what happens when AI replaces all our jobs?

[AwakenTheSkies]

Seriously, who is interested in AI dominated music business? This benefits no one.

Who are the gear brands going to sponsor if it’s a fucking AI doing the music.

Who are the kids going to look up to and be fanatics about if it’s a fucking AI artist.

Who will they write books and documentaries about and all this adjacent bullshit that makes money if it’s an AI topping the charts?

And what about live performances and all the money that makes?

Music and art at its core is a very human thing, we like it because it’s cool. But AI drives the “cool” factor into the ground. It’s not a real human with opinions, it’s a fucking robot that will do anything you say.
I can see its potential as a tool to aid in making sounds or whatever else you want to get creative with.
I never bothered to learn to paint, if I ask chatGPT to draw me this detailed image that doesn’t make me a fucking painter does it.

 

[narad]

By why would you want an AI to do those things, when they're already easy to do with non-AI software? Amp sims are already good. Snare samples are already good. "Changing parameters on an effect" is something you do by.... changing the parameter? Why do we need to jam AI into all of these things? That's just AI for the sake of AI.

Which really characterizes the AI conversation a lot for me - it feels a lot of the time like AI folks just want to jam it in anything and everything just because they care about the AI, not because of any genuine need or want to improve or enhance the thing they're jamming AI into. Is an AI snare sample better than a normal snare sample? How would it be? It's just a snare sample.

We're in the "AI is a hammer searching for nails" stage of AI hype.

This is one of those "the world is bigger than SSO" things. If you hung out on deviantart all day and talked about what impact generative art was going to have when you could just pick up your wacom and open up corel painter and make it yourself, you'd miss that a lot of people who want to make images for various purposes aren't capable of doing that / are going to do that. If you know how to use amp sims and are happy with the set and are happy paying for that, then you can still use that, and you can setup the amp in a certain way, and reamp it, be that hands on. But if me, the average person, can just say, "Replace the vocals in these Periphery songs with <X> voice", or accomplish similar goals, that's going to enable them in a way that hundreds of hours into DAWs and recording tools is probably not.

Whatever your tools that you use now can accomplish, incorporating AI into it is going to expand what you can accomplish. If the sound you want is something created from hardware devices that exist now, of course you can get by with just these things. But AI is a much more flexible way of generating sound. When it comes to samples, personally for me I would much rather create new sounds, or even navigate existing sounds via interaction with a model than through searching libraries of stuff other people recorded. I don't find that to be particularly noble, or efficient, and ultimately not always capable of satisfying what the artist is looking for.

 

[narad]

Seriously, who is interested in AI dominated music business? This benefits no one.

Who are the gear brands going to sponsor if it’s a fucking AI doing the music.

And then the gear review youtubers all go out of business and disappear? This is the best use case for AI I've heard all day.

 

[TedEH]

you'd miss that a lot of people who want to make images for various purposes aren't capable of doing that / are going to do that.

I'm not missing that at all. I think that if you're not capable of a thing, sometimes it's fine to just not do it. Or to pay someone to do it. Especially when the thing is art.

But if me, the average person, can just say, "Replace the vocals in these Periphery songs with <X> voice", or accomplish similar goals, that's going to enable them in a way that hundreds of hours into DAWs and recording tools is probably not.

Sure, that's neat, but what problem does it solve? What need do you have to replace the vocals on a song? If it's for novelty, then it's - as I said - a solution searching for a problem. If it's to present yourself as an artist doing a cover, then I'd find that disingenuous and an insult to the craft. AI vocal removal so that you can add your own voice? Sure, why not. That would be handy.

Whatever your tools that you use now can accomplish, incorporating AI into it is going to expand what you can accomplish.

I feel more like you missed my point that while AI can be useful in some places, it's not the appropriate solution for literally every situation, but the current climate is trying to jam it into everything. If AI is the appropriate solution to 10 things, we're currently trying to solve 100 problems with it.

Using AI to explore a space of samples within a library you bought to save some time in a selection process, sure. But I don't need my snare sample to be AI generated. I don't need my vocals to be AI generated. I would feel like a grifter if I released music with AI vocals on it.

 

[narad]

I'm not missing that at all. I think that if you're not capable of a thing, sometimes it's fine to just not do it. Or to pay someone to do it. Especially when the thing is art.

They're not going to though. I've paid artists to make graphics for me on commission, with one edit included. It's not terrible, but it's not quite what I was going for. At the same time, in terms of effort involved, the artist asked a fair value for his time... it's just not efficient for like, a simple graphic that for me is not tied to my income, etc., just a for-fun graphic. So had AI existed at that time, I would absolutely have done that. I'd probably have a better result, and it would have taken me less time, and less money. For all the hammers in search of a nail talk, that was pretty much the winning tool in every category.

On the music front, I might be making a video game fairly soon, and I would want background music for it. Of course I could make the background music, but that's very time consuming for me. Of course I could hire someone, but we may not like their background music and there's probably not much money to pay them anyway. AI is again a great solution here.

That's not taking away from the value of the art of video game music. I literally just finished listening to three hours of discussion of Nobuo Uematsu's writing of FF5/6/7 soundtracks. That's proper art. But I'm not choosing between Uematsu and AI. I'd be choosing between a huge amount of my time that's required elsewhere, or random dude who's going to want a lot of money for his time and can't get, or AI, and I imagine AI is going to do a good job in this scenario (and that it's only going to get better in this regard). There are a lot of people who have a need for this sort of media, and have a fixed budget, and the choice is basically AI or nothing. AI's going to win here, and it's going to be a win for any indie development team.

Sure, that's neat, but what problem does it solve? What need do you have to replace the vocals on a song?

Enjoyment? I mean, you've heard stock Periphery before, right?

 

[TedEH]

They're not going to though.

There's literally several people in the thread telling you they'd make that exact choice. I'm not saying everyone will make that choice, but some absolutely will.

That's not taking away from the value of the art of video game music.

I frankly disagree. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

But I'm not choosing between Uematsu and AI

I feel that to be a weird take from a member of a niche music forum. Small artists are still artists. This is exactly what devaluing art looks like.