1 Comment
Feb 3, 2022·edited Feb 3, 2022

I'm somewhat amazed that Philip Glass sat down, listened to and discussed what were essentially cookie cutter renditions of his music.

I can't find justification for the end results of "OpenAI" being fed a smorgasbord of Glass works from midi files.

First off, it's a very bad way to approach computer generated composition as we are expected to take faith that the software can make intuitive human like decisions of the Composer process. I think it spit back pieces of midi files and attempted to produce simplistic variations. But so far as achieving any kind of synergistic function in assimilation, it failed miserably.

It clearly does not understand musical form, which Glass immediately pointed out. Nor does it comprehend an emotional progression which is intrinsically linked to the decision processes a Composer makes which cannot be separated from technique without becoming lifeless. (Glass pointed this out also).

I think Philip Glass is incredibly gracious in even doing this. A living composer who will be annulled in music history...wow.

It also made me think of how people at cocktail parties all seem to be experts on music. It's tedious at best.

Physicists, for example, will have a better time at said cocktail party then the composer who forgot to not mention what he or she does.

It's a safe bet no one at the party is going to expound on relativity, but you never know these days thanks to the collective trash heap which is the internet.

What bothers me most is the number of people who will use this AI and suddenly become "composers".

(I'm glad to have found that little three dot edit comment button).

Expand full comment