JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Problem I foresee with ai

I am not absolutely certain, but it may be that John thinks he is being clever by attempting to compare me to you.
He can tell you whether he actually is or not. See post 1193824[/quote]

Hmm...this reply loses me. Have no idea what you're saying Sunset. Anyway, no I'm not comparing the two of you.

John

Dom...that's exactly what my experience was as well....and it was very exciting to experience.
I'm glad for this software....because I am enjoying what you are producing with it. This to me is progress....
Bill

Hmm...this reply loses me. Have no idea what you're saying Sunset. Anyway, no I'm not comparing the two of you.

John [/quote]


my take: you addressed Dom but appeared to talking to Marty.

Thanks Bill! Now I get the confusion. No, I was directed my remark at Fdemetrio Which is Dom - I think...

John:)

Hey John. Yeah. I'm enjoying all the thoughts folks have on this great topic. I think I am trying to keep it straight by Thinking :those for, those against.
Bill

It's nice to see this cleared up and forgotten. Isn't it Dom?

No idea lol

Man this software has issues. If you want a second verse your gonna have to cut and paste in a daw hie er then your lyrics are gonna be the same . Nice to have variation on second verse but it's badddddf

I don't think you can produce a ding beginning to end with this without sounding like 5 songs in one. It's pretty dumb that way and frustrating.

So I'm not going to try to make full song. I'm having some fun with it. Using my older songs, I'm not feeding my babies to it

I’m with Bill Draper. Liking the thread.

Thats so interesting Craig. AI robots being trained in music variation. Some one in a youtube commented, the developers might be using the the free beta version to illustrate how the software can be used...and then will sell it to an educational institute for teaching purposes.

Bill

I Googled these types of applications and found there are more song & lyric generators. You guys are correct about one thing, there's no stopping this monster that is now out of the cage.

John

right now, it's not that good. I spent alit of hours on it and you can't really make s song. You have very little control over it. You can't have riffs
Or motifs or anything too specific..

Your gonna use their arrangement, whether it supports or not.

From a composing pov, no such thing as a specific voicings

No writing a song about a roller coaster and having the music sound like one.

Take Billy Joel's Down easter Alexa, where the music sound like being on it.



It's more for generic takes on songs.

I also notice that 8 lines of lyric, the melody will not change much and kinda get stale.

But it is still in it's infancy so we shall see

Dom
I havent tried that program yet, but I expect that your assessment is a reasonable conclusion.
But that is changing as we type here.

For now, its a great (and fun) tool for pulling the handle on the "slot machine" and seeing what you get.
If you like what you get, it wont be radio ready, but it may be very good for pulling into a DAW and using as a work-up stencil.

This morning I have been trying out AUDIMEE which is a very easy to us voice AI that will take my vocal stem and convert to other voices and adjust by semitones.
My voice has limitations. As a consequence, deriving things from my voice has limitations...

but damn the program is impressive. And I am just using the free version so far.

Well that's interesting . Anything that still allows you to be you is a good thing.jke a drum program, really it's still you cause your programming it according to you. Some people may use generic beats which is ok for alot of basic music

Post what you get out of it .

Funny side note. I took lyric of one of my songs, described what I wanted, which in this case was to sound like Springsteen.

Now you can't say sound like Springsteen. I tried that. Instead I describe the sound style everything is great detail. His vocal quality etc

I did publish it maybe this is why. Shortly thereafter, it gave me a notice saying they removed for sounding too much like Springsteen.

Then I looked and it was gone , first I thought they deleted me...

Anyway I did it again and it was accepted I guess , still with me I posted it in mp3

The plot thickens...

Is that u being a wise ass?

Cause I get the latter Im just not sure about the former.

mike says same thing really Mike o my goodness thanks for sharing

Your mood swings

Remember my hook stay off the motorcycle and on your meds

Might oh that tune next

And get your meds refilled

Not sure I can top Willie

Hey I wonder if lyrics entered from a user is them Thrown into their base recycling them and using them on other songs

It appears that Fiverr, a website to hire performers, etc. is using AI technology. I use a sax player there regularly for my piano/ sax lounge tracks. This disease is spreading faster than Covid!

John

Is that just you being a dckhead?
Or is your schizophrenia manifesting itself in your last disjointed and phrenetic sounding post?

All my comment meant was that there now appears to be a threshold that is triggered by likeness to the original artist.
Where is that threshold? How is it set? etc.
The AI music PLOT IS THICKENING.

Of the two of us, I'm not the one that needs meds.

Lol I don't know how anyone charge for something they didn't do and anybody could possibly do

I don't think they're using it yet with the performers. They have other services like production and help for songwriters.

John

Sarcasm I'm the king of it so I know it

Yes but again you may not know if they used it

Things are getting weird.

It's a dog eat dog world and I'm wearing milkbone underwear

Well, I'm 100% sure it's a real sax man. I've worked with him for several years.

John

I reckon this issue has come to a stand-still until the next development. Not much more can be said. It's been real...

John

Lol don't feel bad nobody gives a [naughty word removed] about my work either.

I don't get why people visit And lutk for no other reason but to read

There's gotta be better reads out there!

I think jingles are done and probably tv and movie placements, at least at low level. No reason why any low budget doc or movie would pay to have someone else do it when they can do it themselves.

Maybe not this version , still sound and originality problems. But you could still use this for most low budget applications

A.I. is not a problem. It is a tool. If you buy a book about Songwriting, every principle in that book is derived from someone's else's original thoughts, then compiled through an Authors filter to become a new "thing" which may or may not be helpful. A.I. is simply another tool, like that book about songwriting, from which you will take what your own filters make of the information and resources offered, and use it to create something, or many somethings, using your own filter. All new things build on previous things run through a human filter. A.I., even if it learns from every copyrighted work, is simply compiling info in a convenient way so a human can add their own filters to that info and the result is something new. Verbatim theft where you straight plagiarize another work has always existed. Some get away with it, some don't. But even in cases where someone sings their own version of someone else's song, they have still added themselves (or those they choose to perform it) into the mix and the result is something new. Only in this tiny window of "commercial music industry" has any of this even mattered. Frankly, society would be far better off if a copyright existed for 5 years and then expired forever. This artificial "commerce" angle has set back humanity in horrible ways and worse, has allowed hucksters and scam artists to abuse what was intended to encourage progress and more good works by offering financial advantage. It hasn't worked.

Now, we have people ONLY progressing for financial gain and little else. Our "progress" has been stunted and the abuses have set back endless advancements. It has allowed amazing innovations to be artificially constrained or even withdrawn from existence by greedy corporations and governments and has had negligible positive impact on society. When a new idea is revealed, the timer should force development and availability so that as soon as it hits the market, improvements and new ideas can spin off of it. Societal innovations would lift all boats by taking such advantages out of the hands of people with ill intent. If someone has a great idea, that idea should never be allowed to be shut down and packed away like the Arc in a Raiders of the Lost Arc plot. Sure, allow the creators to cash in briefly, but the give everyone the tools to build on it and continue improvements. For every inventor and every invention, there are countless FREE tools they got to use to arrive at that new "thing" which were only there because someone in the past made it available and it was in the public domain.

Machines are fully capable of creating every conceivable melodic pattern and then "copyrighting" those melodies essentially blocking any further works using an abusive and archaic copyright system. It is time to end it Likewise, all governments should be forced to make public all patents. The US Government has abused the system to put unmitigated power into the hands of elites, keeping inventions and innovations off the market to protect their greedy overseers. Here's an entertaining recap of just a fraction of energy related technologies that the Governments of the world have kept from all of us.

I agree with all of that, accept this is a tool that can do everything itself

All anybody has to do is say write me a song about dog food and call it... top paw. Enter and it's done. A great sounding wonderfully arranged piece of music that you can market as a song, jingle, etc.

The user can be deaf, and have his song.

I been experimenting , I have no desire for this to write my songs , I don't get what satisfaction one would get other than fun.

Hey let's get it go write a song about farting, and they'd have great recording of it or close.

Right now I'm trying to use it to sing my lyrics as close to how I would. It can't use my music ideas .

But what it's going to do is marginalize artists ,,

I think it will lead to a revival of real people playing real instruments in front of real people.

As I mentioned before, my publisher makes us sign an agreement that we haven't used AI in any part of the songs we submit. I can't see the music supervisors of any major tv stations using this. They want music free of lawsuits. Although the low-budget stations may opt in for AI. It's definitely killing creativity. And it's more than just a tool to aid musicians. it's a system to do it all without real musicians. In the long run it's terrible for the Music Industry and creative songwriter/ composers. In it's present state, it needs more development. From what I've listened to, everything is quantized, even the vocal tracks. Sounds artificial - oh yeah, it is artificial.

John

Definitely more than s tool it's an artist in itself .

It may not sound like it's on the radio, but this could easily be used for commercials .

And some tv spot where all they need is spooky music for 30 seconds and they get it free, and give themselves a music credit.

John,

Believing the music/vocals to be "all" quantized is a basic misunderstanding of how the samples are created in the first place. The AI is trained on real audio. There is NO midi involved whatsoever in ANY part of the sample creation process, unlike AIVA, Magenta, and other tools. So it's a safe guess that some samples will sound quantized, such as EDM and Hip-Hop beats, but any older jazz or classical styles? Not so much. In fact, on their Discord Server, Udio users are complaining about how "unquantized" many of the samples are!

Indeed, I have been creating stems of some Udio tracks I wanted to work with, further, and after putting them on a timeline, I noticed many cases of BPM "drift" as well as notes within a given bar or two that are slightly ahead of and slightly behind the beat, and not in any perceivable pattern or (128th, 64th, 32nd, 16th) quantized measure.

I don't know exactly what Udio tracks you were listening to to form your opinion, but I notice no such quantization on the tracks I have been making, and if there was any hint of it I would know, having jaded ears from years of working in a DAW with both quantized and unquantized music.

As to "AI killing creativity"...

I am a creative songwriter and composer and I don't think "in the long run," as you say, that this is terrible. Nor do any of the songwriters that I talk to from my old Northern California stomping grounds, nor many of the recording artists I follow...such as Momus, one of the most prolific composers in the last few decades:




Don't you think it might be a little early to make such a sweeping epic pronouncement such as this?

Creativity comes down to making choices; that's all these tools do, is pair things down so we can make choices.

Creating from scratch, using just our brains and non-AI software will take a piece of music down a specific path that meets our intentions, with maybe (intentionally or not) a curve thrown here and there so our process isn't too predictable, unless that's the environment we want, when composing, creating, and finalizing audio tracks.

But the idea I am trying to convey here is, with normal composing methods, "intention" is in control of most every aspect of the music. With generative AI music, we are still in control over many of a music's aspects, and can figure out how to obtain what we need by writing in the prompt box those specific words that will elicit the music/vocals we want. Or as close to it as this fledgling AI can get us, as Udio is in Beta...

How is learning how to tell AI how to fulfill an intention anything other than a creative act?

Maybe a different kind of creativity, but "understand our intention" figures prominently in both normative compositional methods and AI ones.

Creativity and "surprise" share a nice bit of overlap in their Venn Diagram. Creating music with AI gets folks back in touch with their "inner child," cuz it feels like magic, and what it outputs is often in the "happy surprise" category of something not quite expected, but good, nevertheless. Indeed, I have witness this in recent days from JPFers here, as they use Udio.

I welcome the democratization of the art making experience. Maybe crime will go down or at least some people will lead less boring lives. There are all kinds of people in this world. Maybe some of them just want an alternative to Prime Video and discover they can "create" exactly the KIND of music they hear in their head, with Udio. I guess I am a little disappointed that you can't imagine that this AI could be of any use for anyone.

I am not asking you to like music AI in any of its forms. You make Library Music, and with the advent of Udio, of course you are not going to like something that might, someday, mean your income slows down.

AI is nearing "singularity" proportions. It is getting better and better, faster and faster. Soon enough, whatever drawbacks you yourself are hearing in it--they will be gone. Udio has only been around two weeks or so.

There are indeed a LOT of professionals justifiably threatened by the advent of AI, and we all know it is not going away, and no one embraces adaptation, except maybe the youngest among us.

It's okay to feel threatened by AI and it's drawbacks/negatives while still recognizing its potential benefit for mankind.

Music creation AI tools like Udio.com can be powerful additions to the creative process, but it's critical to use them with intention and awareness. By embracing them as collaborators rather than replacements, musicians can navigate the potential risks and explore exciting new sonic territories. And non-musicians who don't care to become musicians? Perfect tool for them...


Mike

*******************************************************************************************

Here's a summary of my thoughts...

The impact of music creation AI tools like Udio.com on the creative process is complex and has both potential benefits and risks:

Potential Benefits:

Democratization of Music Creation: AI tools can lower the barrier to entry for music creation.

They provide an accessible way for non-musicians to explore their creativity and make music that was previously out of their reach.
Inspiration and Experimentation: For experienced musicians, AI can serve as a source of inspiration, pushing them outside their comfort zones with unexpected chord progressions, melodies, or rhythmic patterns. It opens up new ways to experiment.
Efficiency and Workflow: AI tools can assist with technical tasks like generating chord progressions, drum patterns, or basic arrangements, saving time and effort for musicians.

Potential Risks:

Over-reliance and Homogenization: If musicians become over-reliant on AI tools, there's a risk that it could lead to a lack of originality and a homogenization of sound. Music may start to sound formulaic and lose its unique, human touch.
Devaluing Skill and Artistry: The ease with which AI tools can generate music might lead to a devaluation of the skills and artistry musicians develop through years of practice and dedication.
Ethical Concerns and Copyright: The use of AI-generated music raises questions of ownership, copyright, and potential use of existing musical material without proper attribution.

Mitigating Risks and Finding Balance

The key to harnessing the power of AI in music creation lies in finding a balance:

Treat AI as a Tool, Not a Master: Use AI tools as a complement to your creativity, not a replacement for it.

Employ them to spark ideas, explore possibilities, but always infuse your work with your own unique voice and artistry.
Develop Musical Skills: Continue to hone your musical skills, understanding theory, and learning instruments. This makes your collaborations with AI more meaningful and keeps you in control of the creative direction.
Ethical Usage: Be mindful of potential copyright issues when working with AI-generated music.

Seek transparent tools that clearly define the ownership and licensing terms.

Good to see you back Michael. I don't think we'll ever come together on this. But you raise some interesting points. My thought can be summed up with this phrase: "this just ain't right" - ha, ha.

Best, John

What path AI takes and what work that it usurps is not up to any of us. We are just watching the train from a distance.
In the case of music, it will mostly be determined by the software creators, and the software will become its own creator and Taylor Swift fans (or their peers) will listen to it, purchase it or not....drive it or not.

If they like the way that something sounds, they will have no concern with it's production.

Millenials not only dont care if someone in the mortgage industry loses their job, many if not most prefer obtaining their loan exclusively through an a app.

100%

I agree, and actually think this a good thing--being driven by how something makes us "feel" rather than the history of how it was made.

God gives gifts to people for the betterment of mankind, so with AI being able to do everything better than man, I guess God will give up giving gifts to man. Did God give us AI or did the enemy.

If God is timeless, omniscient, all knowing, all seeing, all powerful and the creator of everything, both good and bad...

then God created and gave us AI, and knew before he did, how it would ultimately turn out.
So the best place for you to get your question answered is directly by God.

If he gave this to mankind, knowing full well that we would use it to make our condition worse...ask him why he did that?

Inquiring minds

Actually, bad things exist to make us stronger and bring us closer to God. I'm no expert on religion, but that issue was covered in our church sermon this week.

John

I don’t see much difference between udio and a college student using AI to generate a term paper.

John

If he gave this to mankind, knowing full well that we would use it to make our condition worse...ask him why he did that?

There is no need to ask God “why” about anything, and we spend way too much time doing just that... everything that happens is “allowed” by God..the question I ask is not ”why God” but rather “what is it you want of me Lord”...when confronted how am I to react? That requires me to think about my responsibility.


God gives gifts to people for the betterment of mankind, so with AI being able to do everything better than man, I guess God will give up giving gifts to man. Did God give us AI or did the enemy.

God allows everything, good or evil...and there is good and evil in AI...it matters not who gave us AI “God or the enemy”...God allows AI to be both good and evil
God gives humans the ability to create and AI is nothing more than a creation of mankind, He also gave us the ability to choose between good and evil and everything that has been created by mankind, for good or evil, has been allowed by God and from AI will come both good and evil

Steve

They are exactly the same

Steve

In the end it depends on what the student does with the info...will he/she use it to write the paper or for better access to info to create the paper themselves
Steve

Steve

I've heard all of that but I personally cannot get past an omniscient being allowing people to wreck themselves, knowing all the while that they were going to.
Over my life, I have heard various explanations of why that is "his plan," but I've never heard an explanation that I felt persuasive.
We live by different life philosophies. In the one that I subscribe to, you never stop asking "why?"


Having said all that...take the last word if you feel the need. I am not going to get into an extended back-and-forth about God, Trump or Biden.
It's a song site. I introjected here in the hopes of derailing religion and politics.
Doms's craziness drives the car off onto the shoulder many days, but to his credit, he focuses on music related topics.

Y'all have a nice day.
Marty

Only a musician with songwriter experience will likely fare better. Cause he does have some say if he knows what he's looking to hear.

And will have more as this goes.

A student may be able to get a paper written by ai, but the more knowledge he has on the subject the more he can tweak it to get what he wants.

But it does pose ethical problems. How will anyone know so was used. May have answered my own question, individual results will still vary.

Some will still be stronger than others

Just wondering if this thing takes your ideas and throws them into the pot. If so it's conceivable somebody else could end up using parts of your idea in their songs. Then your originality becomes moot and ai grows from it.

I guess the key is to keep making new music so your a step a head.

This still has huge limitations, like biab, toontrack
You'll find yourself settling instead of being sure

Pete Townshend on streaming and Ai


What's actually been happening is that very, very few artists are starting to monopolize the majority of streaming, to the extent where the long tail, which was predicted when the internet started... [has] become so clogged up. You go onto Spotify — Apple [Music] is the same — you go into an area, which nobody else is listening to. And you hear the most extraordinary stuff. You hear it on SoundCloud, Bandcamp you make discoveries, and you think, 'Who the [naughty word removed] is this? They're brilliant!' They're a genius, but they've got 12 followers."

He added:

"It's sort of tragic, what's actually happened, because not that all of those people could ever have [have] been famous. We're used to the star system being a place... where a 'black swan', that's somebody that's just extremely lucky to be in the right place at the right time [finds success]."

Circling back to AI, Townshend concluded:

"But with respect to AI, I'm hopeful, but I'm not going to say is inevitably going to be a good thing, because I think it's when it becomes what drives the machine, then we have to be careful."

And while opinions on AI vary, Queen's Brian May, who's dealt with AI in his scientific endeavors, recently shared a pretty grim warning about the technology's impending impact on the music industry:

"My major concern with it now is in the artistic area. I think by this time next year the landscape will be completely different. We won't know which way is up. We won't know what's been created by AI and what's been created by humans. Everything is going to get very blurred and very confusing, and I think we might look back on 2023 as the last year when humans really dominated the music scene. I really think it could be that serious, and that doesn't fill me with joy. It makes me feel apprehensive, and I'm preparing to feel sad about this."

My thread continues to draw views

Keep reading love it.

Btw ai can change how we make videos .

It will generate images based on the lyrics

Just about every good invention man has come up with, man has found an evil use for, from gun powder to AI. There are two main powers at work in this world, one good , one evil. AI can have many good uses for mankind, great, but also many bad uses, bad. It is not the Technolgy that is bad or good, it is how man will use it. Many great inventions have been squashed by governments and big business because of greed and power.