Music is supposed to be something I enjoy listening to, period.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Deezer Launches AI Music Detector for Apple Music, Spotify, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The main problem with AI creativity is ethics. AI is only able to create art and music because it has scraped artists' copyrighted work without their permission. Using work that real artists poured their lives into, now with the press of a button even a non-artist can mass produce music that's just slightly different enough to be called different. They're using artists' own work to compete with them--completely unethical.
mansplains
macrumors 68000
This “real” tool would certainly be quicker, listening to an entire playlist in real time rather than analyzing metadata 🙄
It’s not roundabout at all, it’s directly telling you they’re looking at your music metadata to provide you with a service. This is like complaining about giving permission to location for google maps.
iemcj
macrumors 6502
Well as long as we're still able to access it. I don't think I've bothered with any new "artists" in months, Ai music is just so much better tuned to the styles I care about. Just so much more personalized.
Gone are the days when you would like a band, anticipate their next album, then just be so let down that it's nothing like their original work and they drifted into something different. Now you can actually get music YOU want and less just being spoon fed whatever the companies want to force on you.
Gone are the days when you would like a band, anticipate their next album, then just be so let down that it's nothing like their original work and they drifted into something different. Now you can actually get music YOU want and less just being spoon fed whatever the companies want to force on you.
My biggest issue with AI music is it’s all so bland. Just like AI images all look the same, AI music all sounds the same. They all have this sort of echo and the lyrics are usually about nothing. Most often the lyrics are just describing things. And just like AI images, there are exceptions. For every billion produced, you might find one decent result. The trouble is those other billion get posted too. It’s all quantity over quality.
I feel disappointed when I discover a song is AI. I think “aw, I thought somebody put effort into this.” *How* something was created absolutely matters. Otherwise we wouldn’t have “behind the scenes” content for movies. It’s fascinating to learn about how something was created.
Take The Postal Service as an example. Their most popular song is Such Great Heights. Their music was made before the internet allowed instant transfer of files, so the two artists would mail CDs back and forth to create the album. That’s where the name comes from.
That’s a far more interesting story than “I pressed a button while sitting on the toilet. The random number generator made sounds that weren’t half bad, so I uploaded it.”
Hell, even vocaloid music like Hatsune Miku has more human creativity than AI music. Somebody still assembled the music and coded the vocals. Plus, it takes serious skill to understand what the hell she’s saying.
bLackjackj
macrumors 65816
Oh please,..then you shouldn’t be listening or paying for ANY studio created music!
Your local busker is the only one not using computer created effects, tones or sound regeneration. Even major writers these days use AI created output, whether it be rhyme adds, different riff sets..I’m sorry you we’rent aware, but you can thank me later for dropping your monthly sub.
This looks like a complete data grab and nothing more.
its93rc
macrumors 6502a
What a moronic take. Music is a form of artistic expression and some of us want to listen to music that has artistic merit. Music IS a hobby in itself -- the writing, production, art design, etc.
bLackjackj
macrumors 65816
Rediculous reply. All music has artistic merit..yeh and all of it uses a mixer connected to a computer in a studio! Is that “authentic”? There is no song on any music platform that is 100% authentic according to your own “logic” Lol
In what universe did they say that electronic tools were not allowed? You seem to view AI as a tool to create something, like a synthesizer is a tool to create sounds, but you are not creating anything with AI. The AI has done 100% of the work. There wasn't a melody in your head you just had to get create or a chain of lyrics that meant something to you. You did little more than roll a dice.
The same basic phenomenon happens with generative text. Students are far more willing to submit their AI-generated essay because they somehow feel that the AI generated what they would have written had they put the time in. But this is never (or rarely) true. Regardless, it's still just plagiarism, but instead of rewriting somebody else's essay with their own language, they had an AI rewrite somebody else's essay in its language.
Generated images, music, video, text, code, whatever is not the prompter's work. They didn't contribute anything. And it cannot be copyrighted.
uacd
macrumors 68000
Wait till it identifies remasters of rock classics as AI.
How can one discern AI from real music if it all sounds same? AI doesn’t give you different frequencies or specific instruments, it just generates whatever it is ought to generate. Deezer is simply trying hard for publicity because no one uses their platform
How can one discern AI from real music if it all sounds same? AI doesn’t give you different frequencies or specific instruments, it just generates whatever it is ought to generate. Deezer is simply trying hard for publicity because no one uses their platform
It doesn't sound the same. It might sound the same _to you_, but there are signals in the waveform that Deezer is looking for. In a majority of the AI songs, humans *can* hear the difference though, even if they don't know what they're listening for. It's hard to describe, but there's a kind of weird echo effect.
There was a song that came on my playlist in the car yesterday that didn't immediately jump out at me as AI like most do, but after listening to the lyrics a bit, I said to my wife "I'm pretty sure this is AI." AI music is usually about nothing, and this was very true here. When I got home I looked up the "artist" and found they had TONS of tracks released within the last year, every title following the exact same pattern. Very clearly AI.
nnoble
macrumors 6502a
Wow. How pretentious of you to state nobody asked for this. Have you even looked at the Deezer forum? Some people want to see live music and real musicians singing heartfelt lyrics - they need to earn money. Truly weird of you to call this a waste of time. Just don’t use it.
“who” would exclusively imply the artist is human. You probably (and sadly) meant to say “I don’t care who or what makes my music … “
Let me and mganu know if it worked for you in case it is important to you to be able to identify human vs. robotic art creations.
Apple MessagePad
macrumors regular
"Who"does not have to be a human. We use the word "who" to indicate plenty of non-human objects. But thanks for adding absolutely nothing to the discussion.
"Who" is only used for sentient beings with a "personhood" (or a group of them). There may come a time when society considers AI a person, but right now it's not, so it's referred to as "what/that".
Sadly, human composers and songwriters that can let emotion drive the creative process may have to compete with AI algorithms who are inherently incapable of emotion.
Apple MessagePad
macrumors regular
None of that changes the fact that the word "who" has been used for years when referring to non-human objects.
Who makes the iPhone?
Do you mean Apple to be your example of a non-human object? A company is a group of humans (sentiment beings with personhood).
I'm unclear, are you arguing that "who" can be used for AI?
Apple MessagePad
macrumors regular
Someone had originally said that the word "who" can only be used when referring to humans and must use "what" when referring to non-human entities. I was simply pointing out that first their comment had no relevance but also that "who" can refer to non-human entities.