Omicronrg9

This is interesting in and of itself. For your use case, AI actually does help you getting what you want faster and better than you yourself could do without that brush. But I may ask, why would you need to learn "more tricks" on Suno or Udio if an AI could do that for you? Where do we stop that neverending cycle or why should we? If an AI can help you make better lyrics faster, why would you not use it? Most free AI song checkers, maybe. You can yourself try and investigate. In my experience and doing lil' research, only certain operations that act non-linearly over the audio actually confuse the checker. Suno is in fact the easiest one to spot nowadays, both humanly and with computer assistance. Other lesser known software gives more uncertainty to the blocks. This is from your latest version. The other one was also "AI Generated". Usually with other sources I get a more mixed percentage. You can try the operation of re-recording or other stuff to check if there's something that tricks it. But it'd be a waste of time imo. https://www.submithub.com/ai-song-checker Returning to the initial topic: my solution to these questions is simple -> Composing is not a tool for me like it is for you. Composing for me it's the goal, not the route towards it. I don't have any other aim with the music I do but to do it, perform it if possible, share it sometimes. Whatever else happens, so be it. Your objective has nothing to do with that, so it makes sense for you to cut time and effort wherever possible in steps that you don't control. But mind that this is the key difference, you cannot get too nitpicky with Suno, Udio or others. You can run the slot machine as long as you want but if you wanted to make a series of minimal changes it would become increasingly difficult and tedious to do so. Advancing in your knowledge of music may become a pain more than an aid because you will begin to detect things that are off in AI songs that are not off even in mainstream songs. That leads us to your next I would say weird statement: But AI does not learn the way we do. It cannot become a composer who developed his own voice for half a century. You can ask AI itself about that, if my word is not convincing. AIs like Suno can imitate some styles up to a certain degree by prediction. It may be unfair but what you describe does not match with the state-of-the-art knowledge of AI models we possess. Feel free to send that video for reference. Also: I'm sure there will be. Right now they're not very good as some members here can assess. Suno itself has the capacity of extracting tracks and converting them to MIDI if I'm not mistaken so you wouldn't even need another AI as long as you handle some software that reads MIDI as sheet music. You can ask AI to generate a sheet music , it's code after all, but more often than not it will fail because there's a fundamental barrier for pieces that are heavily polyphonic. In other words, feel free to try with a symphony movement any of the tools (paid or free) available that use AI to convert audio to PDF sheet music directly. Sure, you may get a single-instrument or a piano transcription, but mind that AI is not magic, it's math, and math used to craft AI cannot solve certain problems that easily. Mind that you do NOT need that either. That they sound and set me off kinda in a similar way that your piece does. Different styles, yes, but very similar brush, similar way of crafting that can nowadays be perceived. That makes them sound not very good to me, but probably they are acceptable for masses. Mind your target, your target ain't people like me. These people have told you a half-truth. You can indeed export a midi or get a midi, edit stuff and then re-Suno-ise it. Problem is that even the best workflow is far from perfect and that you do need some musical knowledge to change the "note". More often than not you will end up just "rerolling" till you get something you convince yourself it's the best output because you don't remind what the first iteration was. Imo, this is a waste of time specially with Suno because it will anyways Suno-ise everything you throw at it. Voices will still be weird no matter the note, this characteristic noise will still be present, and more often than not you would not do a dramatical change. But once again, let me repeat. From what I extract from your words, I would say you do NOT need to be a perfectionist in any way or form. The more you approach that with AI, the less sense it makes to go through it cause the time you consume trying to get exactly what you want grows non-linearly. My recommendation for you would be: don't try to paint a hyperrealistic portrait with a single big shiny brush. If you're already satiisfied 🤔 Man, what are you talking about? Paper does not need internet either. Sheet music is the main medium of music transmission for a reason. Engraving things on stone on a mountain 😁? Pretty expensive probably, I would prefer other more traditional stuff. I have my stuff secured offline just in case. Not sure if there was anything that I did not reply, I just went out and came back leaving this message as a draft. Attaching 3 things: the audio you requested and what happens when I throw it to some AI that promises to get a piano transcription or a score of my audio: Kind regards! Third eye AI transcription.mp3 Third Eye (Arr.).mp3 Third Eye (Arr.).pdf

Hi again! I'll try. Here you go: • I don't know if it's just me, but I do listen to some gray noise when there's more instrument density, for example. • The voices that Suno and similar stuff produce, at least from my experience, sound all generic and have little to no personality. It's already a miracle that the timbre more or less is kept constant. Soon, it will be impossible to distinguish between these pieces and usual mainstream productions, specially when a guy who knows its craft takes it and modifies it accordingly. • Structurally is usually a "mess", AI is still learning that and it keeps improving. Harmonic simplicity of most songs it produces helps obscuring the fact that it's kinda bad organising material at the middle of them. They work superficially, anyway, and would work for the masses IMO. In the last example you uploaded, there was a great opportunity to repeat the chorus at the end one more time than what it does. • In some songs, instruments, voices, and stuff, appear and disappear at places strangely. Where's the flute and violin at the beginning of the piece? Later on 1:45~ I do listen to some string synths, but that's another unexpected appearance. Thing is that AI doesn't care about the internal coherence but about the output and if it works similarly to LLMs (which I don't know, because I have not delved deep into music AI bots behind the scenes) it's just making the "best guess possible" but it's not building music the way I and others would. Despite it being a way different technology, this feels to me like when Stockfish (chess bot) gets "inhuman" moves in chess, but instead of on par or better than the human alternative, music AI goes to a less convincing path. However, the way either I or others make music is not the only way, obviously. I do make scores, and then record them or tell the computer to play them for me. Some others don't make scores, they use a DAW and make the score afterwards (or not). Some others prefer recording directly and adding stuff in production. Some others use presets. And there are nuances on each way of doing this craft so, in summary, I would dare to state something like "the further away you get from the details you can tweak in each phase of music composition & production, the closer AI gets to your imitate your work". At least in my experience. And just as a personal note, I would insist in the fact that AI may only reach the complexity it needs to satisfy the masses. Here I attach some AI examples that I found on a telegram group. These ain't mine, but from people that prompted it with lyrics that AI generated as well. They're done by 3 different people but to me their differences lie in the surface. The tool is still not subtle enough, but I am afraid that I myself will not be able to tell AI songs and mainstream media songs apart. Finally, in regards of AI song checkers, they may fail in my experience. That's a game I don't play but they must be playing an interesting cat-and-mouse game. Perhaps not my call, but this is a good question. For me, a composer, or a good one, is a prestidigitator of music. Someone able to create their own music from its very conception to the smallest of details. An architect of the score. A composer can make what Suno made for you, but he chooses if he wants the guitar at ~5:20 is doing that Fsus4/Bbsus2 arpeggio, for how long, and if it should be Bb F Bb F C F Bb all 8ths or another line, etc, based on things that he put (or did not put yet) in the score. You, as the composer, decide everything. You even decide what you don't want to decide. You yourself set the variables, each and every one of them. You decide if fixing them or not and how. And you keep doing so, and get better and better at it. The key, the structure, the meter, the instruments, how and when they interact with each other... And a large etcetera. And you do not delegate: in order to make a good melody, you must study and practice how to make them. In order to make a good and convincing harmony or a good counterpoint (vertical and horizontal POVs), you do the same. Texture, color, etc. You keep learning and incorporating things you like into what eventually becomes your own set of tools that define your particular voice. Perhaps this is a radical way of describing a composer and what he does but welp, this is more or less my view on it. TAB is also music notation. Pretty useful at times. Just like with music notation overall, some despise it, some praise it. Sheet music can have TABS, staves (Here's an example of an arrangement I made the other dayThird Eye (Arr.).pdf, these are regular staves), or other kinds of music notation. It can be just chords, or indications, or entire different systems. And yeah I get learning it can be seen as a tedious task, it is what it is. Personally I love it and the main reason I got into music when I was like 4 was because I wanted to understand the symbols of a book called "the day the songs fell silent". Think that spotify may close someday, but if you have your scores secured in many formats, not only people will be able to listen to your works 100 years after, they will be able to understand them, study them, cover them, etc. Results won't be as bombastic as AI-prompting because there's a full layer of music production that I have not mentioned much that AI integrates good enough. You may have much less control over the result, but results are already eye-candy for many. My two cents. Kind regards!

Hi, welcome to the forums SeekJohn14v6! I kind of like AI overall I guess, but after listening to this theme you brought here thrice and listening to hundreds of other AI-prompted stuff I would say that I get more or less the same feeling that comes over me when I listen to this kind of "contemporary" music where, more often than not, one could replace parts of the score by "make random noises" and call it a day or additionally scramble the passages and play them disordered. It's not really that I don't like it (some I do NOT like it at all), but that I feel it and find it gray and boring. Judging by your recent posts here guess that you're satisfied with your work already, and I probably would if I was in your position. In fact, I am when it comes to make thumbnails for videos using Stable Diffusion or similar stuff (and then editing them, I must say). This adds up to the little feedback I could give you, unfortunately. I am no lyricist, and English is not my native language, so I'm not much into the world of lyrics so I cannot really point you towards a place where your stuff may be much more appreciated. This is not to say some people will appreciate or at least get impressed by what you have presented here, but I am unfortunately certain there won't be many people commenting on your stuff for any other reason than discussing if your use of AI should be considered a work or not... Perhaps another lyricist somewhere? The thing is there's little to comment since it makes little sense for most to explain what may have room for improvement, musically speaking. This usually helps composers, they rethink stuff and improve on their mistakes. But this is almost nothing like that. Now, I have read somewhere else that you clarify that these pieces are AI generated because you don't want to be a deceiver. That would be like showing AI art in some artists' forum and calling it a day expecting nobody would notice or suspect, right? From your POV it would be easy to deceive people into thinking this mp3 you submitted is not made by AI, I get you. However, and getting the AI song checkers out of the equation, to me and many others here in this cozy lil' forum, this would have hit as AI from the beginning to the end, which is again not necessarily bad, after all I'm just suggesting that many of us here are mostly pretty capable of distinguishing between AI music and non-AI music specially in these more pseudo-bombastic cases. It's an acquired thing. Maybe in a year or two, it'd pass. Depends on how profitable being as meticulous as possible ends up being. I am glad that you can make your ideas real and your lyrics go live with this technology and 0% or a small fraction of what an actual group or a producer would charge you to recording that. This technology will hopefully improve in the coming years and you'll be able to remake stuff better. At the end of the day, again, if you're satisfied, little else matters. But let me tell you that the world of composition is wide, and if you someday decide to venture deeper on it, you may understand why AI-pieces at this very moment are not much convincing to someone like me, musically speaking. That said, I am sure your album and pieces can get a good audience. Masses will never be that nitpicky, and this —and any random prompt as well ngl— is on par or better than half of the mainstream music produced nowadays 😆. Best of luck and Happy new year! Daniel–Ø.

Welcome to the forums, Mahler2009! I agree with my colleagues here dude. Get more into tonal harmony + whatever piques your interest. Keep composing, this is a discipline that's best learnt by practice, trial an error. Getting your own voice may be difficult but if you are resilient, disciplined and constant, you'll achieve it. Your first works may or may not hint you where you want to go. Be curious, experiment, come back, go forward. Feel free to share them with us, we won't go hard (not much, I hope 🥶) ! Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hi my dear readers, it's me again. I don't understand many things here, but first things first. Imagine that I say this piece is evidently made by AI. It would be very easy to prove me wrong, @Vonias. Instead of submitting .mid files, a better, more detailed description of the process you followed would have clarified all posters here of what you did and what you have not done with it. Personally I don't care a single bit about that but we'll get to that point later. Please, consider that you are in a place filled by trained & experienced musicians and some of us have passed hundreds of hours listening to pieces just to give feedback out of either a brief or a more in-depth analysis. For some, not specifying that you were helped by an AI to make a better recording of your work and ambiguously describe it or talk about it with phrases like: may very well lead to confusion and even anger among others who consciously decided against using this tools in order to participate in an event in which ultimately your compositional ability is what we want people to show off, review and comment. Various AI tools exist to "help" with that recognition, but they are still in beta (mostly) and their own creators advise against using them as reliable methods. I took the liberty to pass the audio to some, despite you confirmed that the recording is AI: It basically says "Pure AI" 90% and provides a model. Tell me —if you want— if it hit it, this will make this developer's work better. But the thing is that you say everything else is not AI-generated. And this is where we get into trouble here. There are two different pieces here. A pdf submitted along the creation of the post that has little to do with the final mp3 you provided and the score that apparently resembles the mp3, according to you, 1:1? What's exactly the relation between the first and second scores? I can see some, let's say "adventurous" chords in the first score but not that many in the second. First score is half the size, begins with a different voicing. Rhythms don't really coincide, lyrics rest at different places "angel____ vs. an-gel cries___" . Midis are all over the place but you can clearly see the difference. Just pointed out some. What @AngelCityOutlaw is pointing out is mostly in the right direction but: That would not work. You need a seed too. If you do that yourself twice with the same material (and without fixing the seed) you'll get different things if you don't specify the same seed to the model, whatever it be. It happens with music, but also with LLMs and Image & video generators. And there are various tools to treat, import and export midis. Generating high-quality products using it is a whole 'nother story yes, but we ain't talking about one here, this is a <1 minute composition. Finally let me tell you that I don't mind if you just made the whole thing via AI, a part, or whatever. I would prefer you and anybody else in that situation to be honest and clarify things from the beginning to the rest of us who most likely are prone to and will have a listen to your piece, perhaps even giving some also honest feedback in exchange. Regarding that, the audio doesn't seem quite fitting. The strange autotune sound that the AI apparently gives to the singers sometimes and the strange cuts in vibrato feel off. The piece lacks development but it's a short "poem" more or less, right? For more info on this topic of using AI to make/export/import music on many formats, an AI that I have enslaved using a rectangular plastic card that spits money, may show you the way. Or maybe not, who knows: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/can-suno-or-similar-programs-e-2dN_8OipSNCC93.FtFGJoA?sm=d#0 Perhaps I'm late to the party, but these are my two cents. Sorry for my possible typos in advance... I am too sleepy. Regards!

Nah, this is GREAT. Thank you, it's so great to come back to this forum and stumble upon such a magnificent work. I agree with Peter in that you should leave the flutes as they are. This live would probably be great! I am not really a fan of concertos. For some reason they don't really stick to me, it just must be that I have not listened to them enough and with enough attention. But here, listening to this, I feel right at home. What a delightful first movement! It was light, gentle, sweet and very enjoyable in summary, although it was not bland or boring, I loved the tenser moments with lots of timpani and the passage right after the introduction. You clearly know your craft and I think that shows in the equilibrium between the orchestra and the soloist! The andante was also lovable. It did even gain a bit of sweetness but it didn't become overwhelming, pompous... No, again I find equilibrium, and I cannot really stop the piece so here I come again. Some resolutions of certain passages remind me a lot of the second movement of Haydn's Trio No. 39, and probably of lots of other pieces written by him but this one came to mind. Third movement was a tiny tiny bit darker or more serious, those minor passages preceded by the striking brass+timpani tuttis (or tuttis overall, didn't see the score at that point) were something I 200% enjoyed. And the last fanfares and finally, the coda... Damn. Impressive, hats off. I feel almost like if I had attended to a premiere of some great musical work (and at my place that's not very common, it's either ultrahyperdissonant or conceptual stuff or already established music by our grand masters of the past). What a great job, many many thanks and congratulations. I have already shared it with my friends. Hi man. Since the OP did not reply yet let me just throw two very well known references that you may know as well, but just in case: ♫ The study of Orchestration by Samuel Adler ♫ Principles of Orchestration by Nikolai Rimsky-Kosarkov In the rare case you haven't heard of them, here you go. Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Nice improv! Are you the saxophonist? Or did you use AI or something like that? Too much cymbal, and it seems a bit odd at times for me, not sure why, but all in all, great! Kind regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hi Burlaw Guy and welcome to the forums! Nice atmosphere you created. Quite simple but it mostly works, soundwise. You don't get into complication, and thus little trouble comes. However, I am not sure of how you recorded this but it's clearly wrong (compared with what the score reads) at many places. It's specially noticeable in the off-rhythm passages that should not be off, and the last section in which you have a piano solo that is everything but equal 8ths! Score-wise and in regards of other aesthetic and musical aspects I believe @TristanTheTristan and @Thatguy v2.0 have given you some advice that is worth checking in my humble opinion. My best advice, if you want to make scores and compose your works yourself for Orchestra, is to first learn how to make them readable, useful for real orchestras or any size, and overall learn about the disposition of these instruments, their characteristics, etc. You won't get to idiomatic writing in the blink of an eye, but you will spot strange stuff in your own scores and maybe in others'! For that purpose I must recommend you a book by Samuel Adler called: "The Study of Orchestration". Examples of strange scoring (for a real orchestra) are: What strings? Violins, violas...? All of them? 4 scores for all strings? This is ambiguous and apart from that you got violas on a separate staff! The order in which you present the instruments in a general score also matters. More to some than to some others but a standard order is always advised. And just to put some more examples of GOOD writing practices for orchestra and details found on a bit more in-depth analysis of the score: • You present female voice and choir parts, but then they turn to Vo. and W. What happened? • The horn can be transposed to F and Bb, normally it's on F as it's the case in your score but knowing things like these and specifying them never hurts! • Specify the type (and if you want, the number) of instrument playin' in every part. "String section" says very little. "String section" with block chords, says a bit more, but not about the piece, but about the approach used to reach it. Normally, you have 2 violin sections, 1 viola section, 1 cello section and 1 double bass section. Get acquainted with the terms divisi and unison, again not 100% needed but an accumulation of good use of conventions and fine details makes a score shine. I know the image I sent you is pixelated but all things I'm saying are in part there. Really, reading a treatise of orchestration such as the one I suggested will greatly help you in this regard! Finally: it is a bit strange that you have almost no brass but the horn. The score overall needs some polishing but it can be read. Beware of overlaps. A bit all over the place for a review, I know, but I just intend to not repeat what my colleagues here said and to give you some more stuff to work on. Hope any of this was of help. Best regards, Daniel–Ømicrón.

Aaah, understood. To be honest, I had never thought much of differences between modern film composers ways of developing motives and themes and the ways of the grand masters of the past. See you around in the forums 😁

Damn man, thanks. I am deeply honored. Thank you (and Peter!) for keeping this forum alive all this years. May we forever see it sprouting posts with new compositions. Now I can see the text thanks to quotting + using Text colour = Automatic! Before... 🥶 I like the "happy-go-lucky but creepy quality much like the way clowns are happy but creepy to many people", did not think about clowns. Actually I have never been into a circus or never assisted any celebrations in which a clown was performing 😰. It's neat to see that the music made you make that connection without extra input. What do you mean by cinematic repetition of themes? Just curious Thank you both for sharing your impressions guys :). Damn, what a contrast between your impression and Peter's! I agree that it's not very spooky, in fact I think I have like 20 pieces way more sinister than this thing. But elves? Gold dust? Wild! I am grateful, not everyday I can read other people's perception of this or any other piece of mine, my public is very limited 😁. Good luck in the polls and once again, many thanks, Mr. Handke!

Hi! Drive links are fine, but you can also just drag your files here and they will be automatically shown. Welcome to the forums! In fact it seems like a work with five movements according to the PDF itself, but the OP submitted 3 here. Multi-movement works are fine, it's a shame you had to split it up. Do not hesitate on publishing the rest anyways! On the engraving plane, I would recommended you to mark the beginning of each movement with its subtitle. Just a detail, but a neat one if you ask me! There are some overlaps here and there but overall the score seems idiomatic for strings. Other users, better acquainted with these instruments may disagree or agree, but I see that you let them "breathe" (except at some spots, e.g: M19-25 on the Scherzando, Violin I, but still probably not too difficult to get) and that you have not written anything incredibly difficult. Articulations are detailed, harmonics are marked, there's a good use of dynamics... First movement starts off decently, but what I liked the most was the groove that it takes sometimes. Wish it had lasted more! This movement alone could have been enough as an entry for the competition, and I find it more or less appealing after a few listens! The second movement also has this groovy feeling that appears and disappears. It takes a bit of time to actually get started and make full use of that swing! This also happened to a degree in the prior movement, you seemed to intentionally try to make the piece not too rooted in that catchy rhythmic pattern. Not sure if it was the best choice or if the way to avoid it was optimal. The third one was the most tense and there were some really GOOD moments in there, but I can't get off the impression that you added unnecessary passages to increase that tension. It may be just me, though. All in all, a great submission. Many thanks for showing it here 🙂 and good luck in the polls! Best regards, Daniel–Ø.

Worked like a charm, thanks!

Hi Dima, welcome to the forums! Instead of google drive links, you can also simply drop the mp3 and pdf here and they will be inserted automatically in the post, just in case). It's indeed brutal as @Wieland Handke remarked. However, I disagree with him in the feelings it produced in me. At the very first minute it did feel like I was attending a human massacre in a slaughterhouse or something like that. Nor spookiness, neither scariness, no: pure +18 gore. But since you don't abandon that mood and just limit to test how much the piano can resist being hit with sledgehammers, it gets kind of boring after the 1:30 mark to me. Then, you finally destroy the piano and the fretted strings come to save the day until the Luthier finishes repairing it. I think it makes up to a Halloween story, a very musical one! Well, maybe I am making up this story along the listen but if I am truly making up this story shouldn't there be a disclaimer somewhere that read: "NO PIANOS WERE SIGNIFICANTLY DAMAGED WITHIN THE DURATION OF THIS PERFORMANCE" or "WE TAKE NO RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DAMAGE CAUSED TO THE PERFORMER'S INSTRUMENT AFTER OR DURING THE PERFORMANCE OF THIS PIECE" Jokes aside, good engraving, but I don't quite get what's your norm with system dividers. They sometimes appear, sometimes not. All in all, a bit too repetitive, but I am not sure if that's bad or if you're even to blame provided that your base was a folk song, and at least where I am from, they are kind of repetitive by default. In any case, thank you for your submission! Hope you stay around 🙂. Kind regards, Daniel–Ø.

Hi Ferrum. When I open the PDF window to check it turns out I just cannot. Something's wrong, but not sure if it's in your side or it's the forums, or... Either way I am very curious about the score, duh. This seems to me like a small medley (well maybe not small actually) that contains a wide range of stuff going on but that seems to be permeated by this motif that you don't cease to state and use to transition to all sorts of places. It's like a spring, moving slightly upward and returning, giving birth to new passages endlessly. I must say though that the general feeling this piece gave me was not as concrete as other clear front-runners as you (front-runners to me, obv.). It was enjoyable, anyways! Maybe my shortest review today, but I cannot really find anything to point out about the piece that be worthy of a line or two more, plus I cannot access the score 😞. In summary, I did like some sections more than others, and I didn't feel it very light to be honest! Maybe when put in comparison, you're right. Many thanks for your submission, Ferrum! Kind regards, Daniel–Ø.