Music is one of the most fundamental pieces of human existence. It's one of the few things we do that other animals don't. Replacing human music with AI is being pushed by exactly the same people who push AI infiltration into human existence and state surveillance. The goal is the same.
Gee thanks. As a musician I love hearing my music is invalid because of the decade it was created in by people who never even made the effort to find or listen to it.
There is a massive difference between using a synth and generating the whole thing by stealing every song ever made.
Software assisted music creation is with a computer and a music program, not a computer and a chatbot.
Cue argument over whether a music-generating AI counts as a large Language model… and remember, it’s the marketing and legal departments of OpenAI you’ll have to argue with, not me.
Apple controls the platform.
I agree with this though, it’s difficult. I hope people can figure this out.
But that is what I was trying to explain about hybrid songs, meaning real songwriters, producers, musicians and arrangers using their OWN WORKS and just use AI as a tool to enhance their work and yet some people still think it's trash just because they used AI as a tool and not just generating songs at the push of a button. So you can't win with these people who think like this.
To me, mechanical performances just sound flat. After all, the sheet music of a classical piece isn’t meant to be executed exactly: It’s mostly a guideline that each performer/conductor can use as the basis for their own interpretation.
I'm talking about taking what you had written, produced, played on a instrument yourself and use AI as a tool to make it sound better, add layers to your songs and/or mix and master with Al technology.
But is it really the persons creation if the AI is involved? I mean, sure, it could be, but I think that if the user just gives the AI certain sounds to work with, not a semi-completed music file, then is it truly made 85% by the human? I don't know, I certainly don't think so. Sure, you could argue that there are equalizers, which is just program, but that is on a whole different level from Artificial Intelligence.
Funny. Auto-tune precedes AI and does not require AI to operate, though, so it isn’t really relevant here. It’s just a sonic tool for correcting pitch through digital analysis and resampling.
You can not be serious, right? A person write a song (compose the music and wrote the lyrics that can be copy written), played instruments of that song or made the beat on a MPC or FL Studio, then sing out the lyrics of that song and you are going to turn around and dismiss the song as not having human involvement and not the person's creation because that same song use some type of AI tool?
If you’re talking about having a plugin whose effect uses AI which is a small component of the sound, and the song was composed and recorded by a human, sure. But the conversation is about generative AI, and not about trying to find edge cases where AI might be ok.
Yeah but there are people on here saying that any involvement of AI even if it's just for enhancing your own work is trash and should be banned.
Let me make this clear: If the AI just makes small changes to the song that a human created, instead of creating an entire song based off of the users input, then it is considered as mostly human made. But if it created almost entirely by the AI, then it therefore is considered as mostly AI created.
I think the issue is a bit semantic, because when you say 'hybrid song', we’re not thinking of an album that was mastered with one of the plugins using AI to do its thing. We're envisaging a song that has entire parts that are made with generative AI, even if it was written and partially performed by humans.
That’s certainly a valid concern and a good reason for a local media library, but I’d say it’s not really relevant to the question of avoiding AI slop. Losing access to tracks or having them replaced by inferior “remastered” versions is definitely a huge downside of relying on streaming services, but it’s a different problem from being served up something completely generated by AI.
It's does not matter. It's still using AI as a tool ether way. What you are describing is someone uploading THEIR OWN WORKS into a AI tool to enhance the song (with the right textures). Ok, and? How many hours did that person worked on that song (writing the melodies and lyrics, playing the instruments or making the beat on a MPC or FL Studio, singing the lyrics)? So once again you are going to discredit their work because that person used AI as a tool to RETRAIN their OWN works? You can't steal your own music sir
I don’t know about enhancing the song, but a hybrid song in the way I understand the word “hybrid” (chunks by humans and chunks by AI) should be banned into oblivion.
I think it’s important to try to understand so we’re on the same page here. What, exactly, is it you’re envisioning here? Someone makes a bedroom recording of a mostly finished song, uploads it to ChatGPT, and says ‘enhance!’? (Metaphorically, the prompt is irrelevant)
