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

361–370 of 751 posts

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#361

Post by [deleted] »

modzu wrote: post #358
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…

nobody demonized afx or idm bro. autotune, yes. but that's different. damn autotune to hell

[deleted]

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#362

Post by anigbrowl »

kazinator wrote: post #227
codexon wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that there's so much pushback against ai generated art and music while there seems to be very little for ai generated code.

I won't merge anything AI generated in any of my FOSS projects, unless I'm successfully deceived. In the first place, I do not regard a copyright notice and license on AI generated code to be valid in my eyes, so on those grounds alone, I cannot use it any more than I could merge a piece of proprietary, leaked source code.

The copyright office agreed with you about the non-copyrightability of AI generated media so in that sense you can safely ignore copyright claims on anything AI-generated.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#363

Post by 6stringmerc »

WD-42 wrote: post #82
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…

I’ve been doing the same over the last few months. The best part for me is going to record stores again. CDs are SO cheap now, especially used ones. I’ll usually pick a few out of the dollar bin just based on vibes and the cover and rip them when I get home. I’ve found some cool stuff. It’s like a treasure hunt. Don’t miss Spotify one bit.

I second this strategy. My suggestion is keep an eye out for soundtracks and “sampler” type promo discs - some quirky gems! Record labels and their relationships with Hollywood did demonstrate money and drugs and music to great together…see: Spawn the movie soundtrack (1990s).

Also my library card is much better for legacy music exploration. It scales too.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#364

Post by james_marks »

troupo wrote: post #327
ivarv wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spotify hires musicians to churn out content that fits certain criteria. see https://harpers.org/archive/2025/01/the-ghosts-in-the-machin...

Spotify doesn't hire any artists because if it did, major labels would immediately pull their contracts. No one actually understands what's written in this article, including the authors themselves. Also note how you didn't provide a single track that Spotify allegedly pays no royalties for.

You’re missing the concept of session musicians that can improvise for hours. No license, flat fee.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#365

Post by nomel »

Ritewut wrote: post #322
nomel wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't agree with this and to answer the question you originally asked me, I do think users are consuming things they don't actually enjoy. The goal isn't to please the user, the goal is to not bore the user. If you talk to people I'm sure you'll find a lot of the music they listened to isn't "enjoyed" so much as it is inoffensive background noise.

It's not surprising that some people are mindless consumers, but it's not useful to assume the majority is, especially of paying customers, and competition exists.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#366

Post by sodapopcan »

soulofmischief wrote: post #198
sodapopcan wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You're just mad that people actually like AI music. Yes, I am! I'm also mad that people like shitty over-produced pop, though (including me sometimes), so what can you do. Life is shit.

Let people enjoy what they like. It makes it easier to just sit back and enjoy what you like.

Oh I do! But I'm also a (failed) musician so a bit bitter (lol). Still do it for fun, though!

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#367

Post by anigbrowl »

netbsdusers wrote: post #197
codexon wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it interesting that there's so much pushback against ai generated art and music while there seems to be very little for ai generated code.

The pushback is motivated by the interests of the petty-bourgeois class, and those are a larger proportion of the former.

Imagine being a Marxist and not respecting the craft and labor required for art production. Couldn't be me.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#368

Post by marcianx »

lossyalgo wrote: post #215
marcianx wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it makes some sense to allow leeway for intelligent "signal processing" using AI (separating out individual tracks, clean-up, etc) vs generating new content with AI. Similarly, say, for video editors, using AI to more intelligently rotoscope (especially with alpha blending in the presence of motion blur - practically impossible to do it manually), would be a great use of AI, removing the non-creative tedium o…

It may be a tedious job to spend days rotoscoping but I personally know people who get paid to do that, and as soon as AI can do it, they will have to go find other work (which they already do, on the side, because the writing is on the wall, but there's a ton of people worldwide who do this kind of work, and that's not the only process being delegated to AI).

So, I'm not pretending that certain kinds of jobs aren't going to be obsoleted. Lots of responsibilities went by the wayside as a lot of things were automated with technology and algorithms - I mean, this is not just an AI thing. But I also see it as many people not even executing certain creative visions that would be out of reach due to the mechanical (not creative) cost of doing things. That's where Jevons Paradox really shines and I do think that's where the explosion will happen. Of the (very few) people I know who do editing and have to rotoscope, rotoscoping is one of the things they really don't enjoy, but they do it anyway.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#369

Post by tensor »

crtasm wrote: post #174
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…

That's not AI generated at all. Using acoustic models to stem out individual sections from a recording is not creating new material (and I wouldn't even describe that as "AI" despite what I'm sure a lot of the tools offering it want us to believe).

Sorry, that's AI. So is OCR, so is voice recognition, and many other things you probably use and take for granted. I'd suggest you focus on use cases not trying to redefine definitions for an entire area of science and technology based on your own preferences.

Saying "I'm against fully AI generated music" is at least precise, and doesn't throw out detecting cancer along with the AI bandwagon term.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#370

Post by IAmGraydon »

neom wrote: post #126
IAmGraydon wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What workflow are you using with Ableton/Suno?

Mostly using it to gen vocals, sometimes stems, sometimes gen samples, then as you'd expect -> wav out -> lay it up in Abelton, add in my teenage engineering stuff - filters -> mix and master -> out https://soundcloud.com/john/eager - I put over 16 hours into this track, I'm sure someone who knows about music can point to loads of errors in it, I'm sure it's sloppy in parts, but I put real effort into it and I'm prou…

So I've used Suno a bit in my own musical creations, but would never release something with any sound that was generated via AI. What I do is write and record a song (I'm also in Ableton), then when I'm unhappy with something or don't know where to go next, I throw it into Suno and have it generate some ideas. I use those ideas just as you would use ideas from a writing partner. If I like them, I transcribe them, play them on real instruments, and record them. So no actual sound from Suno ever makes it into my compositions - just some of the musical ideas here and there. That way it's still me playing and still sounds like me.

To me, this is the most legitimate way for music makers to use AI. If you go look at the credits for almost any professional recording artist, they all work with one or more writers and producers to get their music dialed in. Us normies can't really afford to have Max Martin come over and write with us, and I think using AI in the way I mentioned is a suitable alternative. I really fail to see the difference, honestly.

Post reply on HN