Generative AI evolves. There's little selective pressure for it to be any good - or rather, being good is only one route for it to evolve. The selective pressure is for it to sell itself, so that people buy and build more of it. It appears that for generative AI, evolving into an electronic con-man is a more efficient route.
Hilarious they go all Brian Eno the moment a drone is mentioned. I have heard reasonably convincing hurdy gurdy plug-ins, but nothing I’d consider production ready. Compound instruments are probably stretching its capabilities right now. I’d ask it for similarly layered instruments, maybe a bagpipe or sitar?
It definitely seems to struggle with older/more obscure instruments, tried generating a lute and just got several instances of music that sounds vaguely renaissance/baroque but without an actual lute
I've found that Udio will often not use the instruments requested in the prompt. Even more common instruments than hurdy gurdy. I tried asking for vibraphone, and no success.
Hmmm... something I thought about but forgot to put in the video is that there might be a ton of hurdy-gurdy music that's just not tagged. Maybe the people doing the tagging are only familiar with the sounds of really common instruments (at least common in Western culture music?)
On the contrary, your comment is very on topic. I guess it makes users feel better than something like "more from this person playing around with this toy" (which is how I view it -- my general impression is the same I got with ChatGPT or Midjourney -- it's impressive at first, kinda fun for a few hours while you try silly mashups, creatively most interesting when it totally messes up, ultimately it's just kind of mildly interesting at best).
I have zero notes for you on this, you zeroed in on my concern precisely. I do have a tendency to ask whether my concerns are really valid in this kind of situation, or am I simply gatekeeping? Probably both, to some degree. Certainly, there’s always a sense that the dedication and commitment to learning a skill or trade to some nominal level of proficiency should command some respect. That said, I don’t know that I’ve seen much to suggest there’s a credible threat to my own creative endeavors, so why should I care if some new gimmick wants to extend a largely meaningless title to its users? I’m learning that the anthropomorphism being applied to these LLM and machine learning systems strike an odd nerve, I’m sure I’m not unique in this. I find the revelation of intelligent behavior in other species endlessly fascinating, like corvid birds or cephalopods. I’m excited by how complex cultures, languages, and social systems can develop among elephants, bonobos, and marine mammals. But for some reason (and it’s nothing to do with SkyNet, the singularity, or anything’s razor 🪒) I really dislike the rush to shove even the most rudimentary machine intellect into a human suit. It feels unnecessary, and vaguely sketchy, like I’m being sold a particularly fancy Star Trek commemorative DVD collection. At least for now, I think I’d be more comfortable treating it like the curiosity that it is, and leave the deeper potential, including how its relative consciousness should be expressed, to researchers operating under some sort of defined ethical code that doesn’t involve juicing it up for trillion-dollar behemoths.
There are tons of black spots but what they will do if they aren't idiots is take all of the search results from their page see which ones are quickly deleted, which ones are rated low, or not downloaded (obviously prioritised by frequency) and see that as an area for improvement. And like magic those areas where its weakest will start disappearing. In a world where every business is a data business giving it the data it needs to correct itself if your goal is for it to not is not exactly a good idea.
Generative AI evolves. There's little selective pressure for it to be any good - or rather, being good is only one route for it to evolve. The selective pressure is for it to sell itself, so that people buy and build more of it. It appears that for generative AI, evolving into an electronic con-man is a more efficient route.
I wasn’t wearing my glasses so I misread “Flute, minimalism” as ”Flute, mammalian.” I thought “Wow. This is innovative.”
HAH!
Hilarious they go all Brian Eno the moment a drone is mentioned. I have heard reasonably convincing hurdy gurdy plug-ins, but nothing I’d consider production ready. Compound instruments are probably stretching its capabilities right now. I’d ask it for similarly layered instruments, maybe a bagpipe or sitar?
Oud players are untouchable.
Who wants to hear a hurdy gurdy?
Ok, there are hurdy gurdy like passages in Bach‘s cello suites, which are gorgeous…
My son recently became obsessed with hurdy gurdy music. Not everything in life makes sense. ;)
You must describe the acoustics body of the instrument and it’s mechanical function…
Always fun to ask for Forumlaic Functions (Formulae/Minutiae.)
it was called german because of singer from Alsace
It definitely seems to struggle with older/more obscure instruments, tried generating a lute and just got several instances of music that sounds vaguely renaissance/baroque but without an actual lute
I've found that Udio will often not use the instruments requested in the prompt. Even more common instruments than hurdy gurdy. I tried asking for vibraphone, and no success.
Hmmm... something I thought about but forgot to put in the video is that there might be a ton of hurdy-gurdy music that's just not tagged. Maybe the people doing the tagging are only familiar with the sounds of really common instruments (at least common in Western culture music?)
What is this “more from this creator”? Are they positioning users as “creators”? (sorry, off-topic)
On the contrary, your comment is very on topic. I guess it makes users feel better than something like "more from this person playing around with this toy" (which is how I view it -- my general impression is the same I got with ChatGPT or Midjourney -- it's impressive at first, kinda fun for a few hours while you try silly mashups, creatively most interesting when it totally messes up, ultimately it's just kind of mildly interesting at best).
I have zero notes for you on this, you zeroed in on my concern precisely.
I do have a tendency to ask whether my concerns are really valid in this kind of situation, or am I simply gatekeeping? Probably both, to some degree. Certainly, there’s always a sense that the dedication and commitment to learning a skill or trade to some nominal level of proficiency should command some respect. That said, I don’t know that I’ve seen much to suggest there’s a credible threat to my own creative endeavors, so why should I care if some new gimmick wants to extend a largely meaningless title to its users?
I’m learning that the anthropomorphism being applied to these LLM and machine learning systems strike an odd nerve, I’m sure I’m not unique in this. I find the revelation of intelligent behavior in other species endlessly fascinating, like corvid birds or cephalopods. I’m excited by how complex cultures, languages, and social systems can develop among elephants, bonobos, and marine mammals. But for some reason (and it’s nothing to do with SkyNet, the singularity, or anything’s razor 🪒) I really dislike the rush to shove even the most rudimentary machine intellect into a human suit. It feels unnecessary, and vaguely sketchy, like I’m being sold a particularly fancy Star Trek commemorative DVD collection.
At least for now, I think I’d be more comfortable treating it like the curiosity that it is, and leave the deeper potential, including how its relative consciousness should be expressed, to researchers operating under some sort of defined ethical code that doesn’t involve juicing it up for trillion-dollar behemoths.
Fun video though!
Considering some of the output I've heard, I'm quite surprised that it didn't just spit out a Steve Hillage rip-off.
I wasn't able to create any bagpipe music either.
😥
I tried bagpipe music first, figuring that would be a good torture test. Same result.
What if you explicitly tell it that the hurdy-gurdy is an instrument, e.g. "music played on a hurdy-gurdy"?
I tried that with lute and got a pseudo-hymn without instrumentals and a folk song with no discernible lute
There are tons of black spots but what they will do if they aren't idiots is take all of the search results from their page see which ones are quickly deleted, which ones are rated low, or not downloaded (obviously prioritised by frequency) and see that as an area for improvement.
And like magic those areas where its weakest will start disappearing. In a world where every business is a data business giving it the data it needs to correct itself if your goal is for it to not is not exactly a good idea.
You should try rackett, or shawm, or sackbut.
Maybe if you use the option to upload your own music and use a sample from a real hurdy gurdy