Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Music and Musicians Exchange
Forum Description: Talk with and get feedback from other musicians on the site
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=132891 Printed Date: October 13 2024 at 05:45 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Prog created with the help of AIPosted By: arohtelp
Subject: Prog created with the help of AI
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 11:27
I know that this is rather controversial topic, however I see AI music apps (like SUNO and UDIO) as very advanced music creation tools. And it should be noted that creating something really similar to decent prog in them is not so easy.This actually requires a lot of human input. My experiments have shown that SUNO v3 is not yet very suitable for creating a prog.But UDIO v1 allows, with sufficient persistence, to get pretty good results. I created several songs using my own lyrics in UDIO v1.
Some examples:
Progressive rock slightly reminiscent of Porcupine Tree: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coe8J7Q7msQ" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Coe8J7Q7msQ Progressive metal similar to a mixture of Mastodon and Haken: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmvs2K3mwkE" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wmvs2K3mwkE Progressive metal / Alternative metal vaguely reminiscent of Tool and Deftones: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1FpXsCPYTw" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1FpXsCPYTw Progressive rock in the spirit of early Genesis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuCkiDaUykE" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NuCkiDaUykE Epic progressive rock with female vocals (the style reminds me of someone, but I cant figure out who) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHefMS2zGmM" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XHefMS2zGmM
Alternative rock in the spirit of Skunk Anansie (it's not prog but this song shows amazing vocals that UDIO can do): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To_ZpgnUaME" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=To_ZpgnUaME
Replies: Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 12:45
There's already a thread for this on the forums: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=132798" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=132798 DON'T SPAM thank you
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: AFlowerKingCrimson
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 14:57
Let's see them try to tackle Yes, GG or VDGG. The Genesis one doesn't sound much like Genesis to me but the PT is pretty spot on I'd say.
Posted By: Boojieboy
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 16:02
As a musician, I find the concept of AI-anything music to be incredibly tasteless, irresponsible, and just plain evil.
Posted By: Frets N Worries
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 16:15
AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:
Let's see them try to tackle Yes, GG or VDGG. The Genesis one doesn't sound much like Genesis to me but the PT is pretty spot on I'd say.
Agree, I'd love to hear AI attempt a VDGG song.
------------- The Wheel of Time Turns, and Ages come and pass. What was, what will be, and what is, may yet fall under the shadow.
Let the Dragon ride again on the winds of time...
Posted By: Valdez1
Date Posted: April 26 2024 at 19:32
Nope
Posted By: King Crimson776
Date Posted: April 28 2024 at 00:30
AI has trouble with Prog, which is just more evidence (not that we needed it) that Prog is more creative than most music.
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: April 28 2024 at 00:52
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: April 28 2024 at 10:16
Boojieboy wrote:
As a musician, I find the concept of AI-anything music to be incredibly tasteless, irresponsible, and just plain evil.
Posted By: arohtelp
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 11:45
I was able to create a few more relatively decentprog songs in UDIO with my lyrics. This time they are not so similar to any existing bands, although of course they sound quite eclectic.
"I Will Always Care" - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQaU_fsziXk" rel="nofollow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQaU_fsziXk
Posted By: suitkees
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 12:27
^ Interesting experiment. Not that I'm impressed with the results, because it sounds to me very much like "prog by numbers" (but there are some real prog bands that make music in a similar way: following formulas...).
It would be interesting for us to know what parameters/instructions you fed to the software to produce this. And, you talk about the lyrics, but the singing is that AI generated? Anyway, thanks for sharing these experiments - I'm not convinced (yet) that it can produce interesting music...
-------------
The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 12:33
The Genesis AI was absolutely dreadful. It sounds like a turgidly trite ballad from an 80s hair band. With keys.
------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 13:05
I was able to create a few more relatively decent prog songs in UDIO with my lyrics. This time they are not so similar to any existing bands, although of course they sound quite eclectic.
Excuse me. What?
I was able to create relatively decent prog songs in UDIO
What? 🤣🤣🤣
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: arohtelp
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 14:11
At the moment, it is difficult to create something really unique (especially in the prog genre) in UDIO, since human influence on the process of creating a track is not yet sufficient.
All music and vocals are completely generated by UDIO using my lyrics.UDIO can generate lyrics itself, but they are not very good yet.
In the early stages, I tried to remove vocals from the tracks and sing myself, but my vocal technique is a little lacking for this genre.In short, if I could sing like that, I would sing it myself :)
Describing the details of creating specific tracks will be very difficult and time-consuming.But in general, the algorithm is: I took my lyrics, chose a style (or several styles) and accompanying tags (like "emotional", "melancholic", "calm", etc.) and generated the first 32 seconds of the composition many times until I got something decentsounding.And then repeated the same for the next 32 seconds, and the next, etc.During the process, I also changed the tags for subsequent parts of the track to move the composition in the desired direction. You kind of give general instructions to UDIO, and then choose the best option from those offered.On average, it took me 60-70 generations to create one composition.
In principle, UDIO can be considered a kind of very advanced musical instrument.Although at this stage I would not say that I actually composed music, I rather created it using UDIO.
I want to emphasize this point.This music was not created by UDIO, I created it using UDIO.UDIO by itself, without human participation, cannot create this kind of music.At least for now, anyway :)
Posted By: Sebastianmoto
Date Posted: June 19 2024 at 14:30
Can UDIO even produce anything unique? If it is built upon pre-existing data, is it not bound to always rehash ideas from actual musicians?
If AI can never be 'progressive' then at least the impending threat of AI music might force musicians to stay one step ahead. As long as PA never accepts AI music it'll outlive the internet itself, because we'll never be able to trust another site again soon .
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 20 2024 at 00:57
Arohtelp, you're confusing creating music with clicking a button and a getting and audio result spat out by a procedural generator based on vague prompts/parameters!
The former result matches the creator's vision, while the latter merely matches the prompt and whatever data the overglorified scammer's toy was trained upon.
Please watch this video made by someone with legit knowledge. Get educated, folks!
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: Cristi
Date Posted: June 20 2024 at 01:08
That Genesis cloning song is rather awful TBH.
Posted By: arohtelp
Date Posted: June 20 2024 at 03:23
The problem is not even to create something unique (a random number generator can do that), but to make it unique and enjoyable to listen to.However, the biological neural network in our head somehow does this, so I don't think artificial neural networks can't achieve it.I think that in 5 years all mainstream pop music will be composed by neural networks, and in 10 years each person will have a special neural network that will compose music just for him in a fully automatic mode.For human composers to compete with this, they need to be geniuses on the level of Bach, and even then they will only be listened to by a very narrow circle of connoisseurs.This will be niche art.
I will give a specific example.I really like music that I made with the help of UDIO.Despite the fact that I objectively understand that it is quite average and generic.The thing is that when I created it, I chose those generated pieces that I liked most.The result is compositions that seem tailor-made specifically for me.
Posted By: arohtelp
Date Posted: June 20 2024 at 04:16
I've been composing music as a hobby for 25 years.24 of them without AI assistance:)I see the difference, which is why I use the term "create" rather than "compose".
As for the video, it describes the SUNO.ai, which is much worse than UDIO in terms of sound quality and, most importantly, in terms of the degree to which a person can influence the composition.At the moment it is only suitable for producing simple catchy pop songs, which is what I did a few months ago, but then I quickly got tired of it.
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 20 2024 at 05:17
I've been composing music as a hobby for 25 years. 24 of them without AI assistance
If so, then there's nothing stopping you from continuing to use the legit and not so frowned upon (for a good reason imo) methods. B) Hey! Why won't you share your old songs that you'd composed before the advent of those AI toys? That would be a miles more interesting listen than what you've shared here so far!
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: arohtelp
Date Posted: June 22 2024 at 06:24
I started composing music back in the late 90s using programs like Fast Tracker and Modplug Tracker. (Here are some tracks from that period: https://soundcloud.com/user-483988808" rel="nofollow - https://soundcloud.com/user-483988808 )But then I switched to FL Studio, and began to try to achieve high quality arrangements and sound, which requires a lot of time and effort.As a result, I began to lose the desire to write anything at all.After all, this is a hobby, not a main job.For the last 5-6 years I almost gave up, but then suddenly Suno and UDIO appeared and my interest flared up again.In this sense, such programs can encourage people who would normally never do anything like this to engage in some creative activities.
It could be argued that this would lead to an oversaturation of the music market and harm professional musicians.However, let's be honest, musicians who make music primarily for self-expression in most cases canmake money only from live concerts.But concerts are here to stay.At least in the next 10-15 years. And when they mostly disappear, it will not be because of amateurs using AI to create music, but because of the AIs themselves, who will begin to create music for each specific person in a fully automatic mode.
As for musicians who create music primarily for money, this, in my opinion, is not an art at all, but a craft, which is absolutely logical to automate. And this is neither good nor bad, this is progress.It's unavoidable.
Nobody forbids you to compose music the old fashioned way in the future, but you must be prepared for the fact that you will spend a lot of effort and time, but almost no one will listen to it. In fact, even now almost no one will listen to it, unless you express yourself by composing trendy catchy pop music (but even in this case there will be few listeners without special promotion).
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 22 2024 at 06:33
which requires a lot of time and effort. As a result, I began to lose the desire to write anything at all. After all, this is a hobby, not a main job
I call bullshіt on this one. If something is truly your hobby, you like doing it, and you're really passionate about it, you will never ever lose the desire to do it.
If you don't have enough time for your hobbies in your job schedule, you can simply do it less often. Choosing to use GenAI instead is the equivalent to giving a huge middle finger to your own desires and to other people who are passionate about music making the same way you used to be.
I started composing music back in the late 90s using programs like Fast Tracker and Modplug Tracker
BTW, Tracker music is super cool! As an FL Studio/Reaper user, I like to make some tracker modules from time to time to escape my habits.
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: stegor
Date Posted: June 23 2024 at 18:17
I'm not a musician (maybe a non-musician), so I don't feel threatened by AI in the way that a professional musician might. But it seems to me the only musicians that need to worry are the ones that write disposable stock music, the same with stock photography and clip-art. I don't care how advanced and sophisticated AI music gets, it won't replace real music, because it is not REAL. The love for the CREATOR of the music is as important as the music itself, and who can love a bunch of ones and zeros? Or for that matter the human that types a prompt and pushes a button over and over again?
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: June 23 2024 at 19:55
If any artist uses AI to create music, I think the artist should have full disclosure in the liner notes, giving consumers the choice to buy it or not.
-------------
Posted By: cstack3
Date Posted: June 23 2024 at 23:13
AI is useful as a way to get the creative process going. For example, guitarist Jimmy Page would use different tunings on guitar and just play things, to generate ideas. These were later fleshed out into songs with the band, processed etc.
AI in art is much like that. Most of the product I've seen or heard is garbage, the result of a lot of sampling across the web. However, it can generate ideas.
------------- I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Posted By: progaardvark
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 08:20
cstack3 wrote:
AI is useful as a way to get the creative process going. For example, guitarist Jimmy Page would use different tunings on guitar and just play things, to generate ideas. These were later fleshed out into songs with the band, processed etc.
AI in art is much like that. Most of the product I've seen or heard is garbage, the result of a lot of sampling across the web. However, it can generate ideas.
I agree. It would be more useful as a tool for jump-starting the creative process. What I've been seeing is people telling it to create an entire composition in the style of this or that. Instead of doing that, it would be more interesting to see what it does if told to make some random notes across maybe three bars in a given time signature and give it no style to work from. Sometimes just three or four notes are all that is needed to build an entire song around (e.g., the title track for Gilmour's Rattle That Lock was based on France's railway jingle used by SNCF)
There have been similar kinds of tools in the past: fractal music generators, random number generators, and mathematical tools (like Morse code or the Fibonacci sequence).
------------- ---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 08:35
I don't hate this tech when it's used as a sound design tool rather than a "press here if you lack talent" thing
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: TheGazzardian
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 08:44
Hrychu wrote:
which requires a lot of time and effort. As a result, I began to lose the desire to write anything at all. After all, this is a hobby, not a main job
I call bullshіt on this one. If something is truly your hobby, you like doing it, and you're really passionate about it, you will never ever lose the desire to do it.
If you don't have enough time for your hobbies in your job schedule, you can simply do it less often. Choosing to use GenAI instead is the equivalent to giving a huge middle finger to your own desires and to other people who are passionate about music making the same way you used to be.
This is such a strange take to me. How people choose to spend their luxury time is up to those people, yet you are saying he is 'doing it wrong' and that he's not really 'passionate about it' because he doesn't do it the way you approve of?
GenAI is a landmine right now but imo using it as a creative assistant rather than as a creative replacement is way better. And if it's just to help you enjoy a hobby more - what's the deal? Seriously?
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 08:47
Well, the problem appears when you decide to publish your "creations" made that way. If you publish something, you have to expect the viewers to enjoy it or not. If someone's hobby is to hurt others, it's not fair, right?
also
because he doesn't do it the way you approve of?
It's not a question of whether I approve it or not. It's generally destructive for creativity. Tons of people have said it why that is. People with a lot more weight of words than just a rando like me.
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 10:07
Anyway, I don't want this thread to become another "AI ethics drama battlefield". So, I'll leave yall with this.
Who wouldn't've preferred to wear a T-Shirt of their favorite artist knowing the artist is honest with the public rather than dishonest, right? ;)
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 22:36
IMO, the use of AI in the arts is not creativity from the heart or mind but simply somewhat lazy. Most here have a dislike/hate of autotune, it was not around back in the day and all vocals were the natural talent of the singer.
Today that is not the case at all where tons of autotune is being used. Using autotune replaces the work a vocalist needs to do to create a magical performance. If notes are not hit, simply use autotune and you can fix it.
If you are struggling writing a song/lyrics/music, and don't want to invest the artistic time, simply press a button. I don't think it has much to do about ethics, unless someone said they wrote the song but actually used some artificial help fir some or all if it.
-------------
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 24 2024 at 22:41
unless someone said they wrote the song but actually used some artificial help fir some or all if it.
Sadly, such scams are quite common. :(
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: June 25 2024 at 04:59
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: June 25 2024 at 05:14
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: suitkees
Date Posted: June 25 2024 at 08:30
Personally, I think that this kind of tools can stimulate creativity as long as they are used as tools and not as music/content generators. The more fundamental problem (just like with ChatGPT and the like) is that these tools use (roam the internet for) existing content - with total disregard if this content is copyrighted or not - to generate their things... Meaning: when you use these tools to generate music you might be accused of plagiarism:
https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/record-labels-sue-two-startups-for-training-ai-on-their-songs" rel="nofollow - Record Labels Sue Suno and Udio for copyright infringement
This will be interesting to follow...
-------------
The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: June 28 2024 at 18:07
-------------
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 01:56
Catcher10 wrote:
If any artist uses AI to create music, I think the artist should have full disclosure in the liner notes, giving consumers the choice to buy it or not.
As counterintuitive as it may seem, this lends credence to the notion that AI are to be regarded as person-like entities with the right to such things as copyright ownership. Otherwise, if AI is regarded as a mere tool, then why should the use of such a tool be disclosed when the use of other music creation tools are not required to be disclosed?
Perhaps a solution to the AI "problem" is the requirement that all AI output be placed into the public domain. This would create a disincentive for AI to be used purely for money-making purposes and would create an environment in which AI benefits humanity as a whole.
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 02:23
then why should the use of such a tool be disclosed when the use of other music creation tools are not required to be disclosed?
Simple. It's because of how much creative decitions the ""tool"" is making, and not the creator.
Have you ever seen a guitar that plays itself and comes up with its own chords?
Claiming authorship for a soulless turd made and more importantly conceived entirely by a machine, with no real intention regarding the majority of creative decisions in the "music" is simply being dishonest with the consumer. 👎
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 05:28
Hrychu wrote:
Claiming authorship for a soulless turd made and more importantly conceived entirely by a machine, with no real intention regarding the majority of creative decisions in the "music" is simply being dishonest with the consumer. 👎
Oh really?!! If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it? Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments? If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time? If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice? If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine? If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: siLLy puPPy
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 09:15
^ agreed. Even folkies claimed dishonesty when folk artists used electric instruments. A.I. is just another advancement in computer technology. It can only do what it's programmed to do. Computers have always been a form of A.l. and it has been argued that the first example of A.I. was the Henry Ford's assembly line production of early automobiles. Unlikely any machine will replace human creativity any time soon.
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 09:21
Oh really?!!
Yes. Really.
If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it?
No. Because you're still the composer, mixer, arranger.
Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments?
No.
If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time?
No. As I said, you're still responsible for majority of the the creative decisions. Though here, it's kind of a grey area. It really depends on how much of the track is of your own composition.
If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice?
It depends of what effect it is. But generally, no.
If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine?
Rolling the dice doesn't involve machine learning.
If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
Depends on how much of this is edited and on how big is your creative input.
You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory.
No. I'm not.
On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
I have no clue what you meant actually. It's "inferior" because it replaces the authors conscious creative decisions.
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: Hrychu
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 09:25
This topic is turning into a ragebait. This is my last response to it. ;) Cheers.
------------- On the day of my creation, I fell in love with education. And overcoming all frustration, a teacher I became. Ernest Vong
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: July 06 2024 at 22:17
I prophesy disaster wrote:
Hrychu wrote:
Claiming authorship for a soulless turd made and more importantly conceived entirely by a machine, with no real intention regarding the majority of creative decisions in the "music" is simply being dishonest with the consumer. 👎
Oh really?!! If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it? Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments? If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time? If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice? If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine? If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory. On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
This is all you need to understand what the difference is......
I too from my perspective am done with this thread, I've said my peace.....I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....
-------------
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 02:16
Catcher10 wrote:
I prophesy disaster wrote:
If I compose a piece of music
This is all you need to understand what the difference is......
If the issue is authenticity, then why draw the line at composition? Why not performance as well, or genuine instruments, or an unaltered voice? Drawing the line at composition seems somewhat arbitrary.
Catcher10 wrote:
I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....
Because the music created by AI infringes copyright, or because copyright music is being used to train the AI? If the latter, then I've heard the creators of the AI argue that schools use copyright music under the fair use doctrine to teach their students. Also, if an AI listens to a piece of music, is that really much different to a human listening to the piece of music? And arguing from incredulity that artificial intelligence is not the same as human intelligence is not a valid argument.
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 06:37
Hrychu wrote:
If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it?
No. Because you're still the composer, mixer, arranger.
Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments?
No.
If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time?
No. As I said, you're still responsible for majority of the the creative decisions. Though here, it's kind of a grey area. It really depends on how much of the track is of your own composition.
If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice?
It depends of what effect it is. But generally, no.
If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine?
Rolling the dice doesn't involve machine learning.
If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
Depends on how much of this is edited and on how big is your creative input.
All of the examples above describe tools that enhance music beyond the musician's natural ability to create it. Yet it's machine learning that you regard as dishonest rather than just another tool that enhances music beyond the musician's natural ability to create it.
Hrychu wrote:
You are arguing from a position that is self-contradictory.
No. I'm not.
On the one hand, you are arguing that AI music is grossly inferior, but on the other hand, you are arguing that the consumer is being deceived by it. What if AI music eventually becomes as good as that from the best human artists?
I have no clue what you meant actually. It's "inferior" because it replaces the authors conscious creative decisions.
You manage to avoid self-contradiction by having a definition of "inferior" that goes beyond the music itself. You literally need to know that the music you're listening to wasn't created by AI in order to enjoy it... the music itself isn't enough... you need full disclosure.
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 09:11
Not a fan. And there is no ambiguity about it. AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity, and I want no part of it. AI music needs to have a disclaimer on it like cigarette cancer warnings.
------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Posted By: Logan
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 10:36
I loathe the prevalence of AI. Death to AI. Long live the new flesh.
------------- Two tracks per many of my fave acts: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLXcp9fYc6K4IKuxIZkenfvukL_Y8VBqzK" rel="nofollow - A Youtube Playlist
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 13:23
The Dark Elf wrote:
Not a fan. And there is no ambiguity about it. AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity, and I want no part of it. AI music needs to have a disclaimer on it like cigarette cancer warnings.
Hi,
Agreed.
There are some precedents, although I think they were human touched up to sound better. Way back when in California there was an experiment done and the music was created by a certain name no one had heard before. Many folks liked it ... until one day they were told it was a machine that created the music, and all of a sudden the music is trash and no one knows about it anymore!
The main thing with AI, I think (and I admit I don't know crap about it), is that it can only do what it has been "taught" or has been added to their "brain" ... and doing small adjustments, like humans can and do, is not likely to happen, and I think this would make the music a bit dry, and not easy to understand, or get into it.
Humans, in most music, have a tendency to smooth out moments, so they make better sense, in terms of continuity. I'm not sure this would happen with AI and that it would work correctly ... and well ... but we don't know ... maybe 50 years from now it will be different ... but are we ready to let go of the human difference in the music? Already synthesizers replace an orchestra and that could be considered a form of AI ... but we are fine with it. I think the lines will get blurred.
I'll tell you what scares me more for the future ... people's ability to learn an instrument and become one with it, and maybe go somewhere with it ... this would make AI a lot more interesting and certainly "better" than most folks learning their instrument in the first 5 or 10 years, I'm guessing.
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Posted By: I prophesy disaster
Date Posted: July 07 2024 at 14:09
The Dark Elf wrote:
AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity
But what difference does this make to the listener of the music? If AI music is audibly inferior to human music, then is this judgement any different to a preference of say Van der Graaf Generator music to Genesis music? It seems to me that AI is being perceived as a threat just like autotune was. But AI isn't a threat because it removes the human element of creativity. It's a threat because it is a substantial way that the rich and powerful can oppress the general population. And the threat is greater when we can't tell the difference than when we can.
------------- No, I know how to behave in the restaurant now, I don't tear at the meat with my hands. If I've become a man of the world somehow, that's not necessarily to say I'm a worldly man.
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 09 2024 at 13:27
I prophesy disaster wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
AI composed and rendered music removes the human element of creativity
But what difference does this make to the listener of the music? If AI music is audibly inferior to human music
...
Hi,
Given how folks listen to music, and in a place like this, where the "song" rules, I think it will become impossible to tell a lot about AI. Already I feel like a lot of the stuff listed in the releases of (whenever) that some of the stuff is exactly the same as most of the other ... all of it has the same instruments, only a different sound, and its format is, generally, the same as most commercial music.
In a commercial situation like this, it would be very difficult to find some AI ... I tend to joke that AI is already i nuse by most "prog rock" bands ... since there is too much of the same thing. It was the same thing with the growl thing for a while ... it had become so mechanical as to really make you think about it.
I prophesy disaster wrote:
....
But AI isn't a threat because it removes the human element of creativity.
...
It's a threat because it is a substantial way that the rich and powerful can oppress the general population. And the threat is greater when we can't tell the difference than when we can.
I think it already is a problem and it "removes" that creativity in a different sort ... and it is something I tend to comment on a LOT. The perfect example is the "classic rock" stuff ... after hearing so much the same thing over and over and over again, your ability to find new music details and specially new musics becomes a problem ... you listen to a new band and the first thing that your ear hears is not "recognizable" and is "different" from what you are used to ... and your ability to find new music and materials are a problem.
This was very visible in the many years I have been next to Space Pirate Radio ... started out with some folks not liking it, and slowly it became known and understood, and above all ... it provided a COMPLETE ALTERNATIVE to a lot of "radio" that was already commercial and not with it.
For all intents and purposes, I consider the "tastes", IN GENERAL, centered on the commercial sound, special for "prog rock" ... and what I find is a denial of the origin of the whole thing that became known as "progressive", and later "prog". In the midst of that there are some folks that have some amazing tastes for music, and their listings and postings are a treat ... you're not likely to find AI in there ... but you will in stiff that is similar and basically the "same" in format, sound and instrumentation.
Prog, btw, is not the only one with the issue ... classical music would likely be more attractive to AI than a lot of rock music, but if the individuality was way out in left field, I seriously doubt that AI would even try to add a note or two. Jazz would make AI seem like someone that didn't know music, or perhaps didn't like it!
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Posted By: KorgC3
Date Posted: July 09 2024 at 22:49
I was following the development of AI for quite a while (even had an associated job some years ago), and I really don't get the AI frenzy as well as the fearmongering that extended from it.
When I installed stable diffusion (and I did so on day one), all I could see is a pattern recognition software with a bare-bones user control, and a lack in internal consistency.
The main problem for me however, is when I see art made by stable diffusion, I see not the person who curated the art, but stable diffusion. It's not so much because of the mistakes it makes, but the peculiarity of its rendering. There is a certain recognizable pattern to its texture, and it's never ever had fooled me. Same goes with music software like Suno. A buddy of mine tried to trick me with it, but because I've already engaged with that platform, and I immediately recognized it for what it is. There is a certain compression, the way the notes overlay upon one another, the occasional clipping, the tuning, and many other small things. I guess that there is a lot of mediocre art, which makes AI works look good in comparison, but does it makes it outstanding? Everyone just so decided to pretend that they don't see the obvious difference between a real flower and a plastic reproduction. I especially loathe those "influences" who have art related jobs, but choose to double down on that frenzy, as if they so suddenly lost all of their experience and human intuition. And if some corporations are eager to replace human resource with an AI one, so what? Corporations were already forcing artists to produce art under extreme limitations, ultimately leading to homogenized aesthetics. AI can imitate certain patterns but its struggles to create truly spontaneous aesthetics. For example Beksiński made a very sudden shift in his direction during the 90s. Since AI is heavily reliant on a foundational database its struggles with fast changes. Think of it like that: How long it would take for an AI to result in an Anime-like aesthetic if one is forced to rely only on realistic painting and photographies? AI can create nominally "new" aesthetics, which lack the seed of novelty. And as for programmers, I really don't see an AI replacement of human resource happening anytime soon. Normal people seems to assume that anyone who has/had software/programming related job is a "programmer", which is not true. There are some people who get into the industry to do automation related tasks, something that can be potentially done slightly faster with a pre-set pattern recognizing AI. Incompetent programmers exist as-well, and their bloated and dysfunctional code wouldn't be much more optimized if they resorted to a help of an AI. And mind you, I'm not an enemy of AI. I think it has a its use cases, such as automation of tasks. I personally used vocal separation AI, as the results weren't significantly worse from ones made by slower methods. I also think that "mechanical" AI-vocalist can be an accessible replacement for VOCALOIDs.
Posted By: wiz_d_kidd
Date Posted: July 10 2024 at 07:15
Music created by AI sounds like Steely Dan... and vice versa.
------------- I dont like country music, but I dont mean to denigrate those who do. And for those who like country music, denigrate means to put down.' Bob Newhart
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: July 17 2024 at 04:57
wiz_d_kidd wrote:
Music created by AI sounds like Steely Dan... and vice versa.
Hi,
I was thunkin' that you need to go buy a thrill ... AI would have some big issues with Steely Dan, up to and including what it was in the original story and book! Now that was some serious AI ... ... and mechanical, too ... and it didn't talk back!
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Posted By: Saperlipopette!
Date Posted: July 17 2024 at 05:13
Hrychu wrote:
This topic is turning into a ragebait. This is my last response to it. ;) Cheers.
I scrolled through these three pages, and I notice one person raging while the rest are discussing politely:)
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 13 2024 at 07:54
Catcher10 wrote:
...
.....I'll let the music label lawyers fight it out now since there may be a good argument for copyright infringement using AI....
Hi,
Shhhhhsssshhhhh ... the lawyers would be fighting for more AI so the record company appears to have better music than you know! And, as usual, we would spend our money on it, because some goon shows it listed as a top number of an album!
I think a record company is more likely to abuse this than a single person out there ... who, also, would have a hard time getting people to hear it and see it! We see this on new things posted here on PA already ...
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 21 2024 at 10:41
Hrychu wrote:
...
Oh really?!! If I compose a piece of music on a computer and have it played to a synthesiser via MIDI, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it? Is it being dishonest because they're not real instruments? If I create a piece of music by multitracking several different performances together, is that being dishonest because I didn't manually play it in real time? If I apply an effect to modify my singing voice, is that being dishonest because it's not my real voice? If I use the roll of the dice to assist in what notes or chords to use in a composition, is that being dishonest because the choices made were not entirely mine? If I edit a composition created by AI to conform to my tastes, is that still being dishonest because I didn't do all of the work even though it contains many decisions that are mine?
...
Hi,
I do not think this is AI ... mostly because it would be literally impossible to teach the content of the AI computerized code to include all the emotions and details that you added ... and then put them together which would be an idea YOU CREATED that was not a part of the AI, which would likely put it together differently.
If we're "talking" AI, then we should not be inferring that it will do this or that ... we don't know what was coded into it, and how it will respond according to its own internal rules and decisions.
The mind, and your design and creativity, could be said to be a form of AI, however, it would not be considered so because it is not mechanical ... or as changing and re-considering a lot of things like you normally would to make it smoother ... as you find it while putting it together ... not to mention that tomorrow it will be slightly different and adjusted.
------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com