At the end of the day, will I go to listen to (and watch) some human figures tapping and clattering on instruments, seemingly more or less in sync after what appears to be a long series of years of practice or specialization, producing sounds that are pleasant to my ears, or will I go to watch (and listen to) some presumably human figures with VR headsets on their eyes, dancing while typing language commands or requests with their fingers into prompts? It is not really a question. Technological progress was fun somewhere in the late nineties and the early years of the new millennium. After that, the corporate system that devours everything that can serve a purpose, which was initially designed, even before popularization, as a generator of infinite capital, and which through monopoly in any market completely devalues value itself, became and has remained uninteresting. So yes, for someone who is part of a social animal society that, regardless of everything capital-driven, still recognizes quality, it is not really a question. Of course there will be clubs for AI musicians. The guests of those clubs, as well as the performers, will not need to be physically present in an unnecessary space for entertainment that exists in actual space and time. Virtual entertainers will employ their agents to play, and virtual visitors will employ their agents to listen and watch. If within that ecosystem there is (product/value) something usable for someone, who am I to judge, while watching and listening to those, say, five people over there, each of them tinkering with their own instrument.
Those are the people who are keeping AI Slops scene alive. There is no creativity in in making an AI song, it's more of decorating it. You are a consumer in disguise and most likely going to be the only audience for it. You are just inventing new prompts and not music. I never understand the motivation behind using generative AI for music. If you exploring the tech, it's understandable. But why would anyone want to make music on it? Like 99% people do not make money on their music and they do it because they enjoy doing it. Has writing prompts became as enjoyable as fiddling with notes in piano roll? Last edited: Jul 5, 2026 at 6:22 AM
Well, you just do what's technically possible—maybe you can even cause a little chaos on top of that!
"solved" by mimicking low effort analog consoles with bloated nested submenus recycling for decades, using AI AR+STT as UX layer basically makes look all current softwares obsolete, Reaper's infinite actions list is probably closest to something like AI-native MCP but people already fail to use that properly
I´d argue more effort is usually better, creativity does not exist in a void, but I guess you could look at it as seperate entities. But my point was more about how low effort music and slop in general already drowns out the people who cannot keep up with putting out their work in an assembly line fashion. People not hiring an artist and instead reaching for generative AI is a real problem. We love arts, we love music, right? The human part, the creativity, the effort put into it is part of what enables us to connect with art, so we should push back against everything that undermines those things. I remember a similar discussion about "the democratization of musical instruments", but even if you´d buy a complete, full featured cheap clone gear studio, you´d still have to learn how to use that stuff. Generative AI effectively drops the threshold down to "anyone who knows how to install software". What will be their advantage? Sample packs don´t have to be cracked, so maybe it´s just that sample packs, midi packs etc. are simply so much easier to distribute and they aren´t actually in such high demand. Ableton Live has the workflow and GUI down, imho.
I completely share your concerns and your nostalgia for the physical, human essence of music-making. There is an undeniable beauty in watching a human being master an instrument through years of hard work and dedication. However, blaming capitalism for this shift is looking at the vehicle rather than the engine. The true engine is human nature. As Moby brilliantly put it in the documentary PressPausePlay: "For the longest time, culture was something that you consumed. If you wanted music, you had to hire a musician, or go to a concert, or buy a record. If you wanted a picture, you had to buy a book of photographs or hire a photographer. Now, because of technology, everyone has a digital camera, everyone has recording or editing software on their computer. Everyone's become a producer of culture. The technical and financial barriers to making art have completely disappeared. But the flip side of that is if everybody's a musician and everybody's making mediocre music, eventually the world is just... covered with mediocrity." [1, 2] Technology democratizes access, but human nature instinctively gravitates toward convenience, speed, and the path of least resistance. The corporate system didn't invent this flaw; it just monetizes it. Over time, mass cultural conditioning desensitizes audiences until they settle for that mediocrity. If audiences globally demanded sophistication and genius, algorithms would be feeding them Mozart, Vivaldi, or complex jazz fusion all day long. Instead, algorithms serve what the masses actually want and settle for: repetitive reggaeton deep shit and other similar low-effort mass-produced crap. It is exactly like the Industrial Revolution. The steam engine completely obliterated carriage makers and blacksmiths. Even if half of the global workforce had been carriage makers and the other half blacksmiths—meaning the entire world's working population would have been ruined—their collective protests still wouldn't have stopped the steam engine from replacing horses. It is entirely useless to revolt against a major technological shift. Trying to restrict or regulate it is equally futile. The power of the steam engine was never capped, nor was its evolution stopped into the internal combustion engine, and then into the jet engine. Humanity's drive has always been to go faster, further, and easier. Attempting to shackle or restrict AI is bound to fail. AI will inevitably surpass human capabilities by a landslide, and it is highly probable that we will eventually lose control of it—expecting the opposite would be the real anomaly. In industry, this linear evolution is progress; in art, it is a tragedy. But it is an irreversible trait of human behavior: audiences will always choose the most accessible and efficient option. [1] https://lessonbucket.com/vce-media/unit-2/media-and-change/presspauseplay/ [2]
So are MOMA and such the ones who are keeping the slops scene alive? What a joke. You don't have a clue of who or what I'm and your comment only express your ignorance about a subjetc you know only on the surface and aren't willing to know nothing more. But it's fine: trenches, dicotomies and ramplant fallacies are the butter and bread of online interactions. No surprises here.
This is one of the most human statements here on the forum I think (if one does not want to go into details and create a whole discussion on this subject). This is however the critical part. Because one can not pretend to not have any influence on this decision. If one wants to keep this aways from himself it's fine. That in the case of not being under pressure to create a competeable work, being finally free. It is a very relieving situation.
Yeah, the classic 'you just don't understand my genius' defense. Bro, all you are doing is typing prompts into a text box.
agree but the GUI first impact its screaming more... hate to deal with this AI slop apps in this era... T_T we as musicians and producers NEED tools that can SOLVE our problems... i cant understand why is that so hard to understand... plus, even high levels companies cant solve neither... just selling the more nice skin on another replication of whatever u think... this makes us search harder than ever to find what we need/fit in our workflow.
This is not modern art performance, dont let anyone who tell u this, make u agree. it is not. one thing is let IA help u finish or make a tool, another is let the IA made it for u and u go out and say out loud that "THIS IS THE NEW TOOL WE ARE WAITIN FOR!!!" T_T fk that. ill se a lot of plugins AND (weird) web pages with this skin. its 100% recognizable at first sight.
1-Technology isn't destiny, but it can absolutely shape destinies! If Oppenheimer brought his seven-headed beast to life because there was clear will and pressure behind it, that pretty much proves technological neutrality is a myth. Will and pressure shape choices, choices shape uses, and history has a nasty habit of showing up at your door with a "told you so" look. 2-Technical progress isn’t always human progress... more often it’s just someone’s crypto wallet getting fatter while the rest of us mine meaning out of memes. Social responsibility isn’t optional, ignore it like a parking fine and it’ll still show up at your door. 3-Democratization is not the same as quality. The fact that everyone can make music (whether it’s the cat walking across the keyboard or AI spitting out a track with a prompt and two clicks) does not erase the value of labor and that whole history that makes your family tree proud (or at least relieved you didn't bring shame to the surname!). Platforms show that works with historical value remain strong, and mediocrity hasn’t swallowed everything, even if it tries. The real issue is time and exposure to a pattern of hollowing out content, form, and functionality: constant exposure to shallow content corrodes the ethos, as the Greeks already said. A weakened mind doesn’t create masterpieces, it only creates nausea from too much scrolling! 4-The general public isn't some shapeless blob. Generalizing taste is like assuming everyone only watches/likes blockbuster superhero movies (have you noticed that model has kind of run its course? Dramas are thriving like never before, and plenty of people are already complaining about the lack of good comedies... there are folks who'll wait years for an auteur film from remarkable directors precisely because of their absolutely unique visions, I mean, Cuarón directed Gravity and Harry Potter 3... was that just a coincidence?) There are massive niches sustaining jazz, classical, prog rock, experimental music, and even EDM subgenres (that only their own creators can remember the name of!) Cultural diversity proves that a single direction is just the kind of talk people use when they want to justify their own laziness or irresponsibility, kind of like Ilya Sutskever suggesting they'd need to literally build a bunker before releasing a general AI (AGI), with that classic "—I wash my hands of it, and let the digital apocalypse take the hindmost!" attitude. 5-Cultural resistance is viable, and indie games are living proof of that! They reject AI in creative processes, craft their own aesthetics, build original narratives, and design innovative mechanics. And they even turn a profit... This isn’t utopia, it’s strategy, like surfing against the current, in swim trunks, with the grin of someone who knows exactly where they’re standing! 6-Comparing AI to the steam engine is shallow, almost common sense: steam mechanizes muscles, while AI mechanizes criteria (it classifies, predicts, recommends, and sets patterns). Even worse are robots with AI, where it becomes the "brain" guiding the body, which could ultimately lead to the automation of decisions and actions! But creating more and faster does not mean creating better. The art that endures is born of impulse, time, focus, and realization, not of algorithms dumping content in minutes. Think about it: how long did U2, Tears for Fears, or Philip Glass take to craft a body of work? Go ahead, ask AI to synthesize/represent how long it took Bono to write With or Without You... it'll guess, it'll hallucinate, it'll sound confident, but it won't get anywhere near the soul. Enduring art is something a rushed prompt, typed like someone sprinting for the subway, simply can easily capture. Let's be clear: I’m not saying AI is a black hole, sucking everything in and giving nothing back. But if we don’t take this seriously, with a few good laughs to stay sane, we risk waking up one day to find the world’s playlist entirely generated by some bland algorithm, the kind that never felt a thing listening to Bohemian Rhapsody, and sure as hell will never taste the qualia of a pineapple. And that, my friends, would be a tragedy! Last edited: Jul 5, 2026 at 6:01 PM
Verdict: This DAW belongs in the trash; it stands zero chance against the usual suspects from Steinberg, Image Line, Ableton, and Fender. The attempt to take a dig at the big players failed.
I've forgotten about the DAW at this point. But if you can get me a ticket to the next Brazzers event I will beta-test, teta-test it and whatever it takes Because I just love good film-making and acting
Now you just need to make a clickbait-style video on Youtube, sit back and rake in money from the "controversy".
"I made this AI music software free for everybody, but gatekeepers kept threatening me" And if the gatekeepers don´t shut up, just threaten them with releasing some AI music.
Heh, that's fair. But you gotta realize that a lot of the folks here are not into 500$ softwares either. That's why they're here. Then again those very same folks are way into their respective audio/video crafts as well. Personally I have no use for "AI" since what is being called "AI" in the first place amounts to nothing more than smart/fancy item matching algo's. IMO anything that helps that model is making an already crappy audio landscape of "AI" garbage into an even bigger garbage heap. Further dumbing down of the audio industry is not making it better it just gets worse...just my 2¢...
What?? These are silly, ridiculous concerns. All software is built on top of existing software. All DAWs wrap lots of existing things. Most software nowadays is made mostly by LLMs. In 5 years nearly all software will be made almost exclusively by LLMs. There are no environmental and ethical concerns of doing any of that. The real concern is that it's cheating! It's cheating the user. The user isn't composing the music. The AI is composing the music. That takes the fun, the art, the craft, the creativity out of it.
