Roanoke Fiddle Lessons

FREE LESSON!
To demonstrate how far AI has to go, I am offering a free 45-minute music lesson to the first person who can point out one of the TWO(!) errors in this AI explanation of the chords in A Harmonic Minor.
Instead of an A (minor), Google gets an F-minus (flat?) on the music theory assignment. I have every faith that you humans can do better!

Incidentally: Google, do better. Stop spreading misinformation. One of my cardinal rules as a teacher is, if I don't know the answer, I say so. I don't make up crap. You need to do the same.

A quick word about instruments.
I recently saw a post from a string manufacturer saying, your instrument doesn’t go out of tune; your strings do.

Let me offer some more context:
A GOOD instrument doesn’t go out of tune—the strings do. A bad instrument goes out of tune no matter how good or stable the strings are.

I recently spent half an hour of a 45-minute lesson tuning a student’s violin. And it wasn’t due to any negligence on her part. It’s just a bad instrument.

A bad instrument (or a VSO—violin-shaped object) is a terrible thing. If the choice is between buying a VSO or nothing, I’d recommend buying nothing until you can afford a decent instrument. A VSO is a total black hole. It wastes time and money. It leads to frustration, which leads a student to quit. You’re actually better off setting fire to your money, when you consider the time and frustration that VSO will ultimately cost you.

I sell violins, but I don’t care if you buy one from me. I just care that you’re not buying a VSO that will waste your time, money, and sanity.

If you are ever in doubt about whether what you’re looking at is a VSO, message me, and I’ll help all I can.
One last piece of advice: if you’re shopping on that website that has everything from A to Z, I can almost guarantee you’re going to end up with a VSO.

AI is going to replace you.
Or, Rick Beato is just a cranky curmudgeon.

So we've talked about the role of AI versus the teacher. Teacher: 1, AI: 0

We've talked about the role of the amateur musician who just wants to create, learn, and express themself. Musician: 1, AI: 0

Now let's tackle the professional musician.

Who wants to pay for music? Who gets to earn our money? Let's break that question down into two parts: The music we seek out at home, and the music we seek out away from home.

The music we seek out at home may be incidental. It can be what we listen to while we're working, cooking, eating, chilling, etc. We have it on in the background. And one way or another, we have to pay for it. Whether it's ad-supported, or subscription-based, one way or another we pay for that music. Do we want to pay for musicians who work hard and create albums? Or do we want to pay for a computer to generate music we find pleasing? I can see this being a slippery slope where AI largely replaces the human. Yikes.
AI: 1, Professional Musician: 0 (And that's an overtime squeaker).

But then, when we really get down and LISTEN, I bet we're not going to be satisfied listening to a computer generate what could admittedly be some really terrific music. No one is going to sit and listen and say, "Huh, this is really powerful. I wonder what the computer was experiencing when it composed this music?"
We absolutely DO sit and say "Huh, I wonder what this person's emotional state was when they wrote that line?"
AI: 1, Professional Musician: 1

And then, when we go out of our homes and seek out music. I'm not even going to touch the music that gets played in Applebee's while you're eating a microwaved Quesadilla. It's background noise, and not a worthy addition to this discussion.

Music we actively seek out. Whether we go to festivals, bars with live music, or attend concerts.
I do not, even in my wildest Sci-Fi conjectures, see us going to watch computers play music. We go to experience the "warm thrill of confusion, that space-cadet glow" when we watch people play. We connect with them. We connect with each other.
AI:1, Professional Musician: 2.

Boom.

To research this, I went to one of the loudest voices talking about AI. Rick Beato has made a great living making YouTube videos talking about guitars, amps, recording gear, etc. He is very knowledgeable about the music business, and about the recording studio. He has testified in front of congress about AI and art. But some of the things he says are beginning to veer into "Get off my lawn!"

He recently posted a video where he lamented that technology makes music too easy. He began by comparing Frank Sinatra singing into a microphone, where the entire take had to be perfect, to the modern ability to punch in single lines or notes. Got news for you, Rick. People were complaining about Frank singing into a microphone, and how that wasn't how real music was made. I guarantee it.

And then he went on to the grand-daddy of the curmudgeon complaints: "The creative dependence on technology limits the ability of people to innovate." I laughed out loud.
Rick, people said that same thing about Pink Floyd and their use of electronic equipment. And I won't presume to say that it limited their creativity or innovation. I doubt anyone who really knows what they're talking about would dare suggest that.

So chill out, Rick. The sky isn't falling. Technology will help us unlock our creativity, not limit it.

So let's review. Will AI replace music teachers? Not the teachers who really know what they're doing.
Will AI replace the amateur musician who wants to grow as a human? No way.
Will AI replace professional musicians? In one way, to some degree, yes. But not in the ways that really matter.
When we look for music that speaks to us, that helps make a human connection, whether it's at home or at a concert, we're still going to be looking for humans making music.
If you're keeping score at home, I think that makes it AI: 1, Humans: 4.

In a four-game series, humans win the Cup.