Interesting article. I used to be obsessed with algorithmic composition. That was until it temporarily destroyed my ability to enjoy music. But that's my problem. I recovered when I realized that music only means something to me when it's humans communicating what's in their heart to other humans. Fortunately we have not figured out the algorithm for that sort of thing.
Now there is so much algorithmic music, we need an algorithm that will tell us what to listen to. Along with ads no doubt. And patents to protect "intellectual property." I'm sick of it.
Anyway, I would like to comment on one paragraph from the article.
"One obstacle was that not only was this music composed by computers, it was also played by computer synthesis, and so lacking the interpretation and expressivity of human musicians who bring each tune to life – elements not incorporated in the data the AI had trained on. "
The obstacle is not understanding the nature of music. It's a human activity that can't be reduced to an algorithm.
There's great music for the synthesizer. My favorite example is the album Disco Alliance by the Latvian group Zodiak. This was made way back in 1980 in the good old USSR. I've read it was the best selling album in the USSR for a while. If you search on Youtube you will find it. It's great synth music because it's great music which is arranged superbly for the synthesizer. It's very expressive.
I can also think of lots of music which is played by expressive humans, but does nothing for me. It's just not good music, in my book.