Most active commenters

    ←back to thread

    556 points greenie_beans | 23 comments | | HN request time: 0.812s | source | bottom
    Show context
    legitster ◴[] No.42466978[source]
    This article is fascinating. But what's on display here is less of a nefarious plan from Spotify to replace famous Katy Perry with AI - instead we get to see something much more specific: a behind-the-scenes of how those endless chill/lo-fi/ambient playlists get created.

    Which is something I've always wondered! How does the Lofi Girl channel on Youtube always have so much new music from artists I have never heard from?

    The answer is surprising: real people and real instruments! (At least at the time of writing). Third-party stock music ("muzak") companies hiring underemployed jazz musicians to crank out a few dozen derivative songs every day to hack the algorithm.

    > “Honestly, for most of this stuff, I just write out charts while lying on my back on the couch,” he explained. “And then once we have a critical mass, they organize a session and we play them. And it’s usually just like, one take, one take, one take, one take. You knock out like fifteen in an hour or two.” With the jazz musician’s particular group, the session typically includes a pianist, a bassist, and a drummer. An engineer from the studio will be there, and usually someone from the PFC partner company will come along, too—acting as a producer, giving light feedback, at times inching the musicians in a more playlist-friendly direction.”

    I think there's an easy and obvious thing we can do - stop listening to playlists! Seek out named jazz artists. Listen to your local jazz station. Go to jazz shows.

    replies(14): >>42467115 #>>42467373 #>>42468523 #>>42468534 #>>42468806 #>>42469019 #>>42470366 #>>42471641 #>>42473351 #>>42474647 #>>42477886 #>>42478120 #>>42479458 #>>42480564 #
    Gigachad ◴[] No.42467373[source]
    I’m not even mad about it. It’s background music and clearly people are enjoying it. Just because they smashed out 15 tracks in a single session doesn’t make it unfit for purpose. That’s just how Jazz music is.
    replies(4): >>42468134 #>>42468791 #>>42472073 #>>42477234 #
    wbl ◴[] No.42468134[source]
    Kenny G might deserve your comment. But Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, Ornette Coleman, Charles Mingus...
    replies(4): >>42468301 #>>42468302 #>>42478479 #>>42480086 #
    orblivion ◴[] No.42468301[source]
    I think some people may have a misunderstanding about what jazz is. I know one friend of mine did. Some jazz may be easy listening, but it's not made for easy listening, it's made to bend the boundaries of music theory. And also a lot of "easy listening" that sounds like jazz isn't really jazz.
    replies(2): >>42469078 #>>42474652 #
    1. vasco ◴[] No.42469078[source]
    So what is jazz
    replies(10): >>42469290 #>>42469438 #>>42469887 #>>42470038 #>>42470153 #>>42470302 #>>42470315 #>>42470652 #>>42471290 #>>42472113 #
    2. gvurrdon ◴[] No.42469290[source]
    The term covers a variety of styles, with old ones hanging around as new ground is broken. Perhaps it is a "meta-genre". There are various articles around explaining its history which might be worth looking at, if you're interested. I'd expect to hear some degree of improvisation in jazz, but not in easy listening.
    3. TheSpiceIsLife ◴[] No.42469438[source]
    The devils music.
    4. YagoTheFrood ◴[] No.42469887[source]
    "If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know." Apocryphal quote by Louis Armstrong.
    replies(1): >>42470064 #
    5. kid64 ◴[] No.42470038[source]
    jazz != smooth jazz
    replies(2): >>42471552 #>>42474832 #
    6. netdevphoenix ◴[] No.42470153[source]
    It is an approach to music (more than a genre) that relies on elaborate harmonic structures, freedom of interpretation of melody and personalising the harmony, interesting rhythms and time signatures and a general approach of trying to push the boundaries of music making. It is meant to be listened actively as opposed to having it as background music. The capitalisation of music has led us to the commoditisation of music and treating it as audio content as opposed to art.
    replies(2): >>42470369 #>>42472083 #
    7. jdietrich ◴[] No.42470302[source]
    In short, a cultural tradition. At length:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68zOvCLwcL8

    8. shrikant ◴[] No.42470315[source]
    I found it easier to "get" when I started thinking of jazz as the beat poetry of music.
    9. fc417fc802 ◴[] No.42470369[source]
    > It is meant to be listened actively as opposed to having it as background music.

    The masterpiece hanging in the museum was fully intended to be actively appreciated. The background on the box of cereal is ... just a background on a box of cereal. It's still art though.

    replies(4): >>42471271 #>>42471469 #>>42472065 #>>42472954 #
    10. mesofile ◴[] No.42470652[source]
    the ‘sound of surprise’
    11. technothrasher ◴[] No.42470931{3}[source]
    The original quote is apocryphal, but he did respond to a question from a reporter asking about the quote saying, "Yeah, Daddy. Ya know how it is... jazz is something ya feel... ya live it, that's all." So he wasn't gatekeeping, he was saying the answer to "what is jazz?" was contained in the experience of jazz.
    12. klez ◴[] No.42471271{3}[source]
    That would be the distinction between "fine art" and "decorative art". Jazz as GP meant it is "fine art", the smooth jazz you hear in the elevator could be classified as decorative art.
    replies(1): >>42474891 #
    13. datadrivenangel ◴[] No.42471290[source]
    jazz is what you can get away with.
    14. dijksterhuis ◴[] No.42471469{3}[source]
    in my personal opinion, which is as valuable as the piece of paper i’m writing this on /s

    art has no function except to be observed by an audience. if they enjoy it or not is immaterial. its purpose is to be observed.

    the design of a box of cereal has a purpose - to sell you the box of cereal by making it attractive/stand out/fit the brand.

    graphic design, when it has purposes beyond being observed, is not art — it’s a craft.

    like engineering.

    although graphic design/engineering can become art when it has no purpose except being observed.

    edit — enjoyment is immaterial and the bits about graphic design can be art etc.

    15. browningstreet ◴[] No.42471552[source]
    JavaScript != Java

    These are everywhere…

    16. bezkom ◴[] No.42472065{3}[source]
    Most of the masterpieces you see in museums were used as decoration at some point.
    replies(2): >>42472783 #>>42474829 #
    17. xanderlewis ◴[] No.42472083[source]
    I feel like there’s some kind of analogy between jazz cats and hackers.
    18. kunalgupta ◴[] No.42472113[source]
    delightful mental pain, like a cold plunge
    19. wbl ◴[] No.42472783{4}[source]
    The Pope needed something for his ceiling.
    20. troupo ◴[] No.42472954{3}[source]
    Most masterpieces where literally hanging in the background of some rich person's summer houses, and hunting lodges, and other properties. Thrown out and replaced on a whim.
    replies(2): >>42477184 #>>42479085 #
    21. DonHopkins ◴[] No.42474832[source]
    New Age rhymes with Sewage
    22. mr_toad ◴[] No.42477184{4}[source]
    Or melted down to make spears and helmets.
    23. Neonlicht ◴[] No.42479085{4}[source]
    Art was used by the rich and famous to show off their wealth. In the 19th century countries got into the game (the idea that Dutch masters were ending up in American collections was a national embarrassment).