delirium Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/10/03/musical.robot/index.html I just wander why people want to build something like that...The "product" of "this" never will be real music. btw, who will want to listen to robot's concert... ♫♫♫ motif XS6, RD700GX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linwood Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Maybe way in the future, in a galaxy far far away and I'm all hopped up on goofers, I can be in this band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Still Learning Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Finally a drummer that is never late and doesn't consume all the beer! When most people go to work, they work. When musicians go to work, they play. Which do you prefer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marino Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 To me, the most scaring thing is the last sentence: "We have only focused on human/robot interaction, and we feel the area has not yet fully been explored," he said. "But it would be interesting to see how two robots inspire each other in music." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
latchmo Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 I bet it would burn really well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K K Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 OK, now I wonder. The text refers to the thing as 1) a musical robot, then 2) as a robotic musician. I'm sorry, but this last one is nothing new, since I know a lot of robotic musicians that try to compose, perform and teach. Then they refer to it as 3) a robotic drummer, yet another well-known species. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
burningbusch Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Here, you can have it now with more sophisticated algorithms for $99. http://www.rayzoon.com/jamstix.html Busch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delirium Posted October 3, 2006 Author Share Posted October 3, 2006 Maybe when they mix in one bag all famous licks and phrases from all greatest pianists, order them to the tempo and the key and spit them out randomly theyll get some kind of music with which inexperience listener can be fooled around ♫♫♫ motif XS6, RD700GX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverDragonSoun Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 double Begin the day with a friendly voice A companion, unobtrusive - Rush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverDragonSoun Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 If a male and female music robot mate, will their creation be consider an upgrade or update? Begin the day with a friendly voice A companion, unobtrusive - Rush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delirium Posted October 4, 2006 Author Share Posted October 4, 2006 Originally posted by Silver Dragon Sound: If a male and female music robot mate, will their creation be consider an upgrade or upgate? ♫♫♫ motif XS6, RD700GX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dp2 Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Originally posted by delirium: Originally posted by Silver Dragon Sound: If a male and female music robot mate, will their creation be consider an upgrade or upgate? I have a suggestion for their make-out music: "Computer Love." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Horne Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I wonder how it would voice a Bb7 +11, 13? No guitarists were harmed during the making of this message. In general, harmonic complexity is inversely proportional to the ratio between chording and non-chording instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffLearman Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Har har. Wanna find out? Just plug that into Band In A Box. Get used to it, folks. Software will just keep getting better at making music. Band In A Box is already pretty good at mimicking style. True, not nearly good enough to fool an expert, but good enough to impress me and fool the average joe. They will only get better and more sophisticated over the years. There will always be pundits who prate about the gap between what software can do and what 'liveware' can do, and there will probably always be a gap (at least, in our lifetimes). But that gap will get smaller and smaller. However, it will be a LONG time before software enjoys making music as much as we do. And who wants to go to a venue and see racks of equipment making live music? Not me! For most of us, music is about art and art is about communication and empathy. Computer generated music will take over where music is NOT art -- where it's just background and unimportant, serving the same purpose as wallpaper. There will be exceptions, but computer music won't take over as entertainment. (The most notable exception will be as backing for the one-man band. We already see these folks with CD backing tracks; at some point computer-generated stuff will be easier for them. It almost already is with BIAB.) I'm not down on BIAB, BTW. I think it's a great tool for learning, practice, and as a composition tool. Anyway, this is the way of the future, whether we like it or not. You can get annoyed or not but it'll happen anyway. And I predict one positive aspect. When computers can play with better technical profficiency than we can, mere technical profficiency will become less treasured, in comparison to innovation and soulfulness. This has already happened a lot due to MIDI sequencing, IMHO, and the trend will continue. Not that we won't appreciate technical wizardry, we just won't appreciate it so much without other virtues. (Remember the Fusion era?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delirium Posted October 4, 2006 Author Share Posted October 4, 2006 so should we still practice or no sense anymore... ♫♫♫ motif XS6, RD700GX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Pierce Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Somehow I find this more interesting than annoying. Perhaps I'm just a technology Pollyanna, but I don't feel particularly threatened by robots, software, or other technological devices for creating music. And, by learning how to make such devices better, I think we learn a lot about how the human mind works. To me, that's fascinating stuff. I'd love to see a live performance with this robot and a few humans! --Dave Make my funk the P-funk. I wants to get funked up. My Funk/Jam originals project: http://www.thefunkery.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K K Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Can this robot play a CYLON VOCODER? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
linwood Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I'd love to see a live performance with this robot and a few humans! Rockit Band 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phred Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 I'm with Dave Pierce. Cool stuff, but not particularly theatening... Imagine a full band of robots feeding off of eachother... Pretty neat. I'm just saying', everyone that confuses correlation with causation eventually ends up dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfD Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 learjeff, made some excellent points. Surely, there will always be the pro/con perspective when it comes to technology/art. IMO, technology will never replace the human aspect of what music does i.e. emotional connection. Synths made their mark 30 years ago but folks still want to learn how to play piano and other real instruments. Sequencers dominate several genres of music, yet, country music and rock still have bands. The power single does okay in the local sports bar, pub or club but has yet to consistently sell out Madison Square Garden and other large venues. Technology will always be a tool. Until AI (artificial intelligence) reaches the point of being able to feel, art will always come down to an individual and their creativity with those tools. PD "The greatest thing you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return."--E. Ahbez "Nature Boy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Horne Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Technology will always be a tool. Until AI (artificial intelligence) reaches the point of being able to feel, art will always come down to an individual and their creativity with those tools. When AI devices come close to have the same number of neurons that we have, they will feel ... and they will be creative. In twenty years the discussion here will be the ethics of an AI 'musician' using sequencers and putting other devices out of work. The lines will be clearly drawn - those AI devices that make money using sequencers will support their use and ...... No guitarists were harmed during the making of this message. In general, harmonic complexity is inversely proportional to the ratio between chording and non-chording instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanker. Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Do we really need a thread in the KC about Dave Weckl? A ROMpler is just a polyphonic turntable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeffLearman Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 IMO, technology will never replace the human aspect of what music does i.e. emotional connection.I agree, though it's true by definition. Some day (which I will probably not live to see), we may find music as an expression of artificial emotion. I.e., emotion of non-natural intelligence. Now, THAT will be interesting! Also very cool (but far less likely) would be music from aliens; I wonder what we'd learn from that. Most of today's computer-generated music doesn't convey any emotion, it's just a reflection of our own musical techniques, using theory, hueristics, and "artifical intelligence" algorithms that don't do justice to what we usually mean by "intelligence". There's nobody home. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
delirium Posted October 4, 2006 Author Share Posted October 4, 2006 That so called humans emotions can be fooled though, can you get romantic or excited about e.g. fractals? I can. These are computer/mathematic generated images right? But still in some context can be seen as art. They are more art to me then Picasso painting So everything is relative, fluid and art is a very personal/subjective matter I can say. That's why I'd risk a statement that art is not what we humans or e.g robots can create, but rather what we can perceive. ♫♫♫ motif XS6, RD700GX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ProfD Posted October 4, 2006 Share Posted October 4, 2006 Originally posted by learjeff: Most of today's computer-generated music doesn't convey any emotion, it's just a reflection of our own musical techniques, using theory, hueristics, and "artifical intelligence" algorithms that don't do justice to what we usually mean by "intelligence". There's nobody home. That is an understatement! As a music junkie, I NEVER thought I could turn off the radio. However, betweeen listening to some refreshingly hip live music and rehearsing my trio, I haven't fired up my sequencer in months. The difference between programming music and playing with other musicians is like night and day. Surely, I will continue to use the tools of the trade in my work. However, I clearly see the difference between playing that which sounds good versus that which feels great. I'll take a real band over a band in a box every time. No jab at sequencers intended. PD "The greatest thing you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return."--E. Ahbez "Nature Boy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.