I think beatmakers know exactly what they're doing, and I think they also know what real art is. If you surf the internet, you see that big, famous bands employ or pay video artists, painters, etc. to give their videos a quality look. It's immediately clear to them that they have no technical skills and can't replicate them. I think if you look at TikTok, you realize how few skilled, creative, and makers there really are.

I've never heard a beatmaker call themselves an artist. Most of the time, you hear "I'm a producer," which comes from "producing." There are certainly video artists among them; even spraying graffiti is partly art, depending on your intelligence and skill. But the percentage of art is actually very small. Education and training would be an option, but many lack the willingness to work and learn. Therefore, higher quality cannot be expected.

Since the invention of the computer, DAW, and beat and rhythm machines, anyone can make music at home without much prior training. So where is this ability supposed to come from among the masses? The masses are inevitably forced to deal with digitalization and their devices, and they also need to be able to use social contacts and social media to stay in the game. This leaves no time or understanding for art.

They usually watch what others are doing because young people are usually insecure. If their environment consists exclusively of rappers, the likelihood that they will also rap is very high. If their environment consists exclusively of artists, some talented people would actually become artists.

 

Good for you if you can directly feed from electricity.

 

I certainly won't starve to death because of one less carrot field in my country!

 

imo, AI making stuff up isn't the prompt's fault. (Verifying truthfulness is the user's due diligence though)

The infographic doesn't explain how AI makes me a more intelligent person (better at comprehending information, applying knowledge in practice)? People 5000 years ago were no less intelligent than today, they were just less knowledgeable. More knowledge is not more intelligence.

Buying a fully realised painting vs a canvas + brushes + colours are different things. Not everything can be reduced to the point of being fundamentally the same. Flying a spaceship isn't the same as walking, just because both are "just forms of movement".

If someone interviewed your band and asked who came up with that beautiful melody, would you credit yourself for having said to Peter: "Peter, how about some sad stuff right here" or would you credit Peter for having written the melody, the dynamics, deciding on the techniques, the rhythm, where to put every little bit of emotion into the performance?

But if you truly had the sound in your head, you'd fire up your laptop, re-create the sound precisely as it is/was in your head and move on to the next thing, no? Instead, you're sitting yourself down in front of an endless conveyor belt presenting you with someone else's hyper processed, highly elaborated, already fully realised meals. Just because you occassionally type in "a bit more garlic, maybe a bit less onion. idk, let's go back to the pasta..." doesn't make you the cook, it makes you the taste tester (the sampler, if you want to think about it that way), or the restaurant's manager who decides the overall menu - you had little to no hand in the cooking (artistry) in either case.

 

Last edited: Aug 10, 2025 at 11:20 AM

@xorome These analogies have bored me quite a bit, and as the mod said, we've all been off topic for a while now.. I've said to those who criticize other people's ways of making art, and who don't compose their own tracks "at least" using a midi keyboard, i find them ridiculous.. "Just a personal criticism, like theirs!" Better a nice song sampled from AI generated samples than weird, depressing junk made with presets from some Arturia synth..

 

No it's not debatable in the least. You're not a mind reader to my past professional motivations, this is for sure, and now you can chalk up another nebulous argument.

A mouse can be used for so many things as you are well aware and which does not preclude it's use as a quasi paintbrush which I myself had utilized many years ago. A mouse can also be used to input any and all data whilst using music composition software such as Sibelius.

 

First of all, I don't think it's nice to put down other musicians because they have a different, individual way of working. Others should be allowed the freedom to do what they think is right. You don't have to like it, but we should still talk in general about how some users here put down other musicians because they're not working artistically but using AI.

I'm a sound designer myself, and it was a lot of work to learn everything, and it takes a lot of time to create presets, for example. Of course, it would be great if people would go out into the streets or into the forest to record animal sounds or street noises, then edit them, and then create a melody and rhythm themselves, instead of simply using legal and illegal pre-made samples.

In reality, however, on today's home PCs, the world looks different. Today, machines and samples as well as presets are used, so beginners and the untalented can also achieve usable results. I don't think we'll turn back the clock and the appeals will go up in smoke. Everyone decides for themselves what they want to make music and how they want to make it.

 

I didn't read further, because i imagine the rest is some page copied from Google, or Chatgpt..
Anyway, i'm answering for the last time, because these threads are so boring; I don't care what anyone makes "music" with. You are doing it with those who use AI tools!

PS. It's hard for me to understand you. I still have to figure out if you're a real user! I'M TELLING YOU SERIOUSLY, NOT SARCASTICALLY!

 

Last edited: Aug 10, 2025 at 12:16 PM

Excellent! Everyone uses whatever the fuck they want! Just like our friends who use samples created by Suno. Right?