Producers and labels using gen. AI

[Hensmon]

Thought experiment - if a producer, lets say Airwave, was to feed an AI model all of his tracks from 90-2000 and then asked it to create new tracks, and assuming they are good, how would the AI critics here react?

There would be no moral implications - Its trained on Airwaves owned music. There's an effort component - the 1000's of hours he put making the source material to train the model on. The quality or style is considered better (for some) than his modern output - so the consumer wins too.

 

[Magdelayna]

Thought experiment - if a producer, lets say Airwave, was to feed an AI model all of his tracks from 90-2000 and then asked it to create new tracks, and assuming they are good, how would the AI critics here react?

There would be no moral implications - Its trained on Airwaves owned music. There's an effort component - the 1000's of hours he put making the source material to train the model on. The quality or style is considered better (for some) than his modern output - so the consumer wins too.

Id still have a dim view of it - why would any decent producer want to do that anyway?

Some of us arnt of this 'one click does it all' generation...

 

[tranceissomewhatalive]

why would any decent producer want to do that anyway?

money? not all decent producers are rich or even make their money from music. From Suno perspective this actually would be a very reasonable move to blur the AI/human edge further and legitimate their product amongst wider audience

 

[Hensmon]

To get to that one click though @Magdelayna actually took that artist 1000s of hours of work before hand, and also too from the people who build the AI tools to make it possible. It's actually a huge effort behind the realization of such a track.

Quantifying art or music based on effort is tricky too. Blue Fear was made in 4 hours, yet another track might take 4 months. Does the latter have more quality because more effort was involved? Is a trance track using a real drummer for the recording better than one that uses a drum machine loop in software?

Then let's consider Rothco, who paints giant red squares vs Thomas Cole who paints intricate oil paintings. One clearly involves more effort and skill, but there are people who much prefer a Rothco in their living room. That's not to say skill and effort don't get recognized and contribute to the love of something, but it's not that straight forward. The viewer ultimately wants something they enjoy, and effort is either secondary or not important at all. If Airwave released an EP today that sounded like Lady Blue, People Just Don't Care etc I would listen and enjoy happily, why should I care how much effort was involved really?

 

[Magdelayna]

money? not all decent producers are rich or even make their money from music. From Suno perspective this actually would be a very reasonable move to blur the AI/human edge further and legitimate their product amongst wider audience

Nowt to do with money but ethics...i hope most producers dont want to create a track by clicking a button and then having the audacity to release it hehe.

 

[Magdelayna]

Quantifying art or music based on effort is tricky too. Blue Fear was made in 4 hours, yet another track might take 4 months. Does the latter have more quality because more effort was involved? Is a trance track using a real drummer for the recording better than one that uses a drum machine loop in software?

Doesnt matter if a track took 2 hours - at least the producer made it from scratch and not through an AI program clicking a button....your comparisons are silly...why do you think there is such a backlash towards AI recently - look at the recent Nvidia 'AI' filter they have put all over game graphics - altering the original artistic values..

 

[Jetflag]

Thought experiment - if a producer, lets say Airwave, was to feed an AI model all of his tracks from 90-2000 and then asked it to create new tracks, and assuming they are good, how would the AI critics here react?

There would be no moral implications - Its trained on Airwaves owned music. There's an effort component - the 1000's of hours he put making the source material to train the model on. The quality or style is considered better (for some) than his modern output - so the consumer wins too.

It would be perfectly fair to do from a moral or even financial standpoint imo.. but when doing so you have to get clear what an AI is, how it operates, and what the artistic consequence of that is..An AI is very good at two things:

-generic " boring" work
-(interpolating) averages from libraries.

Feed it a 1000 of your " special" tracks and out of those 1000 it will (when asked) create an " average special track" of that, or AI shlop from that context/library, if you will.

Now there is ofcourse le cream of the slop ....But it also doesn't generate any new "boundary setting davinci mona lisa art airwave" tracks. And Imo one should consider that as an artist.

 

[Jetflag]

Doesnt matter if a track took 2 hours - at least the producer made it from scratch and not through an AI program clicking a button....your comparisons are silly...why do you think there is such a backlash towards AI recently - look at the recent Nvidia 'AI' filter they have put all over game graphics - altering the original artistic values..

Small amateur shrink observation if you'll endulge me. But you haven't explained whát precisely ís morally or even artistically/aesthetically wrong with it, You've just claimed it is/have said Bleh, I hate it and some other people too. Because you experience loss-aversion/feel threatned by the development.

 

[Hensmon]

Doesnt matter if a track took 2 hours - at least the producer made it from scratch and not through an AI program clicking a button....your comparisons are silly...why do you think there is such a backlash towards AI recently - look at the recent Nvidia 'AI' filter they have put all over game graphics - altering the original artistic values..

But if effort is a component to what makes art slop or quality, then you run into problems when extrapolating that logic across other things. Millions of human hours and effort put into Trance in the lasy 10 years, and basically 1% is quality. So whats the point of all that effort, if I am dissatisfied as a listener. If AI is going to help give me more tracks that actually make me feel something, then I'm in a predicament arent I? I have to manually ignore my feelings by applying some artificial outrage on top of them concerning how much effort was involved, even though effort clearly has not been a primary factor in evaluating art for hundreds of years.

 

[Magdelayna]

Small amateur shrink observation if you'll endulge me. But you haven't explained whát precisely ís morally or even artistically/aesthetically wrong with it, You've just claimed it is/have said Bleh, I hate it and some other people too. Because you experience loss-aversion/feel threatned by the development.

Some guys in this topic who are 'defending' AI music dont understand at all the SATISFACTION that a producers FEELS when they make ORIGINAL music of their own,and have a back catalogue of it.....the whole thought of AI music just doesnt agree with me it all. The guys who think its a good idea are probably failed producers...

 

[Jetflag]

Some guys in this topic who are 'defending' AI music dont understand at all the SATISFACTION that a producers FEELS when they make ORIGINAL music of their own,and have a back catalogue of it.....the whole thought of AI music just doesnt agree with me it all. The guys who think its a good idea are probably failed producers...

but muh feeling...

not an argument. further more. you're talking to an artists, who operates in both fields (albeit the AI one not very much in music). again, you or I feeling satisfaction from our work done manually is not an argument for or against its validity.

 

[Magdelayna]

But if effort is a component to what makes art slop or quality, then you run into problems when extrapolating that logic across other things. Millions of human hours and effort put into Trance in the lasy 10 years, and basically 1% is quality. So whats the point of all that effort, if I am dissatisfied as a listener. If AI is going to help give me more tracks that actually make me feel something, then I'm in a predicament arent I? I have to manually ignore my feelings by applying some artificial outrage on top of them concerning how much effort was involved, even though effort clearly has not been a primary factor in evaluating art for hundreds of years.

Ive no idea what youre talking about - so you think AI will make better Trance than actual producers?

 

[Jetflag]

But if effort is a component to what makes art slop or quality, then you run into problems when extrapolating that logic across other things. Millions of human hours and effort put into Trance in the lasy 10 years, and basically 1% is quality. So whats the point of all that effort, if I am dissatisfied as a listener. If AI is going to help give me more tracks that actually make me feel something, then I'm in a predicament arent I? I have to manually ignore my feelings by applying some artificial outrage on top of them concerning how much effort was involved, even though effort clearly has not been a primary factor in evaluating art for hundreds of years.

exactly. if just effort where art, then my cousin with down-syndrome's mountain of potato peels would now be admired in Carnegie hall

 

[Magdelayna]

but muh feeling...

not an argument. further more. you're talking to an artists, who operates in both fields (albeit the AI one not very much in music).

Which other fields? You cant compare AI music to other fields of AI....

 

[Jetflag]

Which other fields? You cant compare AI music to other fields of AI....

sure you can, the field of visualisation (pictures/movies) or code writing for instance. I operate profesionally (and by neccesity) mostly in the former.

 

[facade1984]

Here's my two cents: if you're genuinely making music for yourself then why give a fuck

 

[Jetflag]

Here's my two cents: if you're genuinely making music for yourself then why give a fuck

 

[Magdelayna]

sure you can, the field of visualisation (pictures/movies) or code writing for instance. I operate profesionally (and by neccesity) mostly in the former.

Ive created AI images of myself for a 'laugh'....theres a massive difference between doing something like that and creating a whole AI music track and claiming it as your own...

 

[Jetflag]

... well then again... it is fun, speaking for myself, to box over it with people on the interwebs..

 

[Jetflag]

Ive created AI images of myself for a 'laugh'....theres a massive difference between doing something like that and creating a whole AI music track and claiming it as your own...

whats the functional moral difference between you doing that, and this guy, a professional film editor mind you, doing this for a 'laugh' ?