# AI has finished Beethoven's 10th Symphony...



## Aurelian (Sep 9, 2011)

We'll see.

https://bigthink.com/high-culture/beethovens-unfinished-10th-symphony/


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

This will be fun. 

If the music is bad or mediocre, I'll just forget it. 
If the music is great, I'll have no issue praising it, and I wouldn't mind if orchestras started to play it (unlikely), but I'll never call it a Beethoven symphony. The composer is more like AI/Musicologists based on themes and the style of Beethoven.

Btw, I enjoy Cooper's reconstruction of the 10th's supposed 1st movement, although lacking in form and development.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

It's quite good (though not memorable), but sounds more like middle Beethoven than late, probably because they trained the model on all of Beethoven's symphonies. A better idea might have been to train it on only late Beethoven, and perhaps the music of Beethoven's heirs, Brahms, Schubert, even Wagner.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

The way Beethoven worked, there's no way anyone or anything could "reconstruct" something he'd barely even thought of starting. It's like a mechanical Rosemary Brown. Not even worth pretending to listen to.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

MarkW said:


> The way Beethoven worked, there's no way anyone or anything could "reconstruct" something he'd barely even thought of starting. It's like a mechanical Rosemary Brown. Not even worth pretending to listen to.


The main point of the project is probably training AI to see what they can do now, and set some precedents for future developments in the area. Reconstructing Beethoven is just (a) good marketing to get funds and publicize the work and (b) an interesting challenge to set some grounds and parameters for the project, which is important.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

I would agree it's good promotion and marketing -- but there are people who will believe it really did it. The Soviet musicologist who "reconstructed" a Tchaikovsky Seventh Symphony had more to work with, and made Columbia Records a mint, but poor Peter I. must have been turning over in his grave.


----------



## KevinJS (Sep 24, 2021)

I suspect that a message from beyond Ludwig’s grave might go something like this:

There’s a reason I died after #9. The bucket list was complete.


----------



## 1846 (Sep 1, 2021)

In any event, it does actually sound like Beethoven, though lacking in a strong memorable theme.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

MarkW said:


> I would agree it's good promotion and marketing -- but there are people who will believe it really did it. The Soviet musicologist who "reconstructed" a Tchaikovsky Seventh Symphony had more to work with, and made Columbia Records a mint, but poor Peter I. must have been turning over in his grave.


Nobody who will bother with this reconstruction will believe it's truly a "ressurrection" of the composer through AI. And even if this project got a sudden popular interest for some miraculous reason, then soon would come the cavalry to explain the blasphemy and demystify any wrong ideas. There's no reason to worry.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Livly_Station said:


> Nobody who will bother with this reconstruction will believe it's truly a "ressurrection" of the composer through AI. And even if this project got a sudden popular interest for some miraculous reason, then soon would come the cavalry to explain the blasphemy and demystify any wrong ideas. There's no reason to worry.


 .


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

It would be easy to demonstrate how silly this is: they've fed all of Beethoven into the computer - so give it a smattering of the Ninth and see what it comes up with. I guarantee it won't be the Ninth we know.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

First, it is not a Beethoven composition. Secondly, it does not contain any new ideas, just extrapolations of old, previously used, music (however, this is not how composers actually write new works). 

All I can deduce from this exercise is that their purpose was not to create meaningful and worthwhile music (that they can never do) but to advance the technology of AI. 

Why is this of interest to a Classical music forum?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

SanAntone said:


> Why is this of interest to a Classical music forum?


Because unless you're extrapolating reasons to disqualify this as classical music (although the discussion itself is already worth a thread), you'll notice that this is actually a full-fledge Symphony in the classical style, even if it's not truly a work by Beethoven. Thus, this topic appropriate for this forum.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Livly_Station said:


> Because unless you're extrapolating reasons to disqualify this as classical music (although the discussion itself is already worth a thread), you'll notice that this is actually a full-fledge Symphony in the classical style, even if it's not truly a work by Beethoven. Thus, this topic appropriate for this forum.


You are confused. A Classical symphony can only be composed by a human being. This is a science project with no artistic value.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

SanAntone said:


> You are confused. A Classical symphony can only be composed by a human being. This is a science project with no artistic value.


I disagree.

And, as I said, this discussion itself is a thing.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

AI may one day render human creativity obsolete, but that day hasn’t yet arrived.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

The title could only read "Beethoven was artificially cloned." You can only have all or none, not both. Apparently none in this case.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

Wasn't there some psychic that claimed she'd contacted either Schubert on the astral plane and he dictated the rest of his unfinished symphony for her? 

I don't remember, and I can't find any mention of it by Googling . . .


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Livly_Station said:


> I disagree.
> 
> And, as I said, this discussion itself is a thing.


Well, this discussion is trivial. If you place any importance on AI composing music, then you are very confused. You are missing the point of why music exists and why it is important. The only purpose of music is for human expression. If that ingredient is missing then the "music" does not exist.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Red Terror said:


> AI may one day render human creativity obsolete, but that day hasn't yet arrived.


You are also confused. Human creativity will never be obsolete, it is the only kind that matters.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> AI may one day render human creativity obsolete, but that day hasn't yet arrived.


Still, this is the first real attempt at this, where will this technology be in 5, 10, 50, 100 years? It's a new frontier.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

MarkW said:


> The way Beethoven worked, there's no way anyone or anything could "reconstruct" something he'd barely even thought of starting. It's like a mechanical Rosemary Brown. Not even worth pretending to listen to.


The sample they have in the article is impressive...for an AI.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

ORigel said:


> The sample they have in the article is impressive...for an AI.


I wasn't impressed. I wonder if this is a generational thing.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

SanAntone said:


> You are confused. A Classical symphony can only be composed by a human being. This is a science project with no artistic value.


This AI did compose two movements of a Beethoven pastiche symphony. It is probably a poor symphony, but a symphony nonetheless.


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

pianozach said:


> Wasn't there some psychic that claimed she'd contacted either Schubert on the astral plane and he dictated the rest of his unfinished symphony for her?
> 
> I don't remember, and I can't find any mention of it by Googling . . .


A human would have a better chance of "completing" Schubert's Unfinished than an AI.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

SanAntone said:


> I wasn't impressed. I wonder if this is a generational thing.


We await with bated breath the arrival of your much superior AI algorithm. Godspeed.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

pianozach said:


> Wasn't there some psychic that claimed she'd contacted either Schubert on the astral plane and he dictated the rest of his unfinished symphony for her?
> 
> I don't remember, and I can't find any mention of it by Googling . . .


I think you may be referring to Rosemary Brown (mentioned above in post #4 by MarkW), a woman who claimed to communicate with various dead composers (Liszt, Chopin, Mozart, Bach and many others) who dictated to her their new compositions.

She wrote three books: "Unfinished Symphonies", Immortals at My Elbow" and "Look Beyond Today".

Regarding Schubert's Eighth Brown recalled: "He [Schubert] told me he had decided to leave it as it was. He left it as a mystery and in a way it was more romantic as unfinished."

She also created paintings supposedly under the guidance of Vincent van Gogh, Samuel Palmer, William Blake and JMW Turner. These dead masters guided her hands to produce pastiches of their styles.

Here is a link to the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosemary_Brown_(spiritualist)

And a link to an article in The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2019/dec/05/rosemary-brown-liszt-beethoven-pianist


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

SanAntone said:


> I wasn't impressed. I wonder if this is a generational thing.


My expectations are low. That excerpt is better than AI Emmy's "Beethoven's Tenth Symphony," an excerpt of which is availiable on Youtube:


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Maybe AIs will be able to equal the great composers if we develop General AIs with humanlike intelligence. The AIs we have now are basically idiot savants.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

ORigel said:


> My expectations are low. That excerpt is better than AI Emmy's "Beethoven's Tenth Symphony," an excerpt of which is availiable on Youtube:


The theme reminds me of the 2nd movement of the 5th symphony.


----------



## KevinJS (Sep 24, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> You are confused. A Classical symphony can only be composed by a human being. This is a science project with no artistic value.


The piece could actually have much artistic value. Now, whether the "composer" could appreciate that value is another thing entirely. I could probably listen to the piece and derive some pleasure from the experience. Is it a Beethoven symphony? Of course not. Does it have any musical merit? It has the potential, regardless of the method of composition. It's certainly going to sound better than 99% of the "compositions" of the last 20-50 years.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Hey all! I can't _wait_ for the Eleventh Symphony.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

ORigel said:


> Maybe AIs will be able to equal the great composers if we develop General AIs with humanlike intelligence. The AIs we have now are basically idiot savants.


Yes, but I don't know if the intelligence needs to be more "humanlike", but rather just be proggramed to be more _general_ instead of only tackling one specific task. The thing about art is that a lot of it works through metaphors, so AIs should learn to transpose a non-musical idea into a musical idea to make more meaningful art, so it needs to understand at least two different things.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)

Couchie said:


> Still, this is the first real attempt at this, where will this technology be in 5, 10, 50, 100 years? It's a new frontier.


Don't know Couchie, but I have a feeling you and I won't be around when ***** hits the fan. BTW, impressive work on the website.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

There are always Beethoven's lesser-known works or contemporaries you can spend time on (instead of that crap).







hammeredklavier said:


> Friedrich Witt (November 8, 1770 -- January 3, 1836) was a German composer and cellist. He is perhaps best known as the likely author of a Symphony in C major known as the Jena Symphony, once attributed to Ludwig van Beethoven.


----------



## Haydn70 (Jan 8, 2017)

hammeredklavier said:


> There are always Beethoven's lesser-known works or contemporaries you can spend time on (instead of that crap).


Even better, works by Beethoven's student, Ferdinand Ries:











And how about that short-short-short-long motive in his fifth symphony:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Orchestration is the easiest element of music to duplicate, so the sample makes a Beethoven-like sound. What it doesn't sound like is a Beethoven composition. If this were turned in by a student as a work in the style of Beethoven, I'd grade it "D."

I'm sure the participants in this project had fun. I had fun too, thinking over and over, "Beethoven wouldn't have done that." In fact, had Ferdinand Ries submitted this to his teacher he would have had to duck as a plate of schnitzel and sauerkraut flew past his head.


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

A hallmark of Beethoven was that he was always experimenting - hence there was little natural-seeming "progression" between one piece (or group of pieces) and the next (except over a very long time frame). I doubt if you could program an AI to do that at this time.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Orchestration is the easiest element of music to duplicate, so the sample makes a Beethoven-like sound. What it doesn't sound like is a Beethoven composition. If this were turned in by a student as a work in the style of Beethoven, I'd grade it "D."
> 
> I'm sure the participants in this project had fun. I had fun too, thinking over and over, "Beethoven wouldn't have done that." In fact, had Ferdinand Ries submitted this to his teacher he would have had to duck as a plate of Schnitzel and sauerkraut flew past his head.


I do think many ideas sounded like Beethoven, although some others were a little bit too cartoonish, and the overall sense of progression was off.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

SONNET CLV said:


> Hey all! I can't _wait_ for the Eleventh Symphony.


And 1,000+ more. This is ridiculous.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Just wait until there's a quantum computing AI. It's only a matter of time before composers will have to get a proper job - but not yet...


----------



## MarkW (Feb 16, 2015)

Okay, I listened to the excerpt in the article. To me, it had more the pseudo-Beethovenish sound of the Schumann Fourth, and was certainly more thematically undistinguished than anything Beethoven would have sent a publisher as a major work. But nice try.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

mikeh375 said:


> Just wait until there's a quantum computing AI. It's only a matter of time before composers will have to get a proper job - but not yet...


You mean it's a matter of time until nobody will have a job.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

As an AI experiment it has merit, but it doesn't sound like Beethoven. It's formally incoherent. Doesn't go anywhere. A collection of disconnected gestures. It sounds like what a nine year old clone of Mendelssohn might have written if that clone had attention deficit disorder and less talent than the historical figure.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Livly_Station said:


> You mean it's a matter of time until nobody will have a job.


lol. There is already a problem brewing in media composing which has seen over the last couple of decades, a decline in opportunity for composers - in fact tbh the decline started with the advent of the DAW. There are already inroads being made into the industry with AI composing which will eventually erode even further, any chance of making a living from composing commissioned music. This in an industry already totally drowning in DAW composers and not being helped by duplicitous, unscrupulous producers.
Gloomy I know, but not far from the truth of it.


----------



## JackRance (Sep 13, 2021)

Sorry but I don't understand the reason to do this.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

An interesting exercise in my opinion, but I think that the result is too lightweight and tame to be Beethoven, even early Beethoven. It also lacks a more vivid and solid theme as well. To me, it sounds more as a pastiche by one of the composer's contemporaries like Rossini or Spohr than Beethoven, even despite the presence of the short-short-short-long motif that by way was already used elsewhere before the composer's fifth symphony, for example in Mozart's piano concerto no. 25.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

As far as I am concerned AI music is artificial and I have no desire to listen to it any more than the ghost piano music that was computer generated that I had a disk of an promptly got rid of it.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

I have not listened to this but I heard the obscure "completion" by some musicologist Cooper? 30 years ago when it came out as a curiosity (I think there were even two recordings, Wyn Morris and Walter Weller). It was pretty bad and didn't sound like Beethoven at all.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

mikeh375 said:


> Just wait until there's a quantum computing AI. It's only a matter of time before composers will have to get a proper job - but not yet...





Livly_Station said:


> You mean it's a matter of time until nobody will have a job.


No. I think he means, or is implying, that a composer's job is an_ improper_ job.

And I suspect that if the time comes that no one has an improper job, that's a good thing. No?


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Livly_Station said:


> I do think many ideas sounded like Beethoven, although some others were a little bit too cartoonish, and *the overall sense of progression was off.*


And the "overall sense of progression" is above all what makes Beethoven Beethoven.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

Red Terror said:


> Don't know Couchie, but I have a feeling you and I won't be around when ***** hits the fan. BTW, impressive work on the website.


Thank you! I'm going to actually look into working in some AI to generate playlists and so forth.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

I think they should train the AI to compose Vivaldi concertos, and see if people can pick out which is the AI and which is an authentic Vivaldi concerto. :devil:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Couchie said:


> I think they should train the AI to compose Vivaldi concertos, and see if people can pick out which is the AI and which is an authentic Vivaldi concerto. :devil:


A much more feasible project than a Beethoven symphony. Besides, who hasn't lain on his deathbed regretting that there weren't more Vivaldi concertos for soprano recorder to fill out the long days and years of retirement?


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

SanAntone said:


> Well, this discussion is trivial. If you place any importance on AI composing music, then you are very confused. You are missing the point of why music exists and why it is important. The only purpose of music is for human expression. If that ingredient is missing then the "music" does not exist.


I thought one of the things that Cage taught was that music was all around us, humanly expressed or not.


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

dissident said:


> I thought one of the things that Cage taught was that music was all around us, humanly expressed or not.


Cage was not a teacher, but a huckster, and some of us are not buying what he is selling.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

Couchie said:


> Cage was not a teacher, but a huckster, and some of us are not buying what he is selling.


That's not what SanAntone says.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Couchie said:


> Cage was not a teacher, but a huckster, and some of us are not buying what he is selling.


I guess anyone you learn anything from gets to be called a teacher. But I didn't need Cage to teach me how to hear the music of the wind, and I knew enough to put "music" in quotes.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> And the "overall sense of progression" is above all what makes Beethoven Beethoven.


I agree.

But I still think that the AI had some witty ideas that mimicked Beethoven's style rather well.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Couchie said:


> some of us are not buying what he is selling.


You mean something like this actually has a _price tag_ on it?:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> You mean something like this actually has a _price tag_ on it?:


My favorite part is "the work may...last any length of time." Obviously, that's why it's titled _4'33._"


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Woodduck said:


> My favorite part is "the work may...last any length of time." Obviously, that's why it's titled _4'33._"


That score is from the revised version from 1961 in which Cage made the change in duration and number of instruments.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Couchie said:


> I think they should train the AI to compose Vivaldi concertos, and see if people can pick out which is the AI and which is an authentic Vivaldi concerto. :devil:





Woodduck said:


> Besides, who hasn't lain on his deathbed regretting that there weren't more Vivaldi concertos for soprano recorder to fill out the long days and years of retirement?


Pardon, but I think that you are underestimating Vivaldi. Perhaps his ordinary concerti from early in his career are not so hard to emulate, but there's a kind of élan in his best ones that, I believe, would be difficult for an AI to recreate. Besides, rhythmically Vivaldi is one of the most interesting composers of the Baroque era in my opinion, together with Lully and Rameau, and some of his concertos play some unique "rhythmic tricks" that make me want to move every time I listen to them (I'm thinking for example in some moments in the first movement of the piece in the video below). I believe that these too would be a challenge for the AI to do.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> That score is from the revised version from 1961 in which Cage made the change in duration and number of instruments.


He could have put in more effort in the revision, like


hammeredklavier said:


> The work pales (in terms of "extra-musical" complexities) in comparison with Schulhoff's In Futurum, which predates Cage's 4'33" by 33 years
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Xisten267 said:


> I believe that these too would be a challenge for the AI to do.


I don't think AI can write this - Largo e spiccato 3:42


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

Xisten267 said:


> Pardon, but I think that you are underestimating Vivaldi. Perhaps his ordinary concerti from early in his career are not so hard to emulate, but there's a kind of élan in his best ones that, I believe, would be difficult for an AI to recreate.


I'd say that the achievement of Vivaldi was not concerti 101-500 but the first few dozen that set the frame/style for extrovert virtuoso solo concerti. An impressive feature would be to feed an AI with Italian music of the 1650-1700, such as Stradella, Corelli, Torelli, earliest Albinoni etc. and then to get out how Vivaldi wrote in 1711. Not generating exemplar #600 of an established style with hundreds of samples to learn from.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

MarkW said:


> A hallmark of Beethoven was that he was always experimenting - hence there was little natural-seeming "progression" between one piece (or group of pieces) and the next (except over a very long time frame). I doubt if you could program an AI to do that at this time.


This is a good point. Arguably, what makes Beethoven Beethoven is the degree to which he himself didn't sound like Beethoven from one work to the next, meaning that successive works in a genre often break any mold established by their predecessors, that none could have been predicted or anticipated on the basis of past work. Line up all of the piano sonatas from the Op. 27s to the last (excluding the "sonatinas"), for example, and each is a significant departure from all of the others. When defying expectations is a central stylistic trait, AIs which necessarily rely on simplistic extrapolation from existing works are at a disadvantage.

The other obvious problem for AIs is that a central feature of Beethoven's mature style is its organization into large paragraphs and dramatic units whose unity is beyond the scope of mechanistic algorithms.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

EdwardBast said:


> The other obvious problem for AIs is that a central feature of Beethoven's mature style is its organization into large paragraphs and dramatic units whose unity is beyond the scope of mechanistic algorithms.


This seems to me the essential difficulty. Understanding the "logic" of musical structures - what makes a composition coherent and meaningful - is often difficult or impossible even for human beings, who bring the full range of perceptual, rational and emotional faculties to bear on the task. This is true for the composer as well as the listener; the fundamental creative process is intuitive, much of what emerges is not, and need never be, fully analyzed on a conscious level, and attempts to explain why a piece of music "works" are helpful only to a point. What goes on in a composer's subconscious during the act of creation is extremely complex, vanishingly subtle, and fugitive, and the more original a work is the more impossible it is to explain the how and why of it. The very idea that AI could duplicate this process or produce significant new music comparable to what human beings can create is certainly beyond my imagination. But maybe that's my failing.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Woodduck said:


> *This seems to me the essential difficulty. Understanding the "logic" of musical structures - what makes a composition coherent and meaningful - is often difficult or impossible even for human beings*, who bring the full range of perceptual, rational and emotional faculties to bear on the task. This is true for the composer as well as the listener; the fundamental creative process is intuitive, much of what emerges is not, and need never be, fully analyzed on a conscious level, and attempts to explain why a piece of music "works" are helpful only to a point. What goes on in a composer's subconscious during the act of creation is extremely complex, vanishingly subtle, and fugitive, and the more original a work is the more impossible it is to explain the how and why of it. The very idea that AI could duplicate this process or produce significant new music comparable to what human beings can create is certainly beyond my imagination. But maybe that's my failing.


I agree. That is the big problem. Scholars and critics have been spilling ink on this for two centuries and there is little consensus on what makes Beethoven's mature works work. That is a toxic environment for algorithms.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> This seems to me the essential difficulty. Understanding the "logic" of musical structures - what makes a composition coherent and meaningful - is often difficult or impossible even for human beings, who bring the full range of perceptual, rational and emotional faculties to bear on the task. This is true for the composer as well as the listener; the fundamental creative process is intuitive, much of what emerges is not, and need never be, fully analyzed on a conscious level, and attempts to explain why a piece of music "works" are helpful only to a point. What goes on in a composer's subconscious during the act of creation is extremely complex, vanishingly subtle, and fugitive, and the more original a work is the more impossible it is to explain the how and why of it. The very idea that AI could duplicate this process or produce significant new music comparable to what human beings can create is certainly beyond my imagination. But maybe that's my failing.


Just to give some food for thought, all you're stating here is agreeable but somewhat arbitrary, building from the premise that since we personally can't fully grasp the inner mechanisms of a particular style of music, then it can't be done. That's fine, but maybe it's just our failing, as you said. At the end of the day, it's not impossible that a super intelligent AI with a powerful hardware may understand the building blocks of that style and replicate its formulas, ideas and structures in a way that you wouldn't expect, with finesse and wisdom, and even sounding passionate despite, supposedly, the creative process being "cerebral" instead of "emotional" (more of that at the end of my post).

Truth is that a lot of the human creative process is actually just learning/studying patterns and tropes, mastering those, and then replicating them with a slightly new organization in order to be "new" (not plagiarism) -- and we still call that Art. Some of those techniques are broader and simpler, but some are actually very subtle and crafty, but still patterns possible to learn. In many ways, the 'human way' is not so different from what an AI does it, and, believe me, they can be quite creative and have their own personality even if this sounds like science fiction.

Sometimes, what makes a great artist is the ability to fusion different influences and styles through a minute and deliberate process in order to create his own artistic voice. Well, that's not beyond an AI, in theory and practice. Instead of making the AI learn only Bach or only Beethoven, make it learn a bunch of different artists -- including contemporary classical and pop music --, and then let it freely compose music, choosing from whatever techniques it wants from all these influences. What will come out of it? Maybe a monstrosity (but still art), or maybe something even interesting to human ears and totally original.

Another aspect of this discussion is that we romanticize the creative process because a great artist may try to express personal feelings through pure music, brilliantly finding notes and harmonies that translate into non-musical ideas, all of that following a dramatic narrative (programatic or not) to shape the structure. There's truth to this notion, which is something that may be beyond an AI (or not) considering they're not organic life, and they don't experience reality like humans do -- that said, they're learning from us, which is relevant.

However, the "hermeneutics of art" is a little bit more complicated, since (a) the listener is free to take away from the music his own abstract feelings that maybe were not intentional by the artist, (b) the meaning is always internal to the art regardless of external factors, so we can always try to make sense of it as long as our interpretation is loosely coherent with the object. And since there's this independence, any music can convey emotion and ideas even when they're not intended -- _and most likely *any* musical combination will necessarily generate an emotional reaction on the listener, posite or negative, strong or soft_.

Besides, the more we let an AI self-develop and experience the world (especially through self-teaching), the more it'll probably create its own thoughts and ideas about all things, and all of these ideas can be food for its creative process, making metaphorical art just like humans do. We just can't predict if it'll be relatable.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

SanAntone said:


> That score is from the revised version from 1961 in which Cage made the change in duration and number of instruments.


Those edits really changed the entire complexion of the work. It sounded totally different in the unrevised version! Maybe it will eventually be like Bruckner symphonies, where performers pick and choose bits and pieces of each edition to conceive their own distinct artistic vision of how the piece should unfold.


----------



## BachIsBest (Feb 17, 2018)

Woodduck said:


> This seems to me the essential difficulty. Understanding the "logic" of musical structures - what makes a composition coherent and meaningful - is often difficult or impossible even for human beings, who bring the full range of perceptual, rational and emotional faculties to bear on the task. This is true for the composer as well as the listener; the fundamental creative process is intuitive, much of what emerges is not, and need never be, fully analyzed on a conscious level, and attempts to explain why a piece of music "works" are helpful only to a point. What goes on in a composer's subconscious during the act of creation is extremely complex, vanishingly subtle, and fugitive, and the more original a work is the more impossible it is to explain the how and why of it. The very idea that AI could duplicate this process or produce significant new music comparable to what human beings can create is certainly beyond my imagination. But maybe that's my failing.


Yes, this is a huge challenge in AI, but perhaps not quite in the way you think. With machine learning algorithms we have essentially learned to make computers think intuitively rather than precisely which is a huge step forward. Rather than figure out exactly what's going on, we can tell computers to find a really good approximation to what's going on, which is what humans do in virtually all tasks. Think, for example, of catching a baseball; you don't literally solve the physics of the ball flying through the air and put your hand exactly where the ball will be, but, rather, use your previous experience of balls flying through the air to approximate with a high degree of accuracy where the ball will fly. This is what we can now tell computers to do.

When we want to get an AI to compose music in the style of Beethoven, it is taught based on the previous works of Beethoven and potentially other composers to get a larger sample size. In a basic setting, the computer might look at the previous bar of music and determine something that Beethoven might have written as the next bar. Obviously, this would be incoherent as the AI loses track of what happened a mere bar ago. If you want the AI to take into account more bars of music, the amount of memory this takes up on your computer will increase exponentially to the point where taking into account a large number of bars quickly becomes unfeasible.

Computing power is increasing, but it is not increasing nearly fast enough to except any sort of resolution of this issue, so people who write AI music algorithms will have to come up with other ways to circumvent this problem. However, this main issue is why, for example, most AI produced recipes, books, or music, make a lot of sense for a couple seconds and then quickly start to feel like something is off.

Ultimately though, whether or not AI can replicate human creative endeavors probably depends on two main philosophical questions:
-Is there a cap on the possible computing power available (given finite amount of resources) and where this cap is?
-Is human thought computable (reproducible by an algorithm which terminates in a finite amount of time) or can be approximated by computable algorithms?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Xisten267 said:


> some of his concertos play some unique "rhythmic tricks" that make me want to move every time I listen to them


Actually, come to think of it, you have a good point. This is an area even Emanuel Bach isn't so exceptional at. Particularly his slow movements that are 8 minutes long and go on like


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Couchie said:


> I think they should train the AI to compose Vivaldi concertos, and see if people can pick out which is the AI and which is an authentic Vivaldi concerto. :devil:


An AI, Emmy, did compose a Vivaldi type piece.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Wasn't it supposed to be release on October 9? Where is it?


----------



## ORigel (May 7, 2020)

Xisten267 said:


> Pardon, but I think that you are underestimating Vivaldi. Perhaps his ordinary concerti from early in his career are not so hard to emulate, but there's a kind of élan in his best ones that, I believe, would be difficult for an AI to recreate. Besides, rhythmically Vivaldi is one of the most interesting composers of the Baroque era in my opinion, together with Lully and Rameau, and some of his concertos play some unique "rhythmic tricks" that make me want to move every time I listen to them (I'm thinking for example in some moments in the first movement of the piece in the video below). I believe that these too would be a challenge for the AI to do.


An AI has composed works in the style of Vivaldi. They're not very impressive.


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

mikeh375 said:


> lol. There is already a problem brewing in media composing which has seen over the last couple of decades, a decline in opportunity for composers - in fact tbh the decline started with the advent of the DAW. There are already inroads being made into the industry with AI composing which will eventually erode even further, any chance of making a living from composing commissioned music. This in an industry already totally drowning in DAW composers and not being helped by duplicitous, unscrupulous producers.
> Gloomy I know, but not far from the truth of it.


In other words, expect even more cheezier soundtracks


----------



## Vasks (Dec 9, 2013)

Well, I gave it one minute of listening. 

Really bad. 

Not even close to the way Beethoven composed.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

It's also questionable how much "human intervention" went into making it; how much a human composer fixed things in the AI's finished product to make it sound good.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Vasks said:


> In other words, expect even more cheezier soundtracks


...or perhaps better?..


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Unlike most others, I didn't think the pastiche was all that bad. Thought EdwardBast put it best:



EdwardBast said:


> It's formally incoherent. Doesn't go anywhere. A collection of disconnected gestures.


To play the Devil's Advocate (can't emphasize that enough): It's easy to say the piece _doesn't sound like Beethoven_. If so, then it should be easy to pick out which parts are Beethoven's sketches and which parts aren't. I'd be interested to test whether any listener on this forum could successfully do it. That doesn't make the pastiche a success or necessarily good, but it would make for an interesting experiment. I'm willing to bet that some (maybe all?) who are flatly dismissing this piece as un-Beethovenian would unwittingly pick out those portions that are based on Beethoven's sketches and uphold the "AI fabrications" as the real Beethoven.

All that said, the AI's success or failure can't be judged by this completion. The software needs to be validated. They should have fed the AI sketches from a completed work (sketches roughly comparable to those left for the 10th). That's the only way to really get a sense for how far off the 10ths completion might be.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

MarkW said:


> A hallmark of Beethoven was that he was always experimenting - hence there was little natural-seeming "progression" between one piece (or group of pieces) and the next (except over a very long time frame). *I doubt if you could program an AI to do that at this time*.


I'll bet you _could_: That's the thing about true AI - in it's perfected form it LEARNS, and can adapt and evolve. That's why there is so much compelling science fiction written about out-of-control robots taking attempting to take over the world and exterminate mankind.

I think it won't be long before AI could write a symphony that is virtually indistinguishable from a human-written one.

But, yes, it's sort of mind boggling to imagine some AI composer actually evolving enough that it could extrapolate what Beethoven's 10th, 11th, 12th, 20th or 50th symphonies would sound like had he himself lived long enough, and continued to evolve musically.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

It is too easy to bash this effort as so many have done, and not just on this thread, but this endeavor should be applauded.
Hopefully, technology for this field will continue to advance and musical AI renderings will improve and such activity will be more convincing to us in the future. 
From the snippets that were available, {Magenta, responsible for carrying this event live, somewhat fumbled on their technical and/or worldwide promise.} for my part, it was enjoyable and found it to be Beethovian.
It would appear there was too much exertion to put in all of Ludwig's motifs, almost forcibly so, and suspect this was due to human intervention, as has been opined in this thread.
It may have been truer to what Louis would have composed if directors had resisted putting their hands in the recipe.
If you have heard the AI Schubert performance, you may agree that was more representative of what Schubert would have done, but it should be pointed out that Schubert left technicians more to work with.
Not true for this effort, there simply wasn't that much notation to compile to begin with.
Finally, it seems Mr. Cooper's toils on LVB's 10th are more faithful to what Beethoven would have done.
And bottom line, notwithstanding the esoteric foibles, have purchased this CD.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Again... the symphony was supposed to be performed on October 9, but I can't find any news about it


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Michael122 said:


> If you have heard the AI Schubert performance, you may agree that was more representative of what Schubert would have done, but it should be pointed out that Schubert left technicians more to work with.


But the technicians, in this case, didn't use what Schubert left behind, according to a comment at the Youtube recording of the Schubert:

"ACTUALLY AI DID NOT COMPOSE THIS ON IT'S OWN . The AI actually only composed a melody that was latter turned into a full score by a human composer. Huawei hired composer Lucas Cantor to arrange an orchestral score based on a "melody" the AI wrote . The following is from Huawei own press release. "This wouldn't have been possible without pairing the technological innovation of Huawei's AI with human expertise, so Emmy award-winning composer Lucas Cantor was brought onboard to arrange an orchestral score based on the melody that the Mate 20 Pro smartphone composed to compete the symphony and perform it live."

The third movement isn't bad, but the final movement is horrendous, a *complete* disaster, *if* the object was to compose something in the style of Schubert.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

There exist reviews of the live performance. I read just one today anyway. The author noted a deficiency of 'genius surprise' in the work. 

I think the ai programmers were too conservative in educating the virtual Beethoven. They say this was focused on Beethoven's published works and of his teachers. Innovation, however, would be sourced from his relational future ... like from Czerny his student and beyond. And then, the ai's greatest perceived creativity is randomness. Perhaps that is too scary. The avatar of the composer may exist yet is not.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

Well, there never was a 10th Symphony and is not. Seems available on netflix. AI can make its own thing. I donut care.


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

I am sure this whole idea of AI finishing a symphony for the master would throw him into a fit of rage. I refuse to listen to even one note of it!


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

It didn't take much to do that, apparently.


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

I want to hear it. Is there a recording?

Could an AI also write Bruckners 10th symphony? Please? Maybe in 20 years?


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

You can hear snippets of the October 9th performance in Bonn by searching on "Beethoven ai 10th" and making appropriate selections.
The entire thing is available on CD from Amazon, $16, search on "Beethoven X - The AI Project".


----------



## Tikoo Tuba (Oct 15, 2018)

SixFootScowl said:


> I am sure this whole idea of AI finishing a symphony for the master would throw him into a fit of rage. I refuse to listen to even one note of it!


I do not imagine a dead guy's feeling. I know. And this is evident. One does not die in rage. Nor will I listen to one note of it, the AI proposition. It should admit its programmers originality which ain't much.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Michael122 said:


> You can hear snippets of the October 9th performance in Bonn by searching on "Beethoven ai 10th" and making appropriate selections.
> The entire thing is available on CD from Amazon, $16, search on "Beethoven X - The AI Project".


CD? Are we in 1997?


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Livly_Station said:


> CD? Are we in 1997?


 I am. Sorry. I still buy CDs. For the sound.,


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

vtpoet said:


> I am. Sorry. I still buy CDs. For the sound.,


Hey yes. and I still buy CDs because I just like the physical product. There is something special about having a physical CD set and booklet to fondle while listening and or to look pretty on the shelf!


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

vtpoet said:


> I am. Sorry. I still buy CDs. For the sound.,


They can sell CDs if they want, but not having a realease for stream in absolutely anachronistic.

Ironically, the music was composed by AI, so you'd think the project is forward-thinking and in tune with the state of technology.

Btw, CDs are not particularly great for sound quality, although usually better than streaming services, but barely noticeable.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

I've listened to the "reconstruction" of the first movement on YT and I'm not that impressed. So I don't care to listen to any more of it, human or otherwise. :lol:


vtpoet said:


> I am. Sorry. I still buy CDs. For the sound.,


So do I, but mainly because (as with books) I like physical media that I can actually see and hold as opposed to some sterile something floating in the ether somewhere.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Here:


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Livly_Station said:


> Btw, CDs are not particularly great for sound quality, although usually better than streaming services, but barely noticeable.


Yeah. We're just gonna have to disagree on that count. Strongly. But like SixFootScowl I also like the physical object and the booklets. Gollum.... my _preciouses!_


----------



## Aries (Nov 29, 2012)

The result regarding the 3rd and 4th movement isn't that good imo. I assume AI is not good enough yet and maybe its necessary to feed it with more information (like what humans actually like about fed pieces of music).

But it is an interessting question: What can be expected from AI in the future. I think AI will be capable of creating musical motifs, themes and polyphonic combinations in the style of specific composers. Combing the right themes together for a larger pieces, seems more difficult. Human composers will do it better for a long time probably. And for the structure of a work, the hand of a human will be also very useful.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

vtpoet said:


> Yeah. We're just gonna have to disagree on that count.


No need to disagree. CDs are compressed at 44.1 kHz of sample rate, which captures all audible sonic frequencies (up to 20,000 Hz), but causes distortion due to the elimination of the higher overtones which are part of the music. Also, the dynamic range of a CD is not the best considering it's recorded at 16 bit-depth instead of the superior 24 bit. Besides that, you'll need a device to read the CD, which can also distort the music in many different ways beyond the quality of the monitors.

All in all, CD still offers enough for a perfectly good music experience, but you can find much better audio files compressed at 96 kHz or above, and 24 bit-depth. That's the great stuff!

What about streaming? It can have high audio fidelity if it wants, since it can use any type of audio file, including lossless. That said, most services use MP3 or similar formats, which are technically worse than a CD, but it's really difficult to notice when the MP3 is well compressed, with a high bit rate, and done from a high quality audio file. In case you're wondering, what an MP3 does to reduce the size of the file is to omit things that humans can't hear anyway (according to psychoacoustic), which also generates a little bit of distortion and loss of fidelity... but we already accepted that with CDs, right?


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Aries said:


> The result regarding the 3rd and 4th movement isn't that good imo. I assume AI is not good enough yet and maybe its necessary to feed it with more information (like what humans actually like about fed pieces of music).


I agree that the composition is not very good (although awesome considering the challenge), but I think I enjoyed the 4th movement the most.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

Livly_Station said:


> Here:


Yeah, well...what's with the organ in the 4th movement? And it seems that I hear snippets of the 5th symphony in there. It's all over the place...a chorale-like something with loud chords after each line, another section that sounds like Rossini...at around the 17:00 mark it even sounds like some John Williams thrown in there :lol:


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

dissident said:


> Yeah, well...what's with the organ in the 4th movement? And it seems that I hear snippets of the 5th symphony in there. It's all over the place...a chorale-like something with loud chords after each line, another section that sounds like Rossini...at around the 17:00 mark it even sounds like some John Williams thrown in there :lol:


The organ really came out of nowhere, LOL, but that was a fun surprise to me, especially because Saint-Saëns' Organ Symphony is one of my favorites. I wonder why it's there though.

As for the other references you're mentioning, I should add that the AI was not fed the music of these composers, so it's an accident if it sounds like them... but I don't see it. Or maybe the AI is so genius that it would invent the music of all composers on its own! (just kidding)


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Livly_Station said:


> No need to disagree. CDs are compressed at 44.1 kHz of sample rate, which captures all audible sonic frequencies (up to 20,000 Hz), but causes distortion due to the elimination of the higher overtones which are part of the music. Also, the dynamic range of a CD is not the best considering it's recorded at 16 bit-depth instead of the superior 24 bit. Besides that, you'll need a device to read the CD, which can also distort the music in many different ways beyond the quality of the monitors.
> 
> All in all, CD still offers enough for a perfectly good music experience, but you can find much better audio files compressed at 96 kHz or above, and 24 bit-depth. That's the great stuff!
> 
> What about streaming? It can have high audio fidelity if it wants, since it can use any type of audio file, including lossless. That said, most services use MP3 or similar formats, which are technically worse than a CD, but it's really difficult to notice when the MP3 is well compressed, with a high bit rate, and done from a high quality audio file. In case you're wondering, what an MP3 does to reduce the size of the file is to omit things that humans can't hear anyway (according to psychoacoustic), which also generates a little bit of distortion and loss of fidelity... but we already accepted that with CDs, right?


None if what you're writing is new to me.  The simple fact is that no streaming service with a library comparable to Spotify, Amazon or my own CD collection is going to compare to my CD collection in audio quality. So you can eliminate streaming.

But, you object, one can download lossless FLAC from Prestomusic! (But many albums are still only available as MP3s and Amazon doesn't offer FLAC at all). But let's say you get some, on what equipment are you going to play those FLAC files? What is going to convert those FLAC files (or pick your lossless audio) to audio and will the equipment compare to a high end CD player. Highly unlikely without exorbitant expense.

//All in all, CD still offers enough for a perfectly good music experience, but you can find much better audio files compressed at 96 kHz or above, and 24 bit-depth. That's the great stuff!//

Except that in blind tests no one could tell the difference between 16 and 24:

https://archimago.blogspot.com/2014/06/24-bit-vs-16-bit-audio-test-part-ii.html

Because differentiating that difference, as it is explained at other sites, is beyond the capability of the human ear. So. That, as a practical matter, means that if you want the widest selection of music with the best audio quality, you're going to have to buy CDs.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Livly_Station said:


> Here:


The scherzo is at least reminiscent of Beethoven from time to time, though taken as a whole it sounds like something a clever composition student might offer, tongue in cheek, under the title "Beethoven and Friends: A Potpourri."

The finale is utterly baffling in every way, sounding like nothing anyone would compose, ever (possibly excepting Peter Schickele, who might have called it "Disemboweled Movement with Organ Transplant"). The little quotation/parody of the adagio of Beethoven's "Pathetique" piano sonata at 15:04 made me laugh. The whole movement leaves me with the weird feeling that I've just attended a university graduation ceremony where the band played "Gaudeamus Igitur" for thirteen minutes straight.


----------



## 59540 (May 16, 2021)

Well the thing is, that 4th movement is labeled "rondo" but...it doesn't seem to be one. It just goes from one thing to another. It just doesn't sound like Beethoven at all to me. Now if AI made this from scratch, awesome...but AI music wouldn't be for me.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

dissident said:


> Well the thing is, that 4th movement is labeled "rondo" but...it doesn't seem to be one. It just goes from one thing to another.


That's true. I wonder why it was called a Rondo. I don't know if it's the AI who names it, or the musicologists.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

vtpoet said:


> None if what you're writing is new to me. The simple fact is that no streaming service with a library comparable to Spotify, Amazon or my own CD collection is going to compare to my CD collection in audio quality. So you can eliminate streaming.


That's fine to me. I have nothing against that. I also look for better audio files whenever it's possible, but I also don't exclude streaming from my life because it's a useful service, and I think the the audio quality is not that meaningfully different. So the fact that, apparently, the recording of this AI 10th would be available only for CD was bizarre to me.



> But, you object, one can download lossless FLAC from Prestomusic! (But many albums are still only available as MP3s and Amazon doesn't offer FLAC at all). But let's say you get some, on what equipment are you going to play those FLAC files? What is going to convert those FLAC files (or pick your lossless audio) to audio and will the equipment compare to a high end CD player. Highly unlikely without exorbitant expense.


That's a tricky question. The expense of a high end CD player is not so different from the expense of setting up a good equipament to listen to music at the computer, and usually you can connect your computer to the CD player through a cable.

For me, a good pair of headphones or monitors is already enough for my lossless or MP3 files, but it's in my buy-list to get an 'audio interface' to maximize the sound fidelity and do some music production at home.



> Except that in blind tests no one could tell the difference between 16 and 24:
> 
> https://archimago.blogspot.com/2014/06/24-bit-vs-16-bit-audio-test-part-ii.html
> 
> Because differentiating that difference, as it is explained at other sites, is beyond the capability of the human ear. So. That, as a practical matter, means that if you want the widest selection of music with the best audio quality, you're going to have to buy CDs.


That's very interesting, but I didn't understand the research. As far as I know, the difference between 16 and 24 bit-depth is not about sound quality, but rather dynamic range, meaning that with 24 bit-depth you can mix a larger loudness range from your quietest sound to the loudest in decibels. And this difference is perceptible to the human ear (if you don't get deaf), but also... useless, because it doesn't really happen much in music at all.

So I agree with you that we don't really need 24 bit... but it _is_ the most faithful, if that's the goal we're aiming, not to forget the sample rate too. Personally, that's not my goal since I'm mostly fine even with streaming.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Livly_Station said:


> That's true. I wonder why it was called a Rondo. I don't know if it's the AI who names it, or the musicologists.


The programmer, who has the mindset to compose stuff like


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

Woodduck said:


> The finale is utterly baffling in every way, sounding like nothing anyone would compose, ever (possibly excepting Peter Schickele, who might have called it "Disemboweled Movement with Organ Transplant").


Do you suppose the AI was also deaf?


----------



## vtpoet (Jan 17, 2019)

hammeredklavier said:


> The programmer, who has the mindset to compose stuff like


This is porn's Rule 34 for music-if it can be heard, there is music of it.


----------



## Michael122 (Sep 16, 2021)

My copy of the Beethoven X AI Project CD has arrived.
There are 6 tracks on it, the 1st 4 of which are LVB's 8th symphony.
The last 2 tracks are the 10th and are titled as movements 3 & 4.
This gives one pause to wonder why mvmt's 1 & 2 were not included and if there was a 5th or even a 6th mvmt.
Although the Bonn Beethoven Orchestra plays well, the 2 movements are influenced by previous Beethovian motifs, especially the 1st.
The very 1st track failed to play at all, an "unable to play" error produced, this CD was cheaply packaged and overall, disappointing as it simply is not worth the $16 price, IMO.
Your money would be much better spent on Barry Cooper's effort.


----------



## Livly_Station (Jan 8, 2014)

Michael122 said:


> My copy of the Beethoven X AI Project CD has arrived.
> There are 6 tracks on it, the 1st 4 of which are LVB's 8th symphony.
> The last 2 tracks are the 10th and are titled as movements 3 & 4.
> This gives one pause to wonder why mvmt's 1 & 2 were not included and if there was a 5th or even a 6th mvmt.
> ...


There are so many things that don't make any sense, lol


----------



## VoiceFromTheEther (Aug 6, 2021)

dissident said:


> Yeah, well...what's with the organ in the 4th movement? And it seems that I hear snippets of the 5th symphony in there. It's all over the place...a chorale-like something with loud chords after each line, another section that sounds like Rossini...at around the 17:00 mark it even sounds like some John Williams thrown in there :lol:


I hear a mixture of Chopin and Mendelssohn in the finale that, if refined, could make for a nice piano piece.


----------



## Durendal (Oct 24, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


> The programmer, who has the mindset to compose stuff like


If I had a time machine I would show this score to Mozart just to see what his reaction would be.


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

I'd show it to Beethoven, then I'd get the heck outta there.


----------

