Honda robot conducts Detroit symphony

May 16, 2008 at 7:41 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 24

xenithon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Posts
4,216
Likes
4,255
Location
Mandalore
Any thoughts about this news story?

ASIMO, a robot designed by Honda Motor Co., met its latest challenge Tuesday evening: Conducting the Detroit Symphony in a performance of "The Impossible Dream" from "Man of La Mancha."

"Hello, everyone," ASIMO said to the audience in a childlike voice, then waved to the orchestra.

As it conducted, it perfectly mimicked the actions of a conductor, nodding its head at various sections and gesturing with one or both hands. ASIMO took a final bow to enthusiastic shouts from the audience.


Anyone else here have an inherent fear in the potential (albeit quite distant in the future I believe) of these robots and their effect on musical creation?
 
May 16, 2008 at 7:52 AM Post #2 of 24
I don't fear anything concerning robots or the development of artificial intelligence.

There's no reason that given enough life experience, a sufficiently advanced android couldn't have as much "soul" or character as a human.

I agree though, you may not be able to program it all directly, it would be the sort of thing that would arise on its own as the robot's systems learned and adapted. A sort of emergent property, if you will.
 
May 16, 2008 at 10:56 AM Post #3 of 24
Quote:

Originally Posted by xenithon /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Any thoughts about this news story?

ASIMO, a robot designed by Honda Motor Co., met its latest challenge Tuesday evening: Conducting the Detroit Symphony in a performance of "The Impossible Dream" from "Man of La Mancha."

"Hello, everyone," ASIMO said to the audience in a childlike voice, then waved to the orchestra.

As it conducted, it perfectly mimicked the actions of a conductor, nodding its head at various sections and gesturing with one or both hands. ASIMO took a final bow to enthusiastic shouts from the audience.


Anyone else here have an inherent fear in the potential (albeit quite distant in the future I believe) of these robots and their effect on musical creation? I don't think they'd ever be able to program soul, life, character, personality in terms of musical reproduction...but still....
rolleyes.gif



you say that last part as if you have some idea about us. i promise you... you are wrong. indeed
 
May 16, 2008 at 3:34 PM Post #5 of 24
Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif
There's no reason that given enough life experience, a sufficiently advanced android couldn't have as much "soul" or character as a human..


I disagree. Robots cannot feel. Emotions are required for a moving performance of most musical works.
 
May 16, 2008 at 3:46 PM Post #6 of 24
Quote:

Originally Posted by Computerpro3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I disagree. Robots cannot feel. Emotions are required for a moving performance of most musical works.


x2

No matter how much you program and/or memorize life experiences to a robot, it will never be able to mimic humans "soul". I'm sure they put hundreds of hours programming that robot to move the way it did.
 
May 16, 2008 at 6:12 PM Post #7 of 24
Well, there is always that concept of thought. What happens when a robot can think? Would past experience as well as the ability to think and improvise make a robot that much closer to a human conductor?
 
May 16, 2008 at 7:00 PM Post #9 of 24
Quote:

Anyone else here have an inherent fear in the potential (albeit quite distant in the future I believe) of these robots and their effect on musical creation?


I'm more afraid of them turning on their fleshy pink masters.
 
May 16, 2008 at 7:15 PM Post #10 of 24
that they originally tried to use a robot from Ford, but it was recalled.
 
May 16, 2008 at 10:03 PM Post #11 of 24
Quote:

I disagree. Robots cannot feel. Emotions are required for a moving performance of most musical works.


Perhaps you just have a smaller conception of robots and what they are (or one day could be) capable of, then.

Besides, what is so special about human feelings? They're just the brain's internal perception of automatic emotional processes. What if a robot had a brain that worked like a human's?

My conception of the ultimate android is one whose brain is like a human's. A device that could learn and memorize by itself without being programmed, and would lend itself to the development of real personality through the gradual gathering of information and memories through its life and experiences. It may even have the capacity for emotional perception built right in...
 
May 16, 2008 at 10:17 PM Post #12 of 24
Quote:

Originally Posted by PiccoloNamek /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Perhaps you just have a smaller conception of robots and what they are (or one day could be) capable of, then.

Besides, what is so special about human feelings? They're just the brain's internal perception of automatic emotional processes. What if a robot had a brain that worked like a human's?

My conception of the ultimate android is one whose brain is like a human's. A device that could learn and memorize by itself without being programmed, and would lend itself to the development of real personality through the gradual gathering of information and memories through its life and experiences. It may even have the capacity for emotional perception built right in...



Performing music is incredibly complex. The sheer amount of physical reactions that occur when preparing to perform and actualy performing are incredible. Trust me - I am in a conservatory for piano performance.

Emotions (tempered with logic and discipline of course) are everything when it comes to music. Even such things as anxiety and nerves before performing factor into what makes the performance what it is. Before you perform, you get a rush - a very real emotional response with actual physical, flesh and blood reactions. Adrenaline is running thorugh your veins. Your entire state is heightened. Once again, those physical effects, as well as your ability to control them, play a large part in a performance.

Then there is such things as human error - rushing the tempo a bit because you are drawn into it, or not counting 128th notes precisely. In order for a robot to be able to perform like a human - to perform with the same sincerity and gravity of a human - it would have to be imperfect. Furthermore, it would have to be able to distinguish between a mistake and artistic freedom - when are you required to count the 128th notes strictly, and when can you take some liberty with it? And when you do take liberty, how much time should you take? Should you then speed up to close the phrase contigiously, or should you change the character and make it something different?

Give me a recording of a computer and a recording of a human and I can tell you with 100% accuracy which is which every single time, even if every single little dynamic marking in the score is followed by the computer.

Further, it would have to have the same flesh and blood that we do - and have absolutely identical reactions to external stimulus. How can you program stage anxiety into a robot? How can you program in the sensation of losing yourself in the music?

And the biggest challenge of all - interpretation. How in the world can a robot choose what is the "tasteful" amount of rubato, when there is no true "correct" amount to program in? What about phrasing? What about bringing out the subject in a five voice fugue while keeping all of the voices the same dynamic level, showing each voice only by color and tone changes?

A robot may well one day be able to play each and every marking in the score accurately, and even make some mistakes on purpose to sound more human. But it will never be able to achieve the imperfect organicness of a moving human performance.

Why? Because if it could, if that robot DID have the faculty to do so - was coded with our identical brain, the flesh and blood, had stage fright, the longing to communicate with others....it wouldn't really be a robot anymore, would it?
 
May 16, 2008 at 10:58 PM Post #14 of 24
The concept we have about the robots from 10 years ago is not applicable nowadays anymore, artificial intelligence is making huge progresses everyday, do not underestimate the science, not saying they we will see a robot creating tomorrow, but maybe our grand-grandsons will...

AI is not based in equations anymore, we have nowadays hundreds of sensors that can literally "perceive" and porcessors that are able to process these perceived info....is just a matter of time guys...and I do not want to get in problems with the government now, so I will shut up.....
rolleyes.gif
 
May 17, 2008 at 1:58 AM Post #15 of 24
Quote:

Originally Posted by Computerpro3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Then there is such things as human error - rushing the tempo a bit because you are drawn into it, or not counting 128th notes precisely. In order for a robot to be able to perform like a human - to perform with the same sincerity and gravity of a human - it would have to be imperfect. Furthermore, it would have to be able to distinguish between a mistake and artistic freedom - when are you required to count the 128th notes strictly, and when can you take some liberty with it? And when you do take liberty, how much time should you take? Should you then speed up to close the phrase contigiously, or should you change the character and make it something different?

Give me a recording of a computer and a recording of a human and I can tell you with 100% accuracy which is which every single time, even if every single little dynamic marking in the score is followed by the computer.



True, a digital computer would give a technically accurate and predictable performance. But I'm not talking about a traditional digital computer. I am talking about an advanced android with a brain that is comparable in form and function to our own.

This reminds me of an episode of the anime "The Big O". There is an android named Dorothy, and an android named Instro. They can both play the piano, but with a major difference: Dorothy's playing is technically perfect and always without error, Instro on the other hand was designed with the piano in mind and plays naturally, with variations in loudness, tempo, and personal interpretation of certain passages and pieces. Nobody likes Dorothy's playing, but everybody loves Instro's. What I wonder is, why would a real android have to be like Dorothy? If it was sentient and sufficiently intelligent, couldn't it easily be like Instro?

Quote:

Further, it would have to have the same flesh and blood that we do - and have absolutely identical reactions to external stimulus. How can you program stage anxiety into a robot? How can you program in the sensation of losing yourself in the music?


It'd be easy to program the semblance of stage anxiety into a robot. Getting them to actually feel it is something entirely different. I see no reason to believe it wouldn't be possible though.

Quote:

And the biggest challenge of all - interpretation. How in the world can a robot choose what is the "tasteful" amount of rubato, when there is no true "correct" amount to program in? What about phrasing? What about bringing out the subject in a five voice fugue while keeping all of the voices the same dynamic level, showing each voice only by color and tone changes?


How does a human do it? Why couldn't a robotic brain mimic those same neuronal processes?

Quote:

A robot may well one day be able to play each and every marking in the score accurately, and even make some mistakes on purpose to sound more human. But it will never be able to achieve the imperfect organicness of a moving human performance.


Why not?

Quote:

Why? Because if it could, if that robot DID have the faculty to do so - was coded with our identical brain, the flesh and blood, had stage fright, the longing to communicate with others....it wouldn't really be a robot anymore, would it?


Who said it had to be flesh and blood? Who said it had to act like a typical machine? It could be mechanical but still have feelings. Perhaps not directly analogous to our own, but from the android's perspective they would be real and legitimate. And besides, shouldn't the ultimate android be exactly like a human? After all, the word itself means, roughly, "like a man". The ideal android IMO would be the perfect human simulacrum, only better.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top