Computers Are Incapable Of Creatively Writing Music

[Steve Klinko]

Does that matter? How do you define creativity? How many truly creative artists are there? Picasso, Daly, Bosch ?

I think that example of a "windy day" showing the leaves drifting in the air (all in the same direction) is very creative. I cannot recall ever seeing anything like it.

The OP defines Creativity.

 

[Write4U]

The OP defines Creativity.

Yes, creativity in composing music.

In post #319, did you listen to the finish of Schubert's Unfinished Symphony?

Or in post #326 the comparison of Human and AI classical compositions? The written compositions? Were you able to hear the difference? The classical musicians could not on several compositions!

Did you hear that both compositions were played by human orchestras? Where do you want to define the creativity, in the composition or in the performance?

 

[Steve Klinko]

Yes, creativity in composing music.

In post #319, did you listen to the finish of Schubert's Unfinished Symphony?

Or in post #326 the comparison of Human and AI classical compositions? The written compositions? Were you able to hear the difference? The classical musicians could not on several compositions!

Did you hear that both compositions were played by human orchestras? Where do you want to define the creativity, in the composition or in the performance?

Yes, but if the Computer is simulating these Composers, why would a Human hear a difference, if it is a good simulation? In any case, the difference is irrelevant. There is no Creativity if there is no Conscious Mind Creating it. That is the premise of the OP. You either like that or not. I guess you don't, which is fine.

 

[billvon]

Thank You. I know what Deep Learning is. It is just a Neural Net with lots more layers made possible by faster Computers and more efficient Algorithms.

Nope. Deep learning is not "just a neural net with lots more layers." Deep learning is a system that allows learning from unstructured, unordered and/or unlabeled data. It is different than a deep neural network, which has more than one layer. One is hardware, the other is a process.

However, a deep network is pretty much a requirement for a system capable of deep learning.

I hope you don't think that just because the Book says Deep Learning, that Computers are really Learning. They are electronic devices that can be Configured. We only say they Learn by convention and convenience. There is no Learning in the same sense as what a Human Brain does.

Well, let's see. I could go with the opinion of the experts I work with, who regularly develop learning systems that work in the real world without being "configured."

Or I could go with some guy on the Internet who doesn't understand English grammar and who regularly gets simple definitions wrong - while professing all the while that he is an expert in a field he clearly does not understand.

Not too hard to decide there.

 

[Write4U]

Yes, but if the Computer is simulating these Composers, why would a Human hear a difference, if it is a good simulation? In any case, the difference is irrelevant. There is no Creativity if there is no Conscious Mind Creating it. That is the premise of the OP. You either like that or not. I guess you don't, which is fine.

Obviously you have not listened at all. The compositions were not simulations other than of a Romantic or Dark Film nature and not similar in any respect other than specific genre, else you could say that you can't judge different genres as to creativeness.

Listen and then make a comment. You cannot judge unless you listen!

 

[Write4U]

I hope you don't think that just because the Book says Deep Learning, that Computers are really Learning. They are electronic devices that can be Configured.

I hope you don't think that the terms "hardware" and "hardwired" cannot yield "deep learning" . Note that these terms also apply Human brain neural networks, and we are capable of "deep learning". Or am I posing a false equivalence here?

 

[Write4U]

The OP defines Creativity

Claims about Computers creatively writing Music are misleading. Let's explore the Creative Process for Human Music and for Computer Music. The Human composer will get Inspired by a particular line of Musical Notes while Hearing them in the CM. The Human composer might play these Notes on a Piano, Guitar, or other instrument to get a more robust Auditory Experience than what is in the Imagination of the CM. The Human composer will develop a Desire to write the Music. The Human composer is constantly Hearing the Notes at the CM level in order to write the Music. This is because the Human composer instinctively knows the Music is being composed for the Enjoyment of a CM.

What makes you think the AI cannot figure out what kind of Music patterns humans enjoy? You keep restricting AI's ability to gain knowledge and understanding of human preferences. That is a mistake, IMO.

Remember the interview with GPT3, where it answered every question with precise and pertinent answers, fully satisfying the question. IOW, the AI understood the intent and basis for the question and answered the need for clarity. If it can do that with language, it can do that with musical language. That is what human composer do. Everyone needs instruction in music and composition before they can make a creative composition.. Unschooled composers are hard to come by.

The AI can learn to separate logical harmonious chord progressions from disharmonious chord progressions and emotionally constructive solos.

Listen to the examples !

 

[Steve Klinko]

I hope you don't think that the terms "hardware" and "hardwired" cannot yield "deep learning" . Note that these terms also apply Human brain neural networks, and we are capable of "deep learning". Or am I posing a false equivalence here?

You are just skirting around the issue which is that the Computer Neural Net is not Conscious, but the Human Brain Neural Net is Conscious.

 

[Steve Klinko]

What makes you think the AI cannot figure out what kind of Music patterns humans enjoy? You keep restricting AI's ability to gain knowledge and understanding of human preferences. That is a mistake, IMO.

Remember the interview with GPT3, where it answered every question with precise and pertinent answers, fully satisfying the question. IOW, the AI understood the intent and basis for the question and answered the need for clarity. If it can do that with language, it can do that with musical language. That is what human composer do. Everyone needs instruction in music and composition before they can make a creative composition.. Unschooled composers are hard to come by.

The AI can learn to separate logical harmonious chord progressions from disharmonious chord progressions and emotionally constructive solos.

Listen to the examples !

You are being fooled. What the Computer can do is work with Mathematical Simulations of Music structure. That can correspond to certain aspects of what we hear, but the Computer cannot actually Experience the Music that it is making Mathematical decisions on.

 

[Write4U]

You are just skirting around the issue which is that the Computer Neural Net is not Conscious, but the Human Brain Neural Net is Conscious.

Yes, because the human neural network pattern IS conscious..
The AI neural network pattern isn't. yet.

You are being fooled. What the Computer can do is work with Mathematical Simulations of Music structure. That can correspond to certain aspects of what we hear, but the Computer cannot actually Experience the Music that it is making Mathematical decisions on.

Have you listened to the recordings?

Come back to me when you have.

 

[Steve Klinko]

Yes, because the human neural network pattern IS conscious..
The AI neural network pattern isn't. yet.
Have you listened to the recordings?

Come back to me when you have.

Listening to Music produced by a Program is irrelevant, and not very interesting to me. What was your point supposed to be with links to Computer Music?

 

[river]

What makes you think the AI cannot figure out what kind of Music patterns humans enjoy? You keep restricting AI's ability to gain knowledge and understanding of human preferences. That is a mistake, IMO.

Remember the interview with GPT3, where it answered every question with precise and pertinent answers, fully satisfying the question. IOW, the AI understood the intent and basis for the question and answered the need for clarity. If it can do that with language, it can do that with musical language. That is what human composer do. Everyone needs instruction in music and composition before they can make a creative composition.. Unschooled composers are hard to come by.

The AI can learn to separate logical harmonious chord progressions from disharmonious chord progressions and emotionally constructive solos.

Listen to the examples !

No doubt they can . But AI is not Human .

 

[Write4U]

Listening to Music produced by a Program is irrelevant, and not very interesting to me. What was your point supposed to be with links to Computer Music?

Because it makes you
look silly and ignorant of reality.
Listen to the music and then posit your critique, if any!

No doubt they can . But AI is not Human .

So? What is your point?
Have you listened to the clips? If not how can you judge anything.

You are mixing up playing a musical instrument, with composing a musical score.

AI are still terrible at playing an instrument like, say a violin. There are a few examples and they are just horrible,
like a 4 year old playing a violin and your body shivering from the grating screeches like harpies........

 

[river]

Because it makes you
look silly and ignorant of reality.
Listen to the music and then posit your critique, if any!

So? What is your point?
Have you listened to the clips? If not how can you judge anything.

You are mixing up playing a musical instrument, with composing a musical score.

AI are still terrible at playing an instrument like, say a violin. There are a few examples and they are just horrible,
like a 4 year old playing a violin and your body shivering from the grating screeches like harpies........

My point is this , AI is not Human and AI can create but it depends on what it knows and the programmer . AI can not exist on its own .

 

[Write4U]

My point is this , AI is not Human and AI can create but it depends on what it knows and the programmer . AI can not exist on its own .

Neither can a human unless it learns and practices.

 

[river]

Neither can a human unless it learns and practices.

AI can not exist on its own .

 

[Steve Klinko]

Because it makes you
look silly and ignorant of reality.
Listen to the music and then posit your critique, if any!

So? What is your point?
Have you listened to the clips? If not how can you judge anything.

I'm not judging anything, I'm stating a reality of the Universe: Creativity comes from a Conscious Mind. So there is no point in Listening to Computer Music, since Computers have no Conscious Mind.

 

[river]

I'm not judging anything, I'm stating a reality of the Universe: Creativity comes from a Conscious Mind. So there is no point in Listening to Computer Music, since Computers have no Conscious Mind.

Computers have conscious programs . Programs that bring in information from the outside . Such as light , temperature , and pressure , chemicals , air etc . Into its memory and processes this information to form a conclusion .

 

[river]

Computers will out do us in speed and memory . Hence thought . Connections made , where we could not see , in moment(s) .

Still these connections have to be proven .

 

[Write4U]

I'm not judging anything, I'm stating a reality of the Universe: Creativity comes from a Conscious Mind. So there is no point in Listening to Computer Music, since Computers have no Conscious Mind.

Bye bye.....!