This computer algorithm composes coherent symphonies

[petrarch]

Interesting results in the embedded video:

http://www.geek.com/articles/geek-pick/this-computer-algorithm-composes-coherent-symphonies-20130119/

[ElliotViola]

Coherent- yes. Well thought out- not quite as much...

Here's an interesting though for you.

The point of music is to communicate an emotion from the composer to the listener. If the composition was produced with an algorithm by a feelingless machine, can it still be classed as musical?

[snyprrr]

Oh my, what a serious young jewish computer! Obviously studied with Perle and Babbitt.

[Mirror Image]

A computer doesn't compose anything, humans do. The end.

[petrarch]

The point of music is to communicate an emotion from the composer to the listener. If the composition was produced with an algorithm by a feelingless machine, can it still be classed as musical?

We're not going down that rabbit hole again. I wonder what kind of emotion e.g. Reich's Reed Phase communicates, despite being wholly mechanically algorithmic... Oh, I know! it's the emotion of liking it. All else is irrelevant.

[71 dB]

A computer doesn't compose anything, humans do. The end.

If the computer is as sophisticated as human brain then it theoretically can compose just like a human composer can. It is estimated that around 2060 computers surpass human brain.

[Karl Henning]

Ask the computer where its inspiration came from?

[Florestan]

If the computer is as sophisticated as human brain then it theoretically can compose just like a human composer can.

There's a Romanian saying (with rhythm and rhyme lost in translation):

"Dacă" şi cu "parcă"
Se plimbau in barcă...

i.e.

"If" and "as if"
Had a pleasure trip in a boat...

It is estimated that around 2060 computers surpass human brain.

Estimated by whom and according to which methodology?

Ask the computer where its inspiration came from?

Hah!

[jut1972]

Ask the computer where its inspiration came from?

As many humans cant tell you where their inspiration comes from, is that valid?
Many composers conmpose to a formula, conciously or subconciously, is there any difference?

[71 dB]

Ask the computer where its inspiration came from?

I don't want to argue about claims that take 50 years to be verified. Where our inspiration comes from? If a computer is as sophisticated as our brain then the computer has same kind of experiences about the reality around and it has learned things like we learn things. Why wouldn't it have inspiration to compose?

And yes, by 2060 a computer should be able to answer when asked where it's inspiration came from.

[Cato]

A computer doesn't compose anything, humans do. The end.

Quote from: karlhenning on January 24, 2013, 11:01:41 AM

Ask the computer where its inspiration came from?

As many humans can't tell you where their inspiration comes from, is that valid?

Many composers compose to a formula, consciously or unconciously, is there any difference?

The YouTube example shows me that professors (i.e. human beings) composed the music with a computer and its program. 

The computer did not - like Karl Henning can - will the work into creation.  So yes, the inspiration question is valid, because the computer did not turn itself on, decide to create its own program to compose music, and then start the program running.

Having the computer run a music composition program does not give it willpower, does not give it desire to create a soundscape for symbolizing e.g. the large bright January moon in the morning.

Science fiction postulates that consciousness will eventually occur for computers when they become larger and more complex: the larger question is whether consciousness must include willpower for action, and if it does, how would a box take action?

[Karl Henning]

As many humans cant tell you where their inspiration comes from, is that valid?

An excellent question, and thank you for underscoring my point:  How do you 'teach' a computer a 'process' which is only partially (and probably imperfectly, even in that part) understood?

Mind you, I don't deny the mechanical interest in the exercise.

[Karl Henning]

The YouTube example shows me that professors (i.e. human beings) composed the music with a computer and its program. 

The computer did not - like Karl Henning can - will the work into creation.  So yes, the inspiration question is valid, because the computer did not turn itself on, decide to create its own program to compose music, and then start the program running.

Having the computer run a music composition program does not give it willpower, does not give it desire to create a soundscape for symbolizing e.g. the large bright January moon in the morning.

Science fiction postulates that consciousness will eventually occur for computers when they become larger and more complex: the larger question is whether consciousness must include willpower for action, and if it does, how would a box take action?

Excellent.

[Opus106]

Adding to the list of rhetorical questions for this newfangled topic of Free Will vs. Determinism:

Is it necessary that there be an inspiration behind the music? Does (Should) every listener care about it enough to consider it as a criterion for something to be labelled as music?
Does a "mediocre" musician not produce music -- not Great Music, mind you -- because he simply plays with the rules his teacher taught him?

[Karl Henning]

The quick-&-dirty answer is: it is desired, even if not necessary.

We denigrate hack-work in humans; why should it be applauded in machines?

[ibanezmonster]

This is nothing new- remember David Cope and his 5000 Bach chorales?
http://artsites.ucsc.edu/faculty/cope/5000.html

The process of the computer writing is not much different than a human. When a human writes, they have some idea (even if it's vague) of a style to write in and its rules. What flows from the subconscious is pretty much a random generation based within those confines. With the computer, they just program certain rules for a style and then hit the randomize button. Basically the same thing, the only difference being that the music is composed by both human and computer rather than just human.

[snyprrr]

We're not going down that rabbit hole again. I wonder what kind of emotion e.g. Reich's Reed Phase communicates, despite being wholly mechanically algorithmic... Oh, I know! it's the emotion of liking it. All else is irrelevant.

A) "I had my best piece o' woman listening to Reed Phase. It's a great piece."

B) "I HAD to listen to Reed Phase. It sucks."

[snyprrr]

Quote from: karlhenning on January 24, 2013, 11:01:41 AM


The YouTube example shows me that professors (i.e. human beings) composed the music with a computer and its program. 

The computer did not - like Karl Henning can - will the work into creation.  So yes, the inspiration question is valid, because the computer did not turn itself on, decide to create its own program to compose music, and then start the program running.

Having the computer run a music composition program does not give it willpower, does not give it desire to create a soundscape for symbolizing e.g. the large bright January moon in the morning.

Science fiction postulates that consciousness will eventually occur for computers when they become larger and more complex: the larger question is whether consciousness must include willpower for action, and if it does, how would a box take action?

I'm-Sorry-Dave-I-Can't-Do-That


So, no one thinks this sounds just like a bunch of academics' wet-dream of a serialist work a la Berg? Isn't it so absolutely obvious who is behind this? Norgard, for one, writes better, and with much more imagination, than this bunch.

Very soon, all your great-grandkids will have this "app", and will be churning out LvB's 153rd in no time. In 10 years all the new fans here at GMG will come having been turned on to 'classical' by some C1A programmed brain washing music.

Once again, is it any surprise that the music produced sounds like a perfectly sterile Bergian conceit? The bones are DRY, I tell ya.

The whole IAMUS (I, am us,... haha, I get it!) thing is I-AM-ACADEMIA. Haha, in other words, this computer voted for Obama, haha!

This is BULLSHIT!

[Cato]

Once again, is it any surprise that the music produced sounds like a perfectly sterile Bergian conceit? The bones are DRY, I tell ya.

Amen!   0:)

Hi Snyprr! I see that Red Bull was on sale this week by the case!   

[Karl Henning]

(* chortle *)