A couple of cases where A.I. doesn't suck

[dean.winter]

Hey, thought I'd share an interesting AI use with FSP. While I generally believe the production of art should be left to humans, AI does offer some interesting uses for manual organizational work. Here's a couple use cases.

I ran a session the other day for a jazz quartet. It was 7 songs, and involved 18 channels (2 upright bass, 2 guitar, 1 sax, 11 drums, and 2 rooms). Each song was 7-10 minutes long (cause, you know, jazz), and I did a new FSP session for each song. Normally, this would mean that when I mix I'd set a static mix for one song, and then copy that mix manually to each of the other songs. This works fine, but is tedious. So I thought I'd try an experiment - since Claude can read most of the files that FSP uses, I pointed it at the directory with the songs and said (paraphrasing) - "Can you apply all the mix settings from song A to songs B, C, D, and so on? Make a copy of each of the target songs so you don't overwrite the originals". And holy crap, it worked like a charm. Took about 30 seconds and copied all the mix settings (levels, pan, fx, etc) to each of the target songs. Probably saved me an hour or so of work.

Since then I've used it for a couple other purposes. One more that was very helpful - Claude can read I/O maps. In my studio I run by default at 48khz, but I sometimes have clients who want higher sample rates. Since I heavily use ADAT, MADI, and Dante, changing sample rates also changes the number and mapping of my available channels. In my case that means I drop from 128 channels of A/D and D/A to 64 when going from 48khz to 96khz. It also re-indexes the numbering, so (e.g.) channels 65/66 become 33/34 and so on. As you might expect this makes my 48khz FSP I/O maps completely useless. Normally re-mapping requires hours of setup, but Claude can read the files (including RME TotalMix workspaces) and just do it for you.

Just a couple of thoughts I thought I'd share with the folks here. I know that AI use is potentially controversial, and god knows I share the dislike in a whole bunch of cases, but for these kinds of organizational uses it really is a pretty significant time saver.

Dean

 

[Gerran]

I'm not that fluent with the feature, but isn't "Import Session Data" designed to do exactly these kind of tasks?

 

[dean.winter]

I'm not that fluent with the feature, but isn't "Import Session Data" designed to do exactly these kind of tasks?

Yes!
But also, only sort of

Import session data will allow you to, one by one, import track data from one session into another. BUT - it's manual, and it won't overwrite track data on to existing tracks (at least not that I'm aware of). So that workflow would be:
1 - set static mix on source song
2 - Open dest song 1
3 - Import session data from source song
4 - move existing wave forms onto new tracks created by the import
5 - delete old tracks
6 - repeat for the other 6 songs

The (IMHO) easier manual method is to:
1 - set static mix on source song
2 - Select all tracks and busses
3 - Copy track settings
4 - Open song 2
5 - Select all tracks and busses
6 - paste track settings
7 - repeat copy/paste for the master bus (cuz you can't do it with the tracks/busses)
8 - repeat for the other 6 songs

That works fine, but is time consuming and tedious. Claude can do all that with a single command for any number of dest songs.

Dean

 

[Gerran]

I guess I really need to stop turning away from AI... Somehow it feels daunting for me, although I do see it's uses (as you pointed out above). I'm not ready to get my toes wet, but maybe I'll loosen my shoe laces for now...

 

[Vocalpoint]

Claude can do all that with a single command for any number of dest songs.

Fair enough to see you used AI for some heavy lifting - but how exactly - is Claude residing right ON your DAW machine?

While I too am all for relegating some AI slopster as a nameless grunt worker - I have yet to make any decision about allowing it on my network.

VP

 

[tulamide]

The only problem I see is in the user. Aside from the usual issues, like not paying the sources it was trained on, many don't understand, that despite its name, no intelligence is involved. It is still a propability app - a sophisitcated one using neural networks to find statistical correlations, but still a propability based pattern matching model. That's why there's always this little sentence somewhere in the GUI ("AI can make errors", or similar). Any propability is below 100% - the word "coffee" often stands next to "hot", that's what its neural network figured out. But a VST called coffee is a lot less propable and will not be the answer. And what a hot coffee makes us feel, or how it tastes is something only intelligence could understand.

Always be careful when using AI as a tool. It can and will make errors.

 

[SwitchBack]

With AI even a woolly question produces an eloquent answer, which can easily be taken for the answer because computers are convincing that way. With an AI tool with access to everything on the internet it's very likely that every question will find at least one answer, from sources that just happened to use the phrasing you used in the question. Much better to have an (offline) 'Assistant' with access to good/approved information alone, giving you a "Come again?" if the question isn't finding an answer (or, with a sense of humor: "The answer is 42").

 

[dean.winter]

Fair enough to see you used AI for some heavy lifting - but how exactly - is Claude residing right ON your DAW machine?

While I too am all for relegating some AI slopster as a nameless grunt worker - I have yet to make any decision about allowing it on my network.

VP

Hey VP
I'm using Claude in what used to be called "Cowork" mode. So it's just an app that runs locally on my computer. You can permit it to access any folders you'd like on the local host. For my case I don't allow any access unless it asks me first, and then I grant one time access, but I'm a bit cautious about such things (my day job title is "Security Architect" and sometimes those practices bleed into my regular life a bit. You write enough corporate security policies and you end up starting to follow them without even thinking about it. It's dreadful ).

In any case, it's more-or-less an app like any other, and just like FSP can read, edit, and save files, Claude can do the same thing if you allow it.

Dean

 

[Craig Anderton]

It is still a propability app - a sophisitcated one using neural networks to find statistical correlations, but still a propability based pattern matching model.

Bingo. Which means it can't color outside the lines. If you're writing a chord progression and are stuck on what the next chord should be, AI will give you an answer...based on the most commonly used chord that would follow a progression like yours. But what if you don't want the most commonly used chord?

Dean describes the type of application where AI can be truly helpful in reducing the amount of drudge work we need to do, which will surely benefit our artistic endeavors. But more and more, I'm differentiating mentally between "AI-generated" (like Suno) and "AI-adjacent" (like Dean's application). An AI-generated vocal leaves me cold, but an existing human vocal processed with AI can be emotionally compelling and sonically dazzling.

Hopefully the appropriate cliche in the future will be "the cream rises to the top" instead of Gresham's Law ("bad money drives out good").

 

[FinalGod]

My two cents on AI

One thing I find strange about many AI discussions is that people often talk about "AI" as if it were one single technology that either does everything or nothing.

But AI systems are developed and trained for very different purposes.
For example, I could give Codex full access to my computer. It might be able to operate Fender Studio, create MIDI tracks, load plugins and adjust settings. But that doesn't automatically mean it could compose a good song. Codex and Suno are both AI-based tools, but they were developed for completely different tasks.
And that's where I think a lot of the discussion misses the point.

For me, AI is primarily a tool that helps me turn my own creative ideas into reality.
Take DaVinci Resolve, for example. I might have an idea for a transition, a video effect or a filter, but I don't necessarily have the technical knowledge or the time to learn everything about Fusion or plugin development.

With AI assistance, I can describe what I want and have it help me create that effect.
The creative idea is still mine. AI simply helps me overcome the technical obstacles.
An even better example from my own experience is Synthesizer V Studio.
I've been making music with MIDI instruments for years. I can compose melodies, arrange instruments and work with notes in a piano roll without any problems.
But vocals were always a major limitation for me.
I can't sing. And even if I could, I'd still be limited to my own male voice. That made it difficult to realize musical ideas involving female vocals or choirs.
Discovering Synthesizer V was a huge step forward for me because it finally solved that problem.
And here's an important distinction: AI doesn't compose the vocal parts for me. I do.
I write the melodies, place the notes individually in the piano roll, enter the lyrics and determine how the vocal performance should sound. I can also manually adjust pitch curves, vibrato, pronunciation, timing and other expressive details. The AI is the tool that help me to make my creative ideas real.
The AI-based voice synthesis turns my arrangement into an actual singing voice.
It doesn't decide what my singer should sing. It performs what I've composed, and I can still intervene and refine the performance.
For me, Synthesizer V is essentially another musical instrument, one that happens to use AI to produce realistic vocals.
Without it, many of my musical ideas would have remained unfinished or would have been impossible for me to realize in the way I imagined.
With it, I can finally create the vocal performances my music was missing.
That's why I find the argument that AI automatically replaces human creativity rather unconvincing.

Of course, AI can also be used to generate complete songs, images or videos with very little human involvement. But that's just one possible application, not the definition of every AI-assisted workflow.
There's a huge difference between asking an AI to create an entire song and using AI-powered tools to perform something you've carefully composed yourself.
AI doesn't have to replace the creative person. It can also give that person abilities they didn't have before.
And that's exactly what makes it so valuable to me.
I'm not interested in having AI make all my creative decisions. I want it to help me realize my own ideas, without having to become an expert in every single technical discipline along the way.

 

[Craig Anderton]

With AI assistance, I can describe what I want and have it help me create that effect.
The creative idea is still mine. AI simply helps me overcome the technical obstacles.

Yup, that's exactly what I mean about "AI-adjacent/assisted" as opposed to "AI-generated." If you write an awesome string arrangement, it will be an awesome string arrangement whether you play it with samplers, multitrack all the parts yourself, or give sheet music to the Vienna Philharmonic. That's very different from typing "generate a string arrangement in the style of Paul Buckmaster like what he did on Elton John's albums."

I was a member of Local 802 back in NYC during my studio musician days, when synthesizers were starting to become mainstream. One guy was railing to me about how synthesizers were going to put musicians out of business. I said "Who do you think plays them? Accountants?"

 

[TimC340]

Synthesizer V is exactly what it says it is - a vocal synthesizer that uses waveforms derived from real-world paid singers. The AI is in the stuff that joins syllables and phonemes together in a way that simulates how a person would do it, but it's not creating anything - that's down to the person operating the program, and is no different to using Serum, Massive or (for those old enough) Z3TA+.

 

[Vocalpoint]

The creative idea is still mine. AI simply helps me overcome the technical obstacles.

But it also absolves you from learning how to do anything "hard" by yourself.

If you continue to let it help you every time you hit a snag - you may find that over time - limited knowledge becomes the norm.

VP

 

[lokeyfly]

But it also absolves you from learning how to do anything "hard" by yourself.

If you continue to let it help you every time you hit a snag - you may find that over time - limited knowledge becomes the norm.

VP

This.

I will largely refrain from the conversation as I wouldnt be adding anything other than shoving a few noses in their own AI infatuation vomit. : ) See what I mean. : )

As to using something like Synthesizer V, that is altogether different. Synthesizer V is a really great addition. I dont consider it AI at all, but more like vocal synthesis that someone uses to carry out, or fulfill their musical concept. As to AI, it is an EXTREMELY over used and abused term. Anyone speaking into some non human or voice recorded entity these days assumes its AI. Its painfully startling how stupid humans are already becoming. A voice using VR that might pickup six optional que's or a yes/no response on the phone and people assume it's AI. What instead is becoming artificial intelligence, are people's inability to decipher VR, or some basic algorithms. That puts people in a class of their own artificial stupidity.

So anyway, I'll refrain from the nearly ridiculous comments people consider AI to be. Instead, I liked VP's response because I believe its important to have some stock in the game. Consider. Some (true) AI contributions to our lives could be a marvelous asset. The medical field being one of the major players. Imagine the wonder of a blind person, sharing their imagery, or a paralyzed person walking or dancing again. A child crying with joy, because they could actually taste an orange, and get squirted in the eye from the juice. How beautiful.
Only, when someone feel they could cheat the ability to learn how to use a tool so they can save a few hours, or evenings mixing, using a compressor to gain some speed, or mundane general creation..... then, have the gaul to call it their own, makes me laugh. Remember, I'm talking about the twenty-five cent gumball machine type. "Did you hear her voice and those AI lyrics? I thought of the title!!". Are we that far from that? Am I now a farmer, because I took out the Robot tractor and tiller, to work my land? You be the judge, you have a conscience (I'll guess).

Lean to avoid limited knowledge being the norm, as so well expressed, earlier.

People are more and more inherently lazy. However, they'll claim they now have more time. Good luck with that.