111–120 of 165 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah every musician has a story of writing a new song, bringing it to the band, and they say "oh, this sounds just like [song]." It's almost impossible to make something truly novel.
I have written and performed many songs over many bands. At no point did anybody compare my work to any other artist's work, because it is genuinely unique.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
the reason a song from a friend makes you happy is directly related to the effort behind it, this is totally meaningless.
You know that post card they sent you is not actually a photoshop-free picture taken by them. They just addressed it to, you should totally dump them from your life.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem with real music, is that it requires a hefty amount of musicians to establish a genre. This amount could be somewhere in the range of 100 to 1000 musicians. When this critical number is not amassed then the genre effectively dies. With A.I. we can resurrect dead genres, but not only that, we can combine genres together, popular genres with one another, also popular and unpopular genres or popular and dead…
I’m a pretty big music fan and I have no idea what you’re on about. Where did you get this theory? > The problem with real music, is that it requires a hefty amount of musicians to establish a genre. Why is establishing genre a goal in the first place? > This amount could be somewhere in the range of 100 to 1000 musicians. This is demonstrably false. Genre is defined by critical consensus, and it can arise around one…
What is culture, if not a common agreement on what is beautiful and ugly? Establishing a genre in music is not a goal, but we see it happen over and over again. It is how humans operate since forever, we mimic one another in fashion, in music and many other things.
> Genre is defined by critical consensus, and it can arise around one or a handful of bands.
It arises around a handful of bands, but if it doesn't grow past 5 bands let's say, we are talking about 50 songs in total every year. Who listens nowadays to only 50 songs per year?
> And if the genre doesn’t have a significant recorded catalog, you can’t train a generative AI to produce it anyway.
Yes you can. Synthetic data generation is a big thing already and tens of millions of dollars are poured into it every year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can't concieve even the flimsiest of reasons why anyone would ever listen to (or license/sync/track/ ) any of those generated songs once the novelty of "music made by the AI" is gone. Easy: Independent/single-dev operations needing some quick background music for a project (game, whatever)
Also: People (especially kids, students, etc) who want to make music but don't have the technical expertise to (yet?). Obviously these tools don't do everything necessary to make great music, but the barrier of entry to making music is being lowered, and the quality floor is being raised -- and that'll result in a lot more would-be "musicians"[0] creating music that wouldn't otherwise exist[1]. [0] I leave the argume…
Eh I don't think the world is exactly clamoring for even more music.
I can't speak for everyone's process, but if you don't know how to make music, I'm not convinced that this allows you to do so because the medium of input (aka writing text) is far too divergent from the resultant melodic output to allow for any kind of meaningful individuality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I can't concieve even the flimsiest of reasons why anyone would ever listen to (or license/sync/track/ ) any of those generated songs once the novelty of "music made by the AI" is gone. Easy: Independent/single-dev operations needing some quick background music for a project (game, whatever)
Also: People (especially kids, students, etc) who want to make music but don't have the technical expertise to (yet?). Obviously these tools don't do everything necessary to make great music, but the barrier of entry to making music is being lowered, and the quality floor is being raised -- and that'll result in a lot more would-be "musicians"[0] creating music that wouldn't otherwise exist[1]. [0] I leave the argume…
But fuck all the people who have a career teaching them those skills as a part of a thousands-year long artistic tradition whose value isn't solely defined by the exchange of currency for lessons, but in that it subsidizes those artists' work which goes unpaid and furthers human experience.
It's wonderful techies with a surface level knowledge of the arts are cannibalizing the entire supply chain and marketplace so they can make a buck off the AI craze.
The barrier to entry is already zero. AI lowers the ceiling, not the floor.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference being that a musician being influenced by other musicians still has to work to develop the skills necessary to distill those influences into a final product, and colors that output with their own subjective experiences and taste. This feels like a conveniently naive interpretation to justify stealing artists' work and using it to create derivative generative slop. The final line in your comment is pret…
Law should be considered to be artificial rules optimized for the collective good of society. What's the worst that can happen if we allow unregulated AI training on existing music? Musician as a job won't exist anymore lest for the greatest artists. But it makes creating music much more accessible to billions of people. Are they good music? Let the market decide. And people still make music because the creative proc…
"Generate a rock song" is not a problem that working musicians have. "Take this riff I recorded with whatever guitar I have in the studio and show me what it sounds like as a Les Paul through a 5150 or Strat through a AC30" is, though.
On one hand this is impressive, and I've been wondering when something like this would appear. On the other hand, I am -- like others here have expressed -- saddened by the impact this has on real musicians. Music is human, music theory is deeply mathematical and fascinating -- "solving" it with a big hammer like generative AI is rather unsatisfying. The other very real aspect here is "training data" has to come from…
Anyone with ears can find music satisfying. You don't need an artist's backstory or blessing for that. By all means use slow AI to get the same point fast AI can get to, but don't ask me to value it differently.
It’s less than worthless.
Without disclosing your training data, this should be considered piracy and removed from HN.
What rule is there against discussing piracy on HN?
The current AI music apps have a certain chunking problem: they force extending the song with segments that may or may not fit, which users likely choose as "good enough" and get Frankenstein mash-up songs that have no coherent "flow" or "progression" as its actually chunks of "similar sounding songs" not a coherent "full song generation" by AI but editing result of multiple chunks merged into something.
Here are a few of my songs, I think they are fairly consistent?
https://sonauto.ai/song/e2e3d210-69b4-4ad7-96d1-fb5744d0c648
https://sonauto.ai/song/a94e04a9-7b74-4b87-b5ed-ca3e8d2798d0
https://sonauto.ai/song/55a36595-c60a-4346-81d8-6f03ebe690ff