[NA] Is AI going to end actual musicians?

SixPapaCharlie

SixPapaCharlie

May the force be with you
Joined
Aug 8, 2013
Messages
16,069
Display Name
Display name:
Sixer
This site Sona AI is incredible. Like legitimately incredible.

I told it to write a thrash metal song about giving chicken pox to a turtle and it delivered.
This might be my new favorite song.

suno.com

Ruthless Infection by @fortissimogeneration161 | Suno

thrash metal fast-paced aggressive song. Listen and make your own with Suno.
suno.com suno.com


Here's a link to the root site, Go make your masterpiece.
suno.com

Suno

Suno is building a future where anyone can make great music.
suno.com suno.com
 
To address the original question, man I hope not. Artists of all types are grappling with the same dilemma now.

Perhaps more than any other art form (except maybe literature) the technical aspect of music only represents a portion of the appeal. When teens get into music, it's because someone else feels like they do. You can't feel 'heard' by an AI. AIs aren't 'cool'. Who will trek to a venue in a run-down part of town to see an algorithm play live?

Of course there will be examples that may become popular for meme or novelty purposes, but music fans, en masse, gravitate towards personalities and image more than anything. It's part of a person's image growing up, and music helps to feel like they're part of a group of like-minded people. After all, who's going to wear a Sona T-shirt?
 
Meh....it has been all downhill since the birth of MTV! Video killed the radio star.... now it's AI's turn.
 
Baked Potato said:
To address the original question, man I hope not. Artists of all types are grappling with the same dilemma now.

Perhaps more than any other art form (except maybe literature) the technical aspect of music only represents a portion of the appeal. When teens get into music, it's because someone else feels like they do. You can't feel 'heard' by an AI. AIs aren't 'cool'. Who will trek to a venue in a run-down part of town to see an algorithm play live?

Of course there will be examples that may become popular for meme or novelty purposes, but music fans, en masse, gravitate towards personalities and image more than anything. It's part of a person's image growing up, and music helps to feel like they're part of a group of like-minded people. After all, who's going to wear a Sona T-shirt?
Click to expand...


I kind of wonder if a band might have AI generate songs, then they learn to play them and record them as originals. Have it generate 1000 songs and there will no doubt be a few hits with no effort.
Will AI be able to copyright its creations?
 
Might create a market for the out of tune, bad musicians. "Real Music'...
 
Some of you may know, I have founded and still own businesses in the music space. Long story short, AI is absolutely replacing a lot of musicians. It already is. One of my businesses replaced nearly all of my staff with AI. Will it replace the Taylor Swifts of the world? Absolutely not. They’re a brand AI won’t be able to replace. But will it replace songwriters, session musicians, small time producers for sync opportunities, etc. Absolutely, it already is.
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
Some of you may know, I have founded and still own businesses in the music space. Long story short, AI is absolutely replacing a lot of musicians. It already is. One of my businesses replaced nearly all of my staff with AI. Will it replace the Taylor Swifts of the world? Absolutely not. They’re a brand AI won’t be able to replace. But will it replace songwriters, session musicians, small time producers for sync opportunities, etc. Absolutely, it already is.
Click to expand...
Serious question, though, since you’re in that industry…
If I had AI write songs, and I recorded them and somehow got airplay (or e-play?), how would copyrights/royalties work?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Serious question, though, since you’re in that industry…
If I had AI write songs, and I recorded them and somehow got airplay (or e-play?), how would copyrights/royalties work?
Click to expand...
HAL 9000 will demand a cut...or else your pod door stays shut!
 
The question that underlies this topic is missing:

"Is music a form of artistic expression, or it is a product?"

Many years ago, I got paid for a whole lot of musical "product" that was used for commercial backing, film soundtracks, training film background, etc. While I was happy to have the work, the reality is that AI can easily take that role.

Can AI take the place of groups like the Dead Kennedys, Pink Floyd, Miles Davis, Rush, Prince, or the Violent Femmes? I don't think so. There is an emotional component present that will always come from human creativity that AI won't be able to generate. AI will copy the ideas very well after the patterns have been created and analyzed, but the impetus to create wholly new styles and forms is a human thing.
 
A lot of modern music might as well be written by AI, with how formulaic everything is. I was listening to the radio on my last trip into town, and I'm pretty sure I heard the same song four or five times in a row, just in a different key and with a couple of words changed. Same general premise for the lyrics, same progressions of chords, same four chords. I could see AI taking over all but the live performances, just because people seem to prefer everything auto-tune and tone-corrected to the point that no actual human could sing their preferred sound. I could even see live performances just being an actress getting up on stage and lip-syncing and basically being the "cover image" for a certain genre of AI-generated songs.

Chrisgoesflying said:
Some of you may know, I have founded and still own businesses in the music space. Long story short, AI is absolutely replacing a lot of musicians. It already is. One of my businesses replaced nearly all of my staff with AI. Will it replace the Taylor Swifts of the world? Absolutely not. They’re a brand AI won’t be able to replace. But will it replace songwriters, session musicians, small time producers for sync opportunities, etc. Absolutely, it already is.
Click to expand...
AI songs "written in the style of Taylor Swift" were actually a pretty big thing a while ago, and Swifties were mad because even people who were really into her music were really struggling to tell which ones were sung by her and which ones weren't, so maybe her actual songs/voice aren't that hard to replace - and I honestly think most of modern pop and probably rap/hip-pop falls under that category as well. Her celebrity image definitely would be hard to replace with AI, though.
 
SkyChaser said:
A lot of modern music might as well be written by AI, with how formulaic everything is. I was listening to the radio on my last trip into town, and I'm pretty sure I heard the same song four or five times in a row, just in a different key and with a couple of words changed. Same general premise for the lyrics, same progressions of chords, same four chords. I could see AI taking over all but the live performances, just because people seem to prefer everything auto-tune and tone-corrected to the point that no actual human could sing their preferred sound. I could even see live performances just being an actress getting up on stage and lip-syncing and basically being the "cover image" for a certain genre of AI-generated songs.


AI songs "written in the style of Taylor Swift" were actually a pretty big thing a while ago, and Swifties were mad because even people who were really into her music were really struggling to tell which ones were sung by her and which ones weren't, so maybe her actual songs/voice aren't that hard to replace - and I honestly think most of modern pop and probably rap/hip-pop falls under that category as well. Her celebrity image definitely would be hard to replace with AI, though.
Click to expand...
They are the same:
(some language involved)

And it's just gotten worse.
 
The biggest issue about AI in written material is copyright infringement. I suspect that the same is an issue in the music field as well. Cover artists and those using samples have to secure the respective rights to the music and/or track samples. AI circumvents that.
 
SkyChaser said:
A lot of modern music might as well be written by AI, with how formulaic everything is.
Click to expand...
The only pushback to give on that is the word modern. Going back hundreds of years you can tell what era a lot of the music is from because it sounds like the other music of that era. There have always been formulas, whether it's baroque, rockabilly, hair metal, kpop or the entire generation of swifties that love her music and are making their own.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
This site Sona AI is incredible. Like legitimately incredible.

I told it to write a thrash metal song about giving chicken pox to a turtle and it delivered.
This might be my new favorite song.

suno.com

Ruthless Infection by @fortissimogeneration161 | Suno

thrash metal fast-paced aggressive song. Listen and make your own with Suno.
suno.com suno.com


Here's a link to the root site, Go make your masterpiece.
suno.com

Suno

Suno is building a future where anyone can make great music.
suno.com suno.com
Click to expand...
Aiva, Soundraw, Soundful, it goes on and on. My freshman computer science class just finished "create a music video" using any of the music AI apps and any of the video AI apps (e.g. NightCafe) and present to the class. Then teams of 2 for Debate Camp - one pro, one against what they just saw. Definitely interesting....most students liked having fun with the apps but did not like letting the computer do everything. The #1 reason? It was someone else's "collection" of music and images, not theirs.
 
Sac Arrow said:
The biggest issue about AI in written material is copyright infringement. I suspect that the same is an issue in the music field as well. Cover artists and those using samples have to secure the respective rights to the music and/or track samples. AI circumvents that.
Click to expand...
What's interesting is all these AI music apps have copyright disclaimers/ownership proudly displayed on the front page. Everything generated is theirs - but if you're willing to pay, they'll transfer the copyrights to you.
 
My 15yo asked my opinion on ai just last night. I told her I'm still unsure, not only about its role, but even if it exists at all. Everything Ive seen is 100% derivative. Sampling text, sound, or images and mashing them together to "create" the output. It's only as capable as the database it's given to work with, and that doesn't rise to the level of "intelligence" to me. The creative spark isn't there, and I'm not convinced it can be programmed into a computer.

If you gave an ai only a bunch of blues and gospel for reference, could it create Elvis?
 
172andyou said:
The only pushback to give on that is the word modern. Going back hundreds of years you can tell what era a lot of the music is from because it sounds like the other music of that era. There have always been formulas, whether it's baroque, rockabilly, hair metal, kpop or the entire generation of swifties that love her music and are making their own.
Click to expand...
I agree, to an extent. You can tell the general era, yes, and even find similar trends in melodies and harmonies and rhythms; but it's very rare to hear songs that are basically identical when they are reduced to the fundamental building blocks of music. Even songs based on the same Gregorian chant and with the same text are distinguishable from each other when reduced musically, but much of modern music is actually indistinguishable in many senses. Maybe part of it is the filtering effect of history, but I do think there is a lot less desire to create one's own sound and a lot more conformity in current music.
 
Last edited:
Chrisgoesflying said:
Some of you may know, I have founded and still own businesses in the music space. Long story short, AI is absolutely replacing a lot of musicians. It already is. One of my businesses replaced nearly all of my staff with AI. Will it replace the Taylor Swifts of the world? Absolutely not. They’re a brand AI won’t be able to replace. But will it replace songwriters, session musicians, small time producers for sync opportunities, etc. Absolutely, it already is.
Click to expand...
This right here. Not just music, but literally every industry is mostly filled with people doing small, repetitive and formulaic jobs that keep everything running. Why pay a group of session musicians to sit in a studio all day when you can have AI do it for a fraction of the cost? Why would you pay paralegals a livable wage to review documents when you can buy an AI to do it?

People need to understand that in capitalism, labor doesn't have any intrinsic value but capital (ie. AI software) does. Labor costs are variable and increase with production, capital is fixed gets cheaper with mass production. I mean, literally everything about our system is geared towards undervaluing creative human labor and overvaluing machines capable of constant repetition.

People are going to be surprised when we wake up one day and find out that 99% of human life no longer has financial value to the 1% of people who have concentrated all the capital in their hands. And that's when people find out just how little human life means to them.
 
I look at music the same way I see any form of entertainment - the human element is what makes it interesting to me. Same with sports - can a computer be more accurate than an umpire? Can an AI drive a car around a track faster than a human? Can a robot hit a ball further? Sure, but that's not really the point - I'm a human and when it comes to creative and sporting pursuits, I like seeing humans doing human things.
 
DeadStick said:
People are going to be surprised when we wake up one day and find out that 99% of human life no longer has financial value to the 1% of people who have concentrated all the capital in their hands. And that's when people find out just how little human life means to them.
Click to expand...
You can tell a lot about a person by finding out if they think that world is going to be a paradise in which people can pursue their interests unfettered by having to work for a living, or whether they think it's going to be a dystopian wasteland where only the elite can afford food.
 
Last edited:
I don't think so ...

AI has no soul ...

"Ya gotta live the blues to sing the blues"

You can quote me on that! ;)
 
172andyou said:
You can tell a lot about a person by finding out if they think that world is going to be a paradise in which people can pursue their interests unfettered by having to work for a living, or whether they think it's going to be a dystopian wasteland where only the elite can afford food.
Click to expand...
While I would love to believe it will be the former, experience has taught me to plan for the latter.

How exactly will people be "free" to pursue anything when they don't have the money for food and shelter? That would require some form of universal income or socialized programs for basic needs, and the "Haves" will never go along with that no matter how many "Have Nots" suffer and die for it.
 
DeadStick said:
This right here. Not just music, but literally every industry is mostly filled with people doing small, repetitive and formulaic jobs that keep everything running. Why pay a group of session musicians to sit in a studio all day when you can have AI do it for a fraction of the cost? Why would you pay paralegals a livable wage to review documents when you can buy an AI to do it?

People need to understand that in capitalism, labor doesn't have any intrinsic value but capital (ie. AI software) does. Labor costs are variable and increase with production, capital is fixed gets cheaper with mass production. I mean, literally everything about our system is geared towards undervaluing creative human labor and overvaluing machines capable of constant repetition.

People are going to be surprised when we wake up one day and find out that 99% of human life no longer has financial value to the 1% of people who have concentrated all the capital in their hands. And that's when people find out just how little human life means to them.
Click to expand...
Why pay managers, CFOs, CEOs a huge salary and golden parachute when they could just be replaced by AI?

No need for cube farms, call centers, tech support. No need to build those places or provide infrastructure.

At the end of a game of Monopoly, one person has all the resources and the other players have nothing. And the game is over.

If AI takes on all the roles people project for it, none of us will be "free to pursue our interests unfettered" - because none of us will have a stream of income.
 
DeadStick said:
How exactly will people be "free" to pursue anything when they don't have the money for food and shelter? That would require some form of universal income or socialized programs for basic needs, and the "Haves" will never go along with that no matter how many "Have Nots" suffer and die for it.
Click to expand...

That's hilarious!! You might want to dial it back or people are going to realize it's an act, though. :cheerswine:
 
kayoh190 said:
I look at music the same way I see any form of entertainment - the human element is what makes it interesting to me. Same with sports - can a computer be more accurate than an umpire? Can an AI drive a car around a track faster than a human? Can a robot hit a ball further? Sure, but that's not really the point - I'm a human and when it comes to creative and sporting pursuits, I like seeing humans doing human things.
Click to expand...
I dunno, I can do without Angel Hernandez being the worst umpire in the game. Bring on the robot umpire overlords, lol. Seeing how many calls get overturned every baseball/softball game is pretty eye-opening.
 
kayoh190 said:
I look at music the same way I see any form of entertainment - the human element is what makes it interesting to me. Same with sports - can a computer be more accurate than an umpire? Can an AI drive a car around a track faster than a human? Can a robot hit a ball further? Sure, but that's not really the point - I'm a human and when it comes to creative and sporting pursuits, I like seeing humans doing human things.
Click to expand...

AI is not more human than human(s) - rob zombie, I think
 
AI is excellent at replication but AI is not good at originality. It imitates originality in a predictable way, which is almost a contradiction. Work on enough AI prompts and watch, listen or interpret the results and you start to see this.
Consider the fact that a useful case of AI is creating music and it tells you more about how unoriginal most music is. It's rehashed crap done in the same style as every other musician in the genre for that period. The intros, choruses, interludes, melodies/chords, bass drops, bpm, etc all follow the same rough progression. Because... they're not original :)

Do I think AI will replace the more innovatives like David Bowie, Pink Floyd, Tool ...? No.
Will there be a bunch of follow on people who essentially copy-cat their style and build it with AI prompts? Sure! But only once AI has a template to replicate.

Just a guess :)
 
DeadStick said:
Why would you pay paralegals a livable wage to review documents when you can buy an AI to do it?
Click to expand...
I separated this one out because of the way you phrased it..you can’t “buy” a lot of software anymore…you basically just rent it. I’d much rather base the future of my company on live people that I can train replacements for should they choose to become unavailable. I can’t do that with AI.
 
2-Bit Speed said:
That's hilarious!! You might want to dial it back or people are going to realize it's an act, though. :cheerswine:
Click to expand...
And you've proven my point. You want to live in a fantasy land where 99% of humans are replaced by AI, and yet any realistic response to take care of that mass of humanity is dismissed outright as ridiculous. So how does a society function when unemployment is "everyone"? People are being replaced with AI right now, and you want to close your eyes and pretend nothing is different.

And everyone who is pointing out that AI is not as good as people: take a look around at what has happened to the food we eat, the clothes we wear, and the homes we live in. Mass production at the expense of quality isn't a bug, it's the driving feature of our system. If you think businesses won't trade quality for profit then you're living in fantasy land.
 
ArrowFlyer86 said:
AI is excellent at replication but AI is not good at originality. It imitates originality in a predictable way, which is almost a contradiction. Work on enough AI prompts and watch, listen or interpret the results and you start to see this.
Consider the fact that a useful case of AI is creating music and it tells you more about how unoriginal most music is. It's rehashed crap done in the same style as every other musician in the genre for that period. The intros, choruses, interludes, melodies/chords, bass drops, bpm, etc all follow the same rough progression. Because... they're not original :)

Do I think AI will replace the more innovatives like David Bowie, Pink Floyd, Tool ...? No.
Will there be a bunch of follow on people who essentially copy-cat their style and build it with AI prompts? Sure! But only once AI has a template to replicate.

Just a guess :)
Click to expand...

Some of us at work were discussing AI and I just said, "I haven't seen one yet. When Chat GPT decides it's bored with being a chat-bot and decides it would much rather control traffic lights or be downloaded to a probe and explore space, then we'll have AI. Until then, we just have highly specialized (and complex) decision engines."

That's kind of how I feel.

The tech is impressive, but it's important to know what it isn't.
 
aftCG said:
At the end of a game of Monopoly, one person has all the resources and the other players have nothing. And the game is over.

If AI takes on all the roles people project for it, none of us will be "free to pursue our interests unfettered" - because none of us will have a stream of income.
Click to expand...
This is the sort of nonsense that gets stated and re-stated by people who never studied economics.

Monopoly is a game that is intentionally designed to accomplish a goal - to create one winner while everyone else loses. This is where it is nothing at all like reality. In fact, the core basis of the game is a fallacious canard that is an ECON 101 example of misunderstanding of basic principles.

www.adamsmith.org

The zero sum fallacy — Adam Smith Institute

Ah yes, the Zero Sum Game fallacy returns to haunt us yet again. We can bury it with a stake of logic through its heart at the crossroads, but still it rises from the dead. It’s the one that says wealth is fixed, so that if someone gains more of it, it must be at the expense of someone else having l
www.adamsmith.org www.adamsmith.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top