I love music and experimentation but I find those pieces portrayed there quite devoid of emotional content.
I like the idea of procedural music being created automatically, but I believe that the end result still need to inspire and transport the listener. I have no doubts that we will be able to make some pretty convincing stuff in the future, and it probably won't be a lot worse than what's already playing in the charts.
Genetic algorithms could eventually produce music that triggered a emotional response in humans. Your "fitness test" would need to be having real people listen to procedurally generated scores and rating the emotional impact (if any) of each sample. Perhaps a task for mechanical turk?
In the end though, I think we seek out music or art that puts us in the mindset or emotional state of the artist. Forging a connection of shared experience.
If the music tugged at all the right heartstrings, but you knew it wasn't made by a human, could you feel that depth of connection?
If the music tugged at all the right heartstrings, but you knew it wasn't made by a human, could you feel that depth of connection?
I do think this is a false dichotomy of sorts. (Right turn of phrase?) The music may have been made by a machine, but humans made the machine. What ultimately is the difference between music “made” by a violin being directly played, verses a synthesizer reconstructing songs based on what a programmer did beforehand? It’s just a matter of degree. It might be more productive in discussions to look at the “artist” verses “committee” angle instead.
Comments
I love music and experimentation but I find those pieces portrayed there quite devoid of emotional content.
I like the idea of procedural music being created automatically, but I believe that the end result still need to inspire and transport the listener. I have no doubts that we will be able to make some pretty convincing stuff in the future, and it probably won't be a lot worse than what's already playing in the charts.
Genetic algorithms could eventually produce music that triggered a emotional response in humans. Your "fitness test" would need to be having real people listen to procedurally generated scores and rating the emotional impact (if any) of each sample. Perhaps a task for mechanical turk?
In the end though, I think we seek out music or art that puts us in the mindset or emotional state of the artist. Forging a connection of shared experience.
If the music tugged at all the right heartstrings, but you knew it wasn't made by a human, could you feel that depth of connection?
I do think this is a false dichotomy of sorts. (Right turn of phrase?) The music may have been made by a machine, but humans made the machine. What ultimately is the difference between music “made” by a violin being directly played, verses a synthesizer reconstructing songs based on what a programmer did beforehand? It’s just a matter of degree. It might be more productive in discussions to look at the “artist” verses “committee” angle instead.