Hey Folks,

I'm just curious to hear what some of you think about Band-in-a-Box being called "Artificial Intelligence"?

Performances are recorded by humans and an algorithm is able to intelligently recompile that data into different chord structures and string a progression together in musically intelligent ways. There are enough variations that randomizing the generation produces different results each time. But is it artificial intelligence, or just a clever algorithm?

Low-level AI? It isn't really composing the song rather than following a set of rules, I think. Not sure how the chord progressions are generated, but I think they are just a bunch of programmed chord progressions that can be randomized using some key basic rules that keep the new forms logical and harmonious.

At what point does it become AI?

I'm also wondering what PGMusic developers think about this too, and thinking about what kinds of AI might be added to the application in future for even more creative song constructions and track mixing?

Not sure if this is a silly question to be asking or not, but I was thinking about it and thought I'd see what some of you thought about it.

Cheerios,

Zedd

I don't think BiaB is AI, but instead reflects the creativity and intelligence of Peter Gannon and his team.

I've written styles for a few auto-accompaniment hardware/software and software products, some "for hire" with non-disclosure clauses and with BiaB as an aftermarket business that I hope supports PG Music while making a little 'side money' for me so I don't have to travel to gig in the slow season.

Of the apps I have written for, BiaB has the most intelligent design and allows the style writer to put in things that the others do not.

The result is the output often seems like AI, and even with my own styles, sometimes surprises and delights me.

It's one of the reasons why over 25 years later, I'm still here, still writing aftermarket styles, and still enjoying using Band-in-a-Box.

IMHO we are all using the very best auto-accompaniment device available.

Insights and incites by Notes

Some would call it artificial intelligence only when it crosses the line after which a human can't tell it is not another human. I think BIAB is more like a decision support system. It can only call up RealTracks that have already been recorded. If we ever get to the point where the RealTracks are generated on the fly on demand from an infinite set of possibilities, then I will change my mind.

The dictionary sezs:




However, i often wonder about Band-in-a-Box finding myself somewhat amazed at what i believe to be AI creating music.

How is it that i can type in just one chord in the first bar of let's say 32 bar chord sheet for any given style and away it goes. The human intervention was very limited and the creation of music was not human. I was not playing a keyboard or vocalizing or playing a harmonica by example.

Or i can select a style , type in the chords of a song, although do not add a melody for that song and when you hit play it does create an illusion that you are hearing/listening to that song. Here again the human intervention was limited.

It's just following a set of instructions coded into the app by very intelligent people.

If it comes to the point where BiaB can initiate the desire to create a symphony and then create one, I'll go with AI.

Notes

While it may seem like AI, I think to be AI it needs to be able to learn and adapt as it goes along. It merely follows its set rules, but doesn't adapt to learn more about how you do music the more you use it. Of course, the flip side of that is that it doesn't really provide the user with a means to give it feedback, so it is somewhat one-sided. What if it were more like:

BIAB: "Here's an arrangement I came up with. What do you think?"
USER: "Everything's good, except the drums for this style is too loud."
BIAB: "Okay, I'll adjust that for you so the next time you use the style, I'll tone down the drums a bit. How about now?"
USER: "Perfect"
BIAB: "Great; however, there's another style that probably does exactly what you want. Would you like to preview it and then decide which one to keep?"
USER: "Sure"
BIAB: "Okay, here it is"
USER: "Naw, I like the first one"
BIAB: "Okay, I'll not suggest the second one as a substitute again."

My $0.02 worth and probably not worth even that.

Good answer John.

Or:

User typing in a D chord

BiaB: This is a II chord and it seems like it is in a ii V7 I progression so consider making it a Dm chord. Of course if you want that major 3rd you could leave it, but I liked the sound of the minor better.

Notes

^
jford,

and as always you windowguys will have that version before the Mac version is released

And what Notes said, too.

I don't need a program arguing with me over my choice of chord; I get that enough from other musicians! (kidding)

I've quit some bands because of that Matt (only slight exaggeration).

Notes

Well, I have to agree with that.

And I don't want BIAB to be so smart that I can be able to say, "Hey, BIAB, write the next hit song for me!" "Okay, there you go!"

I like that it does a lot based on my own input, but I still want to retain control artistically, while at the same time not getting mired down by having to manually deal with every little possibility. I love the balance of being able to pick a style that's close to what I hear in my head, perhaps regen it a few times to get it close (and probably good enough), and then if I want to, I can always load it into a DAW and slice and dice it to the nth degree. That last part only happens on a select number of songs. Life's too short.

I don't slice and dice to that extent but...

I use BIAB for vanity projects where I get it close to what the client wants then export the MIDI to Digital Performer. There I assign VIs form among the libraries I own.

Without BIAB, I'd have to charge thou$and$ more for these custom projects. Even though the Real Tracks in BIAB Audiophile never make the final version, it's nice to have them for the demo—it gives the client confidence in my abilities to give them what they want.

Now, if the client says, "Perfect, I'll put my vocals over that.", then the Real Tracks would make the final but that hasn't happened yet.

I believe you are right! The intelligence here is not artificial but rather human ingenuity.




Indeed, jford, indeed. That would be authentic AI and such an enhancement could certainly enhance workflow and the user experience, though I won't expect this until at least BIAB 2028.



<giggle>

Good point! But on the other hand, it would be cool to have AI which you could enable or disable to actually suggest chord adjustments or improvements to the progression that might have greater impact based on a study of popular "hit" songs in certain style. It would be up to us to decide whether we should argue with the AI if in fact the chord progression ended up a bit more interesting than we had made it for ourselves.

Great feedback folks. Thanks for all your comments and discussion on this! I'm glad I brought it up.

In the early days intelligent systems were little more than a series of "if this occurs then do this" if not then if it is this "do this" or else look for the next option. This would look on and on and work its way through a number of iterations. Depending on how well the programmer knew the problem and the possible resolutions was how good the AI system was.

One of the creepiest things I toyed with back in the Commodore 64 days was a thing called ELISA basically this thing analysed your fellings and it worked. How, by asking a question using what you said and a simple set of rules and a basic database that simply fired back at you what you told it. One could sit at this for 30 minutes and you could feel better about yourself. What it really did do was make you think how can a Commodore 64, a toy, do this to me.

Many smart systems I have worked on or with, learnt what fixes were applied in what situation. These systems could indeed recall and repair very complex issues. However if ever faced with an issue the system had never seen before, it was of no real use. Similar to calling most call centres "if your issue is not in the system then it cannot exist" the last else is usually "try the latest update if that doesn't work then contact the user forum maybe that'll fix it".

Using BIAB one sets the chord progression then finds an appropriate set of instruments that fit the pattern (I often find the the instruments - style whatever then design the pattern). Rarely do I use a style without changing or adding a track but that is me. Often, once I have the song down I'll put it into a daw and manipulate parts moving a few bars that sound better here or maybe regenerate a part in RealBand to get something I like better. I may even add my own piece or add a midi part to enhance it (well make it the way I want it).

BB is super clever, it has an absolutely brilliant support team making it even more so. It has the forums lending more weight. Is it artificially intelligent I don't think so but I do think the folk behind it and the support is incredibly intelligent.

My long winded thoughts

Tony

I think it will be AI the day it does things on it's own initiative that the programmers did not code into it, learn from the results of what it did, and improve it on it's own the next time the situations presented themselves.

Insights and incites by Notes

I’m going on a hunch I do think 2020 uses ai. Does it use it for everything not sure depends how bib architecture and databases are set up. I think ai in bib is probably a good thing. Long as embellishments improve and When we title our track like AC/DC it scans our chord and knows it’s a AC/DC song and knows it’s thunder struck so it suggests perfect match real tracks and then plays it perfect. Now we are talking. I think it’s close to this and already might partially do this.