JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Will AI replace session players

If that is Rick's newest one, he left out so much info it is really Lying by Omission. He gave no effort or examples of actual songwriters (who write both words and melody) and use Suno to "cover" their versions in other styles, genders, or in updated production. I see Suno entirely as a production tool. I have never had it write a single word and only when I am writing children's songs with my granddaughter do I not upload a demo prompt for it to follow. And that is mostly because we have so little time to write together that we focus on lyrics about her life, her friends, her toys and favorite story ideas. The value to me is for demo purposes, but most studios large and small are using all sorts of algorithmic tools to make or evaluate or improve music. Suno is still not all the way there, but it is like having a producer, engineer and session players (especially singers) on call 24/7 for little to no money. I know project studios making demos (and openly acknowledging) with A.I. and doing quite well. People want the end result, and how you get there is so full of production tools that I question what % of any release is entirely acoustic/human in nature anymore. Even stuff recorded with real people use autotune, use all sorts of dynamic analysis programs to get the EQ where they want it, which significantly changes the sound they started with, then you have mastering where it is ALL about technology and perfecting the imperfect. But it is also why stuff sounds like everything else. A.I. is just the distraction from the truth that all the corporate artists use tech and secondary players, singers and tools to significantly take the process out of human hands and ears and into the same universe as ANY version of A.I.

If I had the cash, I would absolutely hire human players to do what I want. Frankly I have spent way more time per song on the Suno stuff than any song in a studio where most musicians play their instrument and/or sing and their part is DONE. They have a team doing the rest. I am putting WAY more of my artistic vision into all these songs than that. I have done over 500 versions of one song and I am still not quite happy with it. But it is way closer than my demo because I have a female vocal and wrote it for our female singer but we never got it recorded beyond my demo.

Beato does a disservice to all creators by leaving out reality and truth (and I think it is by accident, he truly doesn't begin to understand how it can be used). Can people make crap songs with it? YES! Were they making crap songs without it? YES! Do these at least sound better? Also YES which is why it isn't going anywhere. If studios are not using new technology, people will go elsewhere. Plus they can't afford NOT to use tools to make workflow faster and better. Everything made with computers or advanced tools is no less suspect than current A.I. which is still in its infancy. But Rick did get his conclusion right. A.I. WILL be embraced fully by young listeners who don't care how the sausage was made. They will like or dislike the song and move on.

Covered wagons and teams of horses once ruled the day. Buying one today costs a FORTUNE so why would you if you aren't in specific need of one (entertainment, work around a farm etc.). The answer is we drive cars. A.I. tools are just a better mousetrap and will get MUCH better and the same creative talents will dominate if/when they use them, and if they want to make money, they will too.