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

AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

old.reddit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 751 posts

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#271

Post by belthesar »

pousada wrote: post #209
nartho wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is not so much an artist that will use it as a tool, even though there is much to say about it, it's the hundred of thousands of people with no interest in music whatsoever, that will flood the platforms in order to make a quick buck.

People who won’t invest anything and just want to make a quick buck won’t be successful with AI generated content/music. You still need to invest significant time and effort to make it work.

Musicians who are being threatened by AI impersonating them, flooding the market with music like theirs, and otherwise actually harmed by this would disagree with you. Benn Jordan speaks at length about it in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVXfcIb3OKo

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#272

Post by kazinator »

don-code wrote: post #123

A few months ago I spoke with the frontman of a local Boston band from the 1980s, who recently re-released a single with the help of AI. The source material was a compact cassette tape from a demo, found in a drawer. He used AI to isolate what would've been individual tracks from the recording, then cleaned them up individually, without AI's help. Does that constitute "wholly or in substantial part"? Would the track…

Suppose we have two image-oriented AI's.

One is trained with a set of pairs which match words with images. Vast numbers of images tagged with words.

The other is trained on a set of photographs of exactly the same scene from the same vantage point, but one in daylight and the other at night. Suppose all these images are copyrighted and used without permissions.

With the one AI, we can do word-to-image to generate an image. Clearly, that is a derived work of the training set of images; it's just interpolating among them based on the word assocations.

With the other AI, we can take a photograph which we took ourselves in daylight, and generate a night version of the same one. This is not clearly infringing on the training set, even though that output depends on it. We used the set without permission to have the machine extract and learn the concept of diurnal vs. nocturnal appearance of scenes, based on which it is kind of "reimagining" our daytime image as a night time one.

The question of whether AI is stealing material depends exactly on what the training pathway is; what it is that it is learning from the data. Is it learning to just crib, and interpolate, or to glean some general concept that is not protected by copyright: like separating mixed audio into tracks, changing day to night, or whatever.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#273

Post by JohnFen »

patates wrote: post #122
te_chris wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. But shhhhh about cds, don’t want people to realise… Also the price of decent (Sony hifi grade, not ES) CD players used is great too.

Aren't CD players just reading digits? I'm not anywhere close to a hifi expert but it must be all about the DAC, no? Or do you mean the ones with a built-in DAC?

> all about the DAC, no?

Yes, it is (unless the CD player is so bad that it can't do adequate error correction). What I do is rip the CD to my music server, which is where I listen to the music from. Then the quality of the CD player isn't important, as long as it works correctly.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#274

Post by nomel »

teucris wrote: post #226
nomel wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All of the "discoverability" algorithms are specifically and fundamentally about sifting through the millions to find the few that are preferred . That is their many-billion-dollar industry purpose. Spotify does a fantastic job with this, for me. > will often just opt for whatever is popular. Are you suggesting that people consume media they don't like? I'm not familiar with anyone that does this. I personally skip i…

> All of the "discoverability" algorithms are specifically and fundamentally about sifting through the millions to find the few that are preferred. They are fundamentally about finding the content that will generate the most revenue. That changes the dynamics quite a bit.

You're not wrong, but the need to please the user is still paramount, otherwise they'll just do something else. This is why TikTok is eating everyone's lunch.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#275

Post by butlike »

troupo wrote: post #208
mcpar-land wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify has a history of intentionally boosting internally produced, royalty-free and/or AI music over actual artists. https://harpers.org/archive/2025/01/the-ghosts-in-the-machin...

That article is bandied around, and no one either reads or understands what's written there. Neither do article authors BTW. 1. Spotify doesn't have "internally produced music" 2. There are companies that provide white-label ambient/white noise/similar music. 3. Spotify may have preferential licensing deals with some of them (as any company would seek preferential contract terms) 4. Some of that music is generated (A…

Preferential contracts to AI-gen music makers is equivalent to "internally produced music" in my mind, even though they're not technically equivalent.

`==` vs. `===` essentially

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#276

Post by jay_kyburz »

frakt0x90 wrote: post #30
neom wrote: post #5

I've been having fun making stuff in Suno, I'm not a musician but I've always enjoyed "producing tracks" using Abelton and find the Suno + Abelton combo to be real magic on the weekends. I think some of the stuff I made isn't too bad and I'd love feedback on it. For a few weeks I went back and forth about uploading them to my soundcloud and resolve with this: I wouldn't have insisted we only allowed art made with MS…

Whenever I see defences of AI "art" people very often reduce the arguments to these analogies of using tools, but it's ineffective. Whether you use MS Paint, Photoshop, pencil, watercolor etc. That all requires skill, practice, and is this great intersection of intent and ability. It's authentic . Generating media with AI requires no skill, no intent, and very minimal labor. It is an approximation of the words you ty…

I'm a professional artist. I don't use AI as it's just not there yet.

But I don't consider using AI all that different to using a camera. A photographer still has plenty of work to do with composition and framing, the lighting, the subject mater, even timing. I still consider a photographer an artist.

I think an AI artist will have a lot to consider as well. To distinguish themselves from other AI artists.

Update: When I say the AI tools are not there yet, its precisely because I can't seem to get the AI to take feedback or instructions. I can't adjust the lighting to create the mood I want, I can't tweak the framing.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#277

Post by hxugufjfjf »

marknutter wrote: post #249
olivierestsage wrote: post #16

Funny to see this right now. Spotify's promotion of AI music bothered me so much that it has actually pushed me to Bandcamp and the practice of buying music again. It's really fun to build a collection knowing you're supporting the artists, download FLAC files, organize your little "collection" page ... Feels like a renaissance in my relationship with music, the most fun I've had since what.cd. Anyway, love this stan…

If you came across a song and fell in love with it, only to find out later that it was generated by ai, would you stop loving the song?

Absolutely not. Reggae Wars is proof of this.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#278

Post by RIMR »

WD-42 wrote: post #98
te_chris wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. But shhhhh about cds, don’t want people to realise… Also the price of decent (Sony hifi grade, not ES) CD players used is great too.

I did just realize after posting maybe touting how affordable CDs have become is maybe not the best idea.

The people who really want to stop paying for streaming are going to turn to piracy, don't worry. Physical media will still be accessible for people who are willing to pay with space instead of money.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#279

Post by JohnFen »

marknutter wrote: post #249
olivierestsage wrote: post #16

Funny to see this right now. Spotify's promotion of AI music bothered me so much that it has actually pushed me to Bandcamp and the practice of buying music again. It's really fun to build a collection knowing you're supporting the artists, download FLAC files, organize your little "collection" page ... Feels like a renaissance in my relationship with music, the most fun I've had since what.cd. Anyway, love this stan…

If you came across a song and fell in love with it, only to find out later that it was generated by ai, would you stop loving the song?

Yes, I certainly would. I might even start hating the song, if that discovery left me feeling tricked.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#280

Post by casey2 »

BrokrnAlgorithm wrote: post #79

I'm a musician, but am also pretty amused by this anti ai wave. There was recently a post referencing aphex twin and old school idm and electronic music stuff and i can't help bein reminded how every new tech kit got always demonized until some group of artists came along and made it there own. Even if its just creative prompting, or perhaps custom trained models, someday someone will come along and make a genuine ar…

People don't listen to music because it sounds good, most music sounds downright awful, they listen to it for the human stories and connection. 99% of the music I listen

Nobody listens to techno - Eminem

AI needs to make music that sells. The same way Scorsese and Brando sell the Godfather. until it can do that literally nobody will care.

Post reply on HN