Without wishing to cast aspersions on your trumpet playing, may I venture that there is a significant difference between a high-school trumpeter and a professional? And, no, the iPad doesn't give you the control that you can have over even a crappy upright piano, let alone a Steinway model D, Bosendorfer Imperial or Fazioli F308...
Possibly today, but think about the processing power and the ability of AI in say 10 years... 20 years? It's hard to imagine what will be left for humans to even do especially when it comes to the arts.
So let's imagine for a second that the iPad or some other computer manages in the future to replicate the literally infinite soundscape of a violin etc. It'll still need to be programmed, or told what to do through a controller. And at that point, the complexity of the controller will be such that I would question the value of using it over the original. The only possible gain I can see is greater accessibility in terms of cost.
All I’m saying is that we haven’t even scratched the surface on AI and considering how powerful processors have become in the past 20 years imagine the next 20 years. In the United States, there is a classic country music singer named Randy Travis. He had a stroke many years ago and can no longer sing. They just released a new song from him a few days ago called “Where That Came From.” The only problem is it’s not him. He hasn’t been able to sing for the past 10 years since his stroke. It’s all AI. I would challenge anyone to listen to his old human sang songs and the new AI one and try to tell the difference. It’s almost scary how well it emulates him. If you can copy a human voice that well today it won’t be hard to do so with every musical instrument.
https://www.embertone.com/instruments/joshuabellviolin.php
It’s been that way for quite some time: https://www.latimes.com/entertainme...y-all-we-do-is-press-play-20120626-story.html
Are you an artist or a creative who makes a living with art? If not, then I suggest you don’t tell us what we should or shouldn’t be offended by.
I'd be unmoved if a truckload of old tablets got crushed live, on-air. Tech is inherently disposable. No one really bonds with their tablet.
Totally inaccurate and naive. It suggests that Apple intentionally provoked backlash for publicity; such a strategy would be highly uncharacteristic for a brand that values its reputation. Moreover, Apple certainly has the means to buy all kinds of publicity…. What they can't afford is to tarnish their brand image. Despite the old adage that "all publicity is good publicity," for a company as prominent as Apple, negative attention is genuinely detrimental. Bad publicity is just that—bad.
