What do you think about artificial intelligence in your music?

Sound Explorers Corner Free speech
#1

Hello,

For my part, I may have been wrong to want to understand the merits of a composition that was so difficult to create.

Today, I could let myself be guided by AI, but deep down—aside from Instacomposer 2-3—I just can’t bring myself to even consider using a system where I risk losing the essence of my musical sensibility.

What about you?

What do you think?

Amitié.

3 Likes
#2

It’s a thorny issue and one of the most polarising subjects in music today! And in art. And 3d. And filmmaking. And coding. And writing. And web design. And. And . . .

When people get passionate about AI, they are often talking about generative AI - i.e. the creation of new content. But there is also assistive AI, i.e. augmenting workflows to help with a task.

Personally, I don’t use AI to generate new ideas or sounds for the simple reason that I don’t need to. That sounds a bit pompous, which isn’t my intention. What I mean is I have enough musical sense (just!) to get huge satisfaction from noodling on a guitar or tinkling on a keyboard until something interesting falls out, which I then work up into a song. AI would take that away from me and make the songwriting process less satisfying.

That said, I am talking about generative AI, such as Suno. Of course there are plenty of assistive AI tools that provide utilities such as stem separation or mastering. I have used these with varying degrees of success, mostly just about acceptable, but not enough for me to want to carry on with them. I’ve also used Harmony Bloom and Eternal Arps - not AI as such (I don’t think, although it could fall under the assistive AI umbrella) but still, it wasn’t me creating the output. Certainly, I took whatever those plugins spat out and developed it into a song, but those elements were not created or imagined by me. Audio repair? Noise reduction? Should I spend hours doing it manually? Nah.

For me, where the debate gets really tricky is when you consider using AI to generate, for example, a single instrument part (or the arps I mentioned above). Some would argue that if you can’t play it (or programme it) yourself you should hire someone to do it for you. Others would argue that doing so might be out of reach for them financially, or practically. Does that mean they don’t deserve to have bagpipes in their song? Or should they take an ethical decision not to write a song with bagpipes if they can’t afford a player? What about AI vocals? To me, they’re horribly generic as an up front voice in a song, but what about for demos, or as a guide track before your vocalist turns up? Or for backing vocals? I can’t afford to pay three backing vocalists, and my voice isn’t strong enough to do the job. Does that mean I shouldn’t have backing vocals in my songs? (In fact, I run a theatre company and I have access to whole bunch of singers that help out with backing vocals, but you get the point).

And then there’s the AI -v- samples/loops debate. I very rarely use samples and the only time I used a loop (that I didn’t create) was for a conga track. I didn’t create it or perform it or even come up with the pattern. It was a free loop I found online. Would it have been wrong for me to use AI to create that part instead? What’s the difference? Or should I not have had the congas and ended up with a lesser song?

I think one of the most important things in the AI debate is disclosure: making it clear if a song is AI generated. But how do you enforce that? And does that mean you have to disclose the use of AI if a pad track or backing vocal was generated by Suno? If so, why wouldn’t you have to disclose that you mastered a song with Landr, or mixed it with Ozone? Or used Midjourney to create your album cover? or ChatGPT to write some blurb for your release? Or Gemini to remove the bass player from your band photo after you fired him?

Like I say, it’s all so polarising, and people will have very valid arguments for and against everything I’ve said above. At this point in time, there are more questions than answers. The most important thing is that as musicians, or songwriters, or producers - of any standard - we have a choice to use or not use AI. At the moment we also have a choice whether to listen to AI generated music or not. But that choice is rapidly diminishing as the lines become more blurred.

2 Likes
#3

If you involve so-called AI in your music, it is not your music.

2 Likes
#4

I don’t agree. Or if we consider this as a fact, then:

  • You don’t make your preset ? Not your music.
  • You use samples from other tracks ? Not your music.

Making music never has been to create and control 100% of your assets.
Using AI to create pattern, chords progression, etc, is strictly equivalent to using any software or plugins that does it for you.

My call tho, this is an endless debate with no true answers.

Cheers !

2 Likes
#5

I have never been glad for sample loop based music either. But i like some anyway.

I remember we in my music education school had some paper cards with bars of musical notes. They could be put together after our wishes and form a musical piece.

Using Randomness is also kind of machine driven.

I will say that it depend on what one use AI for. The music should be your own.

I can be worried that music will sound even more the same that in main stream music today. In the same beat and same … so on.

It’s a very difficult subject. It’s about where the artist put the finger on it, and when and how it can be called the artists work.

But can we call AI the artist?

3 Likes
#6

Hello and thank you for your participation.

@bigblip This is a very insightful analysis, and as you said, it raises far more questions than it answers.

I found myself thinking about this after responding to a Cubase survey; the last few questions were about AI, and I have to admit that made me a little uncomfortable.

I know it’s used in FL Studio and that many DAWs will likely implement it, so will we be able to control the system?

It seems quite complicated, according to some computer scientists; I’m starting to miss my old 4-track recorder.

Thank you for this detailed analysis; it helps me better understand the future of music.

I don’t plan on using it—I bought Samuel Adler’s book on orchestration a year ago, and although I’m having a hard time getting the gist of it, it’s a real bible, and there’s a pleasure in turning the pages that AI will never have the chance to experience—that sensation of paper.

Thank you.

Best regards

4 Likes
#7
  • You use samples from other tracks ? Not your music.

Correct. Isn’t that why samples are usually attributed? Or they can be subject to copyright cases.

I’m not sure I agree. If I spend time going through chord progressions finding what works, that is my time and creativity. If I click a button that generates a song, where is the creativity?

I certainly use plugins. But I don’t use AI to create a song.

3 Likes
#8

This is what will happen. A sort of slushy lowest common denominator, devoid of creativity. It sort of sounds like music, but there is something off about it. Grey music.

1 Like