What Are You Doing Right Now? (197 Viewers)

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

That shit is so gay. Anything to do with Royals is gay.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Strickland]

Does this make sense to you? For me its hard to see it become more than a gimmick, but what do I know

 

[swag]

Does this make sense to you? For me its hard to see it become more than a gimmick, but what do I know

It mostly makes sense to me.

I think it doubles down on how much artists will need to profit from live touring.

 

[X Æ A-12]

It could probably replace shitty pop music

 

[swag]

Shitty pop music is already derivative and should have been replaced by AI years ago

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

Shitty pop music is already derivative and should have been replaced by AI years ago

Lizzo is a modern version of the IBM machines used during the Holocaust.

 

[swag]

Lizzo is a modern version of the IBM machines used during the Holocaust.

And she sure knows how to Hollerith-Abteilung dat booty.

 

[s4tch]

Does this make sense to you? For me its hard to see it become more than a gimmick, but what do I know

first of all he's one of the very few guys on youtube i actually follow for a few years, and i'm not just subscribed to his channel. i like to watch his vids when i have the time. his interviews are fun too, the lukather one is a must watch for anyone interested in the life of a musician. i also wish i had his ear, his transcription skills are awesome too. he used to be a producer, he's a qualified musician and knows the industry from multiple angles (ex musician, ex producer, and he's also a music lover who instantly understands what he actually hears, just check one of his spotify top10 analysis)

anyway, my tl;dr point is that his opinion is the very definition of an educated guess when it comes to popular music. you don't have to agree with him, i often don't, it's just that he usually makes fair points

 

[Strickland]

But would you regularly listen to something thats 100% computer made, no creativity, no emotion, no depth, no story behind it?

I completely agree with the convenience argument, wherever AI can make production, songwriting and whatever else more convenient it'll find its use and perhaps already has without us knowing it.

I just find it very hard to believe AI Nirvana or AI Beatles will be a big hit. I used to love every noise Kurt ever recorded as a teenager, but I'm completely uninterested in being a consumer of AI Nirvana. And I dont feel very special, I imagine most fans of deceased or existing artists feel similarly.

- - - Updated - - -

first of all he's one of the very few guys on youtube i actually follow for a few years, and i'm not just subscribed to his channel. i like to watch his vids when i have the time. his interviews are fun too, the lukather one is a must watch for anyone interested in the life of a musician. i also wish i had his ear, his transcription skills are awesome too. he used to be a producer, he's a qualified musician and knows the industry from multiple angles (ex musician, ex producer, and he's also a music lover who instantly understands what he actually hears, just check one of his spotify top10 analysis)

anyway, my tl;dr point is that his opinion is the very definition of an educated guess when it comes to popular music. you don't have to agree with him, i often don't, it's just that he usually makes fair points

Oh I do like Beato a lot, he's my favorite musical content creator in youtube. Had high hopes for the Darkness guy, but grew tired of him, very British

 

[s4tch]

But would you regularly listen to something thats 100% computer made, no creativity, no emotion, no depth, no story behind it?

would you ever notice?

did you ever notice drum parts created by using superior drummer humanize function? and it wasn't even ai generated

do you ever notice the difference between a truly inspired song and one that was written as a routine work? really? i mean you think you can distinguish the two, but are you 100% sure, or is it the end result that matter?

artists often create illusions anyway, don't they

 

[swag]

But would you regularly listen to something thats 100% computer made, no creativity, no emotion, no depth, no story behind it?

I completely agree with the convenience argument, wherever AI can make production, songwriting and whatever else more convenient it'll find its use and perhaps already has without us knowing it.

I just find it very hard to believe AI Nirvana or AI Beatles will be a big hit. I used to love every noise Kurt ever recorded as a teenager, but I'm completely uninterested in being a consumer of AI Nirvana. And I dont feel very special, I imagine most fans of deceased or existing artists feel similarly.

People seek deep tracks all the time. They go bonkers for slightly different variant versions of songs performed at concerts. They go apeshit if Rihanna so much as farts where it sounds like a song drop.

So there’s demand.

Will that demand be a lagging indicator or a leading one? That’s where I have doubts. There will likely be some AI-driven hits that will get someone noticed who hadn’t been before. But I have a hunch that AI will be much less valuable for breaking artists.

Why? AI works off of past data. It’s a mashup of what already exists. And I rarely see a mashup exceeding the public attention that the original raw material failed to achieve.

Oddly this is a little reassuring, human creativitywise. It means human originality still matters. It should also inspire artists to be more original and not sound as derivative of others, because that’s something an AI could do all day long.

Thus my tl;dr: AI music will be not be a king-maker but a king-raker.

And side note to the mention of dead artists making new AI material: it’s a cute idea but it’s wholly inviable as a sustainable business. There ain’t no Gen Z kid who will say Bing Crosby slaps to some new trap music. Dead people have little relevance to younger generations.

 

[Strickland]

would you ever notice?

did you ever notice drum parts created by using superior drummer humanize function? and it wasn't even ai generated

do you ever notice the difference between a truly inspired song and one that was written as a routine work? really? i mean you think you can distinguish the two, but are you 100% sure, or is it the end result that matter?

artists often create illusions anyway, don't they

for sure the AI in music will be used where convenient. f.e. to craft lyrics, chord progressions, riffs, hooks and what not. for a creator it's definitely easier to write a query and pick the best option out of 10 AI generated options, takes 5 minutes instead of hours and hours. Imagine Metallica given the AI option while they were writing St.Anger, they'd take it without blinking

however what I find hard to believe is that we'll have successful 100% pure "AI artists" where everyone is aware that it's AI, like Rick is suggesting. even if the creation is 100% AI, I think for appeal purposes the illusion and the facade will still be maintained, they'll still try to sell it off as the newest work of 80yo Elton John or 75yo Sting.

- - - Updated - - -

People seek deep tracks all the time. They go bonkers for slightly different variant versions of songs performed at concerts. They go apeshit if Rihanna so much as farts where it sounds like a song drop.

So there’s demand.

Will that demand be a lagging indicator or a leading one? That’s where I have doubts. There will likely be some AI-driven hits that will get someone noticed who hadn’t been before. But I have a hunch that AI will be much less valuable for breaking artists.

Why? AI works off of past data. It’s a mashup of what already exists. And I rarely see a mashup exceeding the public attention that the original raw material failed to achieve.

Oddly this is a little reassuring, human creativitywise. It means human originality still matters. It should also inspire artists to be more original and not sound as derivative of others, because that’s something an AI could do all day long.

Thus my tl;dr: AI music will be not be a king-maker but a king-raker.

And side note to the mention of dead artists making new AI material: it’s a cute idea but it’s wholly inviable as a sustainable business. There ain’t no Gen Z kid who will say Bing Crosby slaps to some new trap music. Dead people have little relevance to younger generations.

then again movie business for decades now is a reheated soup that used to be a salad, perhaps you're overrating the need for original rawness in general public Ed Sheeran is an elite musician commercially and that guy is the musical equivalent to the Les Miserables movie - a movie adaption of a musical thats an adaptation of a book that's been adapted in different formats hundreds of times

 

[s4tch]

however what I find hard to believe is that we'll have successful 100% pure "AI artists" where everyone is aware that it's AI, like Rick is suggesting. even if the creation is 100% AI, I think for appeal purposes the illusion and the facade will still be maintained, they'll still try to sell it off as the newest work of 80yo Elton John or 75yo Sting.

that's a valid point, but i still insist: nobody (or only a small minority) will notice that it's ai. if it's good then it'll gain some traction and people won't care. spotify algorithm will suggest a track, you don't even check the name of the artist, you'll like it, you'll save it to a playlist and you'll enjoy it, that's how it will work

 

[GordoDeCentral]

This thread turning into elder scrolls

 

[.zero]

 

[ALC]

People seek deep tracks all the time. They go bonkers for slightly different variant versions of songs performed at concerts. They go apeshit if Rihanna so much as farts where it sounds like a song drop.

So there’s demand.

Will that demand be a lagging indicator or a leading one? That’s where I have doubts. There will likely be some AI-driven hits that will get someone noticed who hadn’t been before. But I have a hunch that AI will be much less valuable for breaking artists.

Why? AI works off of past data. It’s a mashup of what already exists. And I rarely see a mashup exceeding the public attention that the original raw material failed to achieve.

Oddly this is a little reassuring, human creativitywise. It means human originality still matters. It should also inspire artists to be more original and not sound as derivative of others, because that’s something an AI could do all day long.

Thus my tl;dr: AI music will be not be a king-maker but a king-raker.

And side note to the mention of dead artists making new AI material: it’s a cute idea but it’s wholly inviable as a sustainable business. There ain’t no Gen Z kid who will say Bing Crosby slaps to some new trap music. Dead people have little relevance to younger generations.

honestly, the top hits have been dominated by older song remixes lately. Shit, some of them aren’t even remixes, just straight up older songs that are getting a second wind.

 

[IliveForJuve]

The top hits are pure shitty formulas anyway. Might as well let AI do the work

 

[swag]

But are they breaking new artists though?

That’s the thing. Like Ed Sheeran, who has zero talent in my book other than as a derivative AI.

If you don’t already have a following, AI isn’t going to be how you create one. It’s going to be how to monetize the crap out of your catalog while you sip gold-rimmed margaritas in Cancun.

 

[swag]

then again movie business for decades now is a reheated soup that used to be a salad, perhaps you're overrating the need for original rawness in general public Ed Sheeran is an elite musician commercially and that guy is the musical equivalent to the Les Miserables movie - a movie adaption of a musical thats an adaptation of a book that's been adapted in different formats hundreds of times

Movie franchising is complexly based on derivatives of past successes. That is why we have all the crap franchises, death-by-Marvel series, and nobody tries to introduce any big production for a new theme unless it has at least a two sequel potential with cross-marketing sales.

But here’s the thing: that optimization is due to managing cost risks of failures. When AI is generating that content, the cost risk goes to near zero. Meaning you don’t have to follow the Hollywood movie formula line when it comes to music.

When production costs go to zero, the market will flood with all kinds of derivative content to see what sticks. AI Ed Sheeran is gonna spew out covers of Celine Dion, the Backstreet Boys, the Chemical Brothers, and death metal all at the same time.

 

[ßöмßäяðîëя]

This thread turning into elder scrolls

Close shut the Gates of Oblivion!