[HN Gopher] AI-generated sad girl with piano performs the text o...
___________________________________________________________________
AI-generated sad girl with piano performs the text of the MIT
License
Author : amichail
Score : 537 points
Date : 2024-04-04 13:57 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (twitter.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (twitter.com)
| EwanG wrote:
| Amusing, as well as a decent ad for the latest version of Suno.ai
| pk-protect-ai wrote:
| Absolutely amazing!
| donbrae wrote:
| Impressive! Quite a nice song, too.
| JacksonWaschura wrote:
| Wow! I hadn't kept up with music generation for the past few
| years. It's come a long way!
|
| Long-term coherence, reasonable-ish melody, all on top of very
| unmusical text. Very impressive.
| xedrac wrote:
| The song really picks up when you get to the all CAPS section.
| tivert wrote:
| Twitter is stupid now, so I can only see the linked post. But are
| there instructions to replicate this, and has anyone done so?
| Just kind of skeptical of videos of demos in general.
|
| If this is legit, the Spotify spam is going to become atrocious
| and probably unmanageable.
| donbrae wrote:
| The actual page at suno.ai: https://app.suno.ai/song/da6d4a83-1
| 001-4694-8c28-648a6e8bad0....
| huytersd wrote:
| Yeah you can generate any type of song with really good results
| on suno.ai
| codingdave wrote:
| Yeah, it works, and doesn't need any technical instructions.
| Just go make a song on suno.ai.
|
| I had done a folk song version of my resume. It wasn't going to
| become a hit or anything, so I don't see this replacing any
| real musicians, but it absolutely worked to create a passable
| performance as a song.
| cruano wrote:
| The Spotify spam _is_ already atrocious and unmanageable. If
| anything, it might get a little bit more creative instead of
| people just publishing the same samples from Splice everywhere.
| sigmar wrote:
| The delivery of "(the 'software')" at 0:21 had me chuckling.
| cwillu wrote:
| Mer chan ta billlll iiii tttyyyyyy
| buzzm wrote:
| Agreed! Unexpected and made my morning.
| navane wrote:
| I hoped for a choir when I saw the al caps section coming, and
| I was not disappointed.
| n4r9 wrote:
| Some strange and funny vocal aberrations here:
|
| * sublicence - "sublissence"
|
| * fitness - "fisted"
|
| * infringement - "infring-ment"
|
| * liable - "liar-ful"
|
| It's also obviously not a pure human voice recording as the pitch
| transitions sound heavily auto-tuned or electrified (think Cher's
| "Believe").
|
| I anticipate people becoming experts in detecting AI-generated
| vocalists in much the same way that we can currently detect AI-
| generated images due to abnormalities especially in details like
| ears or fingers.
| haolez wrote:
| And I also expect that, very soon, we won't be able to tell
| them apart anymore (like those wine experts that fail to detect
| the good wines if blindfolded).
| Etheryte wrote:
| That fail to detect even whether they're having white wine or
| red wine.*
| arketyp wrote:
| I've heard this, and I would have been inclined to believe
| it. But then I watched the documentary Somm about the
| journey of a couple of friends reaching for the highest
| rankings of sommeliers. They could identify grapes, regions
| and year with striking accuracy. I just don't see how you
| could do that and then not be able to tell white and red
| wine apart.
| vundercind wrote:
| I barely know what I'm doing with wine but am 100% sure I
| could at least tell you which are whites and which reds
| if you lined up a typical Chardonnay, a typical Pinot
| Grigio, a typical cab sauv, and a typical Pinot noir.
|
| I am certain there exist weird wines that could fool me
| (I've had a few _really_ weird wines) but typical shit
| from the grocery store, I'm gonna be able to tell at
| least that much. I might even ID them more precisely than
| red or white. It's not exactly subtle...
|
| Then again I don't have a clue how someone could fail to
| tell which is coke and which Pepsi in the "Pepsi
| challenge". They're wildly different flavors. I can tell
| by smell alone.
| n4r9 wrote:
| I vaguely remember looking into this before, and it
| turned out that the tasters were being _told_
| (incorrectly) that it was a red wine, and asked to
| describe the flavour profile. They then used tasting
| terms more frequently associated with reds than with
| whites, and didn 't question what they were told.
|
| So it's less a case of "they cannot distinguish red from
| white" and more a case of "they went along with a
| suggested classification". I feel like this is a weaker
| result, although it's still a little surprising.
| arketyp wrote:
| Thanks. Together with GP's point about the possibility of
| weird wines, it seems reasonable that one could go along
| quite far on a false premise.
| notnaut wrote:
| My feeling is there is the high level classification
| which is quite difficult to fuck up. After that it's all
| adjectives and analogues, which is the fluffed up
| phoniness that inherently presents itself in the process
| of converting our subjective experiences of physical
| reality into abstract symbols.
| yongjik wrote:
| Yeah, but that still shows people's perception of wine is
| barely above noise level, if it can be so easily misled.
|
| For comparison, imagine someone showing a piece of
| Picasso to art critics and saying "Could you please
| describe the artistic significance of this painting by da
| Vinci?" The critics won't start using terms commonly
| reserved for Renaissance era; they'll say "What the fuck
| are you talking about, this isn't da Vinci."
| wizzwizz4 wrote:
| Both artists are dead. It is possible to learn all of
| their paintings. It is not possible to learn all of the
| wines.
| gpm wrote:
| That sounds a lot weaker.
|
| Quick, label all the US states:
| https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/label_the_states.png
|
| I've given this map to half a dozen smart/well educated
| Canadians, who happily engaged in pointing out the states
| they recognized for several minutes, and not one of them
| noticed until it was pointed out.
| ska wrote:
| I suspect it would work nearly as well on many Americans.
| vundercind wrote:
| What's the joke? Looks normal. I see Thirdmont.
| Indiantwo. Yep, ordinary map.
| lupire wrote:
| So? That's focusing on what they know and not having time
| to notice the extra. Different from making incorrect
| statements
| nrclark wrote:
| A lot of the biggest perceived differences come from
| temperature, since red wines are usually served at room-
| temperature. If you ever decide to do a blind test, make
| sure to control for temperature. I did it, and I had a
| very hard time picking out which varietals were red and
| which were white.
| gamblor956 wrote:
| I rarely drink wine (less than 1x every few years) and I
| can tell the difference between a red wine and a white
| wine, and subcategories of red wines (and I do
| specifically mean the _difference_ , so that means only
| when compared to another wine).
|
| The hard part is _identifying_ the type of wine, but many
| of my wine-drinking friends can do with ease. We 've
| tried the "test," having me or someone else randomly
| purchase wines from the closest store and then serving
| random samples to them while they're blindfolded. They're
| able to identify the specific variety more than 4/5 of
| the time.
| svachalek wrote:
| Yeah, I'm sure a lot of these tasters are overly
| pretentious. But some people are willing to go the
| opposite extreme and think people can't taste anything.
| Can anyone tell the difference between Coke and Sprite?
| Between Coke and Pepsi? Coke and Diet Coke? Of course we
| can. The difference between a typical pinot noir, syrah,
| or cabernet sauvignon is not something it takes magic
| powers to differentiate. Now specific years, wineries,
| etc, now that raises questions.
| littlestymaar wrote:
| This one only shows you poor "expertise" more than
| anything, as it is standard exercise while training to
| become a wine expert in France (they also give students
| white wine that have been red-colored or otherwise tempered
| with), so I wouldn't expect any legit expert to be fooled
| this way. Though it's true that with some wines it can be
| tough initially for enlightened amateurs.
|
| Source: my wife's godfather did the studies for that[1] two
| years ago.
|
| [1]: https://www.isvv.u-bordeaux.fr/fr/diplome-
| universitaire-dapt...
| reducesuffering wrote:
| I believed this myth until I actually tried it blind with a
| handful of wine novices, and every one could tell them
| apart.
| n4r9 wrote:
| As far as I can tell, AI image generation still struggles
| with some things after many years of research and is often
| detectable. Perhaps vocals is easier though.
| ancientworldnow wrote:
| It's like cgi, you only recognize bad examples of it while
| the good ones go right past you. I've got plenty of ai
| generations that fool professional photo retouchers - it
| just takes more time and some custom tooling.
| throwup238 wrote:
| _> I 've got plenty of ai generations that fool
| professional photo retouchers - it just takes more time
| and some custom tooling._
|
| What's a good place to find out the SOTA of the custom
| tooling and workflow?
| zzzzzzzzzz10 wrote:
| Comfyui + civitai. 4chan and reddit threads if you want
| to go deep
| ptx wrote:
| > _It 's like cgi_
|
| Right. Full of code injection vulnerabilities.
| VelesDude wrote:
| From audio video editing experience years back, it is much
| easier to slip some cheap audio cuts past people than
| visual ones.
| gosub100 wrote:
| The non-singing TTS are barely discernible now. I watch a lot
| of narration-heavy edu-tainment on YouTube and often the only
| way I can detect TTS is the consistent monotone and uniform
| syllable cadence. There can be 15 minutes before a single
| mispronounced word is spoken. That could be a preview of
| what's to come with AI video.
| jackspratts wrote:
| if by very soon you mean already then. yeah. i can't anyway,
| and i'm in the business.- js.
|
| https://soundcloud.com/rs-539916550/soul-of-the-
| machine?utm_...
| Traubenfuchs wrote:
| The average modern pop songs boasts a worse voice that sounds
| more autotuned than this AI song here. The biggest problem to
| me is how the voice appears to be shaky.
| Martinussen wrote:
| I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't listen to
| much "modern pop" - the production quality of the biggest
| mainstream pop is _extremely_ high at this point, and while
| "worse voice" is obviously subjective, this really wouldn't
| be anything stand-out in that regard even if it didn't sound
| like a robot.
| Retr0id wrote:
| And I'm sure a skilled editor could already edit out those
| tells.
| OmarShehata wrote:
| At that point, is it AI generated?? That feels like an
| entirely different category to me
|
| (like it's sort of no difference than paying someone to voice
| something and share it)
|
| I think the stuff that is completely generated with no human
| in the loop is a different category for me because it can be
| used for things at scale like, bots on social media, or ads
| in a podcast generated just for you, etc. As long as there is
| still a human in the loop making the editing decisions, it
| feels not categorically different from the world we have
| today.
| Retr0id wrote:
| That's a fair point, but "ai does the work and humans clean
| up the mistakes" is generally a lot faster than humans
| doing all the work. Singing well takes skill (even when you
| have autotune), splicing together multiple "takes" into one
| good recording, less so.
| gpm wrote:
| I'm never going to have the voice to sing this, but I can
| easily imagine learning how to edit it.
|
| AI/Human combos can still be valuable. More broadly I'd
| argue that that's how almost all tech works. E.g. there are
| still textile workers, just many less of them producing
| much more clothing.
| tombert wrote:
| I would say it's still categorically different, just
| because we're automating one piece of labor that was kind
| of thought until about ~12 years ago to be un-automatible.
|
| Like, there's been computer-singing voices for awhile, but
| they always sounded pretty robotic and goofy (e.g.
| Microsoft Sam), and I think for a long time people just
| assumed that to get mostly-realistic voices, you need an
| actual singer. Yes, it still requires a bit of human
| tweaking to make it perfect, but I suspect that if put to
| the test it would reduce the cost of making a song
| substantially.
| nostrademons wrote:
| Many human vocalists have similar aberrations. Remember Jimi
| Hendrix "Excuse me while I kiss this guy", or the notorious
| autotune on a number of contemporary pop artists (you gave an
| example yourself)?
|
| IMHO many of the successes of "artificial intelligence" come
| from "natural stupidity". Humans have many glitches in our
| perceptual mechanisms. The AIs that end up going viral and
| become commercially viable tend to exploit those perceptual
| glitches, simply because that's what makes them appeal to
| people.
| n4r9 wrote:
| The difference between this and Hendrix's "kiss this guy" is
| that you can listen to it and plausibly believe that Hendrix
| _is actually_ saying "the sky". In the linked track you know
| the actual words but it still doesn't sound like them.
| latexr wrote:
| > I anticipate people becoming experts in detecting AI-
| generated vocalists in much the same way that we can currently
| detect AI-generated images due to abnormalities especially in
| details like ears or fingers.
|
| People fail to identify even the most basic and obvious fakes,
| but somehow there's a group of people who think that as fakes
| become harder to distinguish from reality, we'll all magically
| become experts at it. We won't. People's ability to detect
| fakes will get worse, not better, as a consequence of more
| prevalent and better fakes.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1U1HMqtam90
| thenickdude wrote:
| You can fix most misspoken words by tweaking the lyrics. e.g.
| in my most recent song it pronounced "pasting" from "copying
| and pasting" as "past-ing.
|
| I just rewrote the lyrics as "paste-ing" and it sung it
| perfectly afterwards.
| b3lvedere wrote:
| I was wondering if she would sing really loud at the ALL CAPS
| sections, but fortunately she did not. Still better than most
| Eurovision Contest songs :)
| tgv wrote:
| But the accompaniment changed. Very uplifting.
| mintplant wrote:
| Disagree, Eurovision is stacked this year!
| ccozan wrote:
| I have my song ready, now I need to know how can I make a video
| clip based on it?
| thenickdude wrote:
| My approach to generating a music video was to generate
| scenes using DALL-E 3, and then animate those using Stable
| Video Diffusion (SVD).
|
| SVD doesn't have well-controllable motion and is utterly
| blown out of the water by Sora, but it's what we have right
| now.
|
| Here's the resulting vid, "a death metal song about a macro
| photographer":
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNVRQ1Zg-a0
|
| If you only want a video file from Suno to share with the
| default static lyrics screen on it, hit Download Video from
| the three-dots menu.
| visarga wrote:
| I made one too:
| https://twitter.com/visarga/status/1775663297297084840
|
| the ending is cool and unexpected
| kybernetikos wrote:
| unfortunately twitter links don't work for me (I don't know
| why). Do you have the suno link?
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Now do The Ballad of ICCCM!
|
| https://www.x.org/releases/X11R7.6/doc/xorg-docs/specs/ICCCM...
| fetzu wrote:
| https://app.suno.ai/song/1dc75742-0e0e-4d5a-97b6-d00b9cffc2f...
| or
| https://app.suno.ai/song/19b86cb0-3f4a-4ed4-9aae-c9c2604321f...
|
| And the overproduced version:
| https://app.suno.ai/song/1e0bf4e2-7850-4401-85db-799a763f732...
| DonHopkins wrote:
| Giving Up Selection Ownership
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/86040709-94f1-4de1-8703-7b306b48b32.
| ..
|
| ICCCM Summary of Window Manager Property Types
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/52d08a23-8e1e-4f03-8e8c-e4df610cef9.
| ..
| isodev wrote:
| The girl is sad because we don't know the name of the
| people/artists on which the music and her voice is modelled.
| titzer wrote:
| In the great web tradition of harvesting the vast body of other
| people's work in the large[1] and shoving it through huge
| amounts of computation to wring out a nickel's worth of value
| that will eventually manifest in some good-paying SWE jobs, a
| rich executive class, and a whole lot of shareholder value and
| inevitably mutate in another goddamn ad-serving platform.
|
| [1] Ha, the poor millions of dumb minions who put their work on
| the web thinking it might be fun for others or garner
| themselves a small following, they didn't check the terms of
| the EULA!
| commandlinefan wrote:
| I wonder if this won't drive a resurgence of demand for live
| performances - as recording becomes more and more artificial,
| live performance will mean more. (Or maybe, as a live
| performer, I'm just wishful thinking here...)
| paulddraper wrote:
| Generally speaking, people create internet content so that it
| is shared.
|
| All of the creators and subjects of meme formats... Should
| they receive royalty every time you post some inane mashup?
| titzer wrote:
| This is not that. We're not talking about some inane
| mashup, but a wholesale digestion of every creative thing
| any person ever did by a monster computer cluster whose
| scale dwarfs imagination, which then promptly uses it to
| maximize "engagement" to gather eyeballs to feed them
| advertising. It's profoundly messed up.
| paulddraper wrote:
| The cost of that computer cluster must also dwarf
| imagination.
|
| I don't begrudge crypto miners either.
| titzer wrote:
| I wasn't aware of a right to recoup the costs of any bad
| idea, which seems to be what you're implying here.
| Because computers, therefore profit? Huh?
| paulddraper wrote:
| The earlier comment was "vast work", so the size of
| effort is somehow relevant to the discussion.
| titzer wrote:
| It isn't. If a serial killer spent a week digging mass
| graves by hand, they don't get years taken off their
| sentence. You don't get points just for working hard or
| spending money, particularly when it cheapens or just
| appropriates other people's work.
| newswasboring wrote:
| > which then promptly uses it to maximize "engagement" to
| gather eyeballs to feed them advertising.
|
| This is the real problem, right? People don't dislike
| generative AI, they dislike the attention economy. Yet I
| see more disgust towards AI than the company policies
| which suck. I don't understand why.
| titzer wrote:
| Oh, haha, yeah. I guess I'm the opposite--I actually like
| AI more than the attention economy! At least one of them
| is not _actively_ trying to drain my brainpower and skill
| set and get my to buy stuff and do stuff I wouldn 't
| otherwise buy or do.
| saulpw wrote:
| yet
| xetsilon wrote:
| I think it is more that art, film and music have largely
| been replaced with complaining online about various
| subjects as the major form of entertainment in America.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| People also differentiate heavily on the basis of scale and
| profit. Artists are often fine with people sharing their
| posts and may even tolerate someone asking for permission
| to make printouts or whatever else for their circle of
| friends, but will expect some sort of royalty if you're
| asking to be able to sell prints of their artwork on a
| store.
|
| Hell, even with viral videos it's relatively common that
| normal people can share away while entertainment companies
| and influencers are expected to pay for a license.
|
| With memes it isn't clear exactly who made the first
| template, and the creation of them doesn't revolve around
| specific people in the same way, nor are they meaningfully
| tied to profits.
|
| When creators post their content online to be shared, they
| do it with the focus being on reaching individuals, not for
| it to be sucked up by soulless companies to extract all
| value without the intention of giving back.
| paulddraper wrote:
| > With memes it isn't clear exactly who made the first
| template.
|
| The Office, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Django
| Unchained, Game of Thrones, etc
|
| These works have identifiable creators.
| titzer wrote:
| The conversation is quickly devolving into a vacuum of
| ignorance where things like royalties, fair use policies,
| revenue-sharing agreements, parodies, sampling, etc, have
| apparently never been thought about.
|
| We're not talking about _any_ of those things. We 're
| talking about wholesale digestion of the entirety of
| human knowledge by automated means, which is now not just
| theoretically possible, but routine.
| dotnet00 wrote:
| Those aren't meme formats in terms of what is typically
| meant by meme.
| arghwhat wrote:
| These kinds of discussions always leaves me wondering if
| people consider how actual humans learn their craft,
| constantly studying and mimicking others. Inspiration is to
| use existing experiences however mixed together, while
| originality comes from an input or an experience that others
| have yet to use.
|
| "Write a sad song about the MIT license" is certainly such
| new input, and if I was commissioned to write the song it
| would be based on inspiration (i.e., "use training on") music
| I have heard or studied. And yes, none of the musicians I
| have listened to or have studied will benefit from the
| endless money fountain I'd acquire from composing such song.
| notahacker wrote:
| Even the most derivative of singer songwriters tend to use
| their own voices rather than a weighted average of the
| voices of other singers in their genre...
| bobajeff wrote:
| Is that why so many people sound so much like Adele or
| some other popular artist?
| arghwhat wrote:
| Using the skills they presumably developed listening to
| and copying other singers and studying music, with an
| instrument built from roughly the same instructions as
| everyone else.
|
| That a person can't sound like the weighted average is
| human limitation (although with modern pop people do get
| quite close!), not because new singers aren't trying to.
| That of course adds variation that we appreciate, but
| doesn't change the underlying similarity in how acquired
| skill is mimicry of those who acquired it before us -
| with very rare exceptions.
| notahacker wrote:
| No, sounding like the genre-weighted average of Spotify
| simply isn't what singers try to do. They haven't
| listened to that much music, they have actual
| preferences, they have natural qualities to their voice
| which they're complimented on or asked to mask, and
| they're trying to hit notes based on their aural
| perception of harmony and related theoretical principles
| not based on the waveforms of other songs involving
| singer songwriters. The fact that they literally couldn't
| do what NNs do even if they wanted to also seems quite
| relevant to the fact that they don't do what NNs do.
|
| What next, are we going to argue that what programmers
| creating new programs are really trying to do is generate
| a prompt-weighted average of the bytecode of every
| program they've ever downloaded, and all that business
| analysis and functional spec and use of high level
| programming languages and expressed preferences for
| coding standards is irrelevant?
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| In the case of a human studying, a person puts in effort
| and gets rewarded for their efforts.
|
| In the case of AI, a person puts in minimal effort to
| generate something that devalues the work of all the people
| who did put in effort.
| fho wrote:
| Stable Diffusion did cost 500k to train ... I wouldn't
| call that "minimal effort". (And that is only the
| computation cost.)
| arghwhat wrote:
| > In the case of a human studying, a person puts in
| effort and gets rewarded for their efforts.
|
| When someone needs something composed, they don't learn
| how to write music. They pay someone else the bare
| minimum, e.g. a few bucks on fiverr. The person will
| spend the least possible amount of effort to try to make
| their life go around with the little money they got.
|
| When you then use an AI model, the work done for those
| five bucks is replaced by work done for almost free.
|
| Neither the person you would hire or the AI credited
| those who created the material they trained on.
| dsign wrote:
| > When someone needs something composed, they don't learn
| to write music...
|
| Speak for yourself! There is only one thing that scares
| me more than composing music, and that's paying somebody
| a few bucks in fiverr to do it for me.
| drusepth wrote:
| > In the case of AI, a person puts in minimal effort to
| generate something that devalues the work of all the
| people who did put in effort.
|
| Worded differently: people who couldn't otherwise produce
| skill-based works of value have had the barrier of entry
| lowered for that specific medium of expression, allowing
| for more works across a wider spectrum of skill.
| bugglebeetle wrote:
| It's so bizarre when people say stuff like this. There is
| absolutely nothing preventing the unpracticed or
| untalented people from any form of creative expression.
| What instead people who use AI seem to want is for
| unpracticed or untalented people to perform at the level
| of the practiced and talented, but this is no net gain to
| anyone. Why? Because only a rare subset of people who ARE
| practiced and talented create anything of interest or
| value in the first place. What this tells you is that
| skill or level of performance is not the barrier, but a
| means through which great things CAN be achieved (i.e.
| necessary, but not sufficient)
|
| Flooding the world with unpolished, unpracticed works,
| AI-tuned to the level of being mediocre, is a creative
| and intellectual dead end.
| drusepth wrote:
| I think the bizarrity arises from the following
| differences in beliefs:
|
| * That "_any_ form of creative expression" is a viable
| creative substitute for people wanting to create in a
| _specific_ medium of creative expression -- especially
| those that had a high barrier of technical skills
| required to be seen as "good enough" to share.
|
| * That a person who has an idea for art will put in the
| necessary time to become proficient enough to create that
| "good enough" art through traditional means (IMO
| demonstrably incorrect), and that is preferred over that
| person just not expressing a lower-quality version of
| that idea at all.
|
| * That those who use AI primarily want or expect to
| "perform at the level of the practiced and talented"
| (i.e. top-tier art) rather than using it to produce art
| they otherwise couldn't have, even at low- and mid-level
| qualities.
|
| * That there is no skill or talent in using AI tools to
| produce art (or that the skill or talent using AI tools
| is meant to be a full replacement for traditional
| artistic skills or talents).
|
| FWIW, I'm a long-time sketch artist and acrylics painter
| (~20 years). There are many mediums, subjects, and styles
| that I'm not good at -- and I enjoy using AI to express
| myself in those areas (and have also liked using AI to
| create songs to show to my more musicially-adept
| wife...). But even in my own wheelhouse (landscapes and
| still life), I also often use AI to brainstorm
| composition, perspective, colors, textures, lighting,
| etc. It's a great tool for experts to lean on, but an
| even better tool for non-artists who couldn't or wouldn't
| otherwise share their art.
| titzer wrote:
| Indeed. As an amateur guitarist, but a professional
| virtual machinist, I have a ton of respect for people who
| have dedicated their whole lives to mastery in any one
| particular area. To have a machine gulp down untold eons
| of human exertion and then barf out soulless mimicry, no
| matter how jaw-dropping of a feat of engineering behind
| it, and then mint no-talent ass clowns by the million
| because viral videos make an awesome advertising platform
| --it's just some kind of dystopian peak tech, except the
| dystopia is mildly amusing rather than a disappointing
| and jarring marginalization, flippant dismissal of all of
| us.
| neon5077 wrote:
| > for unpracticed or untalented people to perform at the
| level of the practiced and talented
|
| This is what tools are.
|
| Cheap digital tablets have done away with the need for
| expensive consumables. You can just download a different
| brush style instead of learning a physical technique. No
| waiting for paint to dry or smudged pencils. The barrier
| to entry for painting has dropped to a one time
| investment of like a hundred bucks. Almost nobody mixes
| their own paint, nor stretches their own canvas. Those
| skills aren't needed anymore.
|
| It's possible to build very precise machine parts by
| hand. It's very difficult and requires great skill, so
| nobody does that. Some do and are admired for it, but
| everybody else uses precise machines to make precise
| parts with nearly no effort.
|
| It's just a tool. Only difference is that we had assumed
| art would never be automatable.
|
| Objectively, I don't think this is a bad thing. It
| doesn't change the subjective value of art any more than
| the average cartoonist devalues the Mona Lisa. It's just
| a new form of art, there will _always_ be people mixing
| their own paints and stretching their own canvas, just as
| there always has been.
|
| It's only a problem because in our society you either
| have a job or you starve. No one can afford to be an
| artist. Those that do tend to grind out as many pieces as
| fast as they can so they can pay the goddamn rent. If not
| for that, these AI tools would be pretty cool.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| > eventually manifest in some good-paying SWE jobs
|
| Unless Devin has his way.
| SilasX wrote:
| Just like we're all sad because we don't know the names of the
| people whose work or interactions influenced Stephen King's
| writing.
| Conasg wrote:
| I wonder who was the first to claim this was plagiarism;
| ironically, everyone else seems to have mindlessly
| plagiarised their belief
| ronsor wrote:
| 95% of beliefs are shamelessly plagiarized from someone
| else.
| fho wrote:
| The funny thing is that most creatives are quite open about
| their influences.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| They wouldn't be if every named influence wanted a 5% cut
| of all future projects.
| bena wrote:
| AI isn't influenced. It doesn't have restrictions. It doesn't
| have to work within confines. AI can always remember the word
| it wants to use. It always can hit the note it intends. And
| it can hit every note. Etc. It uses the corpus of training
| data and mashes it into a new form.
|
| Stephen King won't be able to remember every word of every
| story he's ever read. And if he wants to make something
| "Lovecraftian", it'll be what Stephen King _thinks_ is
| Lovecraftian. And there will be something to that. Some bit
| he believes is more or less important than other people And
| those bits are what makes Stephen King, Stephen King.
|
| Everyone has had access to the same material King read.
| Access to the same tools he used to create. Everyone had the
| chance to effectively be Stephen King. But there is just one.
| Because there is some unique bit of observation or recall or
| combination of such things that is unique to King.
|
| And from what I've seen so far, these LLMs can't do that.
| There is a missing element of pure imagination.
| SilasX wrote:
| You can tune AI output.
| bena wrote:
| But you can't make it creative. You can't say "give me
| something cool" and have it produce something of note.
| SilasX wrote:
| Yes, you can absolutely play god of the gaps.
| bena wrote:
| How am I doing that? I am claiming that LLMs lack
| imagination. They are incapable of creating out of whole
| cloth or interpretation.
|
| Saying they cannot create based off of a vague suggestion
| is very much in line with that claim. I consider it a
| vital difference between Stephen King being inspired and
| LLMs mashing training inputs together.
| mirekrusin wrote:
| She's sad because she knows the license will be changed to
| business non compete one in a year.
| throwaway74432 wrote:
| We don't know the names of all the people on which the style
| and content of your comment is modelled either.
| kube-system wrote:
| That's correct, but they are (probably) human, which is
| pivotal to the application of copyright law.
| non-chalad wrote:
| Is it Hatsune Miku? Twitter is glitching out again, so I can't
| hear.
| schroeding wrote:
| No, it's a synthetic voice from suno.ai, sounds like a (very
| sad) American singer-songwriter.
| cwillu wrote:
| I'm impressed how it managed to extract rhyme from that license.
| The software is provided (as is) without warranty, of any
| kind express, or implied.
| fho wrote:
| Yeah, there are some good rhymes in there. Actually better
| rhymes than those ChatGPT delivers if asked for lyrics or
| poems.
| Fnoord wrote:
| Plot twist: MIT license was written by a poet.
| paulddraper wrote:
| Exactly. Tough constraints, having zero flexibility in lyrics.
| gardaani wrote:
| This reminds me of OpenBSD release songs!
| https://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html
| Fnoord wrote:
| And early nerdcore.
|
| (Dual Core FTW!)
| lordnacho wrote:
| It's a satire generator. Take any text you want to make fun of,
| turn it into music.
|
| I'm not sure whether I've just run out of credit, or Suno
| actually knows what the political sensitivities of the text might
| be, but I can't generate a second amendment song.
| seydor wrote:
| Has anyone had decent results with C++ code?
| bombcar wrote:
| Won't be able to beat "Program in C"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tas0O586t80
| floxy wrote:
| In the lower left hand corner there is a "subscribe" button,
| and above that a "credits" counter.
| nickcw wrote:
| Here is my effort
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/13cffa0c-bbd5-41b6-abde-43332b21b0f...
|
| I took the litany of fear from Dune and got Bing Chat to re-write
| it to be about facing down code complexity, then I put those
| lyrics into suno.ai to turn it into a 2 minute song to express
| all your emotions about code that needs to be simplified ;-)
| billh wrote:
| I just had it make a rap song of its own ToS
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/7995f966-6265-4b34-a68e-400981f5931...
| Balgair wrote:
| Lol, nice!
|
| When they allowed longer text inputs, and for faster rapping,
| I can really see this kinda thing taking off with L1s and med
| students.
|
| Like the Animaniacs song about the state capitols.
|
| Or like a Homeric epic that is meant for remembering and
| singing.
|
| The method of loci may have a new competitor as a way to
| remember things here.
| billh wrote:
| One of the things that came to mind when I was listening to
| the ToS song it generated was a video I had watched years
| ago on the very dry topic of Rule 803 - Hearsay Exceptions
| but it was put to a catchy tune and made it very memorable
| and easier to digest.
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UoJ6fgIKYy8)
| sen_armstrong wrote:
| I think it might be more memorable when the med students do
| the writing ... and singing.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVxJJ2DBPiQ
| Diagnosis, Wenckebach *(what?)* It's AV nodal block
| and that's a fact *(yeah)* Take PR interval and
| lengthen that *(yeah)* bradyarrhythmia and heart
| attack *(oh-no!)*
|
| AI songs do make sense if AI will be making the diagnosis!
| dilap wrote:
| Asked Claude Opus to minimally modify the lyrics to add
| rhymes
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/40d0fb88-246b-42f9-8998-0387e75262e.
| ..
| newswasboring wrote:
| This thing can generate lyrics and music for a hindi song. Its
| way better than I expected. Here's a song about wrestlemania.
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/018ca476-803b-4a45-81ed-c7263e08ef3...
| sentrysapper wrote:
| I chuckled at gone "live", but otherwise that was pretty good
| code poetry. Thanks for that.
| butz wrote:
| Is there any information how such songs are made? It probably is
| way more complicated to get a decent result than one might
| expect.
| grumbel wrote:
| It's suno.ai (has a free trial), works much the same as image
| generation, you give it a description and it writes a song in a
| couple of seconds. Lyrics can be customized:
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/41fde9b6-a722-4c39-92dc-8a8296c018c...
| yinser wrote:
| Sunoslop lol
| s-macke wrote:
| We came a long way from the first synthetic singing voices.
|
| https://simulationcorner.net/SAM/sing.wav
|
| Edit:
|
| https://youtu.be/Rm4ZCGgzeeU?si=upK-qCMev8ZaibIa&t=222
| schroeding wrote:
| Even older, Daisy Bell on an IBM 7094 from 1961:
| https://youtu.be/41U78QP8nBk?t=63
| cwillu wrote:
| The Free Software Song:
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/2ce5eab5-d1c5-48b2-91a0-8e6095e29ed...
|
| https://www.gnu.org/music/free-software-song.en.html: "Richard
| Stallman and the Free Software Foundation claim no copyright on
| this song."
| yamrzou wrote:
| This is impressive, but part of what makes it so is that we are
| not used to it. As these kinds of AI-generated
| music/images/videos become ubiquitous, it will be the new normal
| and they will become less impressive.
| callalex wrote:
| Maybe, but I think there is something innately funny about
| making computers say silly things. As a small child it was peak
| comedy to me making a Macintosh say "fart" and it's still funny
| to me when a computer sings the MIT license.
| thenickdude wrote:
| On that theme, I asked Suno to sing a rap but "remove all the
| vowels", and it's hilarious how well it attempts to sing the
| silly result:
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/30f8223e-0d0b-4cac-8b3f-5d8f0f743e2.
| ..
|
| The lyrics generator is some version of GPT so you can give
| it natural language instructions like this.
| ein0p wrote:
| My mind hasn't been this blown by AI since GPT4. You owe it to
| yourself to check out Suno.ai. As a non-pro musician I'm excited
| by this. Some version of this could become a _starting point_ for
| me, rather than an unreachable end goal. I can see how pros would
| be horrified by this, too. For quite a few people some future
| version of this could be an adequate replacement for a music
| subscription, but of course not for a show.
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| I was thinking it would impact places like bars and streams and
| tv the most rather than actual consumers, or wherever licensing
| is concerned. I don't believe people would listen to AI
| generated music for the same reason AI isn't impacting fine
| art. People aren't going to hang AI paintings in their houses
| or listen to AI music.
| ein0p wrote:
| Why not? Have you seen the top 10? It couldn't be any worse
| than what it is now. People who reach the top 10 are rarely
| there for the "art". A lot of them don't even write their own
| songs or music.
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| Honestly I don't even know what the "top 10" is or how its
| measured and have never met anyone in my life who listened
| to top 10 stuff. It's always HR office radio, mechanic
| radio, the bar, club, etc. Even the most normal people find
| stuff they like on youtube and listen to that.
|
| Even if the AI music is extremely good, it's just missing
| the fact that it was made by a person, which changes the
| experience entirely. I think we're more likely to see
| musicians and those top10 artists leverage AI without
| explicitly saying so.
|
| I expect we will have a daft punk moment where someone is
| using exclusively AI and later unmasks that it was all AI,
| and as soon as that happens the music is disconnected.
|
| Same with AI art. I can see something and be duped and go
| "oh wow!!!" and as soon as I know it's AI the caring leaves
| my body completely and reverence and interest is lost.
| aradox66 wrote:
| I love this sentiment about "top 10" radio. If only it
| was so. That's the stuff that's on everywhere, all the
| time. Grocery stores, cafes, etc etc. hell, I listen to
| it on YouTube. It's like junk food. It's bad, it's good.
|
| It's better than AI, even this incredible mindblowing
| suno thing. Production value counts.
| ein0p wrote:
| Will it be better than AI six months from now, that's the
| question. My money is on "no".
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| At least the classical world is safe. They want no part
| in AI.
| throwup238 wrote:
| I think it's a lot better at classical, orchestral, and
| instrumental music than it is at anything requiring
| vocalization. I created this in less than 20 minutes: htt
| ps://app.suno.ai/song/eb93c25b-bdbe-4c9f-8e03-66e9479c869
| ...
|
| I need to stem it, fix it up a bit, and remix for stereo
| in a DAW but it's much better than I expected for my
| first ever piece of music. Obviously it'd take a lot of
| work to create a Hans Zimmer level OST from the tool but
| IMO it wouldn't feel out of place on a Ludovico Einaudi
| album or on some Spotify or Pandora classical radio.
| programd wrote:
| That's actually a very good piece. Like something I'd
| hear on late night Paradise Radio. If I was creating an
| indie movie on no budget I'd be all over this technology
| for the soundtrack.
|
| I don't think musicians and composers are going to
| disappear as a consequence of this technology, in the
| same way that theatre actors were not made obsolete by
| film. What I do think is that a whole new category of
| professionals will be created - musicians and composers
| who get paid to train AI models. I bet it will pay better
| then the laughable amounts that are streaming royalties.
| recursive wrote:
| At some point in the future, wanting no part in AI-
| generated content is going to be like that old Onion
| headline. "Area Man Constantly Mentioning That He Doesn't
| Even Own A Television".
| janalsncm wrote:
| Quality isn't the only factor though. Music made by
| people has copyright which means grocery stores and
| coffee shops have to pay a license fee.
|
| There's certainly a point where this synthetic music gets
| good enough to replace the elevator music Muzak crap that
| they have to pay $2000 to license.
| recursive wrote:
| Someone is writing it. There are a lot more than 10 people
| that want to be in the top 10. It's hard to get into the
| top 10. You might not appreciate it as art, but the songs
| that are there are good at _something_. You could call it
| being catchy. AI is not even close on this metric.
| newswasboring wrote:
| Its not even close now. And these things have been out
| maybe a few months? Of course even the potential of the
| current tools aren't fully explored.
| recursive wrote:
| I think it will get there, wherever "there" is. I think
| it's very impressive now, as a technical marvel. But it's
| really not competing with the best humans yet. I don't
| say this to dismiss it. I say this as an appreciator of
| music who is neutral on AI. Probably one day I'll listen
| to mostly AI generated music. But it won't be this month.
| xetsilon wrote:
| All music at this point is largely ambient music and Muzak.
|
| The future is obviously a form of custom AI Muzak/Ambient
| music with a few pop stars for people to focus on.
|
| I am a big fan of more art type music and guess what? No
| one listens to it. My fav album of 2023 has 6.4k views on
| youtube. At least a 100 of those are mine. No one listens
| to this stuff. People watch video critic reviews of more
| art type music than the actual music itself.
| ein0p wrote:
| Lol, same. A lot of the stuff I listen to is completely
| unknown to a "normal" person. And guess what? AI is not
| replacing those folks for their audiences in the
| foreseeable future, because they don't just regurgitate
| the same chord progression as everyone else
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| _I don 't believe people would listen to AI generated music
| for the same reason AI isn't impacting fine art._
|
| Pretty soon we'll be reviving the old Palmolive "You're
| soaking in it" commercial
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bEkq7JCbik).
|
| We'll all be soaking in it, and no, you won't be able to tell
| the difference.
| j-bos wrote:
| I see this take often, but I don't buy it. Mixtapes and
| playlists are quintessential gifts of affection based on art
| that the giver did not make and by artists the receiver often
| does not know. Just the same lots of people hang costco
| paintings on their walls by anonymous sweatshop workers and
| kids love cool posters about whatever interests them with no
| regard to who made them. I believe consumers are likely to
| enjoy lots of this generated art.
| newswasboring wrote:
| > People aren't going to hang AI paintings in their houses or
| listen to AI music.
|
| A lot of people are very confident about this and I dont
| understand why. The same was said for jazz and comic books.
| But I am listening to jazz with comic book posters on my
| wall. There were different reasons to give the same
| statement, but it almost always turns out to be wrong. Humans
| like what they like and seldom judge an artwork for its
| process (outside of a very small niche community).
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| This is something different entirely. We're outside of the
| "human sphere" so to speak.
|
| >Humans like what they like and seldom judge an artwork for
| its process (outside of a very small niche community).
|
| That's true, but how do you zoom out of process? This is
| beyond process. I would just say most people don't like
| inhuman things.
| newswasboring wrote:
| > We're outside of the "human sphere" so to speak.
|
| Can you elaborate on this a bit? Because this is what I
| don't get.
| MarcelOlsz wrote:
| It's a non-human algorithmic mish mash of a bunch of
| stuff, there is no human quality to it or years of effort
| to reach new heights. AI will not make "new" music in the
| sense that it will make a trumpet song that escapes our
| current understanding of a trumpets limit like how a once
| in a generation player will come along and move the
| ceiling up.
|
| It's an omellete. There is no Dolly Parton behind an AI
| Jolene or a Michael Jackson turning a 4 track tape into a
| musical masterpiece. The journey and personalities are
| what contextualize the sound, without AI that context is
| gone. That's why I think it will just be used for cafes
| and things like that where they want to escape licensing
| fees.
|
| As for consumers - I believe people will see AI music
| consumption as a way of supporting the new technological
| powers that be, and the act of listening to human-made
| music will have an element of counter-culture baked into
| it. I'm a professional musician and I have a very
| physical reaction to sound. Once I know it's AI my
| goosebumps fade.
|
| Another lame incarnation of a tech that will also fade
| like crypto and everything else. The types of
| personalities who will leverage this tech are not the
| same personalities that make the greats.
|
| I'm not worried.
| newswasboring wrote:
| In this post, I can summarize two points you are trying
| to make. One, it takes less effort, and two it doesn't
| fit into our current understanding of how art creation
| narratives work. I don't see how that precludes a piece
| from being good/bad. I feel like you are arguing for your
| personal opinion (if not your image of what the world
| should be) as if it's some kind of objective truth. Your
| goosebumps might have faded but when I heard this post in
| a half sleepy state, I got goosebumps when my sleepy mind
| figured out its fully AI generated. But that doesn't add
| to the argument either way.
| MacsHeadroom wrote:
| I love art made by non-human intelligences. I especially
| love how it can transcend and redefine loved mediums by
| combining them in surreal ways that are otherwise quite
| difficult to obtain. Algorithmic exploration of mediums
| outpaces mere mortal "effort" in its efficiency and in
| doing so raises the bar for what constitutes media worth
| giving our attention to.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| Does it take a long time for it to generate a song? I've been
| waiting for about 10 minutes now with a spinning circle line.
| throwup238 wrote:
| With the pro subscription it usually takes less than thirty
| seconds for the songs to be playable. It keeps generating
| while you play though, so the whole audio file isn't
| available for a few minutes.
|
| Free accounts are queued so it depends on load and I don't
| think the v3 model is available to them.
| haunter wrote:
| Everything is a Remix
| sircastor wrote:
| Reminds me of Regina Spektor's style.
|
| And some of the generated phenomes actually just sound like
| stylistic auto-tuning. I kind of like it.
|
| I'm sure many have already observed this, but I think the thing
| that most artists fear from AI is not that AI will be able to
| produce works on parr or superior to human works, but that most
| people won't care enough to value the difference.
| genter wrote:
| Can I include this as LICENSE.mpeg in the root directory of my
| projects instead of a text file?
| abeppu wrote:
| And does the requirement that "this permission notice shall be
| included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software"
| mean that the mpeg specifically must be included?
| seydor wrote:
| The chorus (or all caps part) is now burnt in our Eula memories.
|
| Wonder how long it will be until someone sings Mein kampf though
| gedy wrote:
| Suno.ai and the underlaying technologies are really quite
| amazing. I've done a few things like:
|
| * Put a poem my late mother wrote to music for her memorial
|
| * <asian-language> versions of 80's new wave songs
|
| and they came out so lovely compared to what I'd be capable of as
| a musician, but puts me in the role of a "producer" of sorts
| tuning the sound and vibe. Really well worth the money.
| layman51 wrote:
| This is scratching an rare itch for me because I am a heavy
| subvocalizer when I read just about anything, and when I have a
| song stuck in my head, I end up wondering what it would sound
| like if someone sang the words I'm reading to the tune of the
| song.
| _sys49152 wrote:
| for college i would convert my physical textbooks to wordfile
| text, then convert the wordfile text to computer voice mp3s and
| use those to play in the background to help me studying.
|
| break up chapters or sections of the college textbook into suno
| songs instead - itd be maad interesting how much better that
| wouldve helped my studies. monotone computer voices of 10+
| years ago will put you to sleep.
| IanCal wrote:
| Probably relevant, I took a photo of my kids "curious questions
| about space" book and threw the words into a song
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/f283429e-ec3e-4152-b5be-a57cd72a6d9...
|
| They've been listening to it in the bath to huge success.
| Particularly the change at about 40s for "why can't we breathe
| on the moon?" which feels like an excellent song lyric.
|
| Honestly I'm blown away at how well it does.
| maxglute wrote:
| Going to make those boring textbooks sound more tolerable.
| Interesting implications for education. If this was a foreign
| language I didn't understand, I don't think I would have been
| able to tell it was generated.
| janalsncm wrote:
| Made one reading the Declaration of Independence. I am impressed.
| https://app.suno.ai/song/54898804-8cd9-4b6f-a18d-3ffbe728579...
| qingcharles wrote:
| I can see this being "a thing." I tried one too - Gangsta Rap
| Constitution:
| https://app.suno.ai/song/0ed4c4e2-9a92-40c1-a1ab-20ae49b7a8d...
| floxy wrote:
| Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death:
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/d67a4c29-9f2a-41b0-9ff8-2c8138a1a7a.
| ..
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/89a48c01-c7e5-487a-b825-4a3978b7259.
| ..
| bmacho wrote:
| There should be a whole Broadway musical of this
| cenan wrote:
| Oh nice, I had the same idea.
| https://app.suno.ai/song/a693c847-7ce6-475c-adc5-0328786b901...
| _DeadFred_ wrote:
| I remember when Solaria came out there were a ton of people
| making emotional spiritual music with it. It felt so odd, robot
| voices singing to God and about the wonder of experiencing life.
| Sounded pretty though.
|
| Soon we will have 'preacher's in a box' that will sing to lift
| you up, mentor you, guide you through life. Most will even be
| 'non-religious' but will basically become your religion, your
| guide through life.
| philipov wrote:
| It's a real Nier: Automata vibe. The machines all chant "Become
| As God" as they try to sacrifice you.
| amelius wrote:
| Reminds me of Richard Dreyfuss reading an Apple license.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cu0lqUlHEko
| schroeding wrote:
| Ha. Voice synthesizers and TTS systems (and NLP in general - dead
| electronics imitating this very intimately human thing, speech
| and language) always fascinated me, so far that this was a
| significant reason for me to study CS and computational
| linguistics.
|
| This is literally some of the impossible sci-fi tech I dreamt of
| as an undergrad. Crazy. I'm still a bit in disbelief how fast
| things currently move on this front.
|
| Interestingly, suno.ai is also able to imitate the very robotic
| and staccato-like intonation of Vocaloids:
| https://app.suno.ai/song/f43e9c46-92d3-4171-bdd9-026213d6772... -
| everything comes around. :)
| mewpmewp2 wrote:
| > Miku voice, speck fast, Vocaloid, math rock, j-pop, mutation
| funk, bounce drop, hyperspeed dubstep
|
| What a banger.
| _sys49152 wrote:
| most impressive ive heard on suno was a live performance. all the
| live performance cliches including the crowd singing along
| acapella. it was unfuckingbelievable - and at the same time i can
| see how that can get burned out real quick by others replicating
| same idea over and over.
| syngrog66 wrote:
| Billie Eilish songgen as a Service
| no_op wrote:
| In a similar vein, LessWrong released an entire AI-generated
| album with lyrics adapted from significant posts made there over
| the years:
| https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/YMo5PuXnZDwRjhHhE/lesswrong-...
|
| I think I'm going to enjoy how surreal widespread access to
| generative AI will make the world.
| plagiarist wrote:
| I'm not seeing a Roko's Basilisk track, disappointing.
| zeekaran wrote:
| I've been with LW people for years and no one has ever
| mentioned Roko's Basilisk.
| muxator wrote:
| I suppose the focus was on voice synthesis here. I won't add
| anything about it since other commenters have already said
| significant things about this wonderful feat.
|
| Musically, however, I can't help but notice that these models are
| still very far from being able to generate something interesting:
| from harmony, to tempo, to musical structure, to dynamics,
| everything is muddled and without structure. I guess there is
| still very much to work on, and I am not sure that purely
| generative models can attain higher levels. Maybe a mixed rule-
| based and generative approach would do?
|
| The progress is really fast in this field, I really do not know.
| BriggyDwiggs42 wrote:
| I think historically every time someone says that the solution
| to an ai problem is more structure, the truth turns out to be
| an issue mostly of data and scale
| muxator wrote:
| That's probably true. Maybe there is a point to trade
| computational/energetic efficiency for attainability of a
| result. Let's see how this unfolds.
| Almondsetat wrote:
| What structure and tempo can you realistically give to the MIT
| license?
| muxator wrote:
| I'll try to give a serious answer, even if I suppose yours
| was a nice joke :)
|
| Music is a language, even if with no semantic. It has
| conventions, dialects, a syntax, a grammar. There are
| multiple dimensions a musician uses to convey what he
| wants/feels: just like an actor has to control at the same
| time its voice, posture, interplay with other actors, so a
| good musician is aware of the structure of the piece he is
| composing/executing, the relations between the various
| subparts, how the musical discourse progresses in time,
| besides agogic, dynamics, sound color.
|
| All of those aspects are continually perpetually compared
| against the conventions of the genre, mixed, evolved,
| strictly followed or balatantly negated.
|
| This is something that normally a professional musician takes
| decades to master (apart from musical geniuses).
|
| A listener takes less time to educate himself to appreciate
| those nuances (but not too little: let's say ~years). Once
| you develop a taste, it becomes very obvious to see through
| the spectrum that goes from bad quality tunes to musical
| artistry.
|
| I see nothing musically interesting in this (wonderful) PoC
| of speech synthesis.
|
| Just to be clear: I did not see anything particularly
| stunning even in Google's Bach Doodle from some years ago
| https://doodles.google/doodle/celebrating-johann-
| sebastian-b...
| kevinmhickey wrote:
| Reminds me a little bit of Catholic mass when the priest
| "sings" some of the sections. There is no consistency, no
| cadence, but their voice goes up and down. It's high-effort
| talking.
|
| I wonder if these models would do something better if the text
| were poetic or punctuated differently.
| MyFirstSass wrote:
| This is _so_ much better than stable.audio released yesterday!?
|
| I've dabbled in music production and this is just unbelievable.
|
| Both amazing and a bit sad because this is already so much better
| than would i would have anticipated.
|
| First illustrators, copywriters, then VFX guys, and now music.
| We're going to loose so many jobs in the creative sector right?
| sho_hn wrote:
| https://www.eikehein.com/kde/plasma6.mp3
|
| Ok, this is pretty fun.
| mayoff wrote:
| Is this sound file itself under the MIT license?
| OkayPhysicist wrote:
| Current case law suggests this song would not be copyrightable
| in the US.
| mastermedo wrote:
| I generated a song in 30 seconds from getting on the site, and
| generated a song that is crazy relatable, funny and sounds good.
| Made the whole family smile. This is going places.
| fivestones wrote:
| Care to share the link?
| andrewmcwatters wrote:
| Babe, new cover of GNU General Public License v2.0 just dropped!
| cenan wrote:
| Song lyrics (generated by ChatGPT) based on the The Declaration
| of Independence.
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/a693c847-7ce6-475c-adc5-0328786b901...
|
| Haha this is amazing!
| amelius wrote:
| ChatGPT has no humor, but this certainly made me laugh.
| lemoncookiechip wrote:
| Suno.AI is very fun. I find that asking ChatGPT to create lyrics
| and then feeding it gives some great results, although half the
| generations tend to have a bit too much static, so you have to
| keep generating.
| spyder wrote:
| I have a dream:
|
| https://app.suno.ai/song/d2f8e712-80ae-40ae-967b-90e13278da5...
| chrisdsaldivar wrote:
| Barely related but this reminds me of a video where Sir Elton
| John sings the text of an oven manual.
|
| https://youtu.be/8GuI4UUZrmw
| m3kw9 wrote:
| To get chorus right I'm not sure if LLM type tech can accurately
| repeat the chorus it has made up before. Many songs have very
| repeated chorus. An example is U2s One. "Is it getting better.."
| and then another chorus "did I disappoint you.."
|
| Current generated songs are made like sentences where you hear
| entire song without much structure
| uyzstvqs wrote:
| Suno is pretty cool. If I had to guess this uses Suno's Bark and
| Facebook's MusicGen? The output of the latter is used as
| conditional layers for the prior similar to ControlNet?
|
| Anyway, what will be interesting is when this can be done locally
| on consumer hardware with open-source AI, a nice UI and
| Vulkan/DirectML GPU inference.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-04-04 23:02 UTC)