ampermusic

[ElmerJFudd]

“original music in seconds”
 

https://www.ampermusic.com

[Docbop]

This line on their page I found interesting....    >>> Kiss copyright takedowns good-bye <<<

 

I don't think the BMI ASCAPs and record companies see when getting YT and similar sites to take down video done for music education.  Or a few seconds of some hits in a non-commercial video on YT.       All those companies see is at most a couple cents they lost,  they don't see the potential dollars they are losing because of potential new fans hearing the music.     Back in my younger days you heard music everywhere all types of store playing radios or CDs, along with small bars,  diners, all sort of place trying to create an atmosphere for their customers.  I know many times I heard a song while shopping having a bite to eat and hear some music I like then go on a quest to find out who it is and buy that record and maybe become a big fan and continue to follow that artist.     So now BMI, ASCAP, and record company and feel relieved they aren't losing a couple cents and people who hear that new music and think.... I wonder what computer created that?

 

Same thing with cities forcing little restaurant and local bars to pay for a Cabaret license because they hired some local musicians to play on the weekends.   Less places for local musicians to play and less business for the local bars and restaurants that generates taxes.   Also less places for young musicians to do their apprenticeship to learn tunes and how to play to an audience.   Sad really sad. 

[bill5]

Oddly funny, annoying, and sad at the same time. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the future of music...people nowhere near talented enough to come up with something on their own (which will be dismissed as "old school") so they push a button, let a machine randomly crank something out, and sign their name to it.

 

I hope the computers that host that thing above burst into flames. 

 

 

[ElmerJFudd]

Some see this as the  democratization of music writing. With the help of AI anyone can write a song.  Increases productivity - there will be more songs than ever - but will many of them be worth listening to? 
 

chatGPT is already capable of writing lyrics “in the style of”.   I can see this AI language tool be useful for creating instruction manuals, summarizing the main point of extensive research.  But do we really want it making our art?  

[Reezekeys]

A quote from one of the press clips linked on Amper's site:

 

“Every time you lower the technological bar for the creation of music, you see more creation happen. So if you go from having to be somewhat musically-trained to make a piece of music to a situation where every single person with access to an electronic device can be a composer and write music, you’ll have a lot of new creators making a lot of new stuff,” is Silverstein’s take."

 

Except when "every single person with access to an electronic device can be a composer and write music" means inputting a few general parameters (length, style desired, etc) and letting a computer do pretty much everything else. That person can claim they "wrote" the music, really? Sure, if you're a shameless untalented amateur – I know I couldn't do it with a straight face.

 

Of course anyone espousing the opinion I just did is a luddite! It remains to be seen if this tech will be used mostly for instrumental beds & background-type music, or perhaps Live Nation will buy them up in their quest to control every aspect of music production and consumption. Why should some pop star part with a portion of their publishing royalties when they can use this to write their own hits? Hell, the simple two or four-chord loopy vamps so popular today seem built for AI composing!

[Docbop]

Is making some choices on song length, style, some other options to be considered "writing" a song.  That like saying I build cars because I sat with an salesperson, picked a model, color paint, and a few other options?  

 

What is going to be interesting is how all this AI generated music ownership works out,  Because you bought it does that mean you have rights to it if someone else decides they like it and want to use it in a video?    That's already an issue with self driving cars when they have an accident who is responsible the buyer of the car or the company who created the software.  AI is going to be a big legal mess in the future. 

[Piktor]

I find it interesting that there seems to be no sample works on the web site for us to hear. 

[Baggypants]

Computers were supposed to help us automate the boring stuff. I don't really get why people want to use them to automate the fun stuff and we get to discuss the legal implications.

People should just get the idea that being bad at being creative is still good.

[time4jazz]

9 hours ago, Reezekeys said:

Except when "every single person with access to an electronic device can be a composer and write music" means inputting a few general parameters (length, style desired, etc) and letting a computer do pretty much everything else. That person can claim they "wrote" the music, really? Sure, if you're a shameless untalented amateur – I know I couldn't do it with a straight face.

Yes, we’re at a strange time when some (many?) people seem to care less about being something and more about appearing to be something. And tech can readily make this happen. The metaverse is where it will all come together. I wonder if all of this will leave any room in the marketplace for those who want to invest the time to actually be something. 

[ElmerJFudd]

Currently chatGPT seems to be at a stage where you tell it the topic and length and it generates the report.  It’s still up to the human user to pick out what is useful, delete what isn’t and refine.  
 

I suspect pro applications like DAWs we’ll see similar - 3.5 minute song, 70s funk in the key of ‘Em.  Check boxes for bass, drums, keys, guitar, horns, melody, select all.  And it will be up to the user to move things around, rework parts.  Write the lyrics, record a human being for vocal or select Vocaloid (check box for male or female, voice range, age). Then hand it back over to the AI for autotune, mix and master.  
 

If I were the developers of Band in a Box. I’d be hiring AI devs right now because they already have the content the AI would absorb to do this job.  At some point they’ll get bought up by Native Instruments, Avid or Apple. 

[bill5]

12 hours ago, Reezekeys said:

A quote from one of the press clips linked on Amper's site:

 

“Every time you lower the technological bar for the creation of music, you see more creation happen.

What a load of crap. Whoever said that should never be taken seriously about music. Unless you add "of crap" betwen "creation" and "happen"

 

  

12 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Some see this as the  democratization of music writing. With the help of AI anyone can pretend to write a song.  

FTFY

 

 

[Anderton]

I think maybe there are three levels to this.

 

1. Hobbyists. There's nothing wrong with music as a hobby. A lot of people go bowling, but never develop their game to the level of professional bowlers. If it makes people happy to "create" something with the "look and feel" of music, that's fine with me. It would probably help music in general.

 

2. People who make "commodity" music. Think soundtracks for timeshare ads on late night TV. They just want something that can fill a space with sound. The "music" itself is of no consequence. These are the same people who would use needledrop or library music, except in this case, they won't have to pay anything.

 

3. Professional musicians. I've heard plenty of algorithmically generated music. It can provide aural engagement, but not emotional engagement. Given that the primary focus of much music is the human voice, it's hard for a machine to fake that, let alone come up with parts designed specifically to support it.

 

I do find that algorithmic options help me in what I do, like using sequencer pattern variations to create hand percussion-type parts, or fitting parts to chord tracks. But - and here's the big difference - they never produce exactly what I want. I always need to go in and make substantive changes. I don't think a hobbyist or commodity music producer would be able to do that, let alone modify it to support a lead vocal or instrument.

[Reezekeys]

I didn't realize how ahead of the game I was in the late 1980s when I used Dr T's "Omega" midi sequencer on my Atari ST, with a module he called the "PVG" ("programmable variations generator"). I think it was more honest in that it used randomization, coupled with a bunch of parameters that you, the user, entered to influence the results - and those parameters weren't "length of the piece", "genre", or anything of that ilk - they were musical attributes having to do with note pitches, durations, etc. IOW, the computer spit out the final result but the quality was directly related to how you wanted to "shape" the music, and you needed compositional skills to use the PVG effectively. I got to use it on one commercial release, a song on a 1991 Japanese CD that was a tribute to Jaco Pastorius. There was a section I wanted a climbing, cascading arpeggiated figure and thought the PVG would be perfect for that, and it was. Alas the CD is long out of print (I don't have it) and only a few tracks exist anywhere online - mine not being one of them (it was a compilation, I had but one track on it).

 

Back then it was "GIGO", now it's "GIGEO" ("garbage in, good enough out")!

[TommyRude]

I'm assuming that the chatgpt type algorithms used to make music - when you input the parameters they go out and crawl / scrape the web for sounds, notes, beats etc? Will the original creator of those sounds get credit?

[allan_evett]

On 1/16/2023 at 12:41 PM, Anderton said:

I think maybe there are three levels to this.

 

1. Hobbyists. There's nothing wrong with music as a hobby. A lot of people go bowling, but never develop their game to the level of professional bowlers. If it makes people happy to "create" something with the "look and feel" of music, that's fine with me. It would probably help music in general.

 

2. People who make "commodity" music. Think soundtracks for timeshare ads on late night TV. They just want something that can fill a space with sound. The "music" itself is of no consequence. These are the same people who would use needledrop or library music, except in this case, they won't have to pay anything.

 

3. Professional musicians. I've heard plenty of algorithmically generated music. It can provide aural engagement, but not emotional engagement. Given that the primary focus of much music is the human voice, it's hard for a machine to fake that, let alone come up with parts designed specifically to support it.

 

I do find that algorithmic options help me in what I do, like using sequencer pattern variations to create hand percussion-type parts, or fitting parts to chord tracks. But - and here's the big difference - they never produce exactly what I want. I always need to go in and make substantive changes. I don't think a hobbyist or commodity music producer would be able to do that, let alone modify it to support a lead vocal of instrument.

Thanks for this, Craig. It provides a balanced perspective to the ever increasing use of AI in music production, though this next big step was initially jarring to me as a working player. To a point it still is, as I remain concerned about the 'cheapening' of skilled craft. It continues to be disheartening - and each year more so as inflation continues and cost-of-living increases are ignored - that the pay scale for a night of basic club work remains at that of 1991. I'm concerned that the examples provided by AI will add a 'perverse twist' anyone-can-do-it justification for owners/managers to keep live music wages low. Still thankful for plenty of teaching and accompanying work, but the live scene - which I've always enjoyed - is discouraging now. Including the preparations, setup and teardown time, the hourly ends up in the mid teens. Might as well pick up extra cash working at the local hardware store and spend more time creating in my studio for fun and fulfillment. At least I can enjoy AI that way; I absolutely adore Logic's Drummer - especially when I can edit its offerings. 

[KuruPrionz]

Kill them...

[Docbop]

In a remote way kind of the same thing look how live music has diminished over last few decades do to DJ's now getting the gigs instead.   Now AI generating incidental music for media but that can easily grow into AI generated music for any situation.   Having a party just tell your AI Boombox what kind music you want for  the night and hit play.    Were just at the beginning of people becoming used to AI becoming part of their lives and more is coming with AR headsets and similar devices.    Science Fiction isn't too accurate about when new tech will change the world, but it pretty good at foreseeing the changes coming.   

 

Okay I will get off my atomic power self levitating soap box and let you get back to AI-Yes or AI-Genesis hour in your AI powered home. 

[bill5]

I'm sorry, what? I missed that while 7 of 9 was busy adding a new implant to me that I don't see any need for, but she insists I do, so.......... 

 

Anyone ever see the movie "Idiocracy?" The movie isn't that great per se, but it's sadly spot on in its assessment of where we are/are going IMO. The intro especially was oddly funny and sad to me at the same time.

[Anderton]

9 hours ago, Docbop said:

Now AI generating incidental music for media but that can easily grow into AI generated music for any situation.   Having a party just tell your AI Boombox what kind music you want for  the night and hit play. 

 

Aren't we already there? "Alexa, play an 80s party mix."

[Anderton]

8 minutes ago, bill5 said:

Anyone ever see the movie "Idiocracy?" The movie isn't that great per se.

 

I've mentioned that movie several times to people, but they couldn't find it. Their mistake...they searched on "comedies," not "documentaries."

[Anderton]

9 hours ago, Docbop said:

In a remote way kind of the same thing look how live music has diminished over last few decades do to DJ's now getting the gigs instead. 

 

I don't think it has anything to do with music any more than self-service checkout at supermarkets has anything to do with food. Downsizing increases the bottom line, and decreases the quality of life. Until people realize that quality of life is what matters, don't expect any changes.

 

Standard disclaimer: some DJs are really, really amazing. But they're the ones putting on huge shows where they make six figures, not the ones doing the Holidome bar on Saturday night that used to hire bands.

[bill5]

I don't think he meant quality, he meant quantity. Harder for real musicians to get gigs when people can hire a DJ to spin tunes for far less. Welcome to America, the land of ever-decreasing standards 

[Docbop]

23 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

Aren't we already there? "Alexa, play an 80s party mix."

I would say stream playlists are probably a combination of human and AI.    Interesting thing I heard today in a talk about ChatGPT that humans are involved in some of the results to review and sometimes edit the output when the results don't seem right for the input.  

[Anderton]

13 hours ago, Docbop said:

Interesting thing I heard today in a talk about ChatGPT that humans are involved in some of the results to review and sometimes edit the output when the results don't seem right for the input.  

 

Also, ChatGPT will make things up to fill in gaps if it doesn't know the answer. So, it may give the look and feel of authority, but it's not necessarily accurate.