Slashdot Mirror


Synthesized Singers

ctwxman writes "Over the past few decades, advances in computer hardware and software have eliminated many jobs... some technical, some menial, but none artistic. As an on-camera performer in television, I've always was believed that I was 'bulletproof' as far as replacement through technology was concerned. Not so fast. Recently, The Sinclair television stations began using 'central casting' to bring news and weather anchors from a central location (near Baltimore) to the local outlets. Still, real people are needed, just not as many. But now, even real performers may be replaced. The New York Times (inhalation of airplane glue required) reports on a new technology which allows synthesized singers to sing. Imagine having a singer with a world-class voice at your disposal, any hour of any day. She's just standing at the ready, game to perform whatever silly song you might make up for her: a ballad about her love for you, a tribute to your best friend's golf game, a stirring rendition of the evening's dinner menu. Scary."

72 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. Google Link by Ryan+Stortz · · Score: 4, Informative

    Google partner link...and yes. I did use my subscription to get it. :P

    --
    Bugs are just features that have been fixed.
  2. So combine.... by panxerox · · Score: 5, Funny

    this with the story "Decoding the Algorithm for Pop Music" and a synthetic DJ and who needs the radio anymore? Throw in a few digital actors and you can have your very own 24 hour copyright free mtv! A whole new meaning to "homebrew music" And what better way to bring down the RIAA than to replace them with software its not like its going to be any more original.

    --
    "It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
    1. Re:So combine.... by Junta · · Score: 5, Funny

      And while you are at it, put in some AIs to listen and watch the crap...

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    2. Re:So combine.... by lurker412 · · Score: 2, Funny

      The only thing lacking would be some autonomous agents to post critical comments about all of the above to /.

    3. Re:So combine.... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 2, Funny

      This completely explains the album "Cowboy Neal Does Sinatra".

  3. Here is the demo MP3 by UnderScan · · Score: 5, Informative

    From >a href="http://www.zero-g.co.uk/index.cfm?articleid= 802">http://www.zero-g.co.uk/index.cfm?articleid=8 02
    LOLA Demo 1 -Little Bird (MP3)
    Demo 1: "Little Bird".
    (NOTE - the lead vocal line on this demo is NOT by Vocaloid - it is a real singer. Please listen to the backing vocals!). This demo illustrates well how LOLA has been used to create a simple backing vocal arrangement for a personally-produced song. The song was written and performed by one of the Zero-G singing synthesis development team, Andy Power. Andy is singing the lead vocal himself, with his real voice, but he was able to add the backing vocals to his song purely by creating them all using LOLA. Although this is only a very simple example, it immediately illustrates LOLA's usefulness in an everyday situation.


    1. Re:Here is the demo MP3 by XorNand · · Score: 4, Informative


      Forget backing vocals, here's a sample of "Amazing Grace" mentioned in the article. Not perfect, but quite impressive.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    2. Re:Here is the demo MP3 by JoshRoss · · Score: 3, Informative

      Here is a solo. And, yes it does sound like a vocorder.

    3. Re:Here is the demo MP3 by vigilology · · Score: 2, Funny

      The pervert in the background going "uuhhhh... uuhhhh..." is too distracting.

    4. Re:Here is the demo MP3 by EvilTwinSkippy · · Score: 3, Funny
      Wow, that's got a great career as a backup singer... for a delivery truck.

      Oh hay watch out,
      I'm back-ing up
      please get ... out of ... the way

      Oh please get lost
      or you'll be crushed

      Scoot and live an-other dat.

      --
      "Learning is not compulsory... neither is survival."
      --Dr.W.Edwards Deming
  4. This must be a dupe... by Motherfucking+Shit · · Score: 5, Funny
    The New York Times (inhalation of airplane glue required) reports on a new technology which allows synthesized singers to sing.
    C'mon Slashdot, enough with the old stories already. Britney Spears has been "singing" for years now!
    --
    "BSD: Free as in speech. Linux: Free as in beer. Windows 10: Free as in herpes." --Man On Pink Corner in #52607549.
  5. Scary? by FatRatBastard · · Score: 2, Insightful

    She's just standing at the ready, game to perform whatever silly song you might make up for her: a ballad about her love for you, a tribute to your best friend's golf game, a stirring rendition of the evening's dinner menu. Scary.

    Imagine a composer getting up in the middle of the night, going to his newfangled magical "keyboard" and whipping up an entire symphony without the need for a full orchestra..... ooooh... scary.

    Man, for a bunch of geeks sometimes the /. crowd come off as downright luddites.

    1. Re:Scary? by cgranade · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This isn't about tech. It's about the need for human creativity and artistry being diminished. I, as a geek, like tech to the extent that it reduces the tedium and frees us to be creative. This is realizing that the very thing we love can be used to work against us. And that is the realization that is truly and deeply scary.

      --

      #define DRM chmod 000

    2. Re:Scary? by John+Miles · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's about the need for human creativity and artistry being diminished.

      Aw, c'mon. They said the same thing about player pianos.

      I, as a geek, like tech to the extent that it reduces the tedium and frees us to be creative. This is realizing that the very thing we love can be used to work against us. And that is the realization that is truly and deeply scary.

      This sort of artistic Luddism has no place in today's world. If you're worthy of the self-applied title "geek," you'll find ways to use this technology to create sounds and effects, maybe even entire musical genres, that were never possible or practical before.

      This isn't going to put Loreena McKennitt out of business, but I could see it giving Enya the willies.

      --
      Dahlmann tightly grips the knife, which he may have no idea how to use, and steps out into the plain.
  6. This is not new technology... by lewko · · Score: 3, Funny

    "a new technology which allows synthesized singers to sing"

    I suspect Milli Vanilli, BROS, Christina, Brittney and N*sync may be suing for prior art.

    --
    Do you or your partner snore? - Visit www.snoring.com.au
  7. Macintosh speech synthesis by Amiga+Lover · · Score: 5, Funny

    The new voice with Panther (Mac OSX 10.3) is scary. Vicki can send shivers up my spine anytime. I KNOW it's only a manufactured voice, a speech synthezizer, but dammit it's a sultry one.

    I'm almost considering getting a mac just to listen to her.

    1. Re:Macintosh speech synthesis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know what kind of 'glue' your 'sniffing' but the voice (Victoria actually) sounds like a school librarian but I guess if you think that's sexy that's you'r problem

    2. Re:Macintosh speech synthesis by danamania · · Score: 3, Informative

      I have a couple of samples from a dev preview. The newer full 10.3 release is better and doesn't have the odd speech impediment in some places, but I have no idea how to actually record panther speech straight to a file (and haven't been bothered looking how to, to be honest!)

      http://www.danamania.com/temp/victoria.mp3 is the old
      http://www.danamania.com/temp/vicki.mp3 is the new

    3. Re:Macintosh speech synthesis by silentbozo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      From the samples I've heard, Apple TTS has only made incremental improvements. We're still talking mostly about stringing pre-recorded phonemes together, guided by a semi-intelligent system for decoding written text into the audio equivalent for the speech engine.

      What I'd like to see is physical modeling of the speech apparatus - lungs, vocal cords, mouth, tongue, teeth, lips, where you can vary parameters such as articulation, etc. We have the computational power to drive such a simulation, witness the brain-dazzling graphics $200 3d cards can pump out. Couple that on-demand speech engine with a decent text to speech translator, and say goodbye to poor phoneme transitions and inappropriate articulations.

      Of course, this technology would probably find it's first applications in interactive 3d porn... Grant applications anybody?

  8. Hrmm by acehole · · Score: 5, Funny

    I can see the live concerts now... packed with people in the crowd, latest pryrotechnics ready to go, all the latest visual and audio gear deployed.

    And in the middle of the stage, a beige computer tower with a monitor, keyboard and mouse and a technician on hand to wiggle the mouse every 10 minutes so the flying windows screensaver doesnt come on.

    --
    Be you Admins? nay, we are but lusers!
    1. Re:Hrmm by quonsar · · Score: 3, Funny

      yeah, and it would be about two minutes later that some "indie" or minimalist "punk" puts on a show featuring nothing but the flying windows screen saver. hordes will flock to throw money at this breakthrough expression of genius, and among the original flying windows fans there will be bitter talk of how it "sold out to the man".

  9. the future of music by qewl · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What is really cool is when machines can do what people cannot do. The first sign of this was several decades ago when drum machines and analog synthesizers came about. The drum machines could play beats so fast and hit more instruments simulateously than a single person has limbs for and the synthesizers could create entirely new sounds. In the present, there are pitch machines which put singers' voices at a desirable pitch when singing. Hopefully next we'll have robots/machines with AI that can create their own insightful, fun, or intelligent lyrics to songs and sing them to an original beat. Popular music analyzers(just posted on /.) are already capable of predicting what tunes have potential. Music is a product of man, whether it is created through human hands or machines. You can't mentally hold yourself back to the idea real music is only a direct product of man.

    --

    (\_/)
    (O.o) This is Bunny. (> <)
    1. Re:the future of music by alphaseven · · Score: 2, Interesting
      What is really cool is when machines can do what people cannot do.

      You might be interested in this album, Farinelli: Original Soundtrack in which computers where used to simulate the sound of a castrati singer.

  10. Ah by Cuthalion · · Score: 2, Funny

    Imagine having a singer with a world-class voice at your disposal, any hour of any day. She's just standing at the ready,

    Is her name Sharon Apple?

    --
    Trees can't go dancing
    So do them a big favor
    Pretend dancing stinks!
  11. Copyrighting one's voice? by TheRedHorse · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Serious legal issues arise when creating "voice fonts" made from singing material previously released by artists. I doubt the RIAA or the artists themselves will like this new techonlogy at all. If this technology is a success then I forsee a push by the RIAA/artists themselves to get their voices copyrighted.

    As an example, Harley Davidson (the motorcycle company), tried to get it's unique motorcycle engine sound copyrighted and failed. Will this change the copyright office's stance?

  12. new "html" by penguinoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The problem with computer-synthesized voice is that it will not correctly convey emotions, and (if plaintext) will not even stress the right words. And it would be a bitch to write the appropriate tags.

    eg
    I didn't say he did it.
    I didn't say he did it.
    I didn't say he did it.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  13. This isn't really NEW by Arker · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It sounds like they've gone to much greater lengths on this project than any I'm aware of in the past, but the basic thing here has been out for a long time. Most any keyboard you can buy has human voices. A single sample can be spread out over your keyboard and sing any pitch you want, even glides and stuff, pretty easily. But it's generally fairly rudimentary - 'ahh' and 'ohh' or similar, you can actually do some nice sounding background vocals but not sing verses.

    From the description in the article, this 'new' thing is really just an inevitable extension of that - they spend about 5 days with a singer, recording her singing many different phonemes and different effects, so that you can then piece together the words to your own song and put it to your own melody in her voice. And, for the moment, they're still aiming at producing background vocals, just more complex ones with the ability to do actual lyrics instead of a oohs and aaahs. Could be kind of cool, but it definately doesn't sound like a 'quantum leap' - just an extension of long-existing technology. I've been expecting to see someone do this for well over 10 years now, ever since I first got to play around with a digital synthesizer.

    --
    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    1. Re:This isn't really NEW by RobPiano · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Did you see the movie "Farinelli?"

      http://www.medieval.org/emfaq/misc/farinelli.htm

      We've been doing a lot with singing voice for a long time now.

    2. Re:This isn't really NEW by metrazol · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I actually develop and work with voice synthesizers that are phoneme and phrase based. We dig up an actor, or an unwitting researcher from another project, and make them rattle off a few thousand sample sentences. Then, in theory, we use that date to make a "realistic" human voice. Yeah. Sure. Riiiiiight. If it worked, I'd be out of a job. :) Technology has come a very long way, but it is no where near what a real person can do. It can't even imitate. The spoken word is a thousand times easier than singing, I'll believe it when I hear it sing what I say within an hour of placing a request. By the way, I proposed that we develop a rapping version of our synthesized voice, just for fun. The idea was trashed in 30 seconds, b/c who wants a voice that raps like an off duty LAPD Sergeant at Karaoke night? I doubt this thing can sing that well...

      --
      "Life's funny sometimes." "And sometimes it isn't." --Cat's Cradle
    3. Re:This isn't really NEW by iabervon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It might actually be easier to do singing than normal speech, because singing replaces intonation, tempo, and some of stress, all of which otherwise have to be determined from a syntactic and semantic analysis of the text in order to really sound right. There have been people who have learned to sing songs in languages they didn't know at all, while I have yet to hear of someone giving a lecture (as convincingly) in a language they didn't know.

    4. Re:This isn't really NEW by Gyan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It might actually be easier to do singing than normal speech

      Given that singing and speech aren't mediated by the same parts of the brain. In this book, there's examples of people who can sing sentences, but can't speak them.

    5. Re:This isn't really NEW by isopossu · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Wouldn't it be smarter to make a virtual mouth and larynx and make it sing? So that the computer would calculate the resulting voice.

      Maybe someone has already tried. Sorry about my bad English.

  14. Who would do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    They said that they needed someone to sing 5 hours a day for a week...so that they could make him/her obsolete? In what life would you make yourself obsolete in your chosen profession for a weeks pay?!

  15. I hate to shoot your ego, but... by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I write music and produce for TV series. I have never had to use a musician. Ever. My boss uses live performers occasionally for shows that might win Emmys. I use Machfive and Digital Performer 4.1. Samplers, especially the 300 dollar Machfive platform/plugin have eliminated the need for live artists in my business. Hell, I will be recording a rap (bleh) artist soon, and the only live recording will be his vocals. The rest will be sampled.

    Your time is coming to an end, but I will say that synths and samplers don't match live studio musicians...yet. Vocalists are still safe, at least until Apple fixes their Speech voices.

    --
    Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    1. Re:I hate to shoot your ego, but... by littlerubberfeet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ouch.

      But you are mostly correct unfortunately. Most Discovery/TLC programs use library or "needle drop" music. It is susually pretty crappy. The studio I work at writes new music for shows, and taylors it to scenes. There is a cymbal crash when "Dr. Brady" gets bitten by a viper. A bowed gong plays when the rodent gets squeezed to death by an Anaconda. This is a simplification, but it is all possible with computers, instead of a 1,000 dollar gong. But yes, most TV music is utter crap. I will shut up about now...

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
  16. I find it interesting... by TheLoneDanger · · Score: 2, Funny

    I find it interesting that the first voices they've decided to use are "SOULful" voices.

    --

    "But I trust in the people's capacity for reflection, rage and rebellion." -Oscar Olivera
  17. Here are some samples by AltImage · · Score: 2, Informative

    There's an English press release here on the Japaneese Yamaha site with some clips available. They're in some weird format that requires a special player. The player is Windows only and is in Japanese. Still easily installable...just click where you think 'Next' should be. Here's a direct link to the player:

    Player

    The samples are very good and worth the trouble if you're interested in this. While not perfect it is better that I was expecting and I could see how it could be passable for a real person in certain situations.. Here are some direct links to the samples:

    Kimi no uwasa / Male lead vocal (Japanese song)
    Sarasara yukigeshiki / Chorus (Japanese)
    Amazing Grace / English example

  18. Endless Listening by trippinonbsd · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Combine these synthetic vocals with some randomized instrumentals and pipe it into your 'hitablity` algorith (covered here and here) and generate endless pop music!

    1. Re:Endless Listening by brahmsnotbombs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Isn't this just Britney Spears?

  19. Soundtrack for my life by DanThe1Man · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I want a soundtrack for my life. Like when something goes good, there would be a choir of "hallelujah". So far I only have this site for when I mess up.

  20. nytimes registration not bad, but.. by theycallmeB · · Score: 3, Funny

    Having been in a research enviroment where exposure/inhalation of airplane glue fumes (we were gluing up parts that were installed and flown on a real airplane (OK, it was tilt-rotor, and those are not real airplanes, but-still) so it counts as airplane glue), I can attest that attempting to sign into the NyTimes website can be greatly hampered by inhalation of airplane glue. Further, when some of those glue-tubes say 'use in a well ventilated area' they mean outdoors in a hurricane.

    Now excuse me while I go try find where my brain cells went.

  21. Q: What do you call someone... by wardomon · · Score: 2, Funny

    who hangs out with musicians?

    A: A drummer.

    ba dum dum chsst

    --

    - - - If the sun is a star, why can't I see it at night?
  22. Electric Monk by Kris_J · · Score: 4, Funny
    The Electric Monk was a labour-saving device, like a dishwasher or a video recorder. Dishwashers washed tedious dishes for you, thus saving you the bother of washing them yourself, video recorders watched tedious television for you, thus saving you the bother of looking at it yourself; Electric Monks believed things for you, thus saving you what was becoming an increasingly onerous task, that of believing all the things the world expected you to believe.
  23. This is a science fiction novel... by farrellj · · Score: 2, Informative

    I recommend everyone pick up a copy of "Little Heros" By Norman Spinrad...it is to the music industry today what "The Shockwave Rider" by John Brunner is to Hacking. Highly, Highly recommended, esp in light of this story about the potential of artificial performers...

    ttyl
    Farrell

    --
    CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
  24. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    We can replace Britney Spears musical endeavors with a small shell script. Then she'll be able to fully devote herself to just looking hot.

  25. Not really buying it. by Reteo+Varala · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know about you guys, but personally, I don't think there's that big a risk of performers really being replaced. At least, not en toto.

    Now, "popular music" notwithstanding, it takes more than just hitting the right notes and holding them to make music. This applies muchly to instruments, and doubly so for voices.

    First of all, just any combination of notes are not what makes music... artists have to play with hundreds of variations of tones to find "that perfect sequence," the collection of tones in a specific order, length, and style that produce a pleasing arrangement. Once that has been found, further arrengments of music are patterned and fitted to that sequence. You can have a synthesizer, but someone's still programming it... and not with numbers, either.

    Voices are many times more complex than musical instruments, because not only is there tone, volume, and length, but there is, for lack of a better term (in my own knowledge), shape of the sound. The artist Karl Jenkins (of "Adiemus" fame) used singers and a nonsensical language specifically to capitalize on that very set of qualities... using the human voice and speech as another "Instrument," rather than as lyrics.

    Now, you could synth using the phonemes and vocal qualities of a singer, but ultimately, without the feeling behind the voice, no amount of coding will put any life to it.

    1. Re:Not really buying it. by Reteo+Varala · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can see where you're going with that argument, and to be quite honest, I don't put much faith in AI, either. The best example of what I think about it is based in an old Infocom game, "A Mind Forever Voyaging."

      Artificial intelligence isn't truly artificial sentience until it has the capability of experiencing it's own existance. Living organisms that posess such self-awareness have thousands of input devices, known as nerve receptors, which alert them to the presence of anything to their immediate position. By this, one must learn to recognize the receptors' data. After a long time of learning the abilities of those receptors, and their cousins, the motor nerves (which activate muscle groups for the purpose of movement), self-awareness becomes available, because everywhere on the human body has such receptors, and what doesn't isn't really the human body.

      With this knowledge, the person then begins to learn what is a pleasant experience to those receptors, and what is pain. With pleasure/pain, over time, the person begins to develop affections and apprehensions, which give way to full emotional response. Some additional functions in the body help this along, such as endorphins which improve the pleasure state in the brain, and thus, the body... further enhancing the personal experiences.

      Now, a computer would have to have MASSIVE amounts of electric and processing power to activate and stimulate such receptors, should miniturization ever allow such devices to be manufactured cheaply and at such quantity to compare with the human's nervous system. And without that system, a computer cannot develop the deep, intricate levels of affection/apprehensions that would allow for emotional responses.

      Add to this the fact that a computer would have to be able to process all of this in realtime, over approximately 12-18 years to truly mature into a true artificial sentience.

      Now, what does this have to do with music?

      Music is all about experience. People write what they know, and they sing how they feel. Experience is a byproduct of sentience, which most definitely means that computerized music, which can please and FOOL audiences, is yet a long time in coming.

  26. replication vs. recognition by markyoshi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    it's interesting how the technologies of voice replication and voice recognition are so similar. The recording studio where I work recently participated in a project for the developers of a voice controlled navigation system (think OnStar). Our task was to record people born and raised in Chicago dictating a long list of words which would presumably use at least most of the phonemes at our disposal. I think they did this in most major metropolises. The goal was to build a system that could recognize english speech patterns with a wide colloquial variance. Perhaps it won't be long before we have a program that can emulate anyone's voice.

  27. Re:Scary, or progress? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What is wonderful about this is that (initially at least) it will devalue the type of generic boy/grrl band trash music which so saturates the current pop market. That's got to be scary for organisations like the RIAA, who actively market the interchangeable swill.

    When pitch perfection and standardised voices are available from a $300.00 software package, music made by people with interesting voices and offbeat musical philosophies will be that much more valuable.

    After all, it seems unlikely that there'll be a software Tom Waits or a digital Johnny Rotten in our immediate future. Punk revival anyone?

  28. Hmm... by cr0sh · · Score: 3, Informative
    No ones yet mentioned Flinger, which is a customized MIDI-adapted singing Festival thingamibob...

    Personally, I think the best examples to download are "The Easy Way" (song 15) and "K'ai - Eyes swim" (song 16).

    While no where near perfect, Flinger and the samples really show where things are heading - I have said it before, but this type stuff (perfected, of course), plus tech like machinima (once again, as it becomes better) are truely going to alter what we think of movies, acting, etc - virtual actors, virtual singers, virtual movies...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  29. Actually, I just found my PHD Project! by theGreater · · Score: 2, Funny

    A little genetic algorithm, a dash of Vocaloid, that hit-o-meter thing they were talking about earlier, and some random seeding. Then, when I get The Perfect Pop Album, I compare the results to Mozart's (alleged) Musical Dice. I'm pretty sure that after 3 years of listening to my own tandomly crappy music, I'd be crazy enough for a tenured position.

    -theGreater Ponderer.

  30. There are more artists than performance artists by LuxFX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Over the past few decades, advances in computer hardware and software have eliminated many jobs... some technical, some menial, but none artistic

    Ever hear of a cel animator?

    --
    Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
    1. Re:There are more artists than performance artists by silentbozo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What about sign painters? There are still 2d animators around, they just migrated media from paper->cel to paper->digital. Of course, those that are still working (no thanks to brainless execs who think 3d is the panacea for bad, overworked and overbudget stories...)

  31. Vibrato by tedDancin · · Score: 2, Informative

    It blows away any keyboard-synth voice I've ever heard before, but it's still not perfect. There's nothing wrong with the tone of the voice for background vocals, but the area they really need to work on is in the vibrato. Hearing a perfectly-oscillating vibrato is a dead-set giveaway and really detracts from the music, especially music that's trying to be old-skool and authentic.

    Having said that though, I'm sure they'll have tweaks for that sort of thing in no time.

    --

    Ladies, form queue here -->
  32. Samples by Datasage · · Score: 2, Informative

    If anyone is wondering what this sounds like, there are some sample here: http://www.vocaloid.com/en/sample.html

    Although pretty convincing, i think it has a way to go before it would be perfect.

    --
    In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
  33. Jazz by axxackall · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Nothing to worry, if you sing a real Jazz.

    Classic singers stay as close as possible to the "absolute" quality line - it's perfect for being mathematically modeled and it's a matter of time such models will be apparead, even if their implementations will take some hardware resources.

    Pop singers make sound anyway far away from being called as an art. It's perfect for being implemented in embeded solutions. It's a matter of time first cyber-singers will be cloned like cheap "made-in-China" electronic (sorry, my oriental friends, although nothing personal or racial in this comment).

    Jazz is still an art, like classical music, but its improvizations are very unpredictable. Jazz singers will be last ones to go. Even more - Jazz improvizators will be eventually involved to prototype new cyber-singers. Hmm, I can even imagine special programming languages for singer-modelling: "bebop", "blues", "swing" :)

    --

    Less is more !
    1. Re:Jazz by jellomizer · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a good point. So far as I see it Jazz has seemed to be the pinnacle of good intelligent music (lyrics aside). Forms after Jazz have seemed to become more minimalist and simpler to produce, and much easier to be analyzed using music theory. Heck techno music can be analyzed by a cartoon character. Jazz as an art form is a very complex and demanding performance where every player is allowed their self expression but yet they need to work in a team to make sure that they are fitting in with the other players. It requires a strung understanding on what sounds good, a keen ear, and understanding of the other players and their own style. These are a lot of features that cannot be broken down so mathematically. Unlike most other forms of music Jazz requires real teamwork. Classical music requires perfection which a computer can reproduce, Rock, well more Pop rock since a lot of older Rock had more of a Jazz element in it, Is a very simple type of music with a simple rhythm followed by simple cords, with a solo on top of it, Just the solo although can be complex just has to fit into the simple music behind it, so it is still easy for a computer to follow this because it knows it.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  34. phone sex industry by wattersa · · Score: 5, Funny

    the implications for the phone sex industry are staggering. Imagine the provider being able to use YOUR NAME in the call with a unique new script each time you call. If only I were a pornographer...

    1. Re:phone sex industry by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah, you could just do a quick and dirty 'search and replace' on an Eliza script, and go from there.

      Sexual Eliza: Hello, my name is Candi. What would you like me to do?
      Customer: Strip for me, baby.
      Sexual Eliza: I think you want me to strip for you. Why is that?
      Customer: Oh, baby, cuz it's so hot.
      Sexual Eliza: What is hot about strip for you?

      And so on....

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
  35. Macross Plus by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 4, Funny
    Anybody read this and immediately think "Macross Plus"? Sharon Apple is the computer character in that anime who is a music sensation. She even has holographics project her image during concerts. However, in reality, she's just some big computer box with lots of stuff inside. Unfortunately, she goes crazy and takes over a building, directing all its defense systems against the hero, but.......there is a price to pay for good music I guess.

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
    1. Re:Macross Plus by tloh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, you beat me to the punchline. I wonder how many here are aware of the incredable OVA that is Macross Plus. Speaking of the music, I truly was blown away by the soundtrack. So amazing was Yoko Kanno's work, I didn't realize until quit some time later that some songs were niether in Japanese nor English, but actually French. She's unusual, this Yoko Kanno. For Cowboy Bebop, the opening theme is this wierd jazzy number. For GitS: Standalone complex, the opening theme is a techno song with russian lyrics. However impressive this new digital system may be, I seriously doubt it can handle anything decent that Ms. Yoko Kanno has to offer.

      --
      Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
  36. Not there yet by perlionex · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many people here have already commented that the voice isn't quite there yet in terms of realism. Many here have pointed out that the technology doesn't seem new -- they're just taking more sound samples and blending them together (albeit in the frequency domain, with smoothing).

    One area that really needs quite a bit more work is the vowels. When singers sing "ee" (as in "saved a wretch like me," for example), they usually soften it so it sounds a bit more like "meh." When I used synthesized voices before on a Mac, I had to specifically spell the lyrics as "meh" so that the program would articulate those vowels properly.

    Of course, maybe the sample of "Amazing Grace" I heard was recorded by a singer who really liked to pronounce such vowels as "ee" rather than soften them to "meh," but it doesn't seem likely.

  37. At last, the ultimate weapon against the RIAA by Animats · · Score: 4, Informative
    U.S. copyright law provides a "compulsory mechanical license" option, allowing anyone to record a "cover" version of a song for a fixed statutory royalty of $0.0155/minute per copy. The RIAA likes this, because they can re-record some oldie using a new band cheaply.

    But this works for anybody. If you can synthesize music from MIDI and vocal models, you can use that deal. The RIAA can't stop you from doing this.

    A synthesized music web site could even buy blanket ASCAP and BMI licenses, which aren't too expensive, and allow music downloads. The going rate seems to be about $5000 per million downloads, or about $0.005 per song.

    This is a real threat to the RIAA. If the technology works.

    1. Re:At last, the ultimate weapon against the RIAA by Psychic+Burrito · · Score: 3, Informative
      Do you have any proof for this? From what I have found, the copyright owner can still stop you from releasing your poorman covers:
      In order for a compulsory mechanical license to be valid, the copyright owner must have authorized the commercial release of the song, and the song must be non-dramatic. While the Copyright Act doesn't provide a specific definition for the term "non-dramatic song," most people think of it as a song that's not from a musical or an opera.

      The compulsory mechanical license rate (also referred to as the statutory rate) is periodically modified. The current statutory rate is 7.55 per song, per record, distributed for recordings of up to five minutes. If the recording is more than five minutes, the rate is 1.45 per minute per record.

      The next change is scheduled to become effective on January 1, 2002. As of that date, the statutory rate will increase to 8 for recordings up to 5 minutes, and 1.55 per minute for recordings over 5 minutes.

      A compulsory mechanical license allows you to make another musical arrangement as necessary to conform the song to your style and interpretation. However, you cannot change the basic melody, the lyrics, or the fundamental character of the song without permission from the song's owner.

      (from http://www.manhunt.com/features/html/55.shtml)

    2. Re:At last, the ultimate weapon against the RIAA by Zeriel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You're misreading the bolded statement.

      Basically, that means that the copyright owner must have released the song for sale in some form...if it's on an album you could have bought at some point, the artist HAS to let you cover it for the stated fees--that's the point of compulsory licensing, the songwriter doesn't get a choice.

      The clause you bolded is to prevent me from doing something like singing a previously unreleased Johnny Cash (for example) song without permission by citing the compulsory licensing law.

      --
      "America has done some terrible things. But I know that Americans don't cheer when innocents die." -Dave Barry
  38. Yeah, but will these computational singers... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Perform illegal operations with child processes?

  39. Walk before you run, talk before you sing by shirai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering that normal speech synthesis has not been done well, singing seems to be hard. Already people can take a bad singer and turn them into a good singer but complete synthesis seems unlikely.

    Furthermore, this tech is likely not going to be what you think. What makes a singer good is their INTERPRETATION of the notes. Even with proper synthesis, at its best, it will be like computer animation. It could be very good and maybe even perfect but it would be TIME CONSUMING. Watch the making of Making Nemo on the DVD to get an idea of how hard it is to understand emoting.

    You would really need to spend a large amount of time figuring out how to make the voice sound EMOTIONAL.

    --
    Sunny

    Be my Friend

    1. Re:Walk before you run, talk before you sing by CmdrGravy · · Score: 2, Insightful
      "You would really need to spend a large amount of time figuring out how to make the voice sound EMOTIONAL."

      Not if you were wanting to create a virtual Kylie, Atomic Kitten, Gareth Gates, Westlife, Robbie Williams, Christina Aguilerra, Madonna, Cher, Britney Spears, J-Lo, Random Pop Muppet you wouldn't.

  40. Pah, old tech by peterpi · · Score: 3, Funny

    Theee coh. maydor ahhmiigahh... ws dooweng theez. Ten yeez ah. go.

  41. Try Fruity Loops for a simple example by nicky_d · · Score: 2, Informative

    The music studio Fruity Loops has had a singing plug-in for a little while now; you don't have a lot of (easy) control over the pitch, so it's really more of a toy most of the time. But combined with some simple audio processing, you can easily get results like these:

    http://www.antics.org.uk/mp3/green/ntk_copyright.m p3 (1mb MP3)

    http://www.antics.org.uk/mp3/green/ntk_eod.mp3 (646kb MP3)

    I'm sure it's nowhere near the league of the featured developments, but it's still a very impressive feature in an affordable package...

  42. Actually, it will be "Sharon Apple." by Glytch · · Score: 2, Funny

    Only test pilots need fear the result, fear not.

  43. Synthesized Idol by QuackQuack · · Score: 2, Funny

    Can "Synthesized Idol" be far behind? Oh wait, isn't that redundant?

    --
    By reading this sig, you agree to the terms of my sig license.