LLMs Will Replace 8-Track Duplication Engineers | Benchoff Design Portfolio

Before running all of these tests, I actually did this the old-fashioned way. With pencil and paper and thinking. This entire project was inspired by putting Blonde on an 8-track and from experience, I can tell you this is a hard problem. The trouble is, I can’t tell you how I did it. There’s some human heuristic I used, definitely not an algorithm, and I can’t write it down. This seems to be what humans in 1977 who gave a damn did too. This is not what the dude making the Sublime 8-track did.

So I can’t tell you how to do this without testing all possible permutations, but human intuition can get pretty close. This sort of thing has shown up in other fields, like Foldit, an online ‘let humans perfect protein folding’ game. Classical computer algorithms can only get so close, and humans watching these classical algorithms got frustrated when they saw a solution the computer didn’t. Humans can see stuff that classical algorithms can’t. And now there’s a dozen Nature publications to prove it.

But now we have LLMs. They’re also a black box, and if you throw enough tokens and context at them, they’ll out-perform humans. They won’t be able to tell you how they did it, either.

This isn’t a victory for humans over algorithms or LLMs over humans, or anything like that. It’s just a fact that a dead and derided music format left behind a benchmark where human intuition beat classical methods that wouldn’t be in a textbook for a decade after the work was done. And half a lifetime later, LLMs would outperform humans for reasons we can’t really inspect.

So that’s something.

This was such a cool experiment and a fascinating head-to-head comparison of LLMs vs. human in the esoteric domain of "8-track music production".