Part 2 of 2 (or more)
In Part 1 of this story, I asserted that “can AI can generate music with meaning” is a better question, and suggested that for me the answer is no (at least not now). Part 2 will focus on whether meaning in music (or any art form) even matters, and this is a much more complex question.
First let me offer that I don’t think that meaning is a requirement for triggering an emotional response to music and art. Although it pains me to say it, I expect that many people feel some emotion when they listen to The Velvet Sundown (for me it’s revulsion). But this is where I think it’s important to delineate between emotional response and emotional connection.
An emotional response is immediate and usually instinctive, and indeed does not depend on knowledge of context or meaning. It’s a reflexive reaction to a stimulation of our senses, and it’s ephemeral- emotional responses don’t last. Laughing at a joke, gasping in fear- these are emotional responses.
An emotional connection is very different. It’s often defined as a sustained bond born of shared values, empathy, context, or narrative, or in other words, meaning. Yes, it’s human meaning that establishes and nurtures a lasting emotional connection, and this my friends, is where AI taps out.
We build profound relationships with music and art when we understand at some level the human stories that surround and flow through it; the struggles, the victories, the human journeys. And it’s the resulting emotional connection that has us returning to our personal favorite music year after year, engaging in passionate arguments about best and worst songs and albums, and inspiring us to see our favorite artists in concert (despite the price of tickets!).
Not to be mistaken- the emotional response that can be triggered by AI-generated music can’t be ignored, and left unregulated, will increasingly create direct competition for human artists, especially with younger (easily distracted) audiences. But as we age, it’s the emotional connection that can only come from music with true human meaning that will be deeply interwoven with our own life stories. And that matters.
That’s what I think- what do you think?
James. these are both really interesting questions, and make good topics for full posts in the future- thank you! But for now, here are my initial thoughts, and I would be really interested to hear more of what you may be thinking.
Classical Music: I think one important detail that would need to be considered would focus on the performance of AI-generated classical music. Specifically, would an AI composition be rendered by the GenAI itself, or would it be transcribed and performed by humans? The first scenario is an easier answer for me, as I feel the lack of humanity in the composition that I believe many may perceive would be amplified by a synthetic performance, and therefore not be appreciated (likely flat-out rejected by true classical music fans). The second scenario is more complex, as so much meaning is imparted by the performers- would this be enough to overcome the lack of meaning in the composition and connect with the listener? I need to consider this more deeply.
Concerning instrumental non-orchestral music, I was going to write a separate response to this, but as I think about it, much, if not all, of what I said about classical music also applies here (even though a non-orchestral performance may be more realistically rendered by AI).
Thanks for very provocative questions, and I think I will need to consider more invested responses to each!
Agree with all of your observations, Jeff. Concerning regulation and enforcement, what do you think of an idea which would put control of provenance into the hands of the artist, placing it inside the DAW? Different from current attribution mechanisms which label already finished works, this DAW-integrated approach could attach provenance information to the building blocks of music itself.