[ rss / options / help ]
post ]
[ b / iq / g / zoo ] [ e / news / lab ] [ v / nom / pol / eco / emo / 101 / shed ]
[ art / A / beat / boo / com / fat / job / lit / map / mph / poof / £$€¥ / spo / uhu / uni / x / y ] [ * | sfw | o ]
logo
music

Return ]

Posting mode: Reply
Reply ]
Subject   (reply to 11284)
Message
File  []
close
father-john-misty-portrait-oct-2016-billboard-1548.jpg
112841128411284
>> No. 11284 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 9:06 pm
11284 spacer
Lads, I've been listening to a fair bit of Father John Misty and it's got me thinking. Is it possible to use algorithms to create music?

It's probably reflective of the slightly bland middle of the road music I seem to have settled into but literally every single song of his sounds like I've heard it before; even on the first listen to a track it's got that warm familiarity and pangs of nostalgia. Now I'm not saying the man has been created using artificial intelligence and manufactured music or imitating other artists is nothing new, but if someone turned around and said that all of his output had been cultivated in a lab with the aim of creating music with widespread appeal then I wouldn't blink an eye. I know the likes of Spotify use algorithms to recommend music they think people will like, but I'm not aware of algorithms being used to create music they think people will like.
Expand all images.
>> No. 11285 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 9:14 pm
11285 spacer
>>11284

I don't have any sources so feel free to ignore me but I'm pretty sure AI has been used to produce chart music for quite a while now. Chart music has been formulaic for at least the last two decades, using machine learning and AI to pick and choose what combinations of beats and melodies are going to sell well is probably an achievable task for a masters student in AI, given the right data sets.
>> No. 11286 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 9:24 pm
11286 spacer
>>11285
I know chart music is incredibly formulaic these days but this is somehow different. I can't exactly put my finger on it, but this is above your lowest common denominator pop hit. More complex and layered.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV2s0UIPOQY
>> No. 11287 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 9:39 pm
11287 spacer
>>11284
I'm pretty sure that Max Martin is just an actor playing the public face of a song writing algorithm.
>> No. 11289 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 11:05 pm
11289 spacer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0zOprEiOOyc&t

This is Besthony Teethtano listening to something sort of like what you imagined. But even with a smaller amount of music, IE, one album, the computer doesn't quite know how to mix it organically. Of course, maybe a larger sample of music to reimagine would give it more options, maybe these sounds are easier to make sound dodgy than the "bland middle of the road" stuff you're talking about, and maybe other things I'm too dumb to think of right now.
>> No. 11290 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 11:12 pm
11290 spacer

klf manual.jpg
112901129011290
Lengthy but entertaining.

http://freshonthenet.co.uk/the-manual-by-the-klf/
>> No. 11291 Anonymous
10th October 2018
Wednesday 11:13 pm
11291 spacer
>>11290

Is that visually obvious the link's underneath the picture or does it look like it ought to be some data about the photo or something?

http://freshonthenet.co.uk/the-manual-by-the-klf/
>> No. 11292 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:28 am
11292 spacer
It's totally viable for AI to write and perform songs, although professionals can knock out records so quickly that it doesn't make much difference. Mike Stock and Matt Aitken reportedly wrote I Should Be So Lucky in twenty minutes and recorded it in an afternoon, which was fairly typical of their workrate in the late eighties. Between the 1930s and the 1960s, the Brill Building in New York functioned like a songwriting factory - dozens of world class songwriters were cranking out songs in enormous quantities. The great session crews (The Wrecking Crew, The Funk Brothers, MFSB) performed on hundreds of hit records, often recording an entire album in a day. Pop music is an industrial product that purports to be art.

It's possible to do imaginative things within the pop format, but most people just don't care - they want something that sounds like all their favourite music, just slightly different. Selling intelligent and sophisticated pop music is just more effort than it's worth, especially now that no bugger actually buys records. People are still making it, but the major labels won't touch it with a bargepole.
>> No. 11293 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:39 am
11293 spacer
As said already, it's just as easy for a human to write these songs. Western music theory is relatively simplistic, and pop in particular tends not to stray from an alarmingly small pool of chord progressions and keys.



I'm quite confident I could teach you how to write a song that sounds like the music you listen to, with no prior knowledge, provided I gave you a musical instrument/controller that could be set to a specific key signature.

The question of why this particular style of song is so incredibly popular is one I've never truly been able to answer - is it all marketing, or is it just that these melodies are genuinely the most resonant with us? And if the latter, is that a taught preference or innate? It's fair to say that western, chromatic music is popular the world over, but it hasn't killed off alternately tuned systems of music.

The other question I find hard to answer is, "if it's so easy, why don't more people do it?" I think that might just have more to do with being in the right place at the right time than anything else. Plus, anyone who's truly into music theory and production will typically try their hardest to do things differently and not conform to the standard, and that's how new genres are born, I suppose.
>> No. 11294 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:46 am
11294 spacer
>>11292
>they want something that sounds like all their favourite music, just slightly different

I think that must be it. If you take Mr Tillman, for example, and you didn't know who the artist was then it's very plausible to believe it was by Beck. There's a fair few other sounds I recognise in there, too. I know Eels had a very similar vibe to Beck, but they never outright tried to sound exactly like him.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5B5IGqyy2s
>> No. 11295 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 9:31 am
11295 spacer
>>11291

I should also add the KLF wrote it and that's the link to the full text.
>> No. 11296 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 9:37 am
11296 spacer

71rEgfe796L.jpg
112961129611296
>>11294

Blake Snyder says something similar, repeatedly, in his Save The Cat series.

>To quote the studio executive who first blurted out this rule to me, Sam Goldwyn-like, during a development meeting: "Give me the same thing... only different!"
>> No. 11297 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 9:47 am
11297 spacer

Capture7.png
112971129711297
>>11295

and that this song followed their instructions.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rENsPWwFh1I
>> No. 11299 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 11:04 am
11299 spacer
>>11293

>The question of why this particular style of song is so incredibly popular is one I've never truly been able to answer - is it all marketing, or is it just that these melodies are genuinely the most resonant with us?

It's the fast food of music - just enough flavour to satisfy, but not enough to surprise. The genre of "easy listening" was much derided, but that's a fairly accurate description of the appeal of most mainstream pop. There's nothing in a pop record that might confuse or disconcert the listener, just a simple melody over a simple progression with a simple lyric.

Sophisticated or experimental music is an acquired taste. A seventh chord is far more ambiguous than a triad, because it's really two triads stacked on top of each other - Cmaj7 contains all the notes of the Cmaj and Emin triads. Add in a bit of modulation and the casual listener can just lose the thread of where the progression is going and where it might resolve to. If you don't have a familiarity with harmonically complex music, it's like listening to a conversation in a foreign language - you know that people are talking, but you don't have a clue what they're saying.
>> No. 11300 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 11:40 am
11300 spacer
>>11299
>Sophisticated or experimental music is an acquired taste. A seventh chord is far more ambiguous than a triad, because it's really two triads stacked on top of each other - Cmaj7 contains all the notes of the Cmaj and Emin triads. Add in a bit of modulation and the casual listener can just lose the thread of where the progression is going and where it might resolve to. If you don't have a familiarity with harmonically complex music, it's like listening to a conversation in a foreign language - you know that people are talking, but you don't have a clue what they're saying.

That sounds a bit Emperor's New Clothes to me; this music sounds like a dog's dinner but I listen to it so I can explain to people that I understand exactly what the musician has done to create this particular pile of shite.
>> No. 11301 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 12:01 pm
11301 spacer
>>11300

You might find this video informative.


>> No. 11303 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 12:24 pm
11303 spacer
>>11300

I think otherlad went to far by saying it's a foreign language. People without a music theory background can certainly understand something with weird complex melodies - jazz isn't exclusively listened to by trained musicians - but he's right that it takes a certain amount of effort or concentration to follow along - it's just that for someone who knows the theory, it's easier.

If we wanted to further torture the metaphor, you could say that just about anyone could understand two french people were having an argument or a fight or were declaring their love from one another, just by looking at them, and still get something out of that -but someone who knew the language would be able to appreciate the actual details of the conversation.

Personally as a trained musician and producer, albeit just a hobbyist at this point, when I'm actively working on projects, I find it very difficult to just turn off the theory and production ear, even when going about my daily business, I'll be listening to the radio or spotify and be thinking "ah, I see what they've done there" and makes it very hard to enjoy the music for what it is. If I take a break from writing for a few weeks, that goes away. That's probably more just a personal anecdote than anything useful to add, though.
>> No. 11304 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 12:56 pm
11304 spacer
Music theory was solved with Pachelbel's Canon, in the same sense that storytelling and film were solved by 'Hero of a thousand faces' and the original star wars, and the wheel solved transport. They haven’t but they cast big enough shadows that if you ignore them you are a fool.

Everything since them made by a professional is either a variation of them "the same thing... only different" under the understanding that they are near perfect but familiarity breeds’ contempt and there is a lot of money to be made by making the next big clone. or deliberately violating the rules, which results in contrarians regularly in sheer pretention and hubris insisting they've made something brilliant it is just that others are 'too stupid' to understand their work when they don't like it because it is a convoluted mess.


Anyway here's wonderwall


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdz5kCaCRFM
>> No. 11305 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 1:57 pm
11305 spacer
I'm more or less convinced that the "pop music is actually really well written and composed to intentionally sound repetitive/familiar" argument I often hear people (I say people, I mean music tech grads who want to justify their existence) often use is completely fucking bollocks.

It's not that at all. It sounds that way because pop artists and producers are both lazy and safe, following trends which drift at a glacial pace. There's nothing secretly clever about it, it's just shit, and if you like it then I'm sorry but you like shit. There's nothing wrong with liking shit, I won't judge you for liking shit, I like a fair bit of shit myself. Just don't try and kid yourself that that bloke who writes hooks for Nicki Minaj is our generation's Mozart.

The reason it's so popular is by sheer brute force and coverage. When you listen to top 40 radio stations, you're not listening to music in between adverts. You're just listening to a non-stop 24/7 stream of advertisement. The songs are played to death, you hear it every day because that fat bint in the corner of your office kicks off if you turn it over, and before you know it you actually like it. It's self sustaining. There's nothing clever about it, it's pure financial brute force.
>> No. 11306 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 2:54 pm
11306 spacer
>>11305

>I'm more or less convinced that the "pop music is actually really well written and composed to intentionally sound repetitive/familiar" argument I often hear people (I say people, I mean music tech grads who want to justify their existence) often use is completely fucking bollocks.

I've never really heard that one, and certainly nobody's saying it in this thread.
>> No. 11307 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:08 pm
11307 spacer
>>11292
> Mike Stock and Matt Aitken reportedly wrote I Should Be So Lucky in twenty minutes and recorded it in an afternoon, which was fairly typical of their workrate in the late eighties.

The cocaine was just so much better back then it's unbelievable.
>> No. 11308 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:23 pm
11308 spacer
>>11306

Well good on you lad. I have, and I didn't say it had been used in this thread.
>> No. 11309 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 7:45 pm
11309 spacer
>>11301
I enjoyed that, thanks lad.

>>11306>>11308
You can pack that in before it starts.
>> No. 11310 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 8:15 pm
11310 spacer
I had rather mundane thought a while back that your musical taste is based on your own musical ability. So if you have no/low musical ability and have never played an instrument apart from grade 1 recorder in year 5, then modern pop music seems fine.

Where as I played piano for 5 years when I was young, and a bit of noodling on guitar over the years, and I listen to some modern pop and it seems like something I myself could knock up, or at least work out how to play pretty rapidly.

So in a very roundabout way I think I'm saying that everyone should to learn to play an instrument and perhaps the standard of pop music would have to rise.
>> No. 11311 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 8:23 pm
11311 spacer
>>11310

I'm sure plenty of Pitchfork snobs can't play instruments, like me for instance.
>> No. 11312 Anonymous
11th October 2018
Thursday 9:01 pm
11312 spacer
>>11310

You can acquire a broader musical palate without being a trained musician. Just listening attentively will allow you to develop an intuitive understanding of the grammar and vocabulary of a particular style of music. That understanding is often transferable between genres. Broadly speaking, pop music was much more sophisticated back in the 50s and 60s, in large part because most of the listeners would have been familiar with classical music and/or swing. It's a lot easier to enjoy Mongolian traditional music if you're already familiar with minimalist western composers like Philip Glass or Brian Eno; it's easier to enjoy jungle if you're familiar with garage or house.

In recent decades, most people have been exposed to an increasingly narrow range of music. Sixty years ago, most households had one radio and one record player, so music was to an extent a communal and intergenerational experience. The transistor radio and the dansette allowed teenagers to listen to their own music in their own bedroom, shutting them off from the boring music their parents listened to. The walkman arrived, then the MP3 player, then (not coincidentally) Top of the Pops went off the air. Technology gave us the ability to listen to exactly what we want, which is a double-edged sword; if you never listen to music you don't like, your tastes will never broaden.

To return to my "fast food music" analogy, it's never a good thing if we get too much of what we like. Without a lot of pushing and prodding, most kids would rather subsist on a diet of chicken nuggets and chips. It takes considerable time and effort for them to be introduced to a wider and more challenging range of foods and learn to like them. Nobody is born with a taste for broccoli or olives or chili peppers. If you don't have an older brother or a music teacher with a great record collection to broaden your horizons, you're unlikely to push through the shock of the new and develop a well-rounded musical diet of your own volition.
>> No. 11313 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 12:57 am
11313 spacer
>>11311
Like this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dVcLHRusR8
>> No. 11314 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 1:04 am
11314 spacer
>>11312

>Broadly speaking, pop music was much more sophisticated back in the 50s and 60s

Broadly speaking or not, I've heard some of the shite my mum listened to in her day out of Jackie magazine or whatever. I don't believe we really have regressed all that badly. That music may have arguably taken a greater level of musicianship to produce than modern pop, but it was still complete bollocks.

>If you don't have an older brother or a music teacher with a great record collection to broaden your horizons, you're unlikely to push through the shock of the new and develop a well-rounded musical diet of your own volition.

Most people I know simply had their peer group and an internet connection. It's probably easier than ever nowadays for kids nowadays to grow up as prog rock snobs or that kind of nerd who only listens to doom metal, but if they're not in the kind of social circle that cares you're not going to bother.

This is only tangentially related but it's for this reason I lament the apparent downfall of youth subcultures. A great deal of musical diversity in the past several decades was tied to and thrived on the following of young punks or goths or what have you.
>> No. 11315 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 11:32 am
11315 spacer
>>11314

There is youth subculture now it is just obsessed with gender politics instead of music.
>> No. 11316 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 12:14 pm
11316 spacer
>>11315
Whilst I think younger generations are more guarded about what they say for fear of being shouted down, I don't think that's it.

There seems to be far more pressure on kids about how they look. You see parents moulding young kids into being mini models and the like; boys about the age of 10 with faded hair, skinny jeans and tops from somewhere like Hollister or Abercrombie & Fitch. When I was that age I thought I looked the shit in my grey Adidas top with grey Adidas trackies with red trim on the stripes and a zip so I could turn them into flares. Then there's also growing up in the world of social media and the way everyone presents an artificially perfect version of themselves.

The pressure on kids today to conform is enormous. We're not letting kids be kids and grow up making their own mistakes. You don't see teenage girls caked in foundation and with wonky bright blue eye shadow anymore because they've all watched tutorials on YouTube on how to apply make-up like a professional.
>> No. 11317 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 1:09 pm
11317 spacer
>>11316

>boys about the age of 10 with faded hair, skinny jeans and tops from somewhere like Hollister or Abercrombie & Fitch. When I was that age I thought I looked the shit in my grey Adidas top with grey Adidas trackies with red trim on the stripes and a zip so I could turn them into flares.

Those are the exact same things though, aren't they? Kids wearing what's fashionable.

It's easy for us old cunts to believe that we were the last generation to do it right, but fifteen years ago I was wearing clothes as dictated by my peers, media, and the bands I listened to. I was very much part of a music scene and there were plenty of them about, and more than enough teenage subcultures. I can't imagine any of that has disappeared in such a short amount of time.

The idea that teenagers don't for groups, cliques, or subcultures now is laughable, honestly. They may not be ones you recognise (though they still exist, I see goths all the time) but they're there.
>> No. 11320 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 5:51 pm
11320 spacer
>>11317
That's a lie. The last goth in the wild died in 2007.
>> No. 11321 Anonymous
12th October 2018
Friday 6:05 pm
11321 spacer
>>11320

They still exist, but they're mostly middle-aged. The average age at Whitby Goth Weekend must be north of 50 these days.

Return ]
whiteline

Delete Post []
Password