Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Suno AI

suno.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 171 posts

Re: Suno AI

#31

Post by csmpltn »

Spiwux wrote: post #3

Cool tech demo, not even close to a level quality I'd consider paying for

I agree that the quality isn't ideal, but I think this tool helps artists iterate much faster and cheaper. I wouldn't focus on the quality of the output, beyond the threshold which allows the artists to generate a reasonable idea of what they eventually want to make.

Think about all the hard work that traditionally goes into composing a single title. Artists will spend days, weeks and sometimes months trying to iterate on ideas. Writing, composing, demoing, tracking and recording, mixing, etc. Think about all of the expensive software and hardware that goes into this process (instruments, microphones, studios, DAWs, VSTs, etc). It's an expensive and difficult process, it's very manual, very sequential.

This could easily be used to speed up that iterative process. Just ask this software to generate 100 ideas for your next bridge, and iterate that way.

Re: Suno AI

#32

Post by Kiro »

adroniser wrote: post #10
CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference? The medium used to create it? "Making music" = soft tissues in our brain VS "generating music" = hard transistors in a chip?

You don't have much control over what is being generated. And if you did want to have fine control then what would be the difference compared to just dicking around on a synthesizer? A lot of the enjoyment of music comes from connecting emotionally with the artist. The artist had something to say based on their experience of life and adversity. You relate maybe because you've been there too. After all, you and the ar…

> A lot of the enjoyment of music comes from connecting emotionally with the artist. The artist had something to say based on their experience of life and adversity. You relate maybe because you've been there too. After all, you and the artist are both just human at the end of the day.

Absolutely not the case for me. The artist is just a name and I often don't know what the song is called. I have zero interest in the "meaning". It's all about the melody/harmonics, beat and production value for me.

Re: Suno AI

#34

Post by colesantiago »

I love this, was thinking about paying for an artist to create some music for my project but now I can do this all myself for free (for now).

There may be an open source version of Suno somewhere but this will do.

Most of the music on Suno is really indistinguishable from music that has been made by humans, but doesn't really matter to me anyway.

The TTS needs a bit of improvement but nonetheless, great work from Suno.

Re: Suno AI

#35

Post by thih9 »

CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #7
bamboozled wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you making music, or generating music?

What's the difference? The medium used to create it? "Making music" = soft tissues in our brain VS "generating music" = hard transistors in a chip?

Not necessarily.

If you hatch a songbird, feed it, take care of it and later record it, then you’ve generated music.

If you resample it and arrange it into a new song, then you’ve added your input and made a new musical piece.

And sure, this can get blurry at times.

Re: Suno AI

#39

Post by adroniser »

lacrimacida wrote: post #30
adroniser wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't you think simply knowing it was an AI would mean you can't take it seriously? Or do you think this is just a cultural thing that will fade away in coming years.

If it appears that it understands what you’re talking about, remembers past dialogue why not take it seriously, at least until you find serious flaws?

I'm saying that it's always going to be in the back of your head that it's an AI regardless of how it acts.

Re: Suno AI

#40

Post by brookst »

thih9 wrote: post #35
CaptainOfCoit wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the difference? The medium used to create it? "Making music" = soft tissues in our brain VS "generating music" = hard transistors in a chip?

Not necessarily. If you hatch a songbird, feed it, take care of it and later record it, then you’ve generated music. If you resample it and arrange it into a new song, then you’ve added your input and made a new musical piece. And sure, this can get blurry at times.

Why does that matter?

And when we look at great songwriters, do we need to know their educational background and what music they’ve listened to in order to determine how much of their work is created out of thin air versus arrived at by reasoning over theory and inspiration from other work?

Post reply on HN