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

Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 405 posts

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#91

Post by tombert »

gedy wrote: post #81
tombert wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly I think the thing that most humans appreciate is effort . Using AI tools is not inherently "bad", but these very-literally mass produced AI songs are almost by definition low-effort and as a result pretty bland and unlikeable. Digital music has always been fine to me, as long as the song being produced feels like it took a human some amount of effort.

Yeah I agree with that nuance, as I personally enjoy making AI covers of songs I like in genres that I can't produce myself (old vintage blues covers of 80s new wave songs if you must know). It's a fair amount of work prompting and curating (and editing in some cases). I think they are cool and have shared a few, but they do tend to get lumped in with "ai slop" and some people take offense.

I think a lot of people make an assumption that problems like this are fixed-sized; that by making getting a song easier, that that's the end of the the line.

In my mind the better mindset is to think that the problems are not fixed size, and instead these tools can allow for bigger and cooler projects, and/or projects that wouldn't be possible (or at least would be infeasible) without some kind of technological assistance.

AI tools can be used to create slop that is either "bad" or extremely bland at an effectively-infinite speed. It could also be used to make some really cool and interesting stuff if a person is really willing to spend time and effort to make it cool. Usually this requires more than just "prompting" though.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#92

Post by input_sh »

CharlesW wrote: post #69
cleversomething wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an aside, but thank you for doing this work! As a musician who plays real instruments and submits real songs to Submithub, it's nice to know that hard work is going into validation and prevention of scammers passing off AI as their own talent. Keep fighting the good fight.

"AI detectors" are fun like horoscopes are fun, until they flag your music as AI generated, and distribution channels blacklist you and your label sues you. On the bright side, you can sue the creator of the AI detector in return.

The only reason you're saying that is because you haven't tried to build such a detector yourself. It's not like text where it's impossible to tell reliably if something's AI generated or not, from a technical perspective it's very trivial to detect anything coming straight out of a Suno/Udio prompt.

Nobody open sourced their detection algorithm as that would just trigger a cat-and-mouse game between Suno/Udio and a detection platform (and Suno/Udio have way more VC money than you do), but plenty are being sold as a service and work very reliably.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#93

Post by charcircuit »

UncleMeat wrote: post #73
ymolodtsov wrote: post #36

Most of the videos uploaded to YouTube are worthless. AI simplifies the creation, doesn't mean it's good and will be listened to. And if it will, then what's the problem? You can talk about ethics, IP, etc. but we're not even there yet.

AI creation kills cultural sharing. People who create AI music are largely not sharing it with others for any reason other than to create a revenue stream. They are also not consuming new AI music to be able to develop influences and synthesize new ideas. The system builds brick walls where there was once osmosis. How can art evolve under these conditions?

>They are also not consuming new AI music to be able to develop influences and synthesize new ideas.

If not they most definitely are listening to other music that influences them. If you have proof that such a producer listens to 0 music feel free to share it.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#94

Post by vasco »

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #86
strangegecko wrote: post #47

I'm trying to learn music production with a DAW, sometimes I wonder if I'm wasting my time. Part of my reason for trying this was reading how creative endeavors can be therapeutic (I'm dealing with burnout/depression/cptsd). I'm at the stage where sometimes I make something that sounds good (to me) but I know it requires work (in the "not fun" sense) to finish it and even then, it will likely never be appreciated by…

You're not wasting your time, my friend. But you've got to be very certain and honest as to why you want to learn that. If your goal is being heard and appreciated, well, you better reconsider. If you're doing it for your own pleasure and pure love of art, absolutely do go on, without any expectations. It may or may not take off, but the samurai must not care.

Some people just never found what that thing is for them. And usually you find those things doing them the hard way while you suck. And then the reward is people will see what you do and recognize the work you put in. But if suddenly every person with a prompt does the exact same thing with zero effort, it does take away from the joy of doing it. At least if the joy of doing it is related to the feeling of liking to do "hard things" or liking to think of oneself as one that "does hard things". And I'd say that includes a lot of people and a lot of activities.

I bet a lot of accountants in the old days were really good at basic math, and proud of being fast and accurate and now there's calculators and the amount of people that work on mental math just for the love of the game is probably super small in comparison to when it was a core skill of many more people's jobs.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#95

Post by mikojan »

SwellJoe wrote: post #48

This shit is so dark. I mean, popular music has always been pretty formulaic, and prone to imitation and trite bullshit, but at least when humans were making it, you'd occasionally get some spark of genius, real originality, even in the most mundane forms. I use LLMs for code every day, but if I could flip a switch to turn it all off and prevent this shit from happening to the arts, I probably would.

"Probably"? I'd hit that a thousand times just to be sure.

Don't understand how one can experience anything but infinite dread when confronted with the effects of these models on the arts.

Maybe I am getting old. But I don't think so...

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#96

Post by devindotcom »

strangegecko wrote: post #47

I'm trying to learn music production with a DAW, sometimes I wonder if I'm wasting my time. Part of my reason for trying this was reading how creative endeavors can be therapeutic (I'm dealing with burnout/depression/cptsd). I'm at the stage where sometimes I make something that sounds good (to me) but I know it requires work (in the "not fun" sense) to finish it and even then, it will likely never be appreciated by…

don't sell your work short. it has value because it comes from you, and struggling to finish is unbelievably common in the creation process - not to mention frustration and a lack of joy.

if you're creating because you feel a drive to create, you are making art and that has intrinsic value to yourself and others. if however you are performing the act of musical creation as a means to an end, what you are doing may be better considered work and not art. the work of others can also be appreciated but it is different.

keep at it though. you are asking good questions and unlike many you are also personally engaging with them.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#97

Post by TheMagicHorsey »

What a coincidence. Just today, someone on my high school alumni group just posted an album they "made", which is 100% AI generated music. They claim authorship because they created the prompts to the AI.

My feeling is that if the AI is this good, the audience will just prompt the AI themselves and cut out the middleman.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#98

Post by strangegecko »

tarnith wrote: post #80
strangegecko wrote: post #47

I'm trying to learn music production with a DAW, sometimes I wonder if I'm wasting my time. Part of my reason for trying this was reading how creative endeavors can be therapeutic (I'm dealing with burnout/depression/cptsd). I'm at the stage where sometimes I make something that sounds good (to me) but I know it requires work (in the "not fun" sense) to finish it and even then, it will likely never be appreciated by…

It depends what you want to get out of it, and what you think art itself really is. If it's nothing but an end product, that needs to fit a specific aesthetic, with a specific sound, then I probably agree. AI is making that "pointless" in a way. Almost everyone I know who's been an artist for years though, has come to a similar realization: What you set out to create, and what it turns into through the process of cre…

Thanks, I like this answer. I think part of my problem is more general, a struggle to enjoy something when I can tell I'm not good at it. It's kind of a circular problem, I will need to spend more time on it to get better and I need to conjure confidence that I could do so out of the ether.

I have experienced the process you're talking about, although to some degree I feel it's symptomatic of a lack of skill. I start out with some kind of inspiration in mind, but end up with a compromise between what I can do and what sounds good when I fiddle around with things. Part of me feels dissatisfaction that I don't know which knobs to turn to get what I want, but I suppose that's just the normal learning process (albeit less structured than those I have gone through in the past, which is its own obstacle sometimes).

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#99

Post by woolion »

CharlesW wrote: post #69
cleversomething wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an aside, but thank you for doing this work! As a musician who plays real instruments and submits real songs to Submithub, it's nice to know that hard work is going into validation and prevention of scammers passing off AI as their own talent. Keep fighting the good fight.

"AI detectors" are fun like horoscopes are fun, until they flag your music as AI generated, and distribution channels blacklist you and your label sues you. On the bright side, you can sue the creator of the AI detector in return.

I've had my digital art flagged a few times for various reasons (automatic copyright infringement and NSFW filters) -- so this is nothing new (in particular the artwork blocked the upload for some artist songs). The only thing is to have a reasonable appeal process. In all cases we got an automated approval after appeal, but it can put an untimely delay.

Honestly I hope that the AI filter would be much better in terms of false positive than the aforementioned one, if only because it should be easier via statistical methods.

Re: Deezer says 44% of songs uploaded to its platform daily are AI-generated

#100

Post by devindotcom »

devindotcom wrote: post #59
hombre_fatal wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What are any reasonable examples of how you can verify a song wasn't AI-generated? e.g. Game speedrunners film the whole process to prove they did it themselves. Presumably you had some ideas when you envisioned "human-verified platforms".

music can be performed live and in person. many musicians work with other musicians, labels, studios etc. a web of trust can be built and verification via performance is a compelling option. not complete but it's certainly an option. would you as a label sign an artist you'd never seen perform? maybe there is value in a platform working under similar constraints.

>But that doesn't sound like something I'd want imposed on all music on a platform.

that's fine. there's room for multiple platforms. personally I would pay for the thing I describe, sounds like you wouldn't. but the question is not whether you or i would, but whether enough people would to make it a viable business - whether it's the platform, or the method, or a label that licenses its music in a certain way, or what.

Post reply on HN