Slashdot Mirror


French Songwriter Kiesza Composes First Mainstream Music Album Co-Written With AI (bbc.com)

dryriver shares a report from the BBC, highlighting "a new album that features everything from cowboy sci-fi to Europop." What's special about the album -- Hello World by Canadian singer Kiesza -- is that it's the first full-length mainstream music album co-written with the help of artificial intelligence. You can judge the quality for yourself: First, view the single "Hellow Shadow" with Canadian singer Kiesza. Next, the BBC story, which seems to think that the album is actually rather good: "Benoit Carre has written songs for some of France's biggest stars: from Johnny Halliday -- the French Elvis, who died last year -- to chanteuse Francoise Hardy. But this month, the 47-year-old is releasing an album with a collaborator he could never have dreamt of working with. It's not a singer, or rapper. It's not even really a musician. It's called Flow Machines, and it is, arguably, the world's most advanced artificially-intelligent music program. For musicians, there's been one good thing about these projects so far: the music they've produced has been easy to dismiss, generic and uninspiring -- hardly likely to challenge Bob Dylan in the songwriting department. But Carre's album, Hello World, is different for the simple reason that it's good. Released under the name SKYGGE (Danish for shadow), it features everything from sci-fi cowboy ballads to Europop, and unlike most AI music, if you heard it on the radio, you wouldn't think something had gone horribly wrong. Flow Machines, developed at Sony's Computer Science Laboratories in Paris, does indeed write original melodies, Carre adds. It also suggests the chords and sounds to play them with. But Carre says a human is always needed to stitch the songs together, give them structure and emotion. Without people, its songs would be a bit rubbish. "There were many people involved in this," he says, listing the likes of Belgian house producer Stromae and Canadian pop star Kiesza. "They gave their soul, their enthusiasm. I think that's the most important point of the album, in a way -- that it's a very human one.'"

51 comments

  1. How would you do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How would you do this? Would you train a neural network with music of the same genre, then seed it with a few random notes? Would a neural network with multiple levels be the best approach to AI for this? My knowledge of AI is somewhat limited, so I'm curious as to what the right tool is appropriate for this job.

    1. Re: How would you do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You hire n1ggers to listen to your stupid noise and give feedback

    2. Re: How would you do this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What part of AI don't you understand ? It implies at least some form of "intelligence", albeit a limited one ...

    3. Re: How would you do this? by Betty+Crocker · · Score: 1

      Hey! I resent that comment!

      I met Weird Al in person, and he is a VERY intelligent artist to work with. A coherent parody is difficult to write.

  2. AI? Really? by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 1

    There's that term again, "AI"... Is it really?

    Computer algorithms that automate and change and actually add to human generated tracks are nothing new.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re: AI? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What algorithms are these, and how do they work? If the algorithm is, say, a neural network, then it would qualify as AI. It depends on the algorithm. Of course, this is Slashdot, and everyone complains about technology, though it's rare now that anyone here actually knows how any of the technology works.

    2. Re: AI? Really? by thinkwaitfast · · Score: 3, Informative

      http://tones.wolfram.com/gener... This has been around 20 years and claims a lot of things

    3. Re: AI? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not really a fan of calling neural networks AI. They're just a more complicated algorithm that still needs a human defining things at some point.

      When someone creates a piece of software that takes it upon itself to say "I'm going to make an album" and then both learns how to make one as well as makes it... Then it is AI.

      Anything else is just some algo developer sucking his own dick.

    4. Re: AI? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fair enough. For what it's worth, I listened to the song that's linked, and I'm not a fan. I don't know that the AI is to blame for that, though. Sometimes it's hard to explain why, but it just doesn't have a particularly good sound, in my opinion.

      Music composition should be a relatively easy problem for computers. Music theory is based on math and statistics, and there are well-defined patterns in music. It's why composers can predict that some chord progressions will sound good and others won't. Go take a modern composer like John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith, and you'll notice common patterns in their compositions. Both have scored a lot of films, and have a recognizable sound that persists beyond a particular soundtrack. Obviously there's a creative element to each song, but there are also patterns that define a composer's style. There's no reason a computer couldn't be trained on the many scores that Goldsmith wrote before he passed away, and then use AI to produce something that has unique elements but uses the same style as he did. One thing is for sure: a song written by AI trained on Goldsmith's many scores would be a substantial improvement over the Star Trek: Discovery theme.

    5. Re:AI? Really? by mapkinase · · Score: 1

      I'd like to see track by track comparison of what came out from AI and what has been added by humans to that track

      --
      I do not believe in karma. "Funny"=-6. Do good and forbid evil. Yours, Oft-Offtopic Flamebaiting Troll.
    6. Re: AI? Really? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      There's no reason a computer couldn't be trained on the many scores that Goldsmith wrote before he passed away, and then use AI to produce something that has unique elements but uses the same style as he did.

      Unfortunately no, the computer doesn't understand what does and doesn't work together. Some people like salty popcorn and some sweet, but very few like half-salty, half-sweet popcorn or pepper popcorn. At best you'd get some kind of clustering where you get classic, middle-of-the-road recipes like lamb with rosemary and thyme. At the core of most the recent advances is self-learning, but it depends on some kind of evaluation of the final result. Like are you winning at Go, beating people at poker, reaching a higher score, completing a lap faster... if the computer can't tell if the music it produced is good or not it's just dumb processing. Unless it's got some amazing model to say what "sounds good" to a human, which would be a bigger thing than the algorithm.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    7. Re: AI? Really? by 110010001000 · · Score: 1

      Neural Nets are not AI. Just because they call them "neural" doesn't make it like neurons. Those are marketing terms to fool people. Just like "deep learning". No such thing. Computers don't learn: they just run programs.

    8. Re:AI? Really? by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      Yeah, not new but it makes for good hype if you pretend it is.

  3. Incorrect headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The French songwriter is Benoît Carré.
    Kiesza is the Canadian singer on the song in the video linked by the article.

  4. Canadian by Freshly+Exhumed · · Score: 1

    Title says French, story correctly says Canadian (she's from Calgary). What about the AI though?

    --
    I deny that I have not avoided attaining the opposite of that which I do not want.
    1. Re: Canadian by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canuckistan is the french province, didn't you know? The same sand n1ggers terrorists refugees adopted by libturds frenchies.

    2. Re:Canadian by Mal-2 · · Score: 2

      Where the title goes wrong is that Kiesza is the singer, not the composer. Benoit Carre is the composer, and is French.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  5. Great I can feel good about pirating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've always felt bad about depriving a musician of funds but since a machine wrote, my conscience is clear, Pirates ahoy!

  6. The humans will be replaced by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    For many kinds of music, the human is already irrelevant. You can just use a RNG to create grindcore or dubstep, and the singer in most popular music has not only been buried in a wall of noise, but their actual voice has been auto-tuned to oblivion. When we're all gone it's just going to be Skynet singing to itself.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    1. Re:The humans will be replaced by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Now if only they could invent an AI that continuously posts "Get of my lawn", we'd have the entire old farts vs. modern culture lifecycle covered.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    2. Re:The humans will be replaced by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Now if only they could invent an AI that continuously posts "Get of my lawn", we'd have the entire old farts vs. modern culture lifecycle covered.

      For the first time in history, old music is selling better than new music. If that doesn't conclusively prove that new music is at least no better than old music (old music is cheaper) then I'm not sure what could.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    3. Re:The humans will be replaced by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Sorry, it doesn't.
      You can't measure quality by sales.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    4. Re:The humans will be replaced by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      You can't measure quality by sales.

      The only quality which matters for music is whether people want to listen to it. Artistic merit is subjective. A song isn't inherently superior because it is clever any more than a human is.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    5. Re:The humans will be replaced by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      When we're all gone it's just going to be Skynet singing to itself.

      We need to set that line to music!

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    6. Re:The humans will be replaced by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Now if only they could invent an AI that continuously posts "Get of my lawn", we'd have the entire old farts vs. modern culture lifecycle covered.

      For the first time in history, old music is selling better than new music. If that doesn't conclusively prove that new music is at least no better than old music (old music is cheaper) then I'm not sure what could.

      The whole story here is interesting. I was listening to Studio 360 last winter, and they were outlining how modern Pop music is made. And it certainly sounds like this article is way beyond late. A group in Sweden performs much/most of the music composition. The algorithms are set to churn out tunes with an emphasis on "hooks". And churning out is the right word. Lots of them.

      These tunes then go to people who decide if the tune sounds good or not. All the production grooups get the same songs, and there have been a few cases where two pop singers have ended up using the same tune, but with different lyrics.

      Now those lyrics. Modern Pop lyrics are mostly just there for rhythm, and they don't even have to make sense. My better half watches the Ellen Show, and she has bands on and shows the lyrics. A schizophrenic would say "this crap makes no sense!"

      Finally, it is interesting that once upon a time, Milli Vanilli was ostracized for not using their own voices in "their music". They were just on stage for their looks, and couldn't sing for shit. But in a few years, that became the norm. Physical attractiveness and the ability to dance and twerk is the number one priority in pop music. And now it even has the advantage of autotune.

      Ugh - give me some Rush, or some other people who play their own music, sing their own intelligent lyrics. The final insult? Modern Pop music makes me appreciate and miss the Disco era. Cue "Fly Robin Fly" and fade out. Now, it isn't all bad - there is good music being put out. It just isn't this pop crap, and you have to dig for it.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
    7. Re:The humans will be replaced by Ol+Olsoc · · Score: 1

      Sorry, it doesn't. You can't measure quality by sales.

      But you can be certain that the music producers are noticing that their shit isn't flushing.

      --
      The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
  7. Re: AI? Really? JSB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Music composition should be a relatively easy problem for computers.

    Huh? Last time I checked it was Sebastian building androids that dream of electic sheep and not the other way around. It could be centuries before computers (AI) can hold a candle to the portfolio of Johann Sebastian Bach.

  8. First Sound of the Future Flow Machines by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Flow Machines, developed at Sony's Computer Science Laboratories in Paris, France

    Vocaloid was developed at Yamaha Corp.'s Electronic Music Laboratories in Barcelona, Spain

    Let's combine those two technologies, so the hologram j-pop diva Hatsune Miku can curb-stomp biological girl bands. Her first big hit was actually "World is Mine" back in late 2007.

  9. The Original Submission Title Was Different by dryriver · · Score: 2

    I submitted as "French Songwriter Composes Album With AI, Result As Bad As Today's Pop Music". The songwriter is Frenchman Carre. Canadian singer Kiesza just sings vocals on the album. The submission and submitted text was rewritten by the Slashdot editors and is now slightly misleading - Kiesza is not French and not the composer of this album.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:The Original Submission Title Was Different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you screwed up the headline, too.
      An accurate version would be "French Songwriter uses Computer to Compose Album; Lies to Press to Pump Sales".

    2. Re:The Original Submission Title Was Different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The original submission, FWIW:

      https://news.slashdot.org/submission/7799227/

    3. Re:The Original Submission Title Was Different by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      No one has ever accused a Slashdot editor of competence. Especially not this latest crop.

  10. nothing beats a human computer by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1
    And Debashish Bhattacharya is beyond measure in the same light as Joe Pass and all the other real greats on strings. If you have the patience to watch and really listen to the incredible 11/8 and use of 10/8 sequences of this performance you will come to understand that computer created music is an unnecessary redundancy that is only there for the lazy in spirit.

    To preempt the inevitable juvenile anon coward assholes that will post comments about this, all I have to say is that the noise being created on Slashdot by anon coward assholes who post prejudiced idiotic comments about anything not white need to just shut up and listen to these incredible, humble great artists.

    Once one gets away from the American pop music prejudiced main stream pap pop crap there is a world of wonder out there that defies replication by artificially generated algorithms. In the original post link to Hello shadow the music is influenced by eastern rhythm but falls flat because it is not spontaneous and is not possible on stage therefore it is artificial and somewhat akin to wanking on a digital fiile not actually making music as I intemperate the word.

    --
    This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
    1. Re:nothing beats a human computer by HiThere · · Score: 1

      To be fair, there are things that computer generated music is definitely better at. E.g., the computer rendition of "The Endlessly Rising Canon" is superior to any human performance of the same thing, but this is because the composition depends on the alteration of the volume in the same note played in different octaves so that there is no audible distinction when the cycle revolved, with the notes starting off played so softly in a lower octave that they are difficult to hear, moving up to being played at a "normal" volume in the middle octaves, and again decreasing in volume at a calculated rate as they go into higher octaves.

      This is an edge case, and there are several such edge cases. The thing they have in common is that extreme precision in certain kinds of performance are important. People aren't really good at that.

      That said, my experience in this area is several decades old, and there have probably been expansions in the areas where computers out-perform humans.

      *That* said, I'd like to comment about an earlier poster who claimed "the lyrics don't make any sense". This complaint is not new. The same was said about "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" and several other songs. In fact the complaint is so traditional that it's specifically mentioned in "Mairzy Doats" (1944), i.e. "It may sound queer, and funny to your ear, a little bit jumbled and jivey". And I recall needing to listen to some of Bob Dylan's middle-period songs several times before I could make out the words. So you need to be sure that this is something new that is being complained about, because it sounds just like the traditional older people's complaint about the younger folks music. (I don't listen to current music, as I refuse to support the RIAA even indirectly, so I'm purely working from historic analogies and current comments.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  11. In a few years... by nospam007 · · Score: 2

    ...the AI will sue him for a part of the money.

    1. Re:In a few years... by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1

      ...the AI will sue him for a part of the money.

      Only if the code is registered with the RIAA and there is no prior art... come to think of it the generated tunes were almost completely based upon some melodic and rhythmic riffs done by real musicians so the code can be said to have come entirely from prior art in the first place... obviously there was nothing GNU in it!

      RLOF, BARF, CHUNDER PLUNK!

      --
      This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
  12. Re: AI? Really? JSB by jblues · · Score: 1

    Indeed. Which is funny because JS Bach's music is some of the most mathematical and algorithmic. He once presented a series of Canons to his patron in puzzle form to be cracked. One would harmonise as in a typical Canon, by playing the initial melody over the top of the original, a few bars later. In another, by turning the score upside down.

    Bach also lived in a time when the mathematics of music was evolving. The notes in a musical scale follow simple mathematical ratios. For example an octave is 2/1, that is, double the frequency, and you get the same note, an octave higher. A perfect fifth, that is G to the note C is 3/2, a perfect 4th or 'F' relative to C is 4 over 3. The notes of a major or minor scale based on these ratios will harmonise beautifully - just arrange the 7 modes into triads. Such scales have been used since prehistoric times, and were not, in fact, limited to our species - a perfectly tuned Neanderthal bone flute was found. (I Read about that here on Slashdot years ago).

    So perfect mathematical ratios eh? Not quite. Major problems happen when you add the state of the art compositional tool of the day - otherwise known as a piano keyboard. If you go around the circle of 5ths, for each of the musical keys, you'll land back where you started. However, using a 'just' perfect 5th, that is, 3 over 2 means you'll land slightly askew of where you started. (The amount relates to the golden ratio). In Bach's day, there were various compromises for this called 'temperaments' - and each musical key had a certain 'colour' that could be exploited. The ones closest in the circle of fifths to the 'natural' key sounded best in tune. At the opposite side it sounded horrible, though that might have been just what Translyvanian pipe organists were after

    Anyway, along came the Well Tempered Clavier - that is, keeping a pure musical octave, then dividing the musical scale into 12 equally spaced semi-tones, using the 12th root of 2. Now each musical key was equally in tune (but also equally out of tune), which afforded the possibility to a) Compose in many different keys b) Use a dominant 7th chord as a launching pad to switch to a new key. Ironically though, a dominant 7th chord in equal temperament sounds grating, while in just intonation it sounds very smooth.

    Anyway, AI will probably evolve music in new directions to suit itself, while keeping us zombie masses enslaved with top 40 pop crap.

    --
    If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
  13. Not a story for /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most pop music is anyway written by formula. Nothing different happening here.

  14. Can a computer get a copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    “To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.”

    The technology isn't there yet, but if a computer writes a whole song, is that song eligible for a copyright?
    Can a computer be an author or inventor, or is it just a tool that the owner uses to make songs.
    When computers get good enough that anybody and make songs with them, is it still promoting a useful are to grant them copyrights?

    1. Re:Can a computer get a copyright? by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1
      Mod parent way up guys. Finally an anon coward worth reading! As John Lennon once famously said; "Music is everybody's possession. It's only publishers who think that people own it." If we start seeing computers generating music that can be have copy-write then just perhaps the entire copy-write motive for composing music will become irrelevant and not worth the doing. This will leave only composers who do it for performance and the love of music free to create variations and homage music again. If every tom dick and sherry can sit at a computer and put a lyric to music then just perhaps the "Day the music (industry, at least) died" is not far off.

      The music publishing industry is about to change and the great publishing houses will need to distribute digital files of sheet music or they will all die a horrible death smothered by the paper they love to peddle. They cannot see the forest because their stupidity is still cutting down the trees! A large letter sized e-ink tablet on the music stand is the future and real musicians will pay for digital files only if the composition and setting is worthy of the player's time. The crap that is being sold by music publication houses these days is not worth the trip to the store or the online purchase! The same can be said about the quality of the digitally altered and generated music recordings being sold by today's so called "arteests" and especially the so called "song stylists" that are being pushed by the music production corporations that run the RIAA. We are indeed at a cross roads and the pied pipers are all silently waiting in the hall, they need to be paid or the "Day the Music Died" will become public domain. As it is our streets are silent except for the din of the drudgery of our lives, music will not die but it needs to be free to survive like all things of the spirit.

      --
      This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
    2. Re:Can a computer get a copyright? by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Since no one involved is from the US what does it matter what the US Constitution says?

    3. Re:Can a computer get a copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only humans are eligible for copyright. However, if you use a computer to help you create a song, your editing--even to the extent of just selecting which tracks to publish, would be sufficient to grant you copyright. You can have a computer generate random noise and get copyright because you chose the output to publish. Choosing == creativity.

    4. Re:Can a computer get a copyright? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes! There are copyright treaties.

  15. Give me a break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's like sayng songs are 'cowritten' with Protools, a guitar, or a mixing board. It is obvious the poster is 14.

  16. I thought it said Al by fox171171 · · Score: 1

    I wondered if it was a collaboration with Weird Al Yankovic.

  17. Royalties? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does that AI get its share of royalties as well? Just wondering. Or who ever made that AI...

  18. Douchebag Hipsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yep, they very obvious douchebag hipsters have done it again...xD

  19. Re: AI? Really? JSB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Take a piano. 7 octaves corresponds to 12 fifths (C to G, G to D, D to A...).

    7 octaves = 2^7 = 128
    12 fifths = (3/2)^12 = 129.7463...

    This discrepancy makes perfect tuning an impossible task, accommodating these errors, distributing them over every note, matching the notes of pianos with instruments were strings are tuned in fifths (violin) or major thirds (guitar), taking int account the fact that, due to mechanical constraints in strings, harmonics are not quite real multiples...

  20. Re: AI? Really? JSB by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyway, along came the Well Tempered Clavier - that is, keeping a pure musical octave, then dividing the musical scale into 12 equally spaced semi-tones, using the 12th root of 2. Now each musical key was equally in tune (but also equally out of tune), which afforded the possibility to a) Compose in many different keys b) Use a dominant 7th chord as a launching pad to switch to a new key. Ironically though, a dominant 7th chord in equal temperament sounds grating, while in just intonation it sounds very smooth.

    Not quite, you're referring to equal temperament, which came a bit later. Well temperament is a general term for various tunings that compromise just intonation, leading up to the 12 equal semitones in equal temperament, e.g. tuning down certain fifths to even out distant keys. Thus Bach's "well-tempered clavier", explores the properties of the different keys not apparent in equal temperament.

  21. Re: AI? Really? JSB by jblues · · Score: 1

    Oops, you are right.

    --
    If it acquires resources on instantiation like a duck, then its a shared_ptr<Duck>
  22. I didn't like the song, BUT..... by No+Longer+an+AC · · Score: 1

    I didn't care for the song, but I probably wouldn't have cared much for the source material from which the AI learned.

    What if anyone could "teach" this AI musician from their own set of music and see what it came up with? This could be really fun actually. What if I fed it a dozen songs from various artists and told it to learn from that? Is a dozen not enough to come up with anything more than a weird mix? Feed it every song in my whole music collectiion.....

    Hmmm......I might not like that. Remove the ones I hardly ever listen to. Okay, now turn that one band up - yeah - let them influence you.

    What would the AI learn if you only fed it Frank Zappa, King Crimson and David Bowie? It would probably be very different from whatever it would learn from Bob Dylan, Joni Mitchell and David Crosby. What if you only allowed it to listen to Gregg Allman (just his solo stuff), Mozart and Britney Spears? WTF would it make of that?

    I want to see what happens if you only let the AI learn from The Ramones and The Beatles.