[NA] Is AI going to end actual musicians?

DeadStick said:
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.
Click to expand...

Again, dial it back a little bit.

DeadStick said:
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.
Click to expand...

Better.
 
My son is a musician, and a few months ago he forwarded me this story: https://www.pressherald.com/2024/03...or-saco-musician-kgfreeze-and-its-scary-good/

A musician local to him and his audio engineer collaborator fed his 7 previous albums into a musical AI called Sumo. In 45 minutes, the AI generated an 8th album, described as scary good, matching the musician's writing style and vocals and it proved capable of fooling his fan base. The AI even trained on cover art for the previous albums and generated a new, slightly aged, photo of the musician for the new album.

The article notes that for this experiment, they had to push aside, at least temporarily, the ethics and morality questions raised by generating that album.
 
Sumo is very good. I had it make a new goal song for my hockey daughter. It's tailored for her and it's awesome.

But no, I don't think I'm selling my Stones tickets to listen to a stones knock-off.
 
GaryM said:
My son is a musician, and a few months ago he forwarded me this story: https://www.pressherald.com/2024/03...or-saco-musician-kgfreeze-and-its-scary-good/

A musician local to him and his audio engineer collaborator fed his 7 previous albums into a musical AI called Sumo. In 45 minutes, the AI generated an 8th album, described as scary good, matching the musician's writing style and vocals and it proved capable of fooling his fan base. The AI even trained on cover art for the previous albums and generated a new, slightly aged, photo of the musician for the new album.

The article notes that for this experiment, they had to push aside, at least temporarily, the ethics and morality questions raised by generating that album.
Click to expand...
Exactly, people don't understand how far the tech has already gone. When you can get 90% of the way there with AI, people start counting how much they spend on salaries and benefits.

No, AI music won't replace the headliners tomorrow, but it is already replacing the engineers who run the lights/pyro, it is replacing the session musicians who fill out a track, it is replacing the producer who mixes it...

Taylor Swift may still be the human face on stage, but all the hundreds of jobs that support her on stage are already being replaced with AI. But people want to pretend like somehow society won't be impacted when we only pay the one person at the top while eliminating everyone else.
 
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.
Click to expand...

Not always. One game we played it ended up with 2 of us left, with one owning half the board contiguously and the other the other half. Money just got passed back and forth. The game went days until we instilled massive penalties for landing on all non owned squares.
 
DeadStick said:
No, AI music won't replace the headliners tomorrow, but it is already replacing the engineers who run the lights/pyro, it is replacing the session musicians who fill out a track, it is replacing the producer who mixes it...
Click to expand...

@Half Fast Thoughts?
 
2-Bit Speed said:
@Half Fast Thoughts?
Click to expand...

For live shows? Oh, we've had computers running show lights since the 1980s. Pretty common, especially where a show track is being used. Sound is a little more difficult since there are so many variables in performance, audience, atmosphere, etc. Still, it doesn't seem much more than the automated entertainment Chuck E Cheese pioneered over 40 years ago, and just about as artistically creative.
 
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...

Wow, worked all day to not get replaced by AI myself one day, come back to this thread and it's two pages long! Anywho, to answer your question: I don't know and I think the talking heads in Washington don't either. The tech is too new and doesn't really fit into any of the current legislation around IP. The way I see it for the music industry, it's a tool so still the creator/user owns the copyright, as long as he/she uses the tool in accordance with the terms and conditions and the said terms and conditions grants those rights to the creator/user. For example, if you use 'AI Music Tool A' and that tool says that if you pay $XXX per month for a subscription, you own the songs you create with that tool during the time you have a valid subscription, then that's it. It's no different than someone buying/licensing Logic Pro. When I was still actively making music as a songwriter and producer many moons ago, I used pre-loaded midi loops. Sure, I modified them, changed notes here and there, adjusted the key to make it fit the singer, etc. But, it was always "mine". Now, if I was to use a specific AI tool, I would see it as the next generation of DAWs. I am still the "creative mind" behind the song because I'm instructing the AI tool. I tell it what I want to hear. I tell it if I want any changes and what the changes should sound like. While I don't push the buttons to make it happen, I still think I'm the "creative" mind behind it. "Creative" is being used very liberally here of course.

In my case, one of the businesses I own, we create custom songs for special occasions (I won't disclose the name as I don't want to appear as if I'm advertising lol) like anniversaries, weddings, etc. I even had a fellow Comanche pilot use our service to write a song about their trip to Oshkosh last year. They had no idea I was behind that business but I sent them an email when my staff told me that they're working on a song for a Comanche pilot lol. We give clients the option to choose between AI generated songs or musician generated songs. The AI generated songs are based off of the 1,000s of songs we created previously by hand so I would say it's safe that we own the work of those for sure.

Lastly, you asked about if you get airplay or e-play. Honestly, nobody will care from a $$$ standpoint even if you don't technically own the IP unless the IP is owned by a major label artist and could be brand damaging. If you just create a song with an AI tool, even if they don't grant you ownership of it because it's part of their T&Cs or you don't pay for the service or whatever, if you get a million streams with that song, you'd earn about $4,000. Getting a million streams is nearly impossible unless you actually have a brand and put serious $$$ (certainly more than $4k) behind building that brand. But let's say, you luck out and get a million streams, suing you for $4,000 is hardly worth it for the offended party. Plus, they probably would never find out anyways if their tool cranks out a large volume of songs.

For artists, the money is in touring, merchandize, brand deals, etc. If that random AI generated song turns you into the next Justin Timberlake, you may have to answer some questions. But, chances this would happen is LOW for someone in the music industry actually trying. It's non-existent for anyone just fooling around on an AI tool and creating a song.
 
Chrisgoesflying said:
Wow, worked all day to not get replaced by AI myself one day, come back to this thread and it's two pages long! Anywho, to answer your question: I don't know and I think the talking heads in Washington don't either. The tech is too new and doesn't really fit into any of the current legislation around IP. The way I see it for the music industry, it's a tool so still the creator/user owns the copyright, as long as he/she uses the tool in accordance with the terms and conditions and the said terms and conditions grants those rights to the creator/user. For example, if you use 'AI Music Tool A' and that tool says that if you pay $XXX per month for a subscription, you own the songs you create with that tool during the time you have a valid subscription, then that's it. It's no different than someone buying/licensing Logic Pro. When I was still actively making music as a songwriter and producer many moons ago, I used pre-loaded midi loops. Sure, I modified them, changed notes here and there, adjusted the key to make it fit the singer, etc. But, it was always "mine". Now, if I was to use a specific AI tool, I would see it as the next generation of DAWs. I am still the "creative mind" behind the song because I'm instructing the AI tool. I tell it what I want to hear. I tell it if I want any changes and what the changes should sound like. While I don't push the buttons to make it happen, I still think I'm the "creative" mind behind it. "Creative" is being used very liberally here of course.

In my case, one of the businesses I own, we create custom songs for special occasions (I won't disclose the name as I don't want to appear as if I'm advertising lol) like anniversaries, weddings, etc. I even had a fellow Comanche pilot use our service to write a song about their trip to Oshkosh last year. They had no idea I was behind that business but I sent them an email when my staff told me that they're working on a song for a Comanche pilot lol. We give clients the option to choose between AI generated songs or musician generated songs. The AI generated songs are based off of the 1,000s of songs we created previously by hand so I would say it's safe that we own the work of those for sure.

Lastly, you asked about if you get airplay or e-play. Honestly, nobody will care from a $$$ standpoint even if you don't technically own the IP unless the IP is owned by a major label artist and could be brand damaging. If you just create a song with an AI tool, even if they don't grant you ownership of it because it's part of their T&Cs or you don't pay for the service or whatever, if you get a million streams with that song, you'd earn about $4,000. Getting a million streams is nearly impossible unless you actually have a brand and put serious $$$ (certainly more than $4k) behind building that brand. But let's say, you luck out and get a million streams, suing you for $4,000 is hardly worth it for the offended party. Plus, they probably would never find out anyways if their tool cranks out a large volume of songs.

For artists, the money is in touring, merchandize, brand deals, etc. If that random AI generated song turns you into the next Justin Timberlake, you may have to answer some questions. But, chances this would happen is LOW for someone in the music industry actually trying. It's non-existent for anyone just fooling around on an AI tool and creating a song.
Click to expand...
I appreciate the explanation, it makes sense.

Not worried about getting rich from it. ;) my goal would basically be to add songs to my playlist in a genre/content combination that doesn’t seem to exist. So I’m guessing that, like most things I prefer, the market would be pretty small.
 
Seems to me that most AI work is derivative, rather than innovative. I don't think any AI will be able to come up with stuff like this:
 
To me this isn't either new, or a problem. Symptom? Maybe, depends on how we deal with it.

By that, I remember maybe a silent movie, about how these new machines were going to replace the "calculators". People that would add up numbers, being replaced by mechanical adding machines that were much faster. Do we have people adding up numbers on paper now? Not so much. Do we have more people than ever before doing paperwork? Yes.

The container ships will replace the teamsters. Many of them? Sure. All of them? No. The continuous miner will replace miners. Many of them? Yes. All? No. Do you need to be an actual engineer to safely run a train now? No. Does an airliner need a dedicated navigator? No. Well, not until gps falls apart.

The difference is that we're talking about "thinking things", sort of, now, as opposed to physical work with some thought involved. To me that's minor.

Can AI make ads for potato chips, or even make an album that sounds a lot like another album? Sure. But I'll bet a mortgage payment that if you feed AI "American Beauty" it's not going to spit out anything like "Shakedown Street".

Root cause? The whole world, all the different sides and factions, is operating on an economic model that isn't any different than that of white-tailed deer. We expand until we run out of food and are overrun by insects and disease. All of the tech we have that we think is helping is actually accelerating the decline. To fix it, we don't need more tech, we need different goals, different values. It won't happen in the lifetime of anyone here.

Huh. That may be one of my least cheery posts. Sorry...
 
Jim K said:
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?
Click to expand...
That is the stuff we are given access too. I’ll have to find the article but there is AI writing its own code that top programmers have no clue what it’s writing. AI will take over in time.
 
Half Fast said:
For live shows? Oh, we've had computers running show lights since the 1980s. Pretty common, especially where a show track is being used. Sound is a little more difficult since there are so many variables in performance, audience, atmosphere, etc. Still, it doesn't seem much more than the automated entertainment Chuck E Cheese pioneered over 40 years ago, and just about as artistically creative.
Click to expand...
Just triggered a memory for me. I had my hands in the guts of a concert light control computer - I don't remember who made it, but I think it was called "Ther Entertainer". They used them on the Lionel Ritchie Dancin' on the Ceiling tour, with Shiela E opening. They had two of these, serial numbers 0001 and 0002, so they had a backup in case one croaked... well, until somebody plugged them both into the same outlet strip and that strip into 220 instead of 110...

I got to fix 'em. :)
 
Not sure how much MIDI is still being used but back in the day (as they say) we could drive a lot of various equipment with it. You had to follow it or "meet it on the one" because it wasn't intelligent at all ...
 
Daleandee said:
Not sure how much MIDI is still being used but back in the day (as they say) we could drive a lot of various equipment with it. You had to follow it or "meet it on the one" because it wasn't intelligent at all ...
Click to expand...
I am using MIDI control tonight, starting in about 10 minutes. It controls my guitar rig for "Jesus Christ Superstar" (Milwaukee - Sunset Theater).
20240504_192331.jpg
 
so you don’t want any electronic involvement in your music, well ok enjoy that lol
<lighten up, it’s a joke!>

 
I've played with AI image generation trying to generate characters for a book I'm endlessly working on. What I saw is it can generate images that look like stuff it's trained on but if you try to get it to do anything original it just breaks down. You get stuff that looks ridiculous, abominations that resemble a human form, etc. Now if you want to make some generic stock photos for advertising/general website purposes it will do just fine at that but even then you're likely to need a few tries before it spits out what you want.

IMO it's just another tool that will have it's uses and limitations like everything else. Barring some orders of magnitude leap in capability I don't see it as being as revolutionary as many people are saying.
 
Can AI help put out a new Lynyrd Skynyrd album? Those guys havent released one in years for some reason. Whats the hold up...
 
They are still playing the Free Bird solo that started back in the late 70’s. It’s been going for over 40 years, they gotta be a little tired by now
 
GoFly said:
They are still playing the Free Bird solo that started back in the late 70’s. It’s been going for over 40 years, they gotta be a little tired by now
Click to expand...
It's a long song if they do the full version rather than the radio edit rendition.
 
charheep said:
Can AI help put out a new Lynyrd Skynyrd album? Those guys havent released one in years for some reason. Whats the hold up...
Click to expand...
:) Hey, you brought the thread around to be airplane related. I'd start with the premise that many musicians are not especially good at risk management.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top