Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

The First Robotic Musician

Posted by kdawson on Tue Oct 03, 2006 10:30 PM
from the jamming-with-roomba dept.
eldavojohn writes, "A new robot named Haile (pronounced hi-lee), which 'listens' to what musicians are playing and play along with them, has been developed at the [corrected] Georgia Institute of Technology. There are some videos at the GATech site. From the article: "If the musicians change the beat or rhythm, Haile is right there with them. 'With Haile there are two levels of musical knowledge... The basic level is to teach it to learn to identify music, to imitate,' Weinberg said. 'The higher level is stability of rhythm, to be able to distinguish between similar rhythms. In essence, Haile has the ability to recognize if a rhythm is more chaotic or stable, and can adjust its playing accordingly.' I don't know about the rest of Slashdot, but I can't wait for the day when I have my very own Robo Puente to play along with."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Scientists Try To Make Robots More Human 88 comments
mikesd81 writes "The Associated Press has an article about a robot named George that plays hide-and-seek. Impressively, the robot can actually also find a place to hide, and then hunt for its human playmate. Scientists are calling this 'a new level of human interaction'. The machine must take cues from people and behave accordingly. Researchers aim to imply humanity in robotics by creating technology that can connect with humans in a more 'thoughtful' way. The places to first see this technology are in the most human-oriented fields — those that require special care in dealing with the elderly, young and disabled." From the article: "'Robots in the human environment, to me that's the final frontier,' said Cynthia Breazeal, robotic life group director at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 'The human environment is as complex as it gets; it pushes the envelope.' Robotics is moving from software and gears operating remotely - Mars, the bottom of the ocean or assembly lines - to finally working with, beside and even on people. 'Robots have to understand people as people,' Breazeal said. 'Right now, the average robot understands people like a chair: It's something to go around.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • GA Tech != UGA (Score:5, Informative)

    by MustardMan (52102) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:32PM (#16300525)
    Jesus, is is that hard to get the university right? Not only is UGA not the same as GA Tech, they are bitter rivals.
    • Yea... a new innovation in robotics at UGA! Hah! What a joke! Actually, I'm friends with one of the students working on this project, and yea, it's really cool if you can get a hold of a video of it in action. /me is posting from the GT Library, working late hours... again. As much as I love this school, I freakin hate it.
    • Indeed.

      Example college at GT: School of Electrical and Computer Engineering [gatech.edu]

      Example college at UGA: School of Poultry Science(sic) [uga.edu]

      You can't get an Engineering degree from UGA. Similarly, you can't get a Literature degree from Georgia Tech.

      Time to continue ramblin'.

  • OLD NEWS (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This is old news.
    See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Aiken [wikipedia.org]
  • by bmetz (523) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:35PM (#16300565) Homepage
    We'll know robots are truly evolved when they build their own museum :)
  • Bitter, instate rivals... get those confused in the wrong company in this town, and you'll regret it :)

    Randy Farmer
    Atlanta, GA
  • by noidentity (188756) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:35PM (#16300575)
    I think we had one of those when I was a kid, though it was usually out of tune and you had to feed it Kibbles 'n Bits.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:36PM (#16300577)
    It's a percussionist, most of them are pretty robotic anyway.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      Right. The problem is that nearly all other types of instruments require so much dexterity (look at the violin for instance) that we wouldn't be able to build a robot that could mechanically produce decent sound.

      I think it would be much easier to create better synthesizers and just have the robots use the synths... I mean the guy says a lot of stuff about how its important that the robot is able to use audio and visual cues, but I dont think that has anything to do with actually playing the music mechani
  • after the lead singer thought he was a fish and the drummer went of to live on an island with a rock as a friend.
  • Oh yeah? (Score:5, Funny)

    by kin_korn_karn (466864) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:53PM (#16300663) Homepage
    Can they show up to practice drunk and/or stoned? Do their girlfriends get jealous of the other musicians' girlfriends and start drama for no reason? Do they forget spare strings at the gig and have to borrow a bass from the other band? Do they need a place to crash one night and you come to find three months later that they still haven't left?

    They can't be REAL musician robots until those conditions can be fulfilled.
  • first? well, maaaybe (Score:5, Informative)

    by radarsat1 (786772) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @11:03PM (#16300729) Homepage
    Of course, musical accompaniment systems have been around since the 80's and earlier. It's been a research topic in artificial intelligence nearly since its inception!

    Robert Rowe [nyu.edu] published a book on the topic in 1992, on his Cypher system. Here's another good article [uci.edu] on the topic by Chris Dobrian. For an open-source system, check out Bob van der Poel's MMA [xplornet.com].

    Additionally, there's been plenty of work done on robotics for playing instruments, particularly for percussion.

    So, admittedly, this is the first time I've personally heard of a project combining the two, so I'll give it that credit for innovation. But I'd be sorta surprised if it hasn't been done previously. When you think about it... all these musical accompaniment systems react in real-time to MIDI input. Simply make a couple of motors respond to MMA's ouptut, for example, adjust timing according to latency and inertia, and you could probably have this project done in a few days.

    Not to play it down, I always love to see fun projects like this.. :) And the physical design is quite beautiful for a drum-playing robot.
    But "first".. well, give credit where it's due. I think the summary is over-reacting. (I scanned the article.. don't believe it makes any such claims.)
    • Whoops.. says so in the first paragraph. My bad. :)
      But is it accurate..
      Like I said, it might well be the first to actually combine robotics and musical accompaniment. I'm not sure. I guess I'll give the article the benifit of the doubt!
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        Yes, I was just stopping in to complain about that "first" business.

        Matt Ingalls, a clarinetist/improviser/composer in the SF Bay Area, did some work with computerized accompaniment that was pretty impressive. His "Recent Works" release had some tracks where you'd swear there was a live pianist following the clairinet improvisations.

        Ah, and if you look under "Sounds" on his homepage, he has some mp3 samples up

  • It's the first robot that hangs out with a bunch of musicians.
  • No, wait. My bad.

    I am always confusing robotized with fossilized.

    Sorry.

    Still, someday every band will be robotic...

  • I'll have to go spin up my trusty Media Lab laserdisc, but I recall Barry Vercoe demo-ing this or something very much like it. They had a virtual performer (piano, IIRC) that could follow / learn / accompany live individual human performer (violin, again IIRC) and cope with changes in phrasing. So this would date to when laserdiscs were cool. Of course there was probably a Cray at the other end of a telltale cable, but hey.
  • by bowlman (944884) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @11:38PM (#16300933)
    We're charging our battery And now we're full of energy We are the robots We are the robots .... We're functioning automatic And we are dancing mechanic We are the robots We are the robots ....
  • oh great... (Score:3, Funny)

    by advocate_one (662832) on Wednesday October 04 2006, @01:29AM (#16301531)
    a glorified metronome that can't keep time... just like our current drummer...
  • by Ralph Spoilsport (673134) on Wednesday October 04 2006, @01:57AM (#16301675) Journal
    1. he doesn't get tired.
    2. he doesn't show up an hour late for practice, completely drunk.
    3. he doesn't ask stupid questions when the rest of the band gets into strategy and show planning.
    4. he won't eat all th efood i nthe fridge at the band house.
    5. he won't choke to death on someone else's vomit.

    But if he is using Sony batteries, he might spontaneously combust...

    RS

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      Depends on what you mean by better. In terms of musical response by humans, the point won't be until emotions and thought are codified and corelated with music theory much more so than they are now. By then, we will have run out of fossil fuels to power our computers, and that guy at your college who always played accoustic guitar by the parking lot will have groupies cooking him dinner over an open fire. However, if by better you mean more harmonic, or more complex, then I guess you can program an alogorth
    • Re:how long.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by pennyher0 (852359) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @10:58PM (#16300697) Homepage
      This is less like computer-generated music, and more like machine-learning, only through music. Seems hella awesome.

      And for the record, art/music is often about context, and the artist is a big part of what makes music "good". An unknown musician doesn't ever make it into the top 20 without the help of producers, promoters, radio spots, stories, etc. This is basic marketing. The product itself rarely sells--it's the story or the artist behind it or the context or just plain mob-consumer mentality that was initially triggered by one of those things that accumulates together to make the thing popular.

      if a robot made cool music, and was intelligent, neat. it might be popular, but not because it is good music... more because it was ROBOT-made music.

      Otherwise, I'd be a fangirl of the engineer who made the robot... just like I'm getting all woozy thinking about the people who made this software.
    • Re:how long.. (Score:5, Interesting)

      by gameforge (965493) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @11:37PM (#16300929) Journal
      how long....before computer generated music becomes better than anything that could possibly be created by a person?

      Could you imagine a digital device, maybe like an iPod, that composed music on the fly, which intelligently complemented your mood? I could see this being addictive for certain people and causing them to lose touch with human music. I mean, in my reality, not yours.

      Anyway... if you could write a program that simulated heroin or acid (or even just pot), it would probably write some pretty cool stuff. But it wouldn't remember to save it and would get the munchies and fall asleep for half a day... and would still be an improvement on current mainstream music, most of which is just the results of marketing formulas anyway. But, no robot could fuzz down a guitar like Jimi Hendrix, or yelp like Kurt Cobain, or offend like Frank Zappa (or name your gangster rap artist).

      Here's a question: what happens when you start jamming with two of these robots, and then you stop playing? Do they just duet until you unplug one of them or what?
    • by Simonetta (207550) on Tuesday October 03 2006, @11:38PM (#16300931)
      So who is the RIAA going to sue? They have to sue someone. After all, that's all they do nowdays since the equalization of the vinyl records is no longer as profitable as extortion. (and because there aren't as many gold records to award as in previous years).

          Any time a robot plays something, it is going to sound like something that the RIAA holds 'rights' to. So the robot is 'infringing' on 'their' copyrights. But, uh, sueing a robot is hard. They don't respond to threats. They ignore injunctions. Robots don't give a shit about human law, man, they just wanna rock'n'roll.

          So are they going after the programmer?

        "Your Honor, Let it be known that after 2.345 hours of playing a 130 beats per minute tempo, in the key of G#, if the human misses the beat by 0.256 seconds, the robot under inditment will consistently and 'knowingly' play the first three notes of "Free Bird". This is a willfull violation of copyright. We want $100,000,000,000.00; payable in monthly installments."

        But the great thing about robots is no only can they now play music, but, with a little tweaking, they can also tear the fingers and toes off of entertainment lawyers. Accidently, of course, but AI routines can get a little unpredictable when clogged with human legal chaos. Shit happens.

        Personally, when I want to play along with a machine I use a Zoom 900x series guitar effects DSP with the early 1970's Rolling Stones fed into the analog mix channel. Mix your guitar with lots of reverb, overdrive, a touch of delay, and a dollop of attitude.

        When you get a robot to do what Keith Richards does, let me know.