Hi all.

I have already shared some message on this forum where I share some news about my Obsidian Neural project.
I've noticed some skepticism/pushback. And to be honest I can understand your point of view. A musician who would like an instrument who would generate a full track would destroy his own pleasure to compose music.
Then... Today Generative AI is here.
Then... What do we do with it?
Do we ignore it and continue as before?
Do we use it and abandon our "traditional" way of composing music in our DAW with our VST, samples, etc?
Or do we use AI with moderation, not to replace our work, but to generate weird sounds, weird textures, etc. Any sounds which would be interesting to use?

I imagine that some of you would claim that I tell you that in order that you download my VST and take a subscription on my API.
Honestly, that's not my main motivation. All the code is full open source on GitHub. You can make your own server. And if someone here has a GPU and want to launch a server, give some API keys to his friend, it's ok. because all the code is open sourced. And that would be great.
yes I have an API solution, because when I initialy released the project in June, a lot of people told me it was too much difficult to install my plugin, etc. Even a journalist told me that while my project wouyld be hard to install he wouldn't write any article on it (spoiler: since it's easier he doesn't even answer me anymore).

I know a lot of musicians hate AI.
I know that's legitimate.
I am a musician too.
I play guitar since my 6 years old.
I know there are fucking risks about AI (I invite you to read the investigation I wrote here about AI drifts: https://dev.to/innermost_47/when-ai...hout-attribution-a-documented-case-study-1h0g)

Then... What do we do?
And you?
What do you think?

 

If it's good enough, I'll use it.

 

All i want is for daws to start using gpus as dsp accelerators... the technology is there, it works, we just need developers to get it done.

 

You might have been playing guitar since 6 years of age, but if you use AI to write for you then you're no longer a musician, you've abducated that title. The argument that since "the genie is out of the bottle..." is to me a rather poor one. If that were the case, anything is within bounds, even the most horrid of things, any behavior and dark thing under the sun.

 

Last edited: Dec 13, 2025 at 6:15 PM

Is there a way to train it so it doesn't generate the usual 'sound' & 'generic' interpretations?

 

most of the AI hype nowadays originated from NLP+LLM,
I feel as if we are 35 years ago "prompting" computers in shell/bash, as if we thrown away 35 years of UX evolution of GUI, mice, drawing styluses and touchscreens, for what exactly ?
me, I don't see clunky text prompting as a step forward, more like a branch from those 35 years ago, question of course is what comes next, but having all the existing tools like actual musical instruments, plugins, heck even cheap midi controllers feels like 35 years ahead of what text-based LLM prompting today is - I'm not saying the AI results are inherently bad, but they have basically nothing to do with user input, I can just as well eradicate humans and let AI prompt itself, but then who will be the paying consumer of such soul-less slop ?

good read, I feel sorry for your project being stolen, to quote your question "The challenge for all of us in the AI space is this: How do we harness the power of automation while maintaining the standards of attribution, quality, and accountability that both creators and consumers depend on?"

well I'm afraid abolition of individual rights in favor of techno-feudalism is inevitable outcome of limitless AI spread,
tech companies are explicitly avoiding any kinds of accountability (calling suicides a user error, uncovering stolen content a breach in terms of use...),
I'm pretty sure you can harness your creativity "offline", without bothering with AI interventions, limiting freedom of reach without compromising freedom of expression hopefully is the compromise to live up to

 

Its results will be even more derivative and the source - more recognizable - in this case. Anyway, generated music is worth nothing, 100 000 new songs uploaded daily on Spotify etc and that's without major AI automations in the DAWs. Good luck with competition. I suggest everyone to focus on live playing and performing, because that will be the only valuable music activity in the near future.

 

AI will DESTROY Recording, the DAW, and Plugins

How AI will change music creation, the DAW, and plugins. Watch AI create full songs in minutes
Generative AI, or Artificial Intelligence, will replace the recording of audio for the most part in the next 5-10 years. Instead, you'll be able to simply enter a text prompt, and a track will be generated for you.

Need a drum track? Generate it!, Need a piano track? Generate it! Need a vocal track? Generate it! Simple. You'll have full control over style, type, tempo, timing, chord structure, and everything else. Or even generate full songs with a simple text prompt.

The DAW will evolve into what I call the "DAIW". It will be a "content aware" environment that will have the ability to generate any sound you want within the DAIW. If you generate a drum track with a certain BPM, the DAIW will be aware of the content on the other tracks and it will be able to generate, for example, a guitar track that goes along with the previously generated drum track.

Your DAIW will also mix for you, and master for you. You will not need to adjust volume, panning, eq, compression, etc... All of that will be done for you automatically so your tracks sound "professional". You will also have the options to customize the mix if you choose to do so.
Plugins as we known them will go away. Plugins (audio effects, VSTS, ect...) will either be rolled into an AI model, or they will be add-ons that you will have to subscribe to in order to unlock the capabilities in your DAIW.

You will be able to use "plugins" by typing or saying exactly what you want to your A.I. assistant. You'll be able to effect a drum track with an SSL-E desk just by typing it in. You'll be able to run your vocal track through a unique, impossible to find EQ just by saying its name.
Everything will be subscription based in the future. All DAWs, plugins, and any other software will require a current subscription to use. I'm not saying this is good, I'm saying this is reality.

The biggest advancements in AI and music are still 5-10 years away, so you will still need plugins and your current DAW for several years. But if you want to be in the music business in the future, you better start researching AI music and audio generation now.

In this video I'll show you several Music AI sites and generate some full songs and tracks only using AI.

 

And how these two things are different from each other? Are you saying that the hypothetical you, the person making music, is the only "real" musician, and the person who would sound design those "weird sounds and textures" is just a nobody, so it's fine to replace him with AI because they're both just a tool for you?

I think you're just trying to find justifications, to draw arbitrary lines for what is fine to replace with AI and what not. And obviously you've got a horse in this race. There is a conflict of interest. I cannot see any argumentation or discussion here, only marketing and research, advertising your product and gauging interest and ways on how you can improve the product, attract customers and sell it better.

I think the line is drawn at generative AI, you either use it or you don't. You replace everyone and everything equally with AI or you let real people do everything. Today you replace sound designers, tomorrow preset makers, the day after be prepared to be replaced yourself because you're also no longer needed. I hope it's obvious why this is a bad thing.

In creative space there is no coexistence between humans and algorithmic machine learning. Until an actual artificial intelligence is created, only humans are capable of creating art and AI slop is not art. You either value the art or the quick dirty paycheck.
The future, at least the immediate one, is going to be ruled by machine learning and algorithms. The cat is out of the bag and there's nothing that can be done. People really like the path of least resistance and that is what AI offers. If you're planning on making money with it, now is the time. Establish the name and start growing before it gets oversaturated by competition.

I'm on the loosing side of the history but I'm ready to die on this hill. I hate AI and everything it stands for. We should be creating more jobs and opportunities for people, not taking it away and making everyone obsolete and useless.
Music and scoring industry has already become a nightmare to get in to even before all the AI stuff and it's only going to get worse with all the stepping stone small busy work jobs fading out of existence. Then there's even more oversaturation in the market, now you're competing for attention not only against a lot of great composers but also against music printing machines who turn out hours of music in minutes. Trying to get a gig will be even harder, the pay will be lower, the deadlines even shorter.
In my eyes there's not a single thing AI can do that will outweigh the damage it has done, is doing now, and will continue doing for only god knows how long. I would rather be an asshole and an elitist cunt than sink this low, throw away all the standards and let AI replace the traditional art.

To clarify, I'm only talking about AI in commercial applications. I do not care what John Doe does at home with AI for his personal use, i.e. creating something only for himself to consume that otherwise without AI would not exist. John Doe would never commission anyone to create remixes or covers of his favourite music but he can use AI for that. In this case AI did not take anyone's job and as long as John doesn't flood the internet with "his" creations I don't care about it, I think it's fair game, do whatever you want.

 

I think it should be its own genre of music. Like elevator music. Muzaak. Kenny G.

If your independent movie trailer needs music and you generate it on a computer, I don't care. Because I never cared who made it before AI.

I have no problem with it if you want to put a hologram of Michael Jackson on a stage. Or hide your "band" behind some cartoons like Gorrillaz.

If you make a metal song on a computer, that's great. Just don't tell me it is your band. Don't imply human musicianship or production created your AI music. That way I know wether I want to listen to it or not. Keep it in your little corner of the internet and I do not care.

I think AI is great. Because I don't care who wrote your program. It's never mattered what individual person created it (it's funny when people think that). It's the same thing with music. You can go make whatever you want as long as you do not somehow get me to listen to it. If you do, just make sure you actually made it. I do not think that is too much to ask. That is where it becomes unethical.
It's not my problem the Marvin Gaye estate feels ripped off. They have enough money and the guy is dead.

 

Last edited: Dec 13, 2025 at 7:33 PM

And where would the FUN part be in all this?
I mean, wasn't that supposed to be the fun part?

It is for me.

What would be the pleasure in letting the AI "have fun" for me?

I think it's okay if others "enjoy" it too.

 

Last edited: Dec 13, 2025 at 7:49 PM

I think 3 kind of people enjoy it - people that don't want to pay for musical licensing (owners of shops, cafes etc).
People that wanted to make music, but never actually tried learning anything about music.
People that like memes - AI can make funny parodies and offensive songs that no serious artist would want to be associated with.

I think that the funny part is that music was worthless even before AI, because it was basically free online (youtube allowing you to listen to any song, mp3 downloads before that etc). AI is just the final nail in the coffin

 

I was referring to the part about enjoying the creative process of making music.
The other part isn't as interesting to me.
Sorry for my english