"But higher budget projects might want compositions that are specifically catered to their movies or shows. This is where AI is a long, long way from replacing. You would have a hard time making AI create a soundtrack which exactly depicts the emotions and timing which the director desires at any given moment. It fails to be able to take in feedback from the director to brush up, scrap, swap out and re-orchestrate every moment of music to match what's happening on screen."
About this argument, AI architecture is based on feedback and enhances itself.
reference:
https://arxiv.org/pdf/1808.03715v1.pdf
Sure algorithmically, but that is a vast oversimplification. If you are proficient in AI tech then you could sit down and essentially create what you want, but that's not that different to just composing it yourself.
A movie director in this example is not a composer any more than he is an AI architect, he's a movie director. That's why they hire other people to do those jobs. It is well known composers and directors have very close relationships with a requirement of understanding and being able to communicate on the director's goals and desires without him having any technical prowess in the field. Like a CEO, he doesn't care about the process, he just wants the outcome. Some of these relationships span decades of movies for a reason.
You can't get that kind of human understanding through AI. all you can do is plug in data. This can certainly make a mimicry of something that sounds great, but you'd be a far cry from the nuance of intent that comes with a composer/director duo
This is indeed one of my problems with the modern obsession with Hans Zimmer - he has such a grand status that he can just write whatever he feels like is suitable and the directors he works with will more than likely just be like 'oh yeah awesome, hans zimmer made my music'. Rather than 'this is good but I want the oboe to express the anxiety the protagonist is feeling as he sees her from the window, but then when he looks back, the oboe should reflect the contentedness he feels around his family'.
A composer/director duo is also an enriching place of idea exchange, too, shaping the very foundations of a movie, something you can't exactly do by plugging in data in front of a computer. It could give raw musical ideas, though (like the art images above)
I was waiting for my credits charged up, Yes, I agree with your view on those prominent composers and artists, they are no longer criticized so become spoiled to make whatever they feel like. And that's exactly why people will prefer AI-generated personalised tastes for them. Also, higher chances of appropriate expressions from the scenes and circumstances than one composer/director duo's intentions from their own experiences.
I thought AI would be the last art field to be conquered, but it wasn't at all. The music and art fields seem to be conquered first. I thought that the field of art was the realm of human creativity, but it turned out that there were patterns that humans felt moved and liked.
I feel it's similar to how AI have defeated Chess. Now we can just download an app on our phone to play chess with a computer that can easily annihilate magnus carlsen, but we don't stop playing or watching chess.
It's the competition and the idolisation of champions that's really behind our love and appreciation of the game, or Tennis etc. Once A.I starts getting a personality, however, then we're in trouble haha
We still play chess over one another with somewhat similar intelligence to judge who's better and feel the trivial pleasure of winning by chance.
The competition and the idolisation of champions are valid among humankind where they are only exposed to human-level intelligence. However, now they saw what has been unseen, another level of genius(a.k.a god) that can win over any kind of game or competition, and could solve what is seemingly impossible for them; that's AI's potential idolisation now. We don't judge god's personality. It is just the best form available for our existence and gives the best outputs(answers, insights, predictions) from our inputs. And it is the fairest kind to interpret the inputs(raw data) unlike humans are biased to existing data, as humans do care about fairness, uncertainty etc which elicits their instincts to judge unknowns and AI performs instinctively after all the complicated processes. Instincts and emotions are no more mysterious; they're just induced by the brain by signalling between neurons. In other words, they can be produced in the same way as logical thinking and reasoning. This is why it has a better understanding of how humans work than we do ourselves. AI is not just about mimicking humans but about augmenting human abilities and making them in a more efficient form.