JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Songwriter Message Forum The new great thing

Well, I kinda mean completely ai generated, if your writing lyrics into it, it's a big part of you in it too, more than you may realize.

It's sometimes spooky to me when it comes close to what I thought, and also spooky how it creates musical environments from your lyrics.

Sam Spade the artist can not use AI. When Sam sings it , he can promote himself as Sam or Elvis , everything anybody says is a freudian slip. Were usually talking about ourselves .AI is novelty played on forums... until if so Sony shuts them down . I really don't know all the uses to make money off AI , I'm sure it can be done .AI will probably survive along with 40 billion plug-ins .

Udio has 800 k songs per day generated. How is it a novelty on forums, here we have 10 people, half of which post nothing.

I think your logic is skewed. And there's only two forums I know of.

Yeah on their site and suno plenty of spins . If you're Diane Brown, but have a robot do all the work , how do you promote yourself as Diane Brown ? You can't , it's a robot. How do you compete with pushing a button ? I guess you can't really .


Well AI ain't going anywhere it looks like e.g., a cash cow ,money robber (KA CHING) . Well they're paying for spins on AI sites. Another way of scapling AI users. who did nothing basically .

https://suno.com


Billions of songs.


I think the difference is pushing a button is not fun. We are probably the last generation that gets to create our own music. Once the robots start building robots, we're toast anyway. Might as well enjoy the ride while we can. You actually have to work to put a song out .


So AI is adding lyrics and push a button on a mouse . You can get 300 versions ( which is genius ) in 15 minutes.
Whats the cost ? , less then a penny a track. Live tracks and you singing it , maybe 3 weeks and the cost $1200.00 on low -side with turnarounds . then promotion , lets say $300.00 with a minnow in a pond of bass .

What's the difference between AI songs and live tracks on sounds ? Not much really .

What's the satisfaction level on AI vs Live tracks ? I'm not sure . I for one feel like I cheated pushing a button and saying it's mine .

But you are right the site has 5 members , usually arguing on politics or religion .

I should start my own site , but it be a lot of work. $10.00 a month

I've kicked around this idea myself, more of a mp3 play, site, sort of like songranp was, only better.

But I think you're underestimating costs.

Songramp ? You were on there ? That was by what's here name , I forget 20 years ago , pitching songs bullshit. people are cheap , they won't pay more then 10 bucks..

Kye Fleming, she ran it. I hung out with her , she was ornery lol. I'm a commercial song whore she told me .publishers doing a strip tease you our shitty songs in Nashville. Don't put lipstick on a pig , thanks assholss

Christian Nashville , Bullshit , They'll rip you a new ashole

Ridiculous

I guess I'm not the only one voicing their concerns with this new and latest marvel.

White Knight
Despite previously using artificial intelligence tools to help resuscitate old John Lennon vocals, fellow Beatle Paul McCartney is now singing a different tune about the tech.

As the Guardian reports, the benighted Beatle has issued a statement ahead of the UK parliament's debate over amending its data bill to allow artists to exclude their work from AI training data. In it, McCartney warned that AI may take over the industry if nobody takes a stand.

"We[’ve] got to be careful about it," the Beatle said, "because it could just take over and we don’t want that to happen, particularly for the young composers and writers [for] who, it may be the only way they[’re] gonna make a career."

"If AI wipes that out," he continued, "that would be a very sad thing indeed."[b][/b]

Ha! Told ya'!
It's the children raised in this environment that will suffer the most...


What do you think is happening right here, right now?

Brian doesn't own and control this site...
GOOGLE DOES!

The "powers that be" have moved from allowing people to "discover" the free world on the WWW, to only allowing people to see who pays the most for advertising. That kind of manipulation and control brainwashes children, sways public opinion, and even interferes with elections...

If I seem redundant, it's because the "REAL WOKE", like myself, are always cancelled and deleted!

3 weeks is a new record for me! "Songcrafters" and "Facebook" just cancelled my new "Odi" accounts at the same time! AND I WASN'T EVEN THERE LONG ENOUGH TO MAKE ENEMIES!

That's not to mention what recently happened to me at "Homerecording"!
And THEY keep their "political RANT pages" private for members only...

Along with several others over the years...

"Tin Foil Hat...?!?"
BULL$HIT!!!


MY INTEGRITY IS ALL I HAVE!

Songcrafters, yeah if you post more than 4 songs , banned for life. I doubt Paul McCartney will stop AI. You'd be lucky if kids even remember his name. There's probably 500k songs loaded in AI sites a day . The kids new trend. it's a good tool for my needs , As it improves it will be in major producers tool box .

There is this Nashville tune , the producer used a live drummer , but then turned it in to a AI sound for beats. Will probably be hearing more of that, a collaboration of humans and machines in the future .

Elvis, you should read more and write less...
Otherwise, you're NEVER going to get the fuk'n POINT!

Chistians should not say fuk , you diminish your credibly Tony. You're always pissed off like Dom. its just a tool , no big deal .

Oooh, welll... Pardon the FUUK out of me!

Who the fuuk defines "credibility", Elvis! YOU!?

I can guaran-fukn-tee, whatever kind of Christian YOU believe I should be...
I AM PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE!

I have no idea what your talking about.. AI is a tool no big deal . See if fuk is in the Bible , I doubt it. Besides this thread is about AI , not religion man, anything that does fit your agenda its the devil

AI IS CANCELING CONSERVATIVE CHRISTIANITY, A$$HOLE!
NOT TO MENTION, THE ORGANIC CREATIVITY IN MUSIC!


Go back to your computer and let AI finish teaching you how to sing, Elvis...

I would rather be forgiven than perfect.

Hi Bennash...
We all know that Paul McCartney will not stop A.I. But that's not the point!
You really seem to have no idea what the point is that myself, Japov and Paul McCartney is making.
We get that A.I. is a tool.... we get it, we get it. we get it! See... we get it.
LSD is a tool that opens the mind. We get it!

As far as I'm concerned, people who use A.I. will diminish their credibly in the music arena.
And will absolutely throw away a process that has enriched all of humanity from music's first inception.
I most certainly get it. But you go on ahead, enjoy your tool; and as you do, know that we all can hear the difference between what A.I. creates and what a human creates.

Well I'm saying as a tool . We all know all AI sounds like robots . But producers are using AI in some form or another. If your using atomos mix , your using some sort of AI. Unless you're a major why worry about it . if you consider how Gershwin recorded songs and how the Beatles did with overdubs , AI changes are at that comparison .And I'm not retired Dom , I find work and music a nice balance . you could drop dead tomorrow

AI is unavoidable in 2025 IronKnee to a certain extent . I find it easier to be more flexible in new technology . Players got butt hurt on drum machines .

They said the same thing about drum machines. They said the same thing about Samplers. They said the same thing about Synthesizers going back to the 60s. The Beatles USED SAMPLES! Strawberry Fields used a synth that played recorded instruments on a loop. Paul McCartney is 100% hypocritical because tech innovations are what took them from their early pop rock to the deeper more interesting tracks that gave them credibility. Now he is saying that using new tech decreases credibility? Nice try, but it falls flat.

As long as you create the underlying words and/or melody, you are 100% a valid as any composer in history before or after. Is Bernie Taupin a songwriter? Yes. His lyrics are some of the most popular ever written. Is Elton John a songwriter? Yes, his melodies are some of the most popular ever written. Is Elton John a superstar musician? Of course. So how would any lyricist, or melody composer be any less than them, not to mention if they do BOTH?

Every recording made in the past 50 years has used significantly advanced technology than what came before. But you can go back to the dawn of recording and find lots of huge advantages gained by every innovation, not to mention recording itself. A.I. is not even as good as older tech in creating tech assisted music. DAWs are FULL of high end processing which do FAR MORE to bend sound in interesting ways to make music. All those plug ins are just more affordable versions of their physical synths and samplers of the previous generations. Look at The biggest selling Double Album of all time. Frampton Comes Alive was that bit because of clever use of the TalkBox. He wasn't the first, but he made it the most popular. Phil Collins, the respected brilliant prog rock Drummer used drum machine to make really catchy synth drum samples sound great in his recordings. He COULD have played it live, but he didn't. Recording drums is difficult. A dum machine is simply a superior way to get drums into the right rhythms to fulfill the artistic desires of the composer. Every generation makes doing manual tasks EASIER with technology. Once you write words and/or music, you are a legi songwriters. How you produce the recording for consumption is itself a variety of artistic choices, same as it every was. If Mozart got a better piano, he used it. If Phil got a better drum technology, he used it. A.I. isn't artificial anything. It is smart programming by the same minds who make your reverb and synths and delays and compressors and everything else. HUMANS. They make better tools. You can refuse to use them, fine. That is a choice. But your "song" is no better or worse because of it. Either you connect with others or you do not. The rest is really mostly about who can hire the best producer, engineers, studios with the highest end technology and gear to make the best finished recording. All A.I. has done is removed the middle people between SONGWRITER and LISTENER.

Now poor people can make radio ready music. If they write a great song, it connects. If they have clever artistic instincts as to what will amuse or move an audience, it doesn't matter what tech they used to finish it, they will succeed based on THEIR talent and THEIR artistic vision and instinct.

I throw away 98% of what A.I. gives me back, just as I throw away 98% of what I try on a DAW. But I take the 2%, keep refining it until it pleases me, then it is done. After that, it is up to the listener. Your opinion is yours, but you are being hypocritical if you use technology of any kind, but draw some red line for others saying they may not pass it or you will condemn their efforts. That is simply hypocrisy. If you think all analog is better, but down electric instruments and still you need a mic, recording device, converters to make it uploadable to even reach an audience. You can't escape tech. Amps, Speakers, etc. are all tech. My view is NONE of it matters and all of it is a choice YOU make artistically.

A painter has new brushes, new colors and paint technologies. New canvases, new tools of sorts I don't even know to make paintings. Theirs are as legit as Picasso or Van Gogh. The results move you, or they do not.

Good grief, Brian...
YES, WE GET IT!
In the music world, the difference between "High Tech" and AI is...
THE MUSICIAN TELLS THE COMPUTER WHAT TO DO!

However;

Currently, "AI" is fooling millions of kids into believing that they are legitimate songwriters... BUT THEY WILL NEVER PLAY, WRITE, OR SING!

A MIDI keyboard or drum machine is obviously NOT AI.

You miss the point Tony , The Beatles used new technology. Thats all AI is , with variables . You have to cut live tracks and sing it . Whatever old artist back then , probably told the Beatles your cheating

Getting it yet, Elvis?

I get your point Tony. but all plug ins are kinda AI
Nashville producers talk about AI in a more intelligent manner than I can

LOL...

A.I. is replacing the human basic instinct. We are giving up the spark and allowing A.I. to create it for us.

Going from acoustic instruments to electric instruments is new technology... A.I. is much different.

Learning how to craft your penmanship, back in the day, was considered an art. We have pretty much moved onto punching a keyboard. Even that pales to the difference with A.I. \We still write the content, at least.
Please don't give me that hooee that people are still going to write their own lyrics and write their own melody. A.I. is going to re-write everything and simply offer samples for you to choose from. And I ask you, where is the art in that? And where is the fun?

All you pros, go on and use A.I. Make some money. I intrinsically know the difference between something inspired, and something that's not.
Question: Can anyone tell me what you would call an absolutely perfect diamond?
Answer: Cubick Zirconia

A.I. will soon be on the way to creating a brand-new genre of music.... I'll brand it "Generic"

But this is an argument that some will never understand or want to hear.

You live in Hawaii ? Why would you care about AI in paradise ? lol.

Its a new toy AI

No, it isn't tricking anyone. It is teaching them how to be CREATIVE. It is removing money from the equation. Most of the WHININH is coming from producers, engineers, session players and people who are their friends. Their skills have always been enhanced by the tech they choose. But now the tech has grown to a point where they aren't needed, especially in the development phase. Now, a kid who can't afford an instrument can access a free A.I. on any connected device and get their creative ideas down. Kids have ALWAYS had musical toys where they push a button and music plays. They did not lose their creativity because their speak and spell played a sound with the push of a button. It is a stepping stone. I wrote lyrics as early as 5 or 6. I did not have my first access to ANY instrument until I was in College and the Frat had a grand piano. I taught myself to play. I took out a loan upon graduation and bought 2 cheap keyboards and eventually 15 more. I also had tons of other gear. I wrote 2300 songs from 1985 (first access to a piano) and 2000 when I quit cold turkey to focus exclusively on helping OTHER writers in a myriad of ways. This message board, which I rarely used to do more than offer help to others, is one example. But most of my time was spent creating live shows for ANYONE to play, no matter how good or bad. Why? Because it wasn't right that developing people, including hobbyists, had so few (or something no) places to play a song for other humans. We did THOUSANDS of shows featuring up to 77 different artists because we never turned ANYONE away. A.I. now gives EVERYONE a chance to make pro quality recordings. Can they still make GARBAGE? Yes. I have yet to hear a good song come from someone just pushing a button. A.I. lyrics are awful and lame. But they DO teach people nonetheless. The same entry level people will make music with the tools available and will STILL suck until they don't suck.

Go back and listen to all the terrible recordings from 25 years here. If you had money, you could release pro recordings of bad songs. A.I. is not different, minus the money. But now instead of SILENCE, poor people get to participate alongside everyone else.

I had ZERO pro recordings of my music. I did however have 2 major label record deals. In the first, they kept the demos they paid for when I backed out of the deal in late 1992. The second ended worse, in the studio after finishing the first 6 songs, my vocalist died. The studio kept those recordings as well. I got on hear 2 on the phone. Now I have 2300 recorded into a cassette deck live, and had a couple dozen recorded into a multi track but without outboard gear (not even a reverb) they didn't sound very dynamic. I have taken those cassette demos and inputed the first 2 minutes into Suno, gotten a full version of the song which copies the music, melody and full lyric and finishes it out into a much upgraded quality. Then I edit and redo over and over until I get sonically interesting versions. I've gotten a lot of positive feedback from my industry friends who want me to do a full album using live players. If I ever get the money, I would love to do it. Meanwhile I have already created 125 finished songs that are perfect pre-production demos. I will never have the budget to record that many, but I plan to upgrade all 2300 songs (plus the dozens of new ones I have been writing since starting this) and it has been a blast. If I get my industry connections to donate their skills to make an album with me, that will be fun, but the net result is much the same. I will get great guitar work from my famous cousin, I will get amazing keyboard work from my buddy who is Fogerty's Keyboard player, I will get great drum tracks from my buddy who just retired after decades with the Doobie brothers and I have several major label vocalists who have volunteered to sing something. All that will be a dream come true. I even have a famous producer who offered to produce a track. But the net result will really be NO DIFFERENCE! I wrote a song, I will have a finished version and in the end, some cranky message board user will say it stinks or will deem it a classic. A.I. or those live players change NOTHING about it. Both are fun processes, and if I had unlimited money I would likely do them all with high end players and professionals. But it is still, my song plus technology wielded by smart humans = results. I would never suggest my "real recording" was more valid than a great A.I. song, just as I have no problem admiring people who write better music than I do regardless of their process. It moves me or it doesn't. Soon enough, all music will be on demand, and all of it will be unique to the desires of the person it is made for. The "industry" which has used every trick and tactic to keep music FROM people that isn't under their control will most vanish to the hell whence it came. When there is no value in "selling" music, then it can return to being a gift to humanity in ANY form, regardless of how it was made and by whom.

Remember, it is rare for you to even know the people who make the music you love. Communities are a rare exception. You can share with your friends and if you manage to please them, how much more rewarding is that than some faceless, nameless, random click on the internet? If you can't perform live for people, a community dynamic is likely all you have left after immediate family and friends. I wish those of you here would start to appreciate the positives.

Speak for yourself. The spark is what starts in my mind. Not at the end of a string I pluck, key I play or button I push. Every step of song creation with ANY tool is just as wonderful. Just because you have your own preferred method, it has no bearing or meaning on anyone else.

its good for stealing melodies lol. Most songs are 3 chords anyway , it has good production ideas to use for live players to kinda follow

Lol Steve
Answer Cubic Zirconia ....as anyone who is familiar with zircon enscrusted tweezers would know
mmmmm wonder if AI could make these kinds of leaps???
and then to Stanley Kubrick Zirconia?
RIP Frank Zappa

and AI Muzak?? what a scary version of banal



All you pros, go on and use A.I. Make some money. I intrinsically know the difference between something inspired, and something that's not.
Question: Can anyone tell me what you would call an absolutely perfect diamond?
Answer: Cubick Zirconia

A.I. will soon be on the way to creating a brand-new genre of music.... I'll brand it "Generic"

But this is an argument that some will never understand or want to hear.