

Artificial music: Computers that create melodies - shill
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20140808-music-like-never-heard-before

======
gordaco
Iamus and Melomics! I worked in that project. The music we generated was,
actually, not very original, nor did it have much quality; but it was varied
enough. One of my coworkers said that we could have defined ourselves as the
greatest elevator music database in the world.

~~~
bane
I like the output of melomics quite a bit. I checked out quite a few tunes on
youtube. If the music had just a hair more structure, I'd almost pay money to
have a continuous stream I could play in the background during the workday.

It's a little markov-chainy right now, which I actually find a hair
distracting.

However, I really liked this tune
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIeo1XvrnTo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIeo1XvrnTo)

How come music generating software like this never seems to end up in the
public's hands?

~~~
Houshalter
They have a website for listening to songs and an API:
[https://melomics.com/](https://melomics.com/)

------
tunesmith
I think much of the debate is beside the point. For instance, if I heard a
piece of music that I found beautiful, and then discovered it wasn't written
by a human, I would then find it less meaningful and interesting than if it
were written by a human. I don't find that inconsistent, and it's just because
I find some of the meaning of music in the fact that it came from a human.
There's a difference between music that comes directly from translating one's
personal feelings and emotion, and music (even if it's the same sequence of
pitches) that comes from a simulation, even if that simulation technology was
written by a bunch of humans that have their own artistic impulses. The
computer-generated piece may be interesting and worthwhile, but the source of
the music is part of the experience for me.

~~~
baddox
If the source of the music is a fundamental part of your experience of music,
how can you appreciate a random piece of music for which you have no
background information? Is it only because you assume (reasonably, though
decreasingly so) that it must have been written by a human? And if so, will
the advent of computer-generated compositions ruin your ability to enjoy music
until you have convincing evidence of its origin?

~~~
coldtea
> _how can you appreciate a random piece of music for which you have no
> background information?_

For one, up to now, it was assumed it was from some human artist. Which is the
case with 99.999% of the pieces out there.

Second, it depends on the listening habits. Some people can like a piece of
art, but they only get really involved when they delve into the biographical
details of the artist. For them, the artist, and the intentions he has, mean
more than the individual songs. That's the root cause of fandom of course...

~~~
imaginenore
> _For one, up to now, it was assumed it was from some human artist. Which is
> the case with 99.999% of the pieces out there._

Where did you get that number? A computer can generate a trillion pieces in a
few hours.

------
Xcelerate
Funny, I was wondering about this the other day actually. I really like this
Melomics tune:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CddmYrLjCI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CddmYrLjCI)

~~~
ozgung
This one was very good actually. Entertaining and very well arranged. I'm sold
with the idea that some of us will prefer computer generated music in few
years. There is even more potential for popular music. I'm eager to see how
this will affect copyright laws and music industry.

~~~
GotAnyMegadeth
It will probably just end up with Google, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft owning
90% of the pop music industry.

------
jvoorhis
Machine Musicianship is a neat book on the subject.

[http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/machine-
musicianship](http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/machine-musicianship)

