# What are some ‘intelligent’ orchestration tools to help break me out of my box?



## DennyB

I’m writing orchestral music with bbcso, komplete, cinematic studios s/b/w, all in Cubase. But I’m in a rut; what are the best tools to suggest orchestrations, chord progressions, anything really to move my composing into a different space?

thanks!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

I sometimes use this....









The Epic Online Orchestra - Online Chord Sample Player


Have your favorite chords played by an epic online orchestra! Jam with different chords, create epic chord progressions and export your results as MIDI file or high quality audio.




epiconlineorchestra.com





Another cool tool is a plugin called Scaler 2, I think there's a free trial.









Scaler 2


Scaler 2, Scaler 2 plugin, buy Scaler 2, download Scaler 2 trial, Plugin Boutique Scaler 2




www.pluginboutique.com


----------



## Willowtree

Your brain and experience. It's as simple and complex as that.


----------



## Jdiggity1

A new reference track. An existing piece of music that you enjoy will have a ton of suggestions in it.

Work out what your intention is before beginning, instead of hoping it comes to you mid-track.

Don't set out to re-invent the wheel. Set out to do something effectively.


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Willowtree said:


> Your brain and experience. It's as simple and complex as that.


Fair enough, but if you don’t have a lot experience with orchestrating, theory, etc, it can very inspiring to discover new musical directives. I use the tools I mentioned quite often, and have learned quite a bit as a result.


----------



## musicalweather

There's an iOS app called Suggester, which may help to add color and interest to your compositions. 

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/suggester/id504740787


----------



## [email protected]

Any orchestral score by Ravel, Debussy, Mahler and Strauss  They are available online as well as recordings on youtube!


----------



## szczaw

Synfire, but you'll need chord progressions and midi phrases to take advantage of it. I've spent over a year building tools that are very effective as far I'm concerned, but they are Renoise specific.


----------



## Stringtree

imslp.org

If your library has scores, it might make you happy to read along while you listen to something you like.


----------



## iamnemo

Willowtree said:


> Your brain and experience. It's as simple and complex as that.


Wow!  A reply as arrogant as it is useless to the OP.

DennyB: sometime ago I used Hexachord Orb Composer for that exact purpose, in some cases successfully. Their structure aka concept is a little strange at first and takes some time to get used to but it makes a lot of sense. Check their older intro videos to get a feeling.

More recently they introduced Orb Producer Suite that is, as far as I know (never used it), an extension of Orb Composer with additional features and instruments. I didn't try it so take this last bit with a grain of salt.  Best of luck!


----------



## DennyB

Thanks everyone!


----------



## ProfoundSilence

Stringtree said:


> imslp.org
> 
> If your library has scores, it might make you happy to read along while you listen to something you like.


this


----------



## DennyB

Stringtree said:


> imslp.org
> 
> If your library has scores, it might make you happy to read along while you listen to something you like.


Love this.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

iamnemo said:


> Wow!  A reply as arrogant as it is useless to the OP.


its really not, literally every major voice on the matter suggests transcribing, score study, mocking up pieces. 

if everyone good at it suggests almost the same thing verbatim and someone else suggests it, MAYBE it's good advice, possibly even better than... say orb composer - something that 0 orchestrators I like have ever had access to.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

DennyB said:


> Love this.


the lazy way is looking at score versions on youtube, you can pause/reference at the same time - and score reductions are usually pretty good as well.

I've been busy with some other stuff so I haven't updated this lately but this is how I like to study things.






Orchestration Example Catalogue!(Group Effort)


So While I might change the format in the future, I'd like to formally start cataloguing youtube video examples of scores or score reductions with useful or interesting devices. Since this isn't monetary in any way shape or form, this is not limited to classical, baroque, or even public domain...




vi-control.net


----------



## szczaw

Working out an idea and harmony is one thing and orchestration another. Orb is good at importing a melody, harmonizing it and if it gets the chords right, generating something that will sound cohesive across several instruments.


----------



## Willowtree

iamnemo said:


> Wow!  A reply as arrogant as it is useless to the OP.
> 
> DennyB: sometime ago I used Hexachord Orb Composer for that exact purpose, in some cases successfully. Their structure aka concept is a little strange at first and takes some time to get used to but it makes a lot of sense. Check their older intro videos to get a feeling.
> 
> More recently they introduced Orb Producer Suite that is, as far as I know (never used it), an extension of Orb Composer with additional features and instruments. I didn't try it so take this last bit with a grain of salt.  Best of luck!


Yes, I am infamously arrogant around here. You sure got me!


----------



## Willowtree

ProfoundSilence said:


> the lazy way is looking at score versions on youtube, you can pause/reference at the same time - and score reductions are usually pretty good as well.


This. Really, it may be lazy, but it's also accessible and a good starting point. You can see the score, instantly hear it. It's in general just a pleasant learning experience compared to studying a score in silence. Just make sure the score matches the recording. Sometimes they sneak in a slightly different score on accident.


----------



## [email protected]

For training I would suggest that you sketch your ideas as a piano score with the melody in the upper stave and the chord progression in the lower stave.
Then listen to some pieces which match the style you want to compose in and which scores you have accessible. 
When you come across a section which is orchestrated in a way you want to have your sketched idea sounding, look at the corresponding section in the score of the original piece and analyze it: Which instruments play the chords? Which instrument play the melody in which range and with which articulation?
Then orchestrale your piano sketch in the same way.


----------



## Willowtree

[email protected] said:


> For training I would suggest that you sketch your ideas as a piano score with the melody in the upper stave and the chord progression in the lower stave.
> Then listen to some pieces which match the style you want to compose in and which scores you have accessible.
> When you come across a section which is orchestrated in a way you want to have your sketched idea sounding, look at the corresponding section in the score of the original piece and analyze it: Which instruments play the chords? Which instrument play the melody in which range and with which articulation?
> Then orchestrale your piano sketch in the same way.


This is also excellent advice, what I'd add is that you should also consider the performance of the piece. Is it performed with lots of vibrato? Is forte here the same as your VI's forte? (in most cases: no). You can double it as an exercise in getting to know your own sample libraries and what they can do.

I do also want to add that no tools will be able to orchestrate intelligently for you though. 

However, you'll over time learn the limits of each instrument (eg flautist needing to breathe, oboeists needing to exhale) and this can only come from experience and to a lesser degree study.


----------



## SupremeFist

Orchestration Recipes


Hear the orchestration, then see how to recreate it—short videos show you which instruments to load, and how to combine them.



orchestrationrecipes.thinkific.com


----------



## ChickenAndARoll

Willowtree said:


> This is also excellent advice, what I'd add is that you should also consider the performance of the piece. Is it performed with lots of vibrato? Is forte here the same as your VI's forte? (in most cases: no). You can double it as an exercise in getting to know your own sample libraries and what they can do.
> 
> I do also want to add that no tools will be able to orchestrate intelligently for you though.
> 
> However, you'll over time learn the limits of each instrument (eg flautist needing to breathe, oboeists needing to exhale) and this can only come from experience and to a lesser degree study.


Doing mockups of pieces that you can get the score to is a great way to analyze a score since the act of inputting and isolating the parts helps you retain the information, and allows you to come up with tangible orchestration techniques that you can imitate to get a similar effect. Like the other day I was looking at the score for the Matrix and I noticed a recurring idea where the clarinets do measured trills in contrary motion from a minor 3rd to a perfect 5th to make a cool sounding texture, and the composer used this in a hilarious amount of his cues. So I did a mockup of that idea and then created variations of that idea, and have now turned that "clarinet contrary motion texture" into a tangible technique that I can easily recall later. 

Long story short, imslp and the Omnimusic Publishing scores are your friend.


----------



## rlundv

Divisimate - Realtime Virtual Orchestration


Realtime MIDI Divisi Engine. Divisimate allows you to orchestrate in real time with virtual instruments. Open the door to a whole new workflow.




divisimate.com


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

Of course no one can argue with the obvious: knowing traditional orchestration rules, careful attentive active listening, studying and emulating the Masters and using your brain (!?) are the standard fare of professional composers but in a world of hybrid orchestration these hardly suffice to produce original music nowadays.

I'm sure that DennyB knows all this and to put it in the context of his original question: he needs new _intelligent _tools to nudge him out of, as he puts it, his current composing rut.

For this the computer and AI-based tools can be, and will certainly become more and more, either our best assistants or our worst enemies. Contrary to the popular, generally uninformed, opinion about the subject, nothing can think more outside the "human brain box" than an AI-based deep learning tool. It knows and can follow all the standard rules or break all of them and push you in a completely unexpected direction.

This is even truer now in very creative fields, the traditionally exclusive hunting grounds of humans, such as the sciences (math, physics, biology,...) and, yes (shudder), the arts.

Over the years I have experimented with many of them, at different stages of their development, and with varying amount of success, but I agree with the opinion expressed by several people above, that Orb Composer was one of the most helpful such tools, by letting me control the process and orient it better than other automatic tools that might be targeting non-composers (AIVA, for ex., comes to mind).

Don't fight those new tools, embrace them and make them your friends. Remember that once the pianoforte was the new tech of the day and composers who were not afraid to use it left their mark.


----------



## gives19

Willowtree said:


> This is also excellent advice, what I'd add is that you should also consider the performance of the piece. Is it performed with lots of vibrato? Is forte here the same as your VI's forte? (in most cases: no). You can double it as an exercise in getting to know your own sample libraries and what they can do.
> 
> I do also want to add that no tools will be able to orchestrate intelligently for you though.
> 
> However, you'll over time learn the limits of each instrument (eg flautist needing to breathe, oboeists needing to exhale) and this can only come from experience and to a lesser degree study.


Totally. As a brass player as well as other instruments I play.. Remember! Wind players have to breath-


----------



## antret

I understand where you are coming from. I use a ton of these tools and take a lot of heat from my other muso friends.  I enjoy working on a laptop so I am not chained to my desk (i can work sitting by the fireplace for example!) and since I can find myself without a guitar or keyboard, I use a ton of different midi tools to get ideas down (piano-like patterns, guitar-ish picking, etc) to massage/re-record later (music prototyping I think is one of the buzzwords).

Sometimes you just need the one thing you wouldn't of thought of to get totally inspired! I've always though it was the same as sitting around listening to a friend plunking around on a piano or guitar until they play something that catches my attention. I would say 'Stop!, that's the idea we run with'.

Off the top of my head, I use:

Hexachord Orb Producer Suite & Orb Composer
Venomode PhraseBox
Squaredheads Nora
Scaler
J74 Progressive (if working in Live.... its a max for live device)
J74 Progressive stand alone (not available any longer from the Dev)
Kirnu Cream (the 4 indepenent arp patterns are fun!)
The Captain plug in suite (not so much any more)
AudioModern Riffer
Some sequencers in the Reason Rack

Anyhow, i think you get the idea.  Some of the software like the Orb products take some getting used to. Rarely (pretty much never) does it spit out a finished piece or a completely great idea (but neither do I all the time). I use the seeds if I'm in a rut and build my own tracks. 

My kids are waiting for me to go out and play in the snow with them! Feel free to ask any questions if you need me to elaborate.

Take Care!


----------



## Jeremy Spencer

Call me lazy, but when I’m in the middle of a project, I simply don’t have the time to sift through online scores and create mock-ups, nor do I have any interest. I really like some of the AI tools, as they can give you some inspiration (and chord progression ideas) when there’s a looming deadline. Tit for tat, but that’s just me.


----------



## Stringtree

beyd770 said:


> Divisimate - Realtime Virtual Orchestration
> 
> 
> Realtime MIDI Divisi Engine. Divisimate allows you to orchestrate in real time with virtual instruments. Open the door to a whole new workflow.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> divisimate.com


This seems cool, but thinking as a programmer, it's something a script might do for a little less than the asking price ($199). I plan to look into it more.


----------



## szczaw

To illustrate...


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

Cool track szczaw! Can be the starting point for more... Case in point: I started composing this track below during a cruise using only my laptop and orb plus very few other tools at hand. Sun, ocean, smell, islands, etc., gave me some initial inspiration upon which I expanded with Orb. I finished composing when back at home in my studio using Cubase and other tools. Here's the result; remember that it was a quick project made from fun and for fun


----------



## szczaw

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> Cool track szczaw! Can be the starting point for more..


Thank you. I got Orb to sift through ideas, quickly see what has potential. 

Here's another one...


----------



## antret

Cool to hear different styles of tracks using some of the orb products! It is fun to sift through the different ideas. 

In my most recent batch of songs the Orbs (and the other tools I mentioned) are used quite a bit for their ideas. Honestly, the orb ones are the 1st things to get added to a new project!


----------



## Malachi

ProfoundSilence said:


> its really not, literally every major voice on the matter suggests transcribing, score study, mocking up pieces.
> 
> if everyone good at it suggests almost the same thing verbatim and someone else suggests it, MAYBE it's good advice, possibly even better than... say orb composer - something that 0 orchestrators I like have ever had access to.


That's pretty much just your opinion, and is equally elitist, condescending and useless as the person you're defending.


----------



## Willowtree

Malachi said:


> That's pretty much just your opinion, and is equally elitist, condescending and useless as the person you're defending.


I'm an elite? Thank you, I appreciate that. I've always wanted to be good at something. ❤️


----------



## ProfoundSilence

Malachi said:


> That's pretty much just your opinion, and is equally elitist, condescending and useless as the person you're defending.


Can you point me to a noteworthy orchestrator that suggests using some tool instead of transcribing and studying scores?

I'm genuinely interested, because the way I'm learning is pretty boring, if they've got some hot new easy alternative I'm all ears. 

Here's what has happened so far: 
Novice orchestrators call everyone who echos the advice every serious orchestrator has followed for HUNDREDS OF YEARS an elitist. 

Don't worry, a member who joined 2 days ago has the correct alternative surely... I can't wait for the day "Malachi" changed orchestration forever with a simple forum post. Surely, you didn't plan on joining the conversation to call people names without actually having any substance to add to the conversation to change anyone's mind.


----------



## Willowtree

ProfoundSilence said:


> Can you point me to a noteworthy orchestrator that suggests using some tool instead of transcribing and studying scores?
> 
> I'm genuinely interested, because the way I'm learning is pretty boring, if they've got some hot new easy alternative I'm all ears.
> 
> Here's what has happened so far:
> Novice orchestrators call everyone who echos the advice every serious orchestrator has followed for HUNDREDS OF YEARS an elitist.
> 
> Don't worry, a member who joined 2 days ago has the correct alternative surely... I can't wait for the day "Malachi" changed orchestration forever with a simple forum post. Surely, you didn't plan on joining the conversation to call people names without actually having any substance to add to the conversation to change anyone's mind.


As a poor queer biracial woman who was raised in isolation by sexual predators, and didn't even get to attend elementary school, I for one am proud to finally be recognised as part of the elite. _That 1%, baby! 😎_

Thank you, @Malachi. You are my hero.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

Willowtree said:


> As a poor queer biracial woman who was raised in isolation by sexual predators, and didn't even get to attend elementary school, I for one am proud to finally be recognised as part of the elite. _That 1%, baby! 😎_
> 
> Thank you, @Malachi. You are my hero.


----------



## SupremeFist

You learn, and get inspiration, by studying and then doing. So you'll learn a ton more by working through something like orchestration recipes than with some so-called "AI" thing. I believe Philip now offers a couple of the lessons for free as a taster?


----------



## mikeh-375

That fella John Williams...what a bloody elitist idiot and don't get me started on that poncy, clever string harmonic nonsense as used by that Ravel geezer. Privileged twots all of 'em. I mean how dare they know what they are doing.


----------



## Richard Wilkinson

Transcribing, score-reading and playing (especially improvising with others) will all supercharge your understanding of music, and help to reveal your own personal inclinations musically. Helper tools can be great for learning, but they are always going to be constrained in a way that keeps you 'on-rails' - particularly wrt orchestral/classical/film music which isn't often just a series of 'chord progressions'.
But the boring answer is 'keep doing it, learn from as many sources as possible, and have the self-awareness to know what you're not good at & why'


----------



## Markrs

Willowtree said:


> As a poor queer biracial woman who was raised in isolation by sexual predators, and didn't even get to attend elementary school, I for one am proud to finally be recognised as part of the elite. _That 1%, baby! 😎_
> 
> Thank you, @Malachi. You are my hero.


Love this (though sorry to hear you had such a difficult childhood, I grew up poor, but thankfully I didn't have to experience those issues). Wouldn't mind having a bit more of the money of the 1% as well!


----------



## Willowtree

Markrs said:


> Love this (though sorry to hear you had such a difficult childhood, I grew up poor, but thankfully I didn't have to experience those issues). Wouldn't mind having a bit more of the money of the 1% as well!


It would've at the very least lended our dear @Malachi some credibility if the elite he imagines many of us to be actually existed outside of his mind. 😉

But yes, some of that 1% cash would be very nice lol


----------



## iamnemo

I cannot be certain about what @Malachi had in mind of course but I think that the "elitist" part did not mean "privileged" in any "quality of life" way. It was more a reflection on the fact that some people are opposed to the use (even knowledge) of _any new additional _composing tools, no matter what, and turn this fact into some kind of dogma that they then try to impose upon others.

Like someone else wrote, great composers of all times used the latest tools and instruments at their disposal to express their vision musically, each time changing the world for the better, making it richer and more diversified. Now you can like the results, or not, but this is a matter of personal taste, as everything else in Art and, sadly, many times, also an occasion for elitism and snobbism by some.

I also certainly agree that observing and learning from the Masters, practice and performing makes perfection as witnessed here by @Willowtree 's virtuosity in handling the world's smallest violin to elicit certain emotions in an otherwise purely academic discussion between composers. It certainly worked for me.


----------



## Willowtree

iamnemo said:


> I cannot be certain about what @Malachi had in mind of course but I think that the "elitist" part did not mean "privileged" in any "quality of life" way. It was more a reflection on the fact that some people are opposed to the use (even knowledge) of _any new additional _composing tools, no matter what, and turn this fact into some kind of dogma that they then try to impose upon others.
> 
> Like someone else wrote, great composers of all times used the latest tools and instruments at their disposal to express their vision musically, each time changing the world for the better, making it richer and more diversified. Now you can like the results, or not, but this is a matter of personal taste, as everything else in Art and, sadly, many times, also an occasion for elitism and snobbism by some.
> 
> I also certainly agree that observing and learning from the Masters, practice and performing makes perfection as witnessed here by @Willowtree 's virtuosity in handling the world's smallest violin to elicit certain emotions in an otherwise purely academic discussion between composers. It certainly worked for me.


Thank you for your kind words, my friend! ❤️

If only I was a proper violin virtuoso, then I wouldn't have to buy so many string libraries!


----------



## ProfoundSilence

iamnemo said:


> I cannot be certain about what @Malachi had in mind of course but I think that the "elitist" part did not mean "privileged" in any "quality of life" way. It was more a reflection on the fact that some people are opposed to the use (even knowledge) of _any new additional _composing tools, no matter what, and turn this fact into some kind of dogma that they then try to impose upon others.
> 
> Like someone else wrote, great composers of all times used the latest tools and instruments at their disposal to express their vision musically, each time changing the world for the better, making it richer and more diversified. Now you can like the results, or not, but this is a matter of personal taste, as everything else in Art and, sadly, many times, also an occasion for elitism and snobbism by some.
> 
> I also certainly agree that observing and learning from the Masters, practice and performing makes perfection as witnessed here by @Willowtree 's virtuosity in handling the world's smallest violin to elicit certain emotions in an otherwise purely academic discussion between composers. It certainly worked for me.


I don't understand, if the masters still compose pen and paper and not the DAW then surely - it's no coincidence. 

Some people write for musicians only and don't even own a DAW let alone fancy tools - and their music is actually performed by musicians. 

What everyone here is saying, is that orchestration is so nuanced that there isn't a short way to digest it, and some program would likely cause more problems than it solves when it comes to orchestration because there are too many things it doesn't understand, not just about orchestration - but about intent. 

If everyone who knows anything about the subject offers the tried and true path to the results you want, why is that elitist to suggest it?? 

Meanwhile, 0 of ths masters are using the "latest and greatest" software like orb composer... None, 0 orchestrators are using it - because the orchestra is not a sequencer - it's a living breathing painting, with a massive spectrum of colors to say exactly what you mean. But hey, what does everyone else know /shrug if you gave common sense advice it's elitist, so you need to give advice that nobody worth anything follows


----------



## ProfoundSilence

We should title this thread : don't lift weights, just keep snorting creatine


----------



## youngpokie

ProfoundSilence said:


> .. if the masters still compose pen and paper and not the DAW then surely - it's no coincidence..


Of course it's not a coincidence. Writing by hand is still faster than entering notes via keyboard (although Staffpad might be changing that at some point). Plus, you only need your eyes to zoom in and out, so you always have a full view of 2 full pages of paper score vs 3 or 4 bars in a DAW.

But once things like these are addressed, the advantages of the computer will become hard to beat, especially when it comes to editing and versioning.

EDIT: I also think DAW may already be dominant in film music


----------



## szczaw

ProfoundSilence said:


> We should title this thread : don't lift weights, just keep snorting creatine


LOL. There are people who as you put it, lift some heavy weights and don't get anywhere either. Personally, I don't care about becoming a master orchestrator or writing for a real orchestra. I'm not even interested in being a musician. I'm interested in using a computer to improvise and generally having a good time.


----------



## szczaw

Prototyped this morning with Renoise using Orb 'recombinator' (sound of thunder)


----------



## chillbot

youngpokie said:


> Writing by hand is still faster than entering notes via keyboard


I'm sure this is true for some people but certainly not for everyone.


----------



## InLight-Tone

youngpokie said:


> Writing by hand is still faster than entering notes via keyboard


Quite the opposite I would say...
"I agree with thesweetestpunch about keyboard skills and your advantage as a guitarist, but in the end there are lots of working composers who point-and-click their way to stardom. That said, if I can lay down a cue in 30 minutes that you have to spend 3 hours clicking in I am going to beat you at the game in the long run. This business is about deadlines. DONE is better than GOOD."


----------



## youngpokie

InLight-Tone said:


> Quite the opposite I would say...
> "I agree with thesweetestpunch about keyboard skills and your advantage as a guitarist, but in the end there are lots of working composers who point-and-click their way to stardom. That said, if I can lay down a cue in 30 minutes that you have to spend 3 hours clicking in I am going to beat you at the game in the long run. This business is about deadlines. DONE is better than GOOD."


I was talking about writing notes, either by hand or via notation program. This obviously is not necessary if "you lay down a cue in 30 minutes"...


----------



## chillbot

youngpokie said:


> I was talking about writing notes, either by hand or via notation program.


I was also referring to this and it certainly depends on context as well as the user's skill... slews of 16th notes can go by much quicker in a notation program.


----------



## youngpokie

chillbot said:


> it certainly depends on context as well as the user's skill... slews of 16th notes can go by much quicker in a notation program.


Very true! Anything that can be copy-pasted with a key command will be faster on a computer than by hand. Editing, deleting are faster too. If the music is relatively simple, and is written/revised while playing on a keyboard, I think DAW already won.


----------



## X-Bassist

InLight-Tone said:


> DONE is better than GOOD


They are not mutually exclusive, as we gain experience we get faster and discover shortcuts (if we are smart) to get to “good AND fast”. But if you believe compromise in quality is essential to getting it done, then yes, for you that is correct. I’m still holding faith in “Good and fast” (I never mention great 😄).


----------



## InLight-Tone

youngpokie said:


> I was talking about writing notes, either by hand or via notation program. This obviously is not necessary if "you lay down a cue in 30 minutes"...


That's a quote from someone else I saved. I WISH I could lay down a quality cue in 30 minutes!!!


----------



## Willowtree

I'm rather amused still that the comment I made about our brains being the most intelligent orchestration tool - a comment made in jest - lead to so much drama.

If anything, this thread's been a good laugh.


----------



## Evans

Jeremy Spencer said:


> I sometimes use this....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The Epic Online Orchestra - Online Chord Sample Player
> 
> 
> Have your favorite chords played by an epic online orchestra! Jam with different chords, create epic chord progressions and export your results as MIDI file or high quality audio.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> epiconlineorchestra.com


I very much like clicking "Random Chord" 15 times, playing it, and going "STOP STOP STOP!" when something catches my ear and I can hear the next few bars in my head. Helps when I've got StaffPad open while this is running on my desktop PC.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

This thread reminds me of another one I contributed to recently: 





Music Making Tools, or Tools Making Music?


Dear composer friends, I'm hoping I've posted this in the right section! I have recently completed a Masters course in 'Sound for the Moving Image' at Glasgow School of Art (UK). My final dissertation/thesis was a research project on media composers, music technology and artificial intelligence...




vi-control.net


----------



## szczaw

In-house music prototyping solution: splitting a bunch of Orb midi files into 1 bar chunks and recombining based on scale, key and harmonic content of adjacent bars. Crud but seems to work


----------



## SlHarder

szczaw said:


> splitting a bunch of Orb midi files into 1 bar chunks and recombining based on scale, key and harmonic content of adjacent bars.


ReMidi is a tool that can help with the split and recombine.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

SlHarder said:


> ReMidi is a tool that can help with the split and recombine.


Never heard of it. I'm intrigued by the website description... Thanks for sharing!

Ha! The company is my "neighbour" ! 


> SongWish is a new music technology company based in Quebec, Canada.


----------



## youngpokie

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> For this the computer and AI-based tools can be, and will certainly become more and more, either our best assistants or our worst enemies. Contrary to the popular, generally uninformed, opinion about the subject, nothing can think more outside the "human brain box" than an AI-based deep learning tool. It knows and can follow all the standard rules or break all of them and push you in a completely unexpected direction.


Despite the derision of AI, this view nails it in my opinion.

Everything in the _process_ of making any art is a series of logical operations. Perfect voice leading is a great example of this: it's just a set of logical rules that are easy to codify and program. Another - orchestration techniques (e.g. chord voicings). Another one - chord progressions. Modulations. And so on.

The first genuinely "convincing" AI music is probably going sound extremely generic, because it will follow all these rules to a T. But then at some point, a "humanization" feature will be introduced, followed by a question - can AI actually make ART?


----------



## SlHarder

Remidi targets a specific task. The included public domain midi help you learn how to use it. It becomes more useful when applied to your own midi. You can accomplish the same results with lots of cut/paste. But, just like an arpeggiator, you can quickly try out many permutations.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

youngpokie said:


> Despite the derision of AI, this view nails it in my opinion.
> ...
> The first genuinely "convincing" AI music is probably going sound extremely generic, because it will follow all these rules to a T. But then at some point, a "humanization" feature will be introduced, followed by a question - can AI actually make ART?


Thank you for your kind words and thoughtful opinion. I agree 100%. I invite you to take a look at this other thread where I posted something that you might find pertinent and even maybe interesting:






Music Making Tools, or Tools Making Music?


Dear composer friends, I'm hoping I've posted this in the right section! I have recently completed a Masters course in 'Sound for the Moving Image' at Glasgow School of Art (UK). My final dissertation/thesis was a research project on media composers, music technology and artificial intelligence...




vi-control.net


----------



## antret

szczaw said:


> In-house music prototyping solution: splitting a bunch of Orb midi files into 1 bar chunks and recombining based on scale, key and harmonic content of adjacent bars. Crud but seems to work



Cool idea! I may have to give that a go some day.


----------



## Crossroads

ProfoundSilence said:


> because the orchestra is not a sequencer - it's a living breathing painting, with a massive spectrum of colors to say exactly what you mean. But hey, what does everyone else know /shrug if you gave common sense advice it's elitist, so you need to give advice that nobody worth anything follows


But I for example am not using an orchestra. I am using orchestral SAMPLES inside said sequencer. The tools and tech are part of what inspires me. The tools can definitely be leading if used right.


----------



## InLight-Tone




----------



## Willowtree

InLight-Tone said:


>



Thank you for sharing this, proving to be a very interesting watch. ❤️


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

InLight-Tone said:


>



Thank you @InLight-Tone. Interesting video. A few years ago I toyed around with OpusModus during my H.A.C.K. phase.  I finally opted for cellular automata as the basis for this piece



which is now in dire need of re-working the piano samples used (Ivory II if I remember well) and re-mastering. Score is available. I might post an extract here later if anyone is interested.

I noticed that Julio mentioned working from the DNA level of the music, the genotype. I also came to this conclusion but moved to the phenotype level instead as shown here




upon which I expanded in this recent post





Horizon 2025: What does it have in store for us, musicians?


Consider the following statement: Consider music, already 99.9% of all music is experienced virtually; less than 0.1% of music is experienced by physically listening to physical musicians physically performing in real time. Is the world worse or better because of this fact? Music has been...




vi-control.net


----------



## ProfoundSilence

Crossroads said:


> But I for example am not using an orchestra. I am using orchestral SAMPLES inside said sequencer. The tools and tech are part of what inspires me. The tools can definitely be leading if used right.


Edit : have fun, but that won't be orchestral music, that will be sequencing music using orchestral samples in a way that has nothing to do with an orchestra.

Also not important to the OP, because it doesn't sound like that's what they are doing either


----------



## chocobitz825

There are a few tools for kontakt that auto-generate some ideas. Sonuscore "the orchestra", and "Elysion"....as well sonokinetic has a bunch of fast orchestration tools mixed with loops and drag & drop midi.

orb composer is a bit more flexible, but might not get much support moving forward. I still have yet to try Orb Producer for orchestral purposes.

In my opinion, rapid composer and synfire are nightmares to use.
Captain Chords and Scaler might not do any full-on composition work but can be good tools for setting the groundwork before you start going deeper into the composition.

Other midi tools would include harvest, cream, Melody Sauce, Nora, Obelisk, Phrasebox (pretty good actually), Cthulhu, Kameleono, Riffer, ReMIDI, and EZKeys. Some are just arps, some are reharmonizers, some are riff generators. I actually find EZkeys to be a bit helpful in that if you feed it various user-generated midi, and match it to your chord structure you can find some interesting alternatives. Only problem is it can't voice lead at all and tends to create some whacky midi that needs to be transposed and edited a bit to sound more natural.

Use whatever tool inspires you. I don't particularly care what the purists say. All the masters they love might do things the same way, but almost all the people here referencing those masters ARE NOT those masters, regardless of how much they mimic the same method, and they will likely never be remembered as much as their idols either. All of those skills are valuable, and it's good to work on them, but if you just want some outside input, go for it. No one on the listening end will care how you got there.


----------



## chocobitz825

ProfoundSilence said:


> But hey, what does everyone else know /shrug if you gave common sense advice it's elitist, so you need to give advice that nobody worth anything follows


ok, but realistically speaking....in the grand scheme of things, most of us are nobodies worth anything.....


----------



## ProfoundSilence

chocobitz825 said:


> ok, but realistically speaking....in the grand scheme of things, most of us are nobodies worth anything.....


So who do you think they should listen to? Other nobodies? Or the same advice that's been common practice for hundreds of years with consistently good results?


----------



## Willowtree

chocobitz825 said:


> ok, but realistically speaking....in the grand scheme of things, most of us are nobodies worth anything.....


I respect you a lot chocobitz, but I don't think it's most of us are "nobodies worth anything". Lots of talented folks on here, whether they're professionally / commercially "successful" or not.

And even then, while I don't think there's anything bad with using outside tools to help learning orchestration, I think orchestration's primary purpose is in making whatever you're writing playable by real players, or (more relevant to samples) help you form a coherent consistent whole (where conscious human decisions about themes are essential, eg. oboe is the duck, clarinet is the cat, see Peter and the Wolf).

Ultimately, a good composition orchestrates itself. Good voice leading and harmonic voicing is where it is at.

This is where I'm coming from. A lot of people on here seem to confuse orchestration with arranging or composition.


----------



## chocobitz825

ProfoundSilence said:


> So who do you think they should listen to? Other nobodies? Or the same advice that's been common practice for hundreds of years with consistently good results?



they can listen to whoever they want. they're responsible for themselves and the results they get. People throw this advice out with no consideration of what the goals of the person are, or what "realistic advice" actually is. If this person is creating for the sake of making their own art and music, then anything is fine. If this person is trying to be a consistent professional that can push out orders on time, AI tools likely won't help them as much as traditional methods. If they're trying to sell their music to the public, then none of it really matters. Most listeners don't know or care, and what works works. Tons of trap beatmakers and EDM producers are making money "cheating", and no one cares.



Willowtree said:


> I respect you a lot chocobitz, but I don't think it's most of us are "nobodies worth anything". Lots of talented folks on here, whether they're professionally / commercially "successful" or not.


My point was not about the talent of this group, its a response to the comment
_ "But hey, what does everyone else know /shrug if you gave common sense advice it's elitist, so you need to give advice that nobody worth anything follows"._ 

Few of us are John Williams, or Hans Zimmer (take those two examples for what you will). we're a vast range of creatives running from hobbyist to professional, and the idea that we need to chain ourselves to the "common sense" practices of composition just because famous composers do/did it that way is pointless because just doing it their way does not make us those composers. There is value in learning it, but mandating it must be done that way is wrong. There are lots of simple but enjoyable songs...there are also plenty of pieces done by the book that are forgettable. In that reality, what does it mean to tell people that writing without tools or a DAW is "better"? These AI tools won't ruin art, and writing score to paper won't automatically make us musical geniuses or legends in the field. So we should just make music, enjoy music, and calm down about all the stuff in between.


----------



## Willowtree

chocobitz825 said:


> These AI tools won't ruin art, and writing score to paper won't automatically make us musical geniuses or legends in the field. So we should just make music, enjoy music, and calm down about all the stuff in between.


Until the AI replaces us as composers and we are forced to bend the knee to them and accept their supremacy.

(I joke, but also ... #AIVA)


----------



## ProfoundSilence

chocobitz825 said:


> they can listen to whoever they want. they're responsible for themselves and the results they get. People throw this advice out with no consideration of what the goals of the person are, or what "realistic advice" actually is. If this person is creating for the sake of making their own art and music, then anything is fine. If this person is trying to be a consistent professional that can push out orders on time, AI tools likely won't help them as much as traditional methods. If they're trying to sell their music to the public, then none of it really matters. Most listeners don't know or care, and what works works. Tons of trap beatmakers and EDM producers are making money "cheating", and no one cares.
> 
> 
> My point was not about the talent of this group, its a response to the comment
> _ "But hey, what does everyone else know /shrug if you gave common sense advice it's elitist, so you need to give advice that nobody worth anything follows"._
> 
> Few of us are John Williams, or Hans Zimmer (take those two examples for what you will). we're a vast range of creatives running from hobbyist to professional, and the idea that we need to chain ourselves to the "common sense" practices of composition just because famous composers do/did it that way is pointless because just doing it their way does not make us those composers. There is value in learning it, but mandating it must be done that way is wrong. There are lots of simple but enjoyable songs...there are also plenty of pieces done by the book that are forgettable. In that reality, what does it mean to tell people that writing without tools or a DAW is "better"? These AI tools won't ruin art, and writing score to paper won't automatically make us musical geniuses or legends in the field. So we should just make music, enjoy music, and calm down about all the stuff in between.




I give up. 

What a pointless conversation to have. 

We aren't world strongest man's, but if they all give the same advice for getting stronger - there's a 99% chance it applies to you, and is more worth listening to than some bullshit your coworker regurgitates. We have actual college professors that visit the forum, should their students stop listening to them because they won't be john williams?

It's not defeatist, it's just stupid. There are plenty of orchestrators that will tell you about all the mistakes they've made and you think AI will do better? 

I can't wait until orb composer and it's kin write 16th note figurations that last eight measures long for the trombone


----------



## chocobitz825

I give up.


ProfoundSilence said:


> What a pointless conversation to have.
> 
> We aren't world strongest man's, but if they all give the same advice for getting stronger - there's a 99% chance it applies to you, and is more worth listening to than some bullshit your coworker regurgitates. We have actual college professors that visit the forum, should their students stop listening to them because they won't be john williams?
> 
> It's not defeatist, it's just stupid. There are plenty of orchestrators that will tell you about all the mistakes they've made and you think AI will do better?
> 
> I can't wait until orb composer and it's kin write 16th note figurations that last eight measures long for the trombone


No but this is the classic trend of academia that pushes the purity of tradition, condemns the new, until the new becomes standard and gets added to the curriculum without any sense of humility.

I’m not saying AI is better, or will produce a better orchestration by any traditional measure. What im saying is, art doesn’t exist for the sake of tradition. It’s not validated by the method in which it was made if it was made for the sake of artistic expression. Whatever tool gets the OPs ideas out, then fine. 

I don’t know about you, but I work in a field where the most talented people are not always the most successful, they’re not the ones working the most, and not the ones with the most accolades and quite often they’re not that unique either. Oddly enough many of them are also not particularly satisfied with the results of all their effort.

im not saying throw out the traditional knowledge and I even said with some of my suggestions you need to know good composition to correct the mistakes AI and algorithms makes. If OP wants to try some idea generators, it matters to no one else but them.


----------



## chocobitz825

Willowtree said:


> Until the AI replaces us as composers and we are forced to bend the knee to them and accept their supremacy.
> 
> (I joke, but also ... #AIVA)


It’s funny because it takes a lot of skill to make a piece from AIVA sound like music


----------



## GNP

chocobitz825 said:


> It’s funny because it takes a lot of skill to make a piece from AIVA sound like music


Lololololololol


----------



## szczaw

chocobitz825 said:


> In my opinion, rapid composer and synfire are nightmares to use.


Hehe, that is correct. I only use Synfire to extract and harmonically 'flatten' phrases to be re-harmonized in Renoise.


----------



## szczaw

ProfoundSilence said:


> It's not defeatist, it's just stupid. There are plenty of orchestrators that will tell you about all the mistakes they've made and you think AI will do better?


Not yet. I think it's entirely possible to devise a system that would consistently orchestrate on a competent level. Since there's randomness involved in the process, producing something above average in an expert system would also be possible by pure chance or given an adequate number of runs.


----------



## Willowtree

chocobitz825 said:


> It’s funny because it takes a lot of skill to make a piece from AIVA sound like music


Hahaha I actually took it for a test run today and the results were ... less than stellar 🤣

But maybe one day!


----------



## chocobitz825

Willowtree said:


> Hahaha I actually took it for a test run today and the results were ... less than stellar 🤣
> 
> But maybe one day!


There is no one button magic-composer. At best aiva is just a fairly competent writing assistant who might spit out a good motif from time to time, and then you have to do the rest. It might spark an idea that you would not normally have, but it’s definitely not ready to do the work for anyone. I wouldn’t base my business on it, but I wouldn’t dismiss the potential for it to have the occasional nugget of a good idea to workshop into something new.


----------



## Willowtree

chocobitz825 said:


> There is no one button magic-composer. At best aiva is just a fairly competent writing assistant who might spit out a good motif from time to time, and then you have to do the rest. It might spark an idea that you would not normally have, but it’s definitely not ready to do the work for anyone. I wouldn’t base my business on it, but I wouldn’t dismiss the potential for it to have the occasional nugget of a good idea to workshop into something new.


I've been eyeing AIVA closely the past year but barely used it, and it's very nice to see how much it's grown.

For me personally, the potential educational resource here is astounding. It's just not there yet. But this could easily be developed into a (separate, perhaps) educational tool. Especially useful for folks with certain disabilities where traditional forms of teaching might not suffice.

This is basically where my mind goes with things like this. How can we use this for the good of the people, to educate and inspire, and to help more people get involved with music.

Which probably is a bit idealistic, but it's where my mind wonders every time.


----------



## chocobitz825

Willowtree said:


> I've been eyeing AIVA closely the past year but barely used it, and it's very nice to see how much it's grown.
> 
> For me personally, the potential educational resource here is astounding. It's just not there yet. But this could easily be developed into a (separate, perhaps) educational tool. Especially useful for folks with certain disabilities where traditional forms of teaching might not suffice.
> 
> This is basically where my mind goes with things like this. How can we use this for the good of the people, to educate and inspire, and to help more people get involved with music.
> 
> Which probably is a bit idealistic, but it's where my mind wonders every time.



I think it depends on how it’s adopted. Daw and notation software makers might pick it up and use it as an orchestration assistant. Educational purposes could be fantastic. Already it can be good for people wanting to challenge themselves with orchestrating and arranging songs that aren’t their own. Maybe some company out there will market one click music for people who can’t afford orchestrated music, or for people who don’t care. If these tools are going to exist might as well make them work for us. It’s not all doom and gloom.


----------



## toddkreuz

The art of stealing other people's ideas. For instance, what JW did with Holst. No doubt
the temp track for Star Wars was stuff from the Planets. There are no original ideas.
We're all playing a big, long game of telephone.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

toddkreuz said:


> The art of stealing other people's ideas. For instance, what JW did with Holst. No doubt
> the temp track for Star Wars was stuff from the Planets. There are no original ideas.
> We're all playing a big, long game of telephone.


That's simply not true. 

Idioms are a part of art - but they are always only one piece of the puzzle, and there is always original ideas unless you have 0 backbone and just lift constantly. 

"No doubt" - this is common knowledge, it's not a conspiracy, Lucas had to actually be convinced to even have original music


----------



## Evans

If this "Orb" thing is the best there is, I think people should stop playing with software and read some sheet music.

This isn't intended to be a criticism of anyone who is using Orb, but rather the ability of Orb itself to have any viable output for an orchestral context regardless of user skill. It seems to either present a dreadful mess, or a bore.

EDIT: I mean, okay, if you get enjoyment out of it, then that's a big part of what music is all about. After all, I'm highly interested in picking up some bowed string instruments, and I know I'm going to be absolutely the worst. But it will be fun. And I admire the programmers for having a go at it.


----------



## Willowtree

Evans said:


> If this "Orb" thing is the best there is, I think people should stop playing with software and read some sheet music.


I think on one end, you've got the beginners, and they just don't know hot little they know yet.

On the other end, you've got the experienced musicians who are looking for alternative ways to approach this for educational or specific creative purposes.

And there's a distinct difference between the two in how these two groups argue their case.

Notably, the former group seems to like the Orb.


----------



## szczaw

Evans said:


> This isn't intended to be a criticism of anyone who is using Orb, but rather the ability of Orb itself to have any viable output for an orchestral context regardless of user skill. It seems to either present a dreadful mess, or a bore.



What does 'viable output for an orchestral context' even mean ? Unplayable by an orchestra ? Not up to some kind of standards (I've heard utter and complete crap, that is not even music, played by orchestras) ? It's silly to expect something generated in not even seconds to compete with compositions. If you want to have quickly generated, yes generic sounding accompaniment for your melody then get Orb. How do you go from there to big ass pronouncements like NOT A VIABLE OUTPUT FOR ORCHESTRAL CONTEXT ? Well, no shit.  Last time I check, Orb was advertised as a tool for music 'prototyping' which it does with varying degree of success and viability. You press a button, the software spits out small or large amount of notes depending on what you're after. It can do that faster than any human.


----------



## jononotbono

Willowtree said:


> This. Really, it may be lazy, but it's also accessible and a good starting point. You can see the score, instantly hear it. It's in general just a pleasant learning experience compared to studying a score in silence. Just make sure the score matches the recording. Sometimes they sneak in a slightly different score on accident.


You got any YouTube channels that you can recommend that do this?


----------



## Willowtree

iamnemo said:


> Again this arrogance that seems to characterize you... So sad.
> 
> Wow this discussion stirs so many strong emotions from both sides.
> it's almost like "two against _the machine"_
> 
> On this question I tend to be of the opinion that _all tools _available can be used to reach a given goal which, in this case, is to elicit emotions in the brain of the listener. I think that *many participants to this tread do have classical training *_*even some at the highest level *_but are still open to using the latest tools to help them achieve their goal in a creative _and _efficient manner.
> 
> Now I have a special message for two participants that stand out in this discussion by being opposite to most others in an obvious self-supporting arrogant fashion:
> 
> 
> Spoiler: First to Miss HollowTree, sorry I mean WillowTree
> 
> 
> 
> More resonating than reasoning.
> I think that your contribution in most discussions where I have seen your posts on this forum make me think that you are actually a troll, somebody trying to stir up controversy over nothing for her personal enjoyment. I therefore suggest that you go back to sit down in front of _this daw that you never reveal _and compose some music, then come back to show us what a great composer you are.
> 
> You should also re-read my previous post for you and re-check the meaning of the expression _to play the world's smallest violin. _But thanks anyway for the good laugh your reply gave me that morning.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: To Mr ProfoundSilence
> 
> 
> 
> Your arguments about following the masters (whoever you think they are or were) are valid and seem deeply felt but are also archaic, myopic, idealistic, unrealistic and vaguely pedantic. That's a lot of "ic"s! You seem to forget that following your own advice will lead you to do what they did themselves to become the said masters: be innovators and use the best and latest tools and technologies at their disposal at the time.
> 
> To illustrate using the very same Shostakovich behind who's photo you hide, I created this post: https://vi-control.net/community/threads/shostakovich-unmasked.106636/#post-4778677
> 
> Please show us _your _music created using _your _principles or stay true to your moniker's meaning, Mr ProfoundSilence.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Before you are tempted to attack my own moniker
> 
> 
> 
> @iamnemo ("I Am Nemo") does _not mean_ "I am Nobody".
> 
> Please know that:
> 1) Nemo is not only the name of a cute fish
> 2) Re-read J.Verne: Captain Nemo is not _nobody,_ he is _anonymous_
> 3) Nemo is Latin and also used as _Outis_ in _The Odyssey_
> 4) Now you get the parallel: _Odyssey _-> Capt. Nemo -> _Finding Nemo_
> 5) I've been listening to music for 50+ years: classical, jazz, avant-garde, etc.
> 6) I've moderated pro audio forums for 20+ years
> 7) I'm a studio owner working with classical and jazz musicians
> 8) I'm not a composer, just a musician
> 9) And yes, I want to remain anonymous for business reasons!
> 
> 
> Nemo, finished venting... filling ballasts...leaving surface...back into deeper waters.


You seem to be ignoring every single reply where I've argued in favour of using AI or other forms of technology for educational or supplementary purposes. I've merely stated it is not sufficient enough for this yet, in my opinion.

This isn't arrogance, my friend, and I respect that you and others disagree with me. Yet I keep getting called names and whatnot. Elitist, arrogant, useless, "HollowTree". Which means I must ask ... Why are you so emotionally invested in this, that you feel the need to insult a mere stranger?

I've responded to everyone in this thread with hearts and a relatively friendly tone, if a bit snarky. Are you okay? Do you need a hug, buddy? Because if you do, I'm here for you. Just, take a walk and shrug it off. We're all just folks on the internet. ❤️


----------



## Willowtree

jononotbono said:


> You got any YouTube channels that you can recommend that do this?


I admittedly tend to just search the score I want to look at and listen to at the same time on YouTube ... But here's a few nice ones I've used enough in the past they're on my list:


https://www.youtube.com/user/Jenny97LvB




https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCY8wKkV3Gx-3v-JyNlxzFXg




https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwbbr8FKVrWLF8T81RI7Lxg



Hope these prove helpful to you.  ❤️


----------



## CT

iamnemo said:


> Nemo, finished venting... filling ballasts...leaving surface...back into deeper waters.


Look at my avatar and then yours, clearly you are an imposter.


----------



## SupremeFist

Chess "AI" is way beyond what musical "AI" can currently do in their respective fields, and the top chess players all use strong computers to workshop interesting new ideas. But everyone agrees that the real passion and drama happens when two humans are battling it out over the board having gone beyond the computer-assisted theory and just duelling with their minds.

Similarly, for me, an intrinsic part of the joy, challenge, and mystery of writing music is coming up with it myself. If an "AI" can do some grunt work along the way? Fine. But why would I want it to compose for me? What satisfaction would I derive from that?


----------



## jononotbono

Willowtree said:


> I admittedly tend to just search the score I want to look at and listen to at the same time on YouTube ... But here's a few nice ones I've used enough in the past they're on my list:
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/Jenny97LvB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCY8wKkV3Gx-3v-JyNlxzFXg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwbbr8FKVrWLF8T81RI7Lxg
> 
> 
> 
> Hope these prove helpful to you.  ❤️


Thank you


----------



## GNP

I would be the first one to jump out of the plane going, "yes, tools influence how you write". I admit, there is a correlation to limitation with what tools are available for you to write with.

However, as what Willowtree has splendidly commented, it's really about your brain and experience. You can't depend on tools to tell you what to do. You're f*cked if you do. *Don't just sit there and let the tools "inspire" you, like some window shopper. You must be inspired yourself, and THEN use the tools that you require.*


----------



## chocobitz825

I have to wonder how many people here are experienced in collaborative writing...perhaps that’s why the AI stuff doesn’t bother me. It’s not advanced enough to push out a fully functioning song, and the “music theory will teach you all you need to know” is fine, but it’s not outside perspective. You may decide to go and study other songs and take in new influences, but you will always write from your perspective. for those that tend to do a lot of writing, especially professionals, we tend to get used to certain tricks and ideas. Writing with someone else provides the chance to work through ideas you never would normally think of. This is the bare minimum value of AI-generated music right now. It can generate a musical idea that you can use your skills to
turn into something else. If you’re using it to produce a whole song, it will fail the test. If you just want to step outside of your own box, then what’s the harm?


----------



## chocobitz825

Orchestration #1080.mp3


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





this was generated in the early days of AIVA. I can't say if it's gotten any better since then, but in retrospect, I could see using some of the motifs and creating a new piece.


----------



## szczaw

chocobitz825 said:


> Orchestration #1080.mp3
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> this was generated in the early days of AIVA. I can't say if it's gotten any better since then, but in retrospect, I could see using some of the motifs and creating a new piece.


It lacks clear direction, motifs are meandering, but I actually find that stimulating. My brain wants to 'finalize' it, take it somewhere.


----------



## chocobitz825

szczaw said:


> It lacks clear direction, motifs are meandering, but I actually find that stimulating. My brain wants to 'finalize' it, take it somewhere.


And that’s the current state of AI in a nutshell. It lacks clear direction, but you can find something to work with if it sparks the desire to ‘finalize’ it.

this is 100% AIVA generated, with just random VI’s applied. It’s flaws and limitations are clear. To Willowtree’s point the potential for educational use and practice or just outside perspective is there.


----------



## szczaw

chocobitz825 said:


> And that’s the current state of AI in a nutshell. It lacks clear direction, but you can find something to work with if it sparks the desire to ‘finalize’ it.
> 
> this is 100% AIVA generated, with just random VI’s applied. It’s flaws and limitations are clear. To Willowtree’s point the potential for educational use and practice or just outside perspective is there.


That's all I want from computer assisted 'composing' just enough of cohesion and musicality to get things going in my head.


----------



## Malachi

ProfoundSilence said:


> Can you point me to a noteworthy orchestrator that suggests using some tool instead of transcribing and studying scores?





ProfoundSilence said:


> Can you point me to a noteworthy orchestrator that suggests using some tool instead of transcribing and studying scores?
> 
> I'm genuinely interested, because the way I'm learning is pretty boring, if they've got some hot new easy alternative I'm all ears.
> 
> Here's what has happened so far:
> Novice orchestrators call everyone who echos the advice every serious orchestrator has followed for HUNDREDS OF YEARS an elitist.
> 
> Don't worry, a member who joined 2 days ago has the correct alternative surely... I can't wait for the day "Malachi" changed orchestration forever with a simple forum post. Surely, you didn't plan on joining the conversation to call people names without actually having any substance to add to the conversation to change anyone's mind.


Oh, sweet summer child... calm your emotions down 😂
Your reply is the exact kind of thing I'd expect from a forum full of useless elitists. If your argument is "we've done it this way for hundreds of years, this is how it's supposed to be", then I urge you to immediately get rid of every piece of modern technology, and go back to the Neolithic period. Go become a hunter/gatherer, because that's how it has always been. "Can you name one caveman that used a computer??" That's all you're saying.
Stuck in tradition, and unwilling to think outside of your bubble. "B-b-but JOHN WILLIAMS", oh shut up.

AI composing apps have a place, and you just feel like it threatens you for some reason. Can it write a song for you? Not a good one. Can it drive inspiration and get you out of your comfort zone? Absolutely. You people just like circlejerking about the way things used to be and are completely ignorant to the last decade of computing. Fortunately, the old guard will die off in the next decade, yourself included.

@that woman: your sarcasm is garbage


----------



## mikeh-375

...useless elitists?


----------



## SupremeFist

I prefer useful elitists myself.


----------



## CT

This is great to read after getting a little heated myself on the forum yesterday. Makes me realize I'm at least not a fuckin' lunatic.


----------



## ProfoundSilence

mikeh-375 said:


> ...useless elitists?



If there was actually a way to prevent that person from being able to access the website it would be 100% worth the entertainment. 

Fortunately for them - every obvious method is merely a minor inconvenience. 

Either way, irony still stands - they are here wasting their time replying to me when I didn't bother reading a single character past this sentence.


----------



## mopsiflopsi

This sounds very similar to a discussion I had with @ProfoundSilence a while ago, regarding learning methods for orchestration. I'm happy to report that one didn't devolve into name calling. 

I'm a total noob here on this forum and coming into this from a software background. When it comes to AI I think people sometimes have simultaneously too generous and too narrow a definition of what it is. Most AI today is no where near being intelligent. Traditional AI, like the kind used in most video games and whatnot, rely on a combination of brute force computation and statistical analysis to approximate real intelligence. In other words, most AI just follow a list of instructions, branching at various points based on runtime conditions (however many the developer could think of accounting for), to arrive at a destination. It's not "intelligence" in human sense, it's just an algorithm. 

The thing about algorithms is that they actually don't require a computer to exist. You could just as well think of Bach chorale style writing as an algorithm with a finite set of rules about voice leading. You could think of counterpoint as an algorithm. You could think of the spectratone chart guidelines on instrument doubling as a potential set of instructions for building an algorithm. In fact the entire point of music theory appears to be identifying the hidden algorithms that help with making music that sounds good. Scales? Algorithm. Modes? Algorithm. Harmonic function? Algorithm. Modulation by diminished 7ths? Algorithm. There is no single "The Algorithm for Making Music", just like there is no single algorithm for sorting a list of random integers or for finding a path from A to B. Doesn't mean you can't write one to help you in *some* situations.

So I can hardly see what the fuss is about when someone uses a computer algorithm to help them navigate all this. The masters did it too. They just didn't use computers for it.


----------



## mopsiflopsi

To add to my last post: Another crucial thing about algorithms is transparency. If you are not the one who built the algorithm or you can't peek under the hood to understand why it's spitting out the result that it is spitting out, THEN you will be a slave to the algorithm. Even then, it may not be the worst thing to happen. I mean, if my career depends on my ability to sort a random set of integers in the fastest way possible, yeah, I better know what's happening under the hood so I can use the correct algorithm for the correct circumstance. If I'm a hobbyist just having fun with this stuff? Don't tell me I need a computer science degree just to have fun at a hackathon.


----------



## szczaw

Computer aided composing will eventually be a part of every major daw. For purists:

*Mozart*, used automated composition techniques in his _Musikalisches Wurfelspiel_ ("*Dice Music*"), a musical game which "involved assembling a number of small musical fragments, and combining them by chance, piecing together a new piece from randomly chosen parts" (Alpern, 1995). This very simple form of "algorithmic" composition leaves creative decisions in the hands of chance, letting the role of a dice to decide what notes are to be used.


----------



## szczaw

High caliber composers of the past, today not only wouldn't have any qualms about using algorithmic tools, they would be interested in developing such tools.


----------



## mopsiflopsi

szczaw said:


> This very simple form of "algorithmic" composition leaves creative decisions in the hands of chance, letting the role of a dice to decide what notes are to be used.



This opens up the question of artistic ownership, which perhaps is the real sticking point for "purists". Am I an artist if I just followed some instructions to create passable music? How much creative leadership did I exercise in doing that? If all I did was to push a button to make a sad song, is that song really mine any more than a random song I heard on the radio was really written by/for me? 

And then how is that different than following voice leading rules? I wrote a short piece the other day as a string voicing exercise with BBCSO, and while I'm sure it doesn't compare to "the masters", it did sound like something an average person could describe as somber and poignant. But the truth is, I had zero emotional engagement with it while creating it. I wasn't feeling sad or poignant. No AI was involved but... was that really me communicating something?

How much did Mozart put his heart and soul into each one of his 600+ published works? How much was done on auto-pilot?

My personal test of art is: 1) Did this piece communicate something to someone? 2) Did the creator really intend to communicate that thing? If the answer is yes to those two questions, then yes, an artist was involved. If something was communicated but it was really accidental or procedural, then there was no artistry involved there. 

The methods of creation, AI assisted or otherwise, have nothing to do with it.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

Of all times, from Bach's fugues, through Kirnberger's and Mozart's dice games all the way to the current A.I.-based tools, composers, as other artists, have used generative, algorithmic, random, genetic, chaotic,... tools to create works of beauty that can touch our soul. And of course, now, it's all about the latest tools, computers.

My personal training is in classical and avant-garde music, studying the masters, etc. but I embrace with great pleasure all the new composing tools now offered to us.

You can either be ahead of your time  or be of your time,  or else, let Time pass you by. 

It somehow reminds of that phrase: _"A timid person is frightened before a danger, a coward during the danger, and a courageous person afterwards." _Not the same but strangely applies here too. 

I'm also reminded of the words of Francis Bacon, the painter, who wrote:

_All painting is an accident. But it’s also not an accident, because one must select what part of the accident one chooses to preserve._

Whatever tools you use, the ultimate decision as to "does it constitute art?" is (still) yours to make!


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

As a fun additional note about A.I. in general... Since we are debating its merits (or lack thereof) for music I thought that it is revealing to let it, the A.I., debate itself, this time on something else.

I received today an article about IBM Project Debater, an A.I. that can debate _any subject_ with humans. In this extract *from 2019* it debates about funding preschools. You can watch the whole video or jump to the A.I.'s closing arguments here: 



And remember: we are just starting with A.I. 

The source article is this one https://www.zmescience.com/future/ai-debate/


----------



## mopsiflopsi

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> I received today an article about IBM Project Debater, an A.I. that can debate _any subject_ with humans.



The amount of time this would save me on the internet...


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

mopsiflopsi said:


> The amount of time this would save me on the internet...


Agreed !


----------



## youngpokie

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> I received today an article about IBM Project Debater, an A.I. that can debate _any subject_ with humans. In this extract *from 2019* it debates about funding preschools. You can watch the whole video or jump to the A.I.'s closing arguments here:


It's creepy and amazing at the same time. 

Also, this AI talks about preschools with the exact same voice that calls me a few times a week with threats about my car insurance, social security and the millions I can make working from home...


----------



## Pappaus

To veer from the ”intelligent” aspect of the original question, there is an app called Chordbot which, while it can do more than this, is just great for having a screen where a great number of chords in a key that you enter are displayed. You can easily hear various harmonic combinations from simple to complex and hum melody lines over them. As I said earlier it is not as intelligent as the other tools mentioned, and won’t help too much with orchestration, but it is good to jar you away from harmonic ruts.


----------



## Tatiana Gordeeva

youngpokie said:


> It's creepy and amazing at the same time.


Exactly! And debating is no less impressive than composing music. It requires knowledge, structure, goal, imagination, creativity, "empathy" (mirror neurons), quoting from "masters", deep cultural references, etc. And again, this is just the beginning!...


----------



## chocobitz825

Tatiana Gordeeva said:


> Exactly! And debating is no less impressive than composing music. It requires knowledge, structure, goal, imagination, creativity, "empathy" (mirror neurons), quoting from "masters", deep cultural references, etc. And again, this is just the beginning!...


are we talking about debating for the sake of exchanging ideas, or is this AI just a master in the art of internet debate where you throw random statements out and refuse to take any input until you both get tired and walk away?


----------

