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

701–710 of 751 posts

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#701

Post by butlike »

gambiting wrote: post #606
leptons wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sterility of AI generated music will lead to a sterility in creativity of humans if "AI" generated music ever becomes dominant. The world is messy, and human music reflects that. But good for you if your life is so uncomplicated that human-created music seems offensive to you, I guess?

Well let me ask you this - if you want to listen to sounds of the rain in a forest or waves crashing on the beach as you fall asleep(as many people do), do you care if someone actually sat on a beach with a microphone for 4 hours straight, or is it ok if what is effectively white noise is computer generated? It's the same with background music when I work. But like as a specific example, that's a specific track I qui…

Yes there's hold music, and yes there's noise for falling asleep (has a falloff), but in either case I personally don't think it should be on Spotify/another generic music streaming service.

Put a different way, if I'm listening to music on random, and Led Zeppelin finishes, do I want there to be a chance of pink noise or elevator music playing after that song? Not really, but if "it's all on Spotify," then it could happen

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#702

Post by butlike »

Anamon wrote: post #589
butlike wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hear you and feel you on this being a hard (hardest) pill to swallow, and I think I have a helpful phrase. It helped me quite a bit so I hope it helps you: 'For the love of the game.' When you don't make any money and no one comes to your shows; when the booking emails go unanswered and the likes on soundcloud remain <10, just remember why you picked up the instrument in the first place. For the love of the game.

I like that strategy. As a non-musician, but being into music to an unreasonable degree, I always thought that the best artists are those where I feel that, even if no one bought their records and there were just five people at their concert, they'd still be doing the exact same thing and with the same passion. Audiences notice.

Exactly! Glad you're into music. It's a fun strange journey

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#703

Post by iamacyborg »

troupo wrote: post #629
iamacyborg wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're being unnecesarily pedantic. They might not hire the musicians directly but if they're hiring an agency to do that, it's effetively the same thing. Ultimately they're trying to get generic music for cheap to reduce royalty payments to artists.

> Ultimately they're trying to get generic music for cheap to reduce royalty payments to artists. 1. Spotify doesn't pay artists. Spotify doesn't have direct contracts with artists. Spotify pays rights holder and distributors . I really wish people who have strong opinions on music industry learned at least the absolute bare minimum about the subject. 2. Again, bringing back to my original comment: where's the eviden…

> 1. Spotify doesn't pay artists. Spotify doesn't have direct contracts with artists. Spotify pays rights holder and distributors.

You are still being unnecessarily pedantic. Most of us understand that there are layers to this, but ultimately, what we care about is how much an artist is paid per stream and what streams are being preferred over others.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#704

Post by senordevnyc »

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?

I generally don't think I'd care, but I don't put most music (or most of any art) up on a pedestal and imbue it with all sorts of stories and meaning about how it's a dialogue or relationship between me and the artist. If I enjoy it, I generally don't care where it came from or how it was made.

BUT I also recognize that is NOT how most people feel, and that's fine.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#705

Post by TyrunDemeg101 »

TyrunDemeg101 wrote: post #354
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 just wanted to say, thanks for saying this. I actually have been writing music and using Distrokid to publish to the normal streaming services (Spotify/Apple Music) and your comment actually pushed me to sign up for and put music on Bandcamp. In case you'd like to take a look, shameless self promotion: https://aaronholbrook.bandcamp.com/music I have to go through my back catalog, and add all my music, but I appreci…

Replying to myself for anyone that sees this... but I just have to say - within a day of posting, someone purchased my entire discography! I'm so blown away!

So validating to know someone enjoyed my work enough to buy it.

Thank you to everyone who's taken a listen, and thank you to the person that bought it!

<3

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#706

Post by latexr »

mapontosevenths wrote: post #416
troupo wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one in these threads ever discusses how you would identify and remove AI-generated music. E.g. how is this worse and needs to be removed: https://youtu.be/L3Uyfnp-jag?si=SL4Jc4qeEXVgUpeC but crap that top pop artists vomit out into the world doesn't

I can think of half a dozen ways to detect AI music in it's current form, btu I'm not sure anyone has actually bothered implementing such a system. Is anyone here aware of one? I might give it a go if not.

This may be of interest to you. Not exactly what you’re asking, but it may give you clues as to people and research to check out.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMYm2d9bmEA

I also remembered a friend telling me about someone talking about a method to detect AI music. I forget the specifics (I haven’t watched the video, was only told about it) but I remember the channel.

https://www.youtube.com/@RickBeato

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#707

Post by ajam1507 »

flumpcakes wrote: post #246
lukevp wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you create music without ever having heard music before? Or are you also extracting other artist’s work and using it as inspiration for what you do? AI music is the same as AI code. It’s derived from real code, but it’s not just regurgitated wholesale. You still as a person with taste have to guide it and provide inputs. Electronic music made it so you didn’t have to learn to play an instrument. Auto tune made it…

> AI music is the same as AI code. It’s derived from real code, but it’s not just regurgitated wholesale. You still as a person with taste have to guide it and provide inputs. I guess the difference is proprietary code is mostly not used for training. It's going to be trained on code in the public. It's the inverse for music, where it's being trained on commercial work, not work that has been licensed freely.

LLMs are absolutely trained on commercial work. You just need to look at the lawsuits coming out against the AI companies.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#708

Post by crucialfelix »

notahacker wrote: post #394
crucialfelix wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Electronic music is also very closely related to computer animation. Animated film technology is much more advanced, but a lot of techniques are similar.

Probably a good analogy too. Pixar's creative process is quite different from drawing it frame by frame and at least some aspects of it will use have used some sort of generative process, but it's incredibly involved and conscious in a way that typing "video of cute cartoon cat, Pixar style" into a prompt isn't. Same applies to Bandcamp not having any issues with people making music in a DAW

I watched some youtube video where they got complete beginners to animate a character jumping across a canyon gap. No skills, no muscle memory, constant struggling. The character looks like a rag doll. Then the professional does it and she's playing with the arc of the jump, adding emotion to the jump, adding little details like turning the head back for a reaction shot. She's playing with it, and explaining her thoughts and having fun. That really shows how much artistic skill there is involved. It's not just "automation". It's like brush strokes, but applied to splines and velocity curves and shaders.

People don't understand that about music either. We may use sequencers and automation, but the work happens in real time, and it is an instrument that we are playing. It's just that we work at a higher level than just playing something on a keyboard.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#709

Post by ajam1507 »

munificent wrote: post #697
handoflixue wrote: post #542

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am a human being who deserves to live a life of dignity Sure, but so does the homeless guy living on the streets right now because computers and the internet automated his job - and yet here you are using the very tools ("mindless automatons") that put him out of work.

A given technology may benefit some while harming others. And it may have harms and benefits that operate on different time scales. The invention of the shipping container put nearly every stevedore out of a job. But it made it radically cheaper to ship things and that improved the quality of life of nearly everyone on Earth. I suspect that for most stevedores, it was a job where the wages provided dignity and meanin…

You say that as if creative jobs haven't been obsoleted by technology in the past. How many sign painters or weavers do you see around today?

In fact, the theoretical turn in 20th century art was due in part to the invention of the camera. What's the point in continuing down the path of representational art if the camera can recreate a scene with infinitely more realism than the best painter?

Many of the same criticisms that people have of photography as art are being used against AI today, like that it's too easy, that it's soulless, or that the machine is the real artist.

Re: AI generated music barred from Bandcamp

#710

Post by leptons »

lukevp wrote: post #519
leptons wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We are just moving from making music as a rote activity similar to code From this statement, I doubt you've written any music worth listening to, or any code that's not trivial. Don't confuse music with muzak. What you get from an "AI" is muzak. It will never, ever have the same depth, warmth, or meaning as a human translating human emotions and experience into music and lyrics.

Where did I claim in my post to have written music worth listening to or nontrivial code? Seems like you’re just insulting me in particular instead of providing a counter-argument. There have already been AI-created #1 hits. Sure, there’s music that has all of the attributes you lay out as “requisite” for “good” music, but this is classic moving of the goalposts. It’s how people always justify that AI is not here yet…

>Where did I claim in my post to have written music worth listening to or nontrivial code? Seems like you’re just insulting me in particular instead of providing a counter-argument.

You didn't, and I never claimed that you did - I wrote that I doubt you have. If you had written non-trivial code, or written any music worth listening to, then I doubt you would have the same conclusions.

>A lot of the music people listen to is devoid of the depth, warmth and meaning you mention, even without AI involvement.

I agree, and it will be forgotten, and that's fine. Not every song is a winner. I guarantee that #1 AI generated hit will not be thought about a year after it comes out. Yes we're still listening to hits from the 1960s that real people created because they express human experience that isn't easily fabricated by a machine.

> lukevp 13 hours ago | parent | next [–]

Where did I claim in my post to have written music worth listening to or nontrivial code? Seems like you’re just insulting me in particular instead of providing a counter-argument. There have already been AI-created #1 hits.

Sure, there’s music that has all of the attributes you lay out as “requisite” for “good” music, but this is classic moving of the goalposts. It’s how people always justify that AI is not here yet, because there’s this facet of it that’s not human enough.

A lot of the music people listen to is devoid of the depth, warmth and meaning you mention, even without AI involvement. It’s written and produced by tens or hundreds of people and there’s no single visionary behind it. It’s a product.

>Similarly, there can be AI assisted music that has just as much depth, warmth and meaning as a human, BECAUSE a human is involved in the decision-making of that music.

AI-boosting nonsense

>Do you believe that if someone uses a sample, or uses a prebuilt drum loop, that their music automatically is bad?

Generally, yes. I abhor Kanye and his ilk. YMMV.

Post reply on HN