Computer DJ Uses Biofeedback to Mix 217
srand writes "So some scientists at HP developed this AI to mix new music tracks for dancers based on biofeedback from the clubbers.
The clubbers are each given a heart monitor, which sends information to the DJ through a wireless link. The DJ itself mixes music using genetic algorithms to find the tracks the audience likes best. The tracks are the "genes", and feedback from the audience determines the fitness levels of the genes." I still think generative music has a lot of potential, although I'd love an intermediate step where some sort of biofeedback picked MP3s based on your mood.
Sorta like...... (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like a good idea... (Score:4, Offtopic)
Re:Sounds like a good idea... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Sounds like a race condition... (Score:1)
2. Software monitors heart rate, which causes music to increase in tempo.
3. Increase in tempo causes ecstasy-fueled dancer to gyrate more wildly, resulting in an increase in heart rate.
4. Go to step 2.
Re:Sounds like a good idea... (Score:2)
However, such a system should be anonymous, and should not be used by the club to track who takes drugs and who doesn't.
Re:Sounds like a good idea... (Score:2, Funny)
Finally we can get rid of lousy music. (Score:2, Funny)
wait
Re:Finally we can get rid of lousy music. (Score:5, Insightful)
Man, record companies aren't stupid. They're out to make as much money as possible. To do this, they need ot sell the greatest numbr of records as possible. To do this, they have to cater to the majority. Which is what they do. When are you people going to realize that statements like "we don't like plagerized cloned music" are blatently false, at leat when tlaking about the majority of the population. This type music IS what the majority like, thats why they make so much of it. If people didn't like this stuff, it wouldn't sell, and they'd stop making it. It's that simple.
And no, its not because "Well thats the only stuff they put out nowadays, so poeple have to like it". THats also totaly false. There is tons of music out here. Most people choose Pop music. It's that simple.
Re:Finally we can get rid of lousy music. (Score:3, Interesting)
Most people choose Pop music. It's that simple.
Most people choose that moronic music because they're brainwashed to buy it. The airwaves are saturated with idiotic catchy tunes like Hanson, the Spice Girls, N'Sync, etc... That gets into people's subconcious and sticks there telling them that they need to listen to it all the time, and not just when the radio plays it.
Do you think any of these records will have anything more than a historic value 10, 30 years from now? I'm still rocking out to Led Zep, CCR, and Jimi - because they made music, not something that will sell more McDonald's happy meals.
If you want a choice, then support the alternatives, listen to college radio, or live365, or better yet - get the permission for some local artists' recordings, and host your own radio show, then tell people about it.
Re:wow, you're an idiot (Score:2)
Re:wow, you're an idiot (Score:2)
Who said anything about being brainless? Listen; MONEY drives the music industry. And guess who spends the most money on music: Teenage girls aged 14 - 21. Guess what music they like: Pop/Dance. They're not brainless, or brainwshed, they like it. And when I was younger, I did to. And so did you. So get of your high horse... If youw ant to change the music out there, the only way is to buy what you want, and kep buying. If enough people buy music of genre X, more music of genre X will be produced.
The RIAA doesn't want to contorl your minds, or control the type of music you listen to. They want to make money. Thats it.
Why waste money on advertising? (Score:2)
Wouldn't it be better if they could sell music without risk, and without marketing costs?
perhaps so but (Score:3, Interesting)
For extra credit, if marketing people are so stupid, why do they earn more than you?
For extra extra credit, if marketing is so easy and lucrative, why don't you go and do it, and write free software in your copious spare time?
for extra extra extra credit, if you lack the "social skills" to be a marketeer because you're "an engineer who only cares about the right way to do things", what makes you so sure that your intutions about what the public likes are accurate?
Triple points if you know more than two people who don't share your personal taste in music.
Re:perhaps so but (Score:2)
Exactly.
It's EASY to brainwash people. Marketers know this and stick to the established formulas. Top-40 is an established format. A large demographic has been told they like this kind of music, so that's what sells! A large enough demographic has been told they like "classic rock", rap, or country, and these markets sell, too. It's easy because the conditioning is already in place.
Marketers aren't stupid, just not very creative or adventurous. I'd be willing to bet if you had a large enough marketing and advertising campain, you could get people to like (and buy) anything.
It still doesn't mean these people have any taste, which I believe was the point of the parent of this thread. No one can really quantify taste.
Re:perhaps so but (Score:2)
This reply is totally baffling. You are basiclly agreeing with everything I said, yet doing it wiih a tone that makes it sound like you're disagreeing.
Re:Finally we can get rid of lousy music. (Score:2)
Hah! My fifteen year old brother cannot get together 20 bucks for dinner; I, a 23 year old Unix sysadmin, just bought myself a set of fencing equipment. A few days ago I bought three Pulp CDs. A few weeks ago I bought 2 HP calculators. A few weeks before that I bought tyres. A few weeks before that a car radio/CD player. A few weeks before that an utterly beautiful Beretta .40 handgun. Who d'you think has more disposable income?
As a young, single adult I have more disposable income than I could ever have dreamed of. I live frugally, save a lot and still have some very nice posessions. What child could possibly hope to compare? I know that I certainly could not, back in the day.
Re:Finally we can get rid of lousy music. (Score:2)
Well then, its the chicken and the egg problem. If most people over 25 don't buy music becuase they don't like the stuff out there (which I believe is hogwash personally.. Theres MORE than enough music available in every genre you can imagine. If you wanted music, there is somehthing available you will like. The reasons people 25 and over don't buy more music are differen than "lack of choice"... but I digress), then sale sof that genre won't b steep enough to justify increased expendatures. If there aren't increased expendatures, the amount of music choice in tha category goes down. So people have less choice, so they buy less, etc etc. The only way to stop this is for people 25+ to start buying the music they like. But as I said, there are other factors disuading older people from buying music.
This is interesting (Score:5, Interesting)
I don't know, maybe I just need to get more sleep
-Q
Re:This is interesting (Score:3, Insightful)
this + csound = fun (Score:2, Interesting)
Love/Hate? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Love/Hate? (Score:2)
- j
Would result in constantly changing music at least (Score:1)
Seems like this would be unfair... (Score:4, Interesting)
I know a way... (Score:1)
Re:I know a way... (Score:1)
You're right; it is really geeky.
Awesome! (Score:1)
This could be awesome for clubbers! There is a lot more to DJing than just keeping beats in-time when mixing. It is a lot harder to 'read' the croud and put on the right tune at the right time, to either build 'em up or chill 'em out.
IMHO, there are only a handful of DJ's who can do this - people like the late Ron Hardy who used to play at The Music Box in Chicago, for example. I might even start going back to clubs if this technology works!
I want more details. (Score:5, Insightful)
Because it seems to me that making music is just a wee bit more involved than having a massive library of sound bites, picking one of them with a rand() function, tossing it into the loop, and waiting for people to react. I could see the AI painting itself into a corner if it only lets itself pick tunes that don't generate a negative value.
In other words, this AI is going to have to be able to compose interesting tunes or else all the flash and glory of reacting to humans is gonna be a flop.
If the AI has implemented some form of SOUNDEX for music files, then I could see it working. Like if the audience was really grooving to artist X, it could pick a similar song from artist Y, rather than just plugging in another song that artist X created and hoping people like it.
Not slamming the project too much though. It is quite cool and spawns all kinds of neat questions that would be a heap of fun to answer.
"The Diamond Age" (Score:2, Insightful)
Ways to influence this (Score:1)
This is my favorite song! Time to hyperventilate1
Serioiusly, though, this would be cool if it was easier to biometrically track things like heartbeat. If I went to a party, I wouldn't want to have some odd biometric device that could alert someone if I was having a "moment" with a pretty girl.
Got to find out where to get this (Score:1)
Re:Got to find out where to get this (Score:1)
Any technology that uses this kind of input as averages from a group output average or mediocre music. there is already plenty of mediocre dance music out there.
i like the idea, but i only see more stupid drumroll buildups and more stupid ethereal breakowns as a result.
Or rather (Score:1)
I hear what you're saying, but I'd be more interested in seeing this as an additive, rather than replacement for, DJing in clubs. Ultimately the key to having it work is the core notion of 'taste' or aesthetic judgment.
Oh, what the fuck. Bring on the DrudgeDrools2002 and slap that cunt silly!
Thats kind of cool but (Score:1, Redundant)
thats my opinion,
http://www.mp3.com/bios
Re:Thats kind of cool but (Score:1)
Reminds me of a technology used in the book Interface [amazon.com] by stephen bury (aka neil stephenson) - where a politician was using these sort of mood measuring wristwatches to gauge different population segments' reaction to his speeches AND feed the input back into the politician in realtime.
(brilliant premise, though the book was only so-so.)
Not for Raves at least (Score:5, Insightful)
(no, I don't use drugs at raves)
Re:Not for Raves at least (Score:1)
I do!
But what a good DJ does _is_ an art form. S/he _creates_ the mood as well as responds to it. A good DJ can lift an audience, make them rise and fall as s/he pleases. And then there is the issue of individual taste. The music selection of each DJ is driven by personal taste, experience, imagination and style; not merely a function of the audience.
More interestingly. the drug selection(s) of the crowd can affect (their hearbeat and so) this product's algorithm in interesting ways. And since different people 'peak' at different times, there'll be no convergence by the algorithm. It'll be akin to disk thrashing!
Re:Not for Raves at least (Score:2)
Then again, it would be interesting to set this up against richie hawtin and see who could tell the difference
DJ's need to stop getting so uptight (Score:3, Interesting)
Bullshit.
Artistry or not, DJ'ing consists of the following:
- a library of songs/tricks/skills
- knowledge of what songs work with what
- tailoring predefined progressions toward your audience
Now, most DJ's as artists tend to not even think about this. Something just instantly feels right, so that's what goes on next. But really, it feels right because they know that it's going to compliment the current song, the current mood, and will lead to someplace where the DJ is similarly comfortable.
Just because the crowd doesn't expect it doesn't mean the DJ doesn't either. (Triple negative, woohoo!)
My point is, DJ'ing comes down to making decisions based upon some sets of knowledge. I think it is very possible for a computer to mimic this. A library of songs is easy to build. A reference of what songs work well with others is possible, both through a DJ's input, or noting how a crowd responded to the two mixed together weighted by the rest of the mood of that session. A list of progessions that generated certain moods is possible. Mutations upon those to cause those "sudden unexpected surprises" is possible.
And yes, I DJ. With that thing called vinyl.
Oh no! (Score:2)
Lately, people request more and more songs each day, and sometimes I want to ask them if they would like it better to have a jukebox standing in a corner so they canjust choose their favorites all night long.
I'm not particularly fond of the idea of a DJ as a "teacher" or style nazi either, but some guests are so stupid and persistent so you just want to punch them in the face.
After some thought though, if you pick a good playlist maybe this would work, but I have serious problems with the idea of replacing club/radio DJs with computers and playlists.
Now I don't remember what it was that I wanted to say with this rant... =)
Wait a minute... (Score:1)
Reminds me of the part in the Diamond Age where they discuss the philosophy of makeup, and how mood-responsive cosmetics are a bad idea.
Copyrights? (Score:1)
Are those traks randomly generated? Probably not - it would result in too much trash, which gets us to the next question: if they get those tracks from copyrighted sources, who owns the resuling music? Are they even allow to extract things from other songs?
Yeah (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Yeah (Score:1)
Actually very few people which work with AI actually work with making computers "think". Most people work with trying to replace a specific subset of human intelligence. (Naturally you can do AI things without imitating human intelligence, just generally flashy stuff is good too.
In this case a DJ is imitated. (Most likely not as well as a good DJ. But the mere geek factor is enough to do it if you ask me.
Re:Yeah (Score:5, Insightful)
No. Just as the term "virtual reality" is applied to a lot more than just perfectly immersive, Matrix-like systems, "aritificial intelligence" has a much wider scope than just HAL-like systems capable of understanding human speech and providing coherent, intelligent replies.
One example of part of the AI field that isn't close to the movie-like image of AI is the expert system. At its simplest, it's a bunch of yes/no questions about a given topic. An answer to each question leads to either a new question or a conclusion. A classic application of this system is a guessing game that operates somewhat similar to 20 questions -- the user picks something and the expert system asks questions in an effort to guess what it is. If the system fails, it prompts the user for a new question to add to the tree that incorporates the new data item. All of this is trivial for anyone with even rudimentry programming experience to implement, it's not especially profound, and it'll never pass the Turing test, but it is a legitimate part of the AI field.
This dance system, as near as I can tell, seems to be way ahead of such a cut and dried expert system. It's using genetic algorithms to assemble music based on feedback from users. That sounds like AI any way you slice it. Sure the system isn't a conscious, self-aware entity, but that's just a small bit of the AI field (and most likely won't be realized for a long, long time).
Counter productive (Score:1, Interesting)
For this reason, this will never catch on as intended. You DO NOT want people dancing.. You DO want them at the bar, spending money.
This will get warped by the business side of clubbing, and statistical analysis/data mining will be done to 'tide' people to the bar at regular intervals.. Beats will be ramped up to create and maintain thirst, so that profit can be optimized.
When in doubt, follow the money.
Real DJ's still have the Edge - For how Long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Then there's teh showmanship part of DJ'ing, cutting up tracks live, giving the audience the rewind, scratching..... There will always be art in DJ'ing.
DJ S&M
Hype or not? (Score:1)
The idea is cool, but I don't think it will work very well. Other more ad-hoc methods would probably be better.
Evlutionary Algorithms in general need a lot of iterations with large populations to work. I will believe that the feedback in the situation described will have some time delay of several seconds at least. And the pattern of music presented will have to last for much longer if it is intended to build up the mood of people, since this is something that depends on more than just the music of the last seconds.
But maybe the laws of statistic will help in the way that the amont of people visiting a club will be large enough to make the group of peoples reaction to music similar from one night till the next. Then this project could be ran for many nights and over time create good patterns.
I do not believe Evolutionary Algorithms is a good way of DJ'ing though.
If at first the idea is not absourd, then there is no hope for it.Genetic Algorithms (Score:1)
David Goldberg's "Genetic Algorithms" [amazon.com] is a classic.
John Koza's Genetic Programming [amazon.com] represents the next step in adaptive computing.
Computers everywhere is bad!!! (Score:5, Insightful)
Would you enjoy to watch a soccer match, with only robots, executing programmed tasks? "I bet on this team, they probably used 23248234 as a salt for their number generator, it's better than 232488, that has a bug line 8723" . Would it be great?
You go to a party to be surprised, to discover something. The DJ changes the music according to dancers feeling, that's right. But dancers feeling also depends on the DJ's work.
Why is Carl Cox a great DJ? Because he does basic beat-matching? No. Carl Cox is fantastic because he plays with the dancers. He smiles, he jokes, he has a wonderful human communication, even without speaking. Why is Qbert a great DJ? Because when you see him, it's just as if he had 10 hands, or as if your eyes were too slow to follow the movements. Can you feel this with a stupid computer playing MP3s?
I work as a house and hip-hop DJ in Paris, France. People have fun listening to my music because I'm playing with kiddy songs, sometimes to "comment" what's happening on the dancefloor with funny sentences. I'm sometimes scratching on Dragonball Z over kicking funk house, just for fun. People don't expect that (so the HP computer won't do that), but they like it a lot. Once again, a stupid computer won't do this.
Computers are handy for a lot of stuff. But please, don't bring us a robot society. Keep some human feeling, or you will kill the fun.
Re:Computers everywhere is bad!!! (Score:1)
Perhaps that's why no one likes to play computer games. Games like Doom or Quake, for instance. Ever heard of them?
Re:Computers everywhere is bad!!! (Score:1)
Discotheques are a sign of the Apocalypse (Score:2)
I suppose that live musicians said the same when dance halls were becominng "discotheques".
Re:Computers everywhere is bad!!! (Score:2)
The whole point of a DJ is do do new things. Sure, you could program a few random tricks into the machine, but if the people are unanimously "in favour "of something, then it's more likely to happen. I'm a really big fan of going out to the clubs (when the opportunity arises) just to hear what the DJ has to play. If I want to hear what the crowd (note: small, western-Canadian city) wants I'll just turn on the top 40 or go to Ryly's and hear the same old mainstream crap.
I'm one of the opinion that a DJ should entertain and make you think at the same time. The best (and I'm adding Timo Maas to the list) can take something you'd never thought of or play something new and end up with something so amazing that it sticks in your head and you wonder how you ever lived without it. You just can't get that sophisticated with a computer. If I ever have some spare time to get back at it, it'll be with good, old-fashioned vinyl and a couple decks, not my computer.
I hope this is profitable... (Score:1, Funny)
I'm not much of a clubber... (Score:4, Interesting)
But I could see this as a pretty neat technology in office waiting areas. If you have to wait around, it would probably be a more tolerable experience if the music system could know what type of mood and guage your response to the current music (or musak as it most likely is).
I suppose it would be pretty cool for home use, too. I don't know if I'd pay for it or not (I don't have that much need for constant background noise), but having a home audio system that could detect my mood and response and play music accordingly would be awfully sweet.
Re:I'm not much of a clubber... (Score:4, Insightful)
Pardon the vulgarity, but the part about leaving the club with the music you helped create sounds just too fucking sweet. I'd club every free weekend if that were an available service in my area.
Re:I'm not much of a clubber... (Score:1)
Re:I'm not much of a clubber... (Score:2)
As a matter of fact, I don't own a single techno CD and have very few (less than 10) techno MP3s on my hard drive. I'm only really exposed to techno when I'm out in the club scene, which is a rarity these days.
As far as comparing the HPDJ to "musical skill", I don't think it can ever been said that AI, no matter how complex, is as creative as a human being. As far as "creating" music goes, this technology will probably never have a creative application in the world of professional music. It is most useful for presenting music that humans have composed and gauging reaction. Almost as a bonus it can do the cross-fading DJs employ to keep the music going non-stop.
But for small-to-mid-size clubs who want to keep the music interesting without having to depend on human DJs (who need breaks, cancel appearances, etc), it could be useful.
It may save lives too (Score:1)
Think of situation A:
Normal club, loud music, drunken confused people wonder what man is doing slumped in chair... prolly drunk too..
Situation B:
Dj sees a flatline... Assumes someone took their wristband off... ok, no difference. Unless there was some foolproof way of knowing if its on or off...
If you could also tell if its on or off, and gurantee this to the DJ, you have situation C:
Um, music stops, someone's heart just stopped.
LOL no, anyway. just thoughts.
This just in... (Score:5, Funny)
This just in: revolutionary new Hearing(tm) technology lets a human DJ bypass the heart monitoring gear altogether and play records based on vocal responses from clubgoers.
another industry automated (Score:1)
I guess this is just one more reason to save the vynil - AI has not quite developed the skills to spin the real stuff!
Wait (Score:1)
Biofeedback good idea and then again... (Score:1, Interesting)
Imagine a psychological therapy with a biofeedback tuned to give the patient music that will help his or her mood. Similar to bringing yourself out of a funk with progressively "happier" music.
Now imagine an improperly set chip sending a minimally depressed person into a spiralling downturn ending in suicide.
And then imagine "A Clockwork Orange," "1984," "Brave New World." ...etc. We give a lot of power to our silicon interfaces (whatever form they may take) Nevertheless where does our control of the situation end, and someone/thing else's begin?
Based on mood? (Score:1)
Ummm. Why is state of mind necessarily linked to state of body? Sometimes when I'm tired I want more soothing music, but then sometimes I want some serious jazz. Other times when I'm tired I want Beethoven. How is a computer supposed to tell the moods in my head when ostensibly my body is simply saying it's tired?
It will work great! (Score:1)
Have they copyrighted those "genes" yet? (Score:1)
If not, give it a few days. They'll make your heartbeat the next Britney Spears...
Mood profiled MP3 management (Score:1)
OK, now for the drawbacks.
1.) No ogg support, although it has been requested and acknowledged.
2.) Windows only.
3.) Proprietary sonic profiling algorithm.
I have been using this on a Win98 machine at home and I am impressed so far.
I like it old fashion (Score:1)
MP3's (Score:2, Funny)
Do you realy want a Smiths album when you are allready fealling depressed
Genetic Algorithms appropriate? (Score:1)
Re:Genetic Algorithms appropriate? (Score:2)
Each of the GAs could get to choose a few tracks, and the DJ chooses a few tracks. After a few tracks, the GAs are assigned fitness values based on whether they match the DJs choice, choose a track from the same album, same artist or same genre (or any other criteria you think are relevant). Then you generate a new generation of GAs, and repeat.
If the DJ has a clear style, and you do your programming right, the GAs should converge on choosing music relatively close to what the DJ would choose in the same circumstances, and their fitness would increase.
Obviously, if used alongside a crappy DJ, this would generate GAs that would make equally crappy choices.
It'll work, but not quite as they intended (Score:1)
It might also help (though minimally) in the design of certain types of music. If you haven't heard, disco is usually set to a tempo which is roughly the speed of the human heartbeat based upon the theory that it makes it more exciting, and a lot of modern pop has encorporated elements of disco. In addition, consider that the Mozart's music is very similar to a mapping of neuronal firings in the brain, including (remarkably) the same fractal dimension, and it has been proven to increase the spacial and temporal reasoning skills temporarily (the Mozart effect).
This could be wrong, but biological theories are a starting point for many kinds of music. Good stuff could come out of this! The real problem that is not being considered is that music is something of a context sensitive language, with lingual rules. Generating music with just a computer must necessarily be a simple subset(because creation in the context sensitive case is NP-hard). Therefore, it will be a tool for people to use, rather than a solution of itself, for a long time.
Diamond Age, anyone? (Score:1)
I'm surprised no one else picked up on that. Hrm.
Fractal Music (Score:2, Insightful)
The last Dead show I saw, in 1995, right before Garcia died, I saw a computer monitor just off the stage, hooked up to all the midi shit and the soundboard. When the band played Space, it was like no other space that had ever been played -- I swear to christ it was fractal music. The music began to play itself, the band stopped playing and left the stage and it began playing NEW patterns, not just ordinary guitar feedback. It would have never stopped. In fact, it continued during the whole intermission, always generating new patterns. Finally they just killed the sound.
Ordinary fractal pictures take a complex valued function, and assign different colors to it based on its closeness to zero. What they had done was map the function onto different MIDI instruments and notes, sound instead of colors. Then they seeded it with their own playing, and took off.
It blew my fucking mind wind open.
Better include a robot arm... (Score:1)
As an amateur DJ (and mixtape maker ever since I got my first AM/FM radio/cassette combo when I was eight), this technology leaves me cold. The art of a good mix is to have a definite flow in mind beforehand. You lead your audience through a series of moods and textures and try to leave them thrilled with the journey. Remember -- if it was up to the crowd, they'd instinctively reach for the records they already have on their bookshelves at home, since that's all they know. A good DJ is a teacher, or a tour guide.
And, while I'm at it -- wristwatches for the biometry? They'd have better luck if they could embed the sensors in those glowing necklaces that the rave crowd always seems to be wearing...
Re:Better include a robot arm... (Score:2)
If you think the idea of a good night is to have everyone collapsing after hours and hours of insane heart activity, then maximizing heart rythm would be a good fitness function. If you want to vary the speed and peoples response, then you have the fitness function vary over the course of the night.
As simple as that.
It seems as if everyone here assumes that biofeedback absolutely has to be used to have the system maximizing heart rate continuously.
We're all gonna die... (Score:1)
Should be one hell of a party though...I'm in.
Re:We're all gonna die... (Score:1)
I think its stupid (Score:1)
We shouldnt mix technology with art.
Music is art, no computer program will ever replace a good DJ, or good musician.
Why even try?
This makes the audience important (Score:1)
So, a computer DJ might end up playing endlessly some OntheTop-Dancefloor-Trash or whatever the local audience might like. This kind of playing behaviour is actually happening in bad clubs with bad DJ's. - It is not with good DJ's, because they surprise and are innovative. You don't have to care about what the rest of the audience wants to listen to (as you might have to with a computer DJ) because you rely on the DJ, who makes his own unexpected choices.
"Genetic Algorithm" -- the new buzzword (Score:2)
WSJ: Microsoft's new product uses genetic algorithms to make Windows XP easy to use!
Programmer: Well, we actually used several perl and php scripts to talk to MySQL to sort and manage user data.
Marketing document: Our product uses genetic algorithms to sort and manage user data.
Boss: So how does this program work?
Me: Well, I take input from the user, run it through a genetic algorithm and the output is what is expected.
Boss: Great! Ship it!
Re:"Genetic Algorithm" -- the new buzzword (Score:2)
It's nice to see that a new buzzword has emerged to allow people to gloss-over topics they don't get
Perhaps it only seems that way to you because its a topic you don't understand. The term "genetic algorithm" is FAR from new, genetic algorithm research has been going on for decades (with some machine-learning-related texts dealing with "evolutionary programming" dating back to the 1960s), and the term describes a very specific (and actually somewhat mundane) AI technique. Its not a "general term" being used to describe something that they aren't willing to describe in the article, in fact, its pretty much a certainty that they chose that word precisely because it refers to the *exact technique* being used, and there is no ambiguity in using it if you know what genetic algorithms are [cmu.edu]. Hardly a buzzword.
Screw the DJ (Score:1)
I'd have to say the DJ is over-rated as hell.
You can scream all you want about the subtleties of reacting to a crowd, but frankly, thats not music-making. Its still playing other peoples songs and taking credit for them. But I digress.
This link [hp.com] provides background including the paper published concerning the first version of the software (no heartrate - beatmatching, just electronic deejaying)
Re:Screw the DJ (Score:2, Insightful)
That being said, one of the things that separates good DJs from great DJs is the ability to not only read and react to a crowd, but anticipate how a crowd will react to a track that's dissimilar to what's being played - thus creating progression. I don't see that ability in this system.
What If (Score:1)
Anyone remember... (Score:2, Interesting)
Generative music links (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.sound-hack.org [sound-hack.org]
http://stub.org [stub.org]
http://slub.org [slub.org]
http://kanak.perl.it/music/ [kanak.perl.it]
http://fals.ch [fals.ch]
I'm a professional club/rave DJ (Score:3, Interesting)
DJs such as Christopher Lawrence [christopherlawrence.com], Nicholas Bennison [nicholasbennison.com], Sandra Collins will never be replaced by a program like this. The organization of their sets and impeccable taste in tracks can never be replaced by aritifical intelligence. What they do is as much an act of pure human artistry as Mozart or Chopin.
That said, what _most_ rave/club DJs produce is just a bunch of semi-related tracks beatmatched together in a more or less random order. A program like this could easily match or beat your average human DJ in this regard. Especially because the article specified that the program is mixing together prewritten tracks (I assume written by humans). If it was composing completely from scratch I doubt that it would be very compelling.
One final point: many people don't realize this, but a big part of what makes rave/club music sound the way that it does is the fact that it's on vinyl. In particular, the sound of two tracks mixing together (mainly the way the waveforms for the bassdrums interact) is very distinct, and a big part of the live DJ sound. You don't get this sound when people are mixing with CDs, you don't get it when performers are playing "live" with synthesizers, and you won't get it from a computer (assuming that it is not using a robotic arm and turntables to play the tracks).
Re:I'm a professional club/rave DJ (Score:2)
Uh, I don't get it - it there a bandwidth limitation of CDs in comparison with vinyl? At the end of the day, the two analog output signals of a CD and the same work on vinyl should be very similar over a wide band. Which frequencies aren't being represented? Or is there some kind of whack feedback between the speakers and the stylus?
I find it difficult to believe you can do the same things with CDs you can with vinyl with regard to scratching/dropping "user interface", but I've seen some imrpessive looking CD mixers recently, and I imagine the "user interface" will get better and better.
Re:I'm a professional club/rave DJ (Score:2)
Yes - what you say is correct. Anyone that says that vinyl is a better representation of the "true" sound is full of crap.
From a non-technical point of view, I just know that it sounds different. In fact, a good DJ takes advantage of that sound to beatmatch - when the kickdrums are dead on, it gets that special vinyl-only overlapping kickdrum sound. When it's not quite on, you don't hear that.
I think, though I am not sure, that it has to do with the behavior of the analogue waveform when it caps out. An analogue singal gets "rounded" as it hits peak; a digital signal just cuts off, completely square. Normally this isn't a problem because you're not overloading your signal, but in the special case of two strong kickdrums dead on, you hear it. For me (and many dance music listeners) that sound is very pleasing and very important to the dance music performance.
When only one song is playing - that is, when you're not in a mix - it doesn't sound any different than a CD. So you could argue that my point is very minor. But it does matter to me.
Re:I'm a professional club/rave DJ (Score:2)
The organization of their sets and impeccable taste in tracks can never be replaced by aritifical intelligence.
Fyndo said:
Also, a computer will never defeat a grandmaster at chess. They won't be able to replicate the inventiveness of a human player.
There's a big difference. Chess is not subjective; winning or losing (and even the individual moves) are easy to evaluate with an algorithm. How do you write an algorithm which decides what music is most pleasing to the human ear? Humans can't even agree with each other. Programming a computer to do it would be a monumental task.
That said, you're right: I shouldn't say "never." Crazier things have happened. But in my professional opinion, as both an experienced computer programmer and as a professional DJ, it won't happen anytime in the next (say) decade.
This will be so disheartening... (Score:2)
Suddenly tunes that lack any structures of sound such as beat, melody, rhythm or harmony are going to be proven once and for all to be the crap that they are. And poorly written lyrics that aren't in tune, in synch, or lack rhythm AND rhyme are going to throw the music straight out.
In the end the dancers are going to learn that most of the music they THOUGHT they like, their bodies really don't, and the DJ is going to be left with nothing left to play.
Finally we won't have to listen to Destiny's Child anymore.
...
Biofeed*back* (Score:2)
Chicago Airport tunnel experience (Score:2)
Hmm, respond to your mood how though? (Score:2)
Imagine a biofeedback mp3 playlist owned by a depressive person that puts on happy music when he's feeling low. Could be one way of looking at it.
-Kasreyn
wandering off to the bar (Score:2)
Actually, the club owner would setup the system such that if *not enough* people are at the bar the music will become awful. I'm half serious here: club owners make their money on selling a rum & coke for $7. It's not in their interest to have people *only* on the dance floor all night.
Re:disintermediation (Score:2)
It was the most miserable time of my life; I didn't know his selection of music, and worse, I had a group of people evenly split between "we just want you to slap on some country records" and "make it groove, man". If I had any TALENT at what I was doing, I might have found a way to split the difference, and apparently my friend was able to do just fine after he arrived (they accused him of doing a Bad DJ/Good DJ switcheroo on them :-).
The point? Mixing music and working a crowd successfully so that everyone (or the majority) is having a good time takes a lot of talent, and I wouldn't slam it until you've been in those moccasins.
Re:who gives a shit (Score:1)
oh BTW, i play the guitar too, and no, I don't listen to techno.
cheers,
-AC-
Re:who gives a shit (Score:2)
*Enter Surly Abrasive Mode* (so what about karma?)
House and trance are two completely different things, and even such an "amazing" musician as yourself could figure this out. Hell, even Lars Ulrich could do it. it's a lot more than just a "bunch of druggies dancing to a steady bass thumping". Saying that is like saying that Rock is "a bunch of jocks and hicks standing around a couple guys plaing the same chord over and over again and droning on about some pointless crap." But by the looks of your post then this may have hit a bit too close to home. Maybe if you opened you eyes and your mind (try it for a change) you'd learn that "electronic" music is a term as broad as "Rock & Roll". I'm sure that you know that alternative is different than death metal, right?
*End rant mode*
And no, if you haven't guessed, I'm not the biggest fan of Rock. Personally, I find it boring and petty and having to listen to RHCP makes me want to vomit blood, but that's not saying that it doesn't have musical insight and value. Yeah, the good artists are extremely good at what they do. When you listen to something you just get used to the more subtle nuances (that means little differences*) of that style. I listen to trance and pick out pitch variations and the melody behind them. I imagine you can hear things that I'd never have heard in the latest Tool CD (or what-have-you).
But the point of the thing is that you can't take the work of an artist (you try DJ'ing and see how "easy" it is) and turn it into an algorithm**. it's an equivalent to having a computer write songs and (crappy) lyrics.
* Note: (if something is not like something else, then it's different)
** An algorithm is something to do with computers