be considered "artists" -- as they're producing what we genuinely regard as "art."