Google Gemini: Get Track Feedback from AI for free!
1,0 / 5,0 | 
Google Gemini: Get Track Feedback from AI for free! · Source: GK Images / Alamy Stock Foto
Google is on the move in the music world! Not only are they making AI effects with Jacob Collier or an alternative to Dolby Atmos, but here comes something quite practical for all producers and mixing engineers. In the latest version of Google Gemini, Gemini 2.0 Flash Experimental, you can upload MP3s and get feedback!
What is Google Gemini?
Basically, Google Gemini is the search giant’s answer to ChatGPT. In other words, it is an AI chatbot. And like Open AI’s bot, Google is constantly releasing updates.
Sometimes, they are faster, sometimes they are “smarter,” and sometimes they have mastered new skills. The latest version of Google Gemini in Google’s AI Studio, Gemini 2.0 Flash Experimental, might be of interest to producers and mixing engineers.
Track Feedback from Google’s AI
This is because it is possible to integrate local audio files into a prompt. The AI behind Google Gemini can then use the prompt to analyze your track in detail and give you positive and negative feedback on aspects such as melody, lyrics, mix, and arrangement, along with suggestions for improvement.
I discovered this recently from a post from the Threads user transcendendantband. On Reddit, other users then detailed which prompts were used to generate which results. As is often the case in the world of AI, the quality of the results depends mainly on the prompt. I worked with this prompt:
Please give a comprehensive review of the song ‘[Song Title]’. Rate all aspects of the song on a scale of 1 to 100 with an accuracy of 1 and give a total score. Be very detailed in your explanations. In your ratings, compare the song to any professional hits you are familiar with. So a score of 100 means it’s the best piece of music you’ve ever heard, and a zero is the line between amateur and professional. A theoretically negative score would be given by an amateur band. Write from the perspective of an extremely experienced music producer, like Rick Rubin.
Detailed Mix Critique for every Track!
It is worth noting that you need a Google account to upload audio files to Google Gemini. Once you have that, you go to Google’s AIStudio, log in, and select either the model Gemini 2.0 Flash Experimental or Gemini Experimental 1206 on the right. Both allow the upload of audio files.
Then paste the prompt from above, drag an MP3 or WAV onto the chat bar, and click ‘Run’ to get started! Of course, you can modify the prompt to suit your needs or use a prompt of your own.
The feature is currently free – but limited. Each upload and analysis uses tokens, and Google provides a certain amount of tokens for testing purposes. As long as these are not used up, you can upload tracks to your account and analyze them! It is also worth noting that Google will use your prompts and your audio files for further training in the free version.
More on Google Gemini
This might also interest you
7 responses to “Google Gemini: Get Track Feedback from AI for free!”
That’s gonna be a no from me dawg.
Great. Now everyone – and everything, has an opinion on my tracks. I think I will stick to producer feedback.
Do you need your wallet to be inspected?! Need to buy a bridge? We got you!
Seems like a straightforward way to steal artist ideas
The only thing I want from Google’s Gemini is an uninstall feature. And I desperately want that. What a creepy app.
U2’s Unforgettable Fire track wit feedback form Brian Eno:
Alright, let’s dissect this “Carnival” track, shall we? I’ve had my ears glued to the speakers, and frankly, there’s a lot to unpack here. It’s not a straightforward piece, that’s for certain.
First Impressions: Immediately, the intro grabs you with that melancholic, almost industrial guitar riff. It’s a bit sparse, giving a sense of desolation, which I find quite intriguing. It’s not trying to be overly polished, there’s a rawness there, almost a desperation, which is a good start in my book.
Instrumentation: The core instrumentation is fairly simple – drums, bass, and guitar, with what sounds like some subtle synth textures in the background. Let’s break down each element:
Drums (Rating: 65): The drum work is functional, keeping a steady beat, but it’s not pushing any boundaries. It feels a bit metronomic at times. It’s not as dynamic as, say, a Stewart Copeland or even a more modern, subtle drummer like Steve Gadd on “Late in the Evening”. The snare sound could use a bit more depth; it feels a bit thin. Still, it’s in time and serves its purpose.
Bass (Rating: 70): The bass is providing a solid foundation. It locks in with the drums, but at times I felt it could do a bit more to add interest in the lower frequencies. It’s not a flashy performance, but it’s dependable, think more of an Andy Rourke than a John Entwistle.
Guitar (Rating: 78): This is where it gets interesting. The guitar textures are the most engaging aspect. That clean, slightly chorused tone in the intro is very effective. The playing isn’t virtuoso, but it’s emotive. There’s a nice touch of grit, not too much to be muddy, but enough to sound like a live performance. It’s reminiscent of some of the more melancholic guitar work you hear on a mid-period Cure record, like Disintegration.
Synths (Rating: 60): The synth textures are a bit subtle, almost too subtle. I had to really focus to hear them. They’re there, providing a bit of atmosphere, but they could have been a lot more prominent and could have done much more to fill the spectrum. They feel like a missed opportunity to add depth. It’s as if they’re scared of getting in the way of other, perhaps more established, elements.
Vocals (Rating: 73): The vocals are delivered with a detached, almost world-weary tone. It reminds me a bit of Ian Curtis but with a slightly more melodic approach. There’s a certain vulnerability there that’s appealing. However, the pitch could be a bit tighter in certain places. There’s a lack of vocal harmonies which I think could have added a lot of richness and dynamism.
Song Structure (Rating: 68): The structure is fairly straightforward, verse-chorus, verse-chorus, and then a more jam-like outro. There’s nothing particularly innovative here, but the sections do flow together nicely. I feel as though there was room for more variation, maybe a bridge section to break up the monotony of the song. The repetition of “Come on take me away, come on take me away” grows a bit tedious by the end.
Production (Rating: 62): This is where the track could really use some work. The mix feels a bit uneven, lacking clarity and depth. The levels of instruments aren’t always sitting right; I felt that at times the vocals are buried in the mix, competing with the guitar. Some EQ and compression could go a long way in bringing out the best of these elements. It sounds a bit like it was recorded live and then mixed on a laptop. The reverb is functional, it doesn’t add too much ambience or character to the piece.
Emotional Impact (Rating: 75): Despite the technical shortcomings, the song does evoke a certain mood. It’s a mix of melancholy and a slight undercurrent of anger, which I found quite compelling. The feeling of being caught between the grit of life and the promise of something better resonates, particularly given the slightly melancholic vocal delivery.
Innovation (Rating: 50): This isn’t groundbreaking territory. There are elements of post-punk and some darker, alternative rock, but it doesn’t really push the envelope in terms of sound design or song structure. The track feels very much “of its time”, rather than ahead of it. It’s not trying to be revolutionary, which may well be the point.
Overall Score and Final Thoughts:
Adding it all up, this track gets an overall score of 69 out of 100.
This is a promising piece, let’s be clear. It’s got the seeds of something very good. The guitar work and vocal delivery are the strongest aspects, but the production needs some real attention. It’s like a diamond in the rough – it’s there, but needs to be cut and polished.
I’d be interested to work with this band, as there’s an undercurrent of real creativity. Given the right production and a bit more focus on the songwriting’s dynamics, I think they could produce something truly remarkable. However, for now, it is a good, but flawed, offering.
Although the language appears to give insight, it ultimately is trite or simply wrong. It identified a Reggae track as indie folk, didn’t mention the horns, and said that the acoustic guitar was played well. There was no acoustic guitar on the track! Keep trying AI, but yer still failing to live up to the promise of the premise.
You are currently viewing a placeholder content from Facebook. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou are currently viewing a placeholder content from Instagram. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More InformationYou are currently viewing a placeholder content from X. To access the actual content, click the button below. Please note that doing so will share data with third-party providers.
More Information