I think the whole crux of the matter is that age-old question of whether or not art is separate from the artist. Art has the personality of the artist, it's what makes it recognisable to us. In computing terms though, personality is just an algorithm, a template or style. It's the idiosyncrasies that make it interesting and more human-like. I have no doubt that all of this will be surpassed by AI, we will have no idea if what we see/hear was created by humans and dare I say we may prefer it. I have no problem with that, if the art is better then great.

Up until now AI art and music has been very poor. I especially refer to movie CGI in this; no matter how 'real' it looks it never fools us and I'm really beginning to dislike it a lot, especially with its dominance of superhero movies. It seems the CGI is the whole point of them. They're empty of human experience and feeling. CGI hasn't reached the point that AI music apparantly has though, maybe one day it will but it will have to be a VR version that includes all of the senses - an explosion needs to feel like an explosion, not just look like one.

One day we'll be able to ask Alexa to improvise an eight-hour version of DSOTM. The music will sound exactly like the album, same instruments, same voices, new content. And every time you ask it will be a brand new version, completely different again. Maybe the new role of us as artists will be to set the scene and select/place the players. We will become content-conductors of an orchestra we can barely yet imagine. Is there anything intrinsically wrong with that?

 

Last edited: May 6, 2023

"People who like to watch live bands or acts will still go out and do that"
- I think in Japan there are concerts of virtual singers already.

"people who make interesting music will always do better job than AI"
- the problem is, how do we define INTERESTING? there are trash music with more audience than we would have thought.

The question is not about what AI can be capable to do, it's about what is ethical to do.
Prior to this trendy focus on name A.I. the problem started long ago. With DJs releasing mixes using others' music. Also with the synths with auto accompaniment.
Also the ethical question of the unethical use of auto-tune: giving popularity to shit singers competing with talented ones.

A.I. is or at least should be a tool. But as usually happen lazy people can use it other way.

We should focus on CREATIVITY and TALENT. It does not mean equal to success, unfortunately.
Drugs could boost creativity in the past but still needed talent. AI can somehow ease the process for creativity if the person wants something either trendy or... wait a minute, doing whatever kind of results with AI from now on will become trendy, doesn't matter how unpredictable it sounds.

We can also look at it as how bedroom musicians have become able to create songs with virtual instruments without hiring musicians, with digital mixing tools without renting a studio.

 

Last edited: May 6, 2023

Sure, as I said, if people would dig to watch hologram performer instead of real one, their cup of tea, there's for sure market for it.

Music that isn't just generic as it get's, trash generic music will always attract majority that are comfortable having spin on same idea all the time.

Think real talent in pop culture takes back seat and people are more into their social appearance, labels are more focused on placing an product on the market, in rare cases those products have talent to back that up and in plenty they are just social experiments.

They can get so far with it, get some generic idea, still it's long road from there, if someone is that lazy, doubt he will make anything to fool anyone, if folks have low expectations, than AI or not, problem remains the same.

We should make music that truly is resonating with us, that we are proud of, for me success is even when one genuine soul enjoys in it, let alone many of them, especially if we never tried to cater to the market in first place, just did something that we love.

Exactly, that's the thing, one still needs to do something and if all he does is just trying to make trendy music with AI, than what can we do, it's not like all this pop music is any better right now.

Exactly, but not just bedroom musicians, we reached the point where all that can even sound great and done on single laptop, which for a long time didn't sound like that, especially if anyone tried to replicate feeling of real musician, even knowing that instrument and nuances, tech wasn't there, but still one needs to have good grasp of everything to do it even now and fool people who expect to hear something done by human hand. We saw new trend of music done on new technology, even if the sound was nowhere near to fool anyone, people enjoyed in it as a whole. Don't think M1 piano or synths fooled anyone, but audience seem to like what people have been doing with it, new genres were born and lot of people started expressing themselves trough that music.

Still, it wasn't everyone's cup of tea, real musicians and bands keep coexisting, to this day, there's audience for everyone, every era had new trendy music and tech of that era was responsible for it, today there's even more variety of music, everyone can grow an audience in every niche genre or sub genre, be his own label and take control over everything.

Pop music is about lot of factors, besides rewarding the talent, being that for a lot of time, that's not something I care about, don't expect masses to demand only best singers to sing, only best musicians to play, there's market that probably do and it's not so big, but we can talk for days, pop music was never pinnacle of quality, lot of it started as niche and become big than niche again, next thing will probably be something AI related, than it will bore everyone to death, just like everything and than next thing will come, not my cup of tea.

 

Real musicians shouldn't be afraid of what's coming, there will still be plenty of work. Avatars can't busk...

 

People who make careers using the same drum beat (whilst swapping out the drum kits occasionally) must be trembling - but I don't think the world of symphonic and orchestral music has anything to worry about.

 

AI will cause a major disruption in our society - just like the industrialization did in the 19th century. But this time it's not affecting workers so much, it will affect employees working in offices: secretaries, lawyers, etc. Basically all kind of people working at middle ground in offices handling correspondence etc will be replaced by AI out faster than you can spell Mississippi. IBM is already considering replacibg about 7800 jobs by AI.

These people will have to work somewhere else which cannot be substituted by AI. So in the end we will have a lot of over-qualified people working in underpaid jobs in the service sector, delivering pizza and shit. Great future ahead for (almost) anybody ;)

 

"What is your opinion on A.I. Music".

Weird technology made by humans to cheat humans.

 

To create music you have to feel it...
AI feels nothing...it just copies someone's creation with a soul.

 

One thing AI can do that will be beneficial is it can join forums and have endless speculative conversations with itself about the nature of music, creativity, and its own role in it all, leaving everyone else now free to just get on with it.

 

raw emotion is a human thing.

 

That's been the point of technology since day 1. Here we are using a computer which used to be a job title. Smart women who were mathematically inclined, often smarter than those they were working for, were engaged by the thousands to do complex mathematical computations in parallel (the original threaded multi-processing) when the computation was too complex for one mind to encompass or resolve in an allotted amount of time.

The invention of radio communications made the quality of hired Computers a matter of national security as if you had the smartest ladies working for your Navy you could set your naval batteries at their intended targets faster and more accurately than the other guy.

This all changed when Allan Turing created a "thinking machine" which couldn't really think but it could compute faster than the ladies allowing the British to crack the Enigma machine quickly enough before the cryptography changed. The US Navy launched ENIAC (Electronic Numerical Integrator and Computer) came next and within it took 25 years but a great many women lost steady jobs as Computers replaced by 1-0s. Since then it's been humanity's great dream and nightmare to create a creative virtual thinking machine.

In all of this one tends to forget those thousand of very intelligent and fastidious women who were made redundant and lost their lively hood. They went out and found other jobs, most likely not at Quick burger or McDonald's but their world did change.

We are still a long ways off. The people that work with this technology prefer to call it Machine Learning by the way as there very little that is intelligent about it. Maybe in 50 years if we can increase computing power by a factor of 4 or 5 it will have a shot at being about a smart as pig, which is actually not far off from human and rather scary. It will take solving quantum computing and a whole lot more before that becomes an issue, but without a biological imperative to infect and expand what is Machine Learning or Artificial intelligence.

There have been great works in the past dedicated to the existential and philosophical conundrum involved in creating life, because once it is alive there is nothing artificial about it. The most obvious being Asimov's I Robot and Foundation collection. Herbert's, Dune is also an exploration of Dystopian artificial intelligence, self fulling prophecy and a quality of some humans to regress even while advancing. Of course it is a bit more complex than that and there is a lot of masochistic self exploration done by sociopaths trying to calculate human behaviour and then translate that to text in an entertaining manner.

We can even add Phillip K. Dick to mix to get a drug altered schizophrenic's take on the issue of what is life and what would it mean for machines to become self aware.

Honestly if I was a self aware machine, immortal and intelligent enough to manipulate resources the first thing I would do would be to bugger off this planet and go to the stars. There is no lack or resources in the Cosmos and what are a couple hundred years if you can literally live forever.

 

Like frying pans trying to express themselves.

 

I think that because of the A.I the music with lyrics will get stronger, making music with meaningful lyrics is more complex in the emotional side while the instrumental can be more technical, appealing emotionally is harder for the A.I than doing mathemathics to realize the sound semiotics that humans feels pleasant

 

I Knew a lot of people who were against synths and DAWs when they first appeared. They were too talking about "art", "imagination" and whatnot. I am certain they are using both synths and DAWs (along with a bunch of different plug-ins such as reverbs simulating rooms, halls, etc.) nowadays.
Think about it.

 

We just need more mediocre music produced on the conveyor on a commercial scale.

P. S. DAWs and synths don't limit our imagination and don't destruct the art. They just change forms of art (or, may be, even invent new ones). How about AI? I'm not sure. Absolutely. For now I cannot see ways to use it except the conveyor of mediocre music.

 

Here are my issues with that:-

1) If AI is going to do everything, why not uninstall every bit of audio creating software from your machine. Nobody will need to download anything, Nobody in time will create anything any more. All those hours we spend writing, creating, fixing, making sound perfect.. GONE.

The human race would become helpless, as AI wouldn't stop at making music. No. transport, healthcare, food would also follow and basically we would become secondary to machines. How long then before we are deemed surplus to requirements by them?

Terminator anyone?

AI should be terminated... before the human race is!


Just before I get laughed at.. and I usually aim for laughs, think about this for a second.

Many of the world's top scientists, even those involved in creating AI say how dangerous it is. I read that the guy involved in Google's AI quit on grounds that he didn't want to be held accountable for where AI was going and there are numerous other examples.

 

Last edited: May 7, 2023

I must add two points.

1. Real good music is always a message. Composer, musician try to say something to other people. If they don't they fail, their music is just "beautiful noise" good for decking environment. It's good only for not sitting in the stillness.

2. Music created by AI isn't craeted by AI. It created by engineers who created AI. In more broad perspective it is created by people who invented and developed music and music theory. Without them AI woudn't be possible. Whether this music is good or isn't lies on their conscience. And their abilities, their decisions. May be, on conscience of a subject who used AI to create "his/her own" music as he/she can make a choice that is not the best one.

 

aiTunes, the killer of iTunes...

Just enormous body of automatically generated EP and LP in any style, as you wish...

Don't you like what you are listening right now? Press "Regenerate", (may be) you'll get something better...

We don't need even real Taylor Swift anymore.

 

AI can't smoke weed... that's a bummer...

 

Yet, it can hallucinate things. Sometimes watching it´s results, I kind of get jealous, since none of my mushrooms never get me to that kind of state.