Originally Posted by Fdemetrio
I think you are a music curator if Ai does it all. It still requires an ear to know what your hearing is really good, or if it just sounds good.

The end result is everybody makes a great SOUNDING song, the average listener may think oh since it sounds good they must be good.

not all Ai songs are equal even if they all sound good


Yes — I actually agree with that.

If AI does the songwriting, musicianship and production, then “music curator” is probably a much better description than “songwriter.” There is still a creative skill involved in recognizing which of the AI's results are worth keeping, and not every AI-generated song is equally good.

And I completely agree that “sounds good” and “is a good song” are two different things. AI can produce an incredibly polished recording, and an average listener may naturally assume that the person behind it must therefore be a great songwriter and musician.
That's actually why I think transparency is so important. If the AI created the melody, music and performance, then the human shouldn't claim those things as their own. If the human wrote the lyrics or melody, that's a different contribution. And if the human mainly curates and selects the AI results, then “curator” seems like a pretty accurate description.

I think we're getting much closer to agreeing on the basic principle: the interesting question isn't whether AI was used, but what the human actually contributed.

I'd like to make one more comment, though.

You mentioned documenting how a verse became a bridge, how you started with a chorus, how the chorus stayed for a year until you found the right verse, where the idea came from, and so on. I understand the reasoning, but I think that's taking documentation much too far. If I write a song, I don't necessarily keep a diary of how every creative decision came about. Sometimes a line or melody just pops into my head, and sometimes a song evolves over months. That's part of the creative process.

And there is another problem with trying to establish authorship through AI history. Suppose I write my lyrics with the help of several AI tools. I could have ChatGPT create a draft, have Gemini rewrite parts of it, then have ChatGPT refine it again before I put the finished lyrics into Suno. How would Suno know where those lyrics came from? And I seriously doubt an AI detector could reliably determine that a lyric was created through a combination of different AI tools.
So even a detailed AI creation history wouldn't necessarily tell us the whole story.

For me, that's where this gets interesting. There probably isn't going to be a foolproof way to prove authorship in the AI era. We're going to have to rely on transparency, consistency and ultimately some degree of trust.