I never thought I would ever agree with something like this, but I do.

 

the question is where exactly is the border.

while most of us will agree that entering a prompt until it works halfway is not coding, i find it more complicated to evaluate using code made by LLMs when they are only parts of a program.

even if claude can code something better then i can, i would always keep the control over everything myself, only then it is fun enough to do it.

one of the best processes imho is that you write your own code and have the AI find bugs when something does not work as it should. for example because of a typo, or because you failed to understand something...

 

Oh god the suno huckster is back. What ai products are we rationalizing, justifying and peddling today?

 

lol.. bro I’ve been on this forum for over a decade, always trying to help well before AI.

the funny thing is nothing I’ve ever posted on here I’ve asked for money for with any of the companies I’ve worked for.

I’ve given away free Suno, replay, loopcloud, even splice back in the day to everyone on this forum.

Every tool I’m offering to the AS community for free if anyone can find them useful.

but you’re right this site fell off in the past 10
Years. Later yall! I got shows to play.

 

Exactly. When I was in sound engineering school there was that one guy a year younger and that stupid fck one day said: Nah, I'm not that much of an audio engineer, I see myself more in the role of a producer. Like I would say "make that kick punchier" or "have that guitar have more grit". And I thought to myself "You my friend are a stupid idiot who is not gonna get far". I hope he found his purpose in life, I haven't seen him in the audio industry, thats for sure.

 

i think broduzer ist written with B but otherwise i agree, and we all know this type of person.

it is sad for these people themselves that they will never be able to use an LLM to get into their righful boss role, but they still could buy a little dog.

 

He's not peddling anything. The opposite actually. Super helpful. Happy to share, with a wide range of knowledge, as well as literally giving, as he mentioned above.

ya'll are being rude. bullies, for no reason. Chasing away someone who not only gives freely, but has invaluable experience and insights into the inner workings of the industry. If you don't like AI, cool, but are we really going to resort to bullying someone who has contributed so much over the years?

Some random account created a week ago starts sharing slop they made, by all means, lets bully lol, but cmon, lets not be jerks to people that actually contribute just because the discussion is something you don't like.

 

next time try codex, or an agent in vscode, much more useful than chatgpt

 

it is astonishing what gemini or claude know even about very rare and very old systems, PPC OSX, MacOS Classic, even Atari and Amiga. They can explain you in detail how some 25 years old quicktime SDK works which has vanished from the apple FTP long before Chatbots existed.

 

i was trying to remember those MS-DOS int 10h VGA/textmode tricks the other day (like forcefully mapping 7x14 fonts into a 16px grid) and Opus proceeded to give me a full list of assembly snippets to manipulate horizontal pixel clocks and raster beam scanline shit. like bro how is that in your weights

 

This moral panic will soon pass, especially once AI gets better.

Some AI-coded plugins will be horrible, some will be good. Some human-made plugins are terrible. Knowing something was made by AI soon won't be very reliable for whether it's good or not. (An extremely non-technical dev + AI is probably a bad sign, though.)

I know nothing about DSP. I've started using GPT-5.5 and Claude Fable 5 to "vibecode" plugins. They're nowhere near done, but so far the results seem pretty good. I don't see what's wrong with doing this, if the quality is great and everything is tested rigorously. The software will speak for itself, or it won't.

 

I hope you label your work or product with a "Created with AI" logo.

You will save a lot of man-hours and, consequently, a great deal on labor costs.
Please keep in mind that truly great synthesizers are rare.

Don't make the mistake of trying to make a quick buck. Look at what other successful manufacturers are doing and improve upon your product. Include an arpeggiator similar to the one in Rob Papen's Predator. Make the buttons round and not too small. Check in with other professionals along the way to ensure you're on the right track. Include a large modulation matrix with at least 12 slots.

Why should I spend money on your synthesizer?
Convince me with the sound quality and extensive modulation options.

Acquire more expertise and do a better job than the competition! I wish you the best of luck.

 

and there we have problem #1, and it is not releated to "morale". you can not even test it.

problem #2 ist that you hardly can claim copyright on it, and if you do, this would be a federal crime im most countries.

problem #3 is that if you can do it, everyone else can do it, too. so how to sell? why share? why making it first in place? why make audio plug-ins when everyone can generate his own music with 3 clicks?

problem #4 is that due to AI mega companies, those who actually create new things will sooner or later stop publishing their work. they will have to switch to SaaS in order to make a living and be able to keep inventing.
this means no more open source, no more collaborations, no more anonymity, no more demo versions, no more cracks, forced updates, higher fees, requires to be online 24/7.

 

Last edited: Jul 6, 2026 at 8:56 AM

Patently absurd. It is not a federal crime to use an LLM to write code "in most countries", or in any country. The majority of major US companies are using something like Claude Code or Codex to write a ton of code daily. Within a year or two it will be nearly all major and minor US companies. They're all violating the law? Come on. They all write code with AI and they claim the copyright to that code. As long as the code does not include, verbatim, some AGPL-licensed stuff or whatever, there are no legal issues.

I can, because the LLMs understand DSP even if I don't. They can test and correct any DSP issues and I (and beta testers) can test the quality of the results and the sound.

I wish I knew DSP or could learn DSP. It is just above my paygrade. I can hardly do basic algebra. I could spend 7 years trying to become as good at DSP and analog modeling as the Cytomic devs (while probably failing, due to being horrible at mathematics), or I could work with an expert and outsource those parts to the expert. In this case a machine expert.

Steve Duda followed a similar process. He hired a seasoned DSP expert to write all of the DSP for Serum so that he could focus on the product and its design and features. I am doing something similar.

This is not to say my plugin will be anywhere as good or high-quality as Serum - it obviously won't be, and Steve is obviously a way better dev and designer and producer and musician than I'll ever be, and the AI probably will not be as good as the expert he hired. (Maybe a future much smarter AI could be.) But I don't really see what's wrong with doing this, as long as I take great effort to try to ensure the DSP is actually correct or at least serving its purpose. (Yes, by using other AIs to look at what the AIs are writing; it does actually seem to work well. Maybe I'll hand the codebase to a human expert and they'd say it's actually all horrible and many of the equations are not right and that it only sounds good by accident, but if it sounds good to me and others then I'm just going to go with it.)

I'm not even really that interested in selling it, or at least I didn't even have the idea to try to sell it until months into it. To be absolutely clear, I am not some kind of slopfactory dev. I just had an idea for a plugin I wanted to use, it didn't exist, so I made it myself. I would not release something unless I considered it very high-quality. I've been an ordinary (manual) developer of other sorts of software for 15 years (and not just lame CRUD web dev stuff), and I've never released anything that didn't meet my standards.

AI actually helps me be more of a perfectionist, not less of one! If anyone here has not used LLMs to code, I think they may be misunderstanding the process. You're typing hundreds or thousands of paragraphs at the LLM over the course of weeks, with many in between each "turn"/round. You're describing the architecture and design of the system and what you want supported.

 

that´s not what i said. i said it is a crime to claim copyright over it and sell or lease it.

that´s not what i said. i said it is a crime to claim copyright over it and sell or lease it.

which is illegal.

it is like selling icecream, stating it contained cream when it does not.

if you know of a software product which has been fully made using AI with no human programming involved, let me know.

you claim all would so that - i wouldnt even know a single one.

please name one.

you can test code yourself, because you can let the AI do it because you can´t?

lol. you totally missed the point about "doing something yourself".

so i am right, if you can´t code it, you can´t test it.

i also wonder why the LLM produces nonworking code in the first place, when it is able to find those bugs later during "testing".

wrong or right is another question.

but you must understand that it is not the same.

and you can be sure that even in the US false advertisment is a fraud.

coco fat for cream = fraud. plastic instead of wood = fraud. AI image without further work emitted as NFT artwork = fraud. claim copyright over something which is free, stolen, or otherwise not yours = fraud.

otoh if you admit it that your product is 99.9% autogenerated (or public domain, or CC-by-commercial), you can not sell it exactly the same way a you could sell your intellectual property.

didnt you just say you can´t? now i am confused.

AI can even be better than a human coworker in finding your bugs. plus it is faster and cheaper.

but if you do not know audio DSP, how can you actually ensure the quality and make claims? you cant, just as you can´t when your employee coded it for you.

yes, i know. one can solve that by liabilty exclusion and disclaimers. that is how it would work for audio software.
that´s why audio software is often full of bugs.

if you code for BMW you can not do this. the bill will only be paid when you deliver what you promised, and what you promised is written down in 300 pages of contract.


take none of that as ciritics of your person or what you do. though... acctually i do not even understand that. creating a little custom effect using reaktor, supercollider, max, swift - or asking a friend if he can do it for you - might be even faster than all these LLM experiments.

my math knowledge is hardly above yours and i wrote close to 800 plug-ins between 2001 and 2007.

learning how to train loras, write RAGs, implement testing procedures using LLMs is about as much brainwork as learning the real thing itself.

 

Last edited: Jul 7, 2026 at 12:35 PM

I think an important distinction is often overlooked when people talk about vibe coding.

Vibe coding is mostly about describing what you want, trying the result and adjusting it until it seems to work. It can be fast, creative and surprisingly effective, especially for prototypes.

Agentic coding is more structured. The AI analyzes the project, plans changes, edits multiple files, runs tests, checks errors and improves the result instead of only generating isolated pieces of code.

But it still makes a huge difference whether an experienced developer uses AI or someone with no real understanding of programming does.

A developer can judge whether a solution is well structured, whether a bug has actually been fixed and whether the code will still be maintainable later. They are also more likely to notice when the AI is only treating symptoms, or when it fixes one issue while creating another somewhere else.

Someone without coding experience can still build surprisingly capable software with AI today. That is impressive and opens the door for many people who could never have built an app before.

The problems usually begin when something breaks, the project grows, or too many quick fixes are stacked on top of each other.

AI can write code, but it does not automatically give the user an understanding of that code.

For developers, AI is an extremely powerful tool. For complete beginners, it can be an amazing shortcut, but a shortcut is not always the same thing as a solid foundation.

Vibe coding can get you to a visible result very quickly. Agentic coding can make the process more systematic. Good software development helps make sure the result still works after the tenth update.

 

You are still mixing up several completely different legal concepts.

Something does not need to be protected by copyright in order to be sold. Public domain books, public domain music, open-source software and non-copyrightable material are sold commercially every day.

A lack of copyright protection would mainly mean that you may not be able to stop other people from copying the unprotected parts. It does not automatically make selling the product illegal, fraudulent or criminal.

Your ice cream comparison does not work. Claiming that a product contains cream when it does not is a false factual statement about its ingredients. Selling software created with AI is not equivalent to lying about the contents of food.

AI-assisted work is also not automatically the same as a work created with no human authorship. A developer may design the architecture, define the features, choose implementations, reject outputs, rewrite code, integrate systems, debug problems and make thousands of creative and technical decisions. Those human contributions do not disappear merely because an AI generated some or even much of the source code.

You also seem to assume that selling software means claiming copyright over every line of code. It does not. A product can include open-source libraries, public domain code, generated code and proprietary human-written code at the same time. The developer can sell the complete product without claiming exclusive ownership of every individual component.

The testing argument is also too absolute. People test systems they did not personally code all the time. QA engineers, musicians, beta testers and safety teams regularly test software without being its authors. Black-box testing is a real discipline.

I agree with the narrower point that someone who does not understand DSP may fail to notice technical problems and should be cautious about making strong technical claims. Independent expert review would be valuable.

But that is a quality-control argument, not proof that the product cannot legally be tested, sold or licensed.

And no, learning to use AI tools is not necessarily equivalent to spending years learning DSP. Knowing how to ask an AI for a filter does not make someone a DSP engineer, just as knowing how to hire a DSP engineer does not make someone one. It can still allow them to build a product, provided they are honest about their limitations and validate the result properly.

 

you don not read what i said.

nobody said otherwise. you only repeat what i wrote above.

please read what i wrote before you answer. i am not an AI. i am used to communicate in contexts and i am not willing to explain the same things 3 times.

"ai-assisted" is not what we were talking about.

a developer. exactly.

i do not assume how licence contracts of audio software mostly works, i know it.

why do you think that takes years? and how would you know if you never did it?

do not underestimate yourself.