JPF Home Page Forums General Messages Musician Message Forum Said this many Times

I've said many times here that the shift would go back to live music it doesn't prove anything was not written by ai, but at least proves you are capable of performing

https://www.youtube.com/live/wnLetXk7zug?is=QGzInKMpIrABUCHv performing.

What??? Are you saying songwriters have to be capable of performing? If you can't perform live, you're not a songwriter?

Nope. Talking about artist songs.

If your a songwriter not performing, nobody should be concerned with the sound or the means of production. Your a songwriter and not a performer. So way too much emphasis on the sound of the demo

If you are claiming you are the artist, you should be able to perform, in which case the sound and production all matter.

Not too hard to follow right little guy?

I think my question made perfect sense, actually. Your original post said that the shift would be back to live music because it would at least prove that someone is capable of performing. You didn't make the songwriter/artist distinction in that post, so I asked a reasonable question.

And in your case, that's why I'm curious. You post AI-generated songs and say you write the lyrics, play various instruments, and can sing. But what we actually hear are AI-generated recordings. So if you're making the distinction between “songwriter” and “artist/performer,” I think it's fair to ask where you see yourself in that distinction.

I'm not questioning whether you can sing or play. I'm just saying that if live performance is supposed to be the thing that demonstrates you're actually an artist/performer, then an AI-generated recording doesn't demonstrate that. It demonstrates what the AI can produce.

So go sing in a studio . What ya waiting for Jesus to come back ? By then it will be to late you'll singing gospel songs . No she broke my heart in Dallas. I'm happy up here in Disney Land. Suno not here its in hell with Hitler .

If you watched the Biato video it coincides with my comments.

Songwriters got too caught up in the demo mainly when the home recording boom hit, the focus shifted to how my reverb sounds, instead of if my song is good.

It shouldn't matter what the recording sounds like, its a Songwriters demo. Nothing else.

I've done both and enjoy both

If you want to create ai personas, and make that your product, I guess you could, but still makes you a creator not a musician or performer

I think the shift has and will go to live, because the world is so ai aware, they'll want to see what's real and what isn't.

I believe its still the person that creates interest, its always been about the person behind the song.

Except for cheesy pop and dance who's only purpose is to dance.

But your condescending responses to me, take a step back dude. I don't wanna go there

This is the part I really don't understand, Dom.
You say, “the world is so AI aware, they'll want to see what's real and what isn't,” and that you think the shift will be toward live music.
But how would a live performance tell anyone what's “real”?

A musician can use AI to write the lyrics, melody, chords and arrangement, have AI produce the entire recording, and then walk on stage and perform the song live. The audience would see a real person singing and playing a real instrument, but they still wouldn't know which parts of the song were created by the person and which parts came from AI.

And it works the other way around too. Someone can write every word and every note themselves and use AI to create the demo. A live performance doesn't prove that they wrote the song any more than an AI recording proves that they didn't.

So I don't see how live performance establishes what's “real” and what isn't. It can prove that someone is capable of performing, sure. But it can't prove who actually created the song.

That's why I questioned your original statement. I think you're mixing up three different things: songwriter, performer, and creator. AI makes those distinctions more complicated, not less.

Absolutely it does change things playing live.

If Ai does everything, song, performance, production, your listening to an illusion, this is
"Johnny Thunderpants"

But he plays live and sucks, there goes the illusion, write him off as an Ai fraud.

Yes, a musician could let Ai do everything and then do it all live, but that would make him a real performer, not just music, but the stage presence, worthy of accolades, capable of covering real music, and paying money to see.

I could envision today, a music fan going to a club, seing a four piece band and saying" wow these guy are playing real music, they are performers, they are the real deal"

Authenticity is gonna be the tricky part of this whole situation

But that's where I still don't follow you. There are thousands of cover bands making good money performing songs they didn't write, record, or arrange. They're just good copycats and people pay to see them perform.

That's got nothing to do with AI or songwriting. Being a good live performer doesn't make you the songwriter, just as using AI doesn't make you a performer. I think we're mixing up two completely different things here.

I'm saying people lump the song and the production of it as one.

If your presenting a ai production of a somg you wrote or didn't write, as this is my art...

Here's me singing, ...ge why can't you sing live...

Cover bands are successful if they are good, worth seeing for the energy they bring.

If not, get a Dj,

I'm saying people and I hear kids, ate rejecting Ai music...theres a reason for it.

Think its a great sketch, not the product

That debate is showing up a lot of places.
And it is interesting to watch.

Being capable of performing live as a human for other humans appears to be the human musicians last stronghold.

AI is writing , not just songs, but everything. Some universities are returning to face-to-face oral exams because stoner students are clicking a couple prompts and turning in term papers.

As for songwriting, there has always been a prevalent belief in the musical world that a true songwriter has to be "musical."
"Musical" includes being able to play an instrument and/or sing with reasonable skill levels.

Makes logical sense. I'm not necessarily talking virtuoso either.

But ai makes it that somebody who has never written a song, capable of writing one. Maybe not very good but

lyricist should have a good sense of melody.

If the song is three chords, and you are performing, play those three chords.

Basicly saying, if you are stamping your name as an artist, be that artist

I think we're mixing up several different things here: songwriter, musician, recording artist and live performer.

A songwriter doesn't have to perform live. A musician doesn't have to write songs. And a recording artist doesn't necessarily have to tour.

My son is a good example. He writes his own lyrics and melodies, plays several instruments, records and produces his own songs (never uses AI), sometimes brings in a vocalist, and has hundreds of thousands of streams and listeners around the world. He never performs live because he simply doesn't want to. I don't see how that makes him less of an artist or musician.

And I'm not convinced that live performance solves the AI authenticity problem either. Milli Vanilli were human performers. Plenty of "live" performers use playback or extensive backing tracks. A four-piece band on stage can still be performing songs they didn't write or recordings they didn't make.

So yes, I agree that authenticity is going to be an interesting issue with AI. But I don't think “can you perform live?” is the dividing line between a real artist and an AI artist. It only tells us that someone can perform live.

Nothing is being mixed up.

I'm not talking about literal facts.
I'm talking about prevalent attitudes amongst serious musicians and "people actually in the music business" that I have personally encountered.

The majority seem to view "songwriters" who do not sing reasonably well or play an instrument reasonably well as...pretenders. The attitude in that industry seems to be that good music comes from good musicians.

Before he made it big, Chris Stapleton was a bonafide songwriter.
Sunset Poet is a guy enjoying a hobby.
Sunset Poet can sing some songs adequately and plays guitar pretty well, so he has that.
If he could not sing or play worth beans...he would be a "pretender" to many in that business.

It is a fact that someone who cannot sing or play anything ...can write "lyrics" and sing some version of them into a cell phone recording app. Almost always sounds terrible.
BUT NOW, SUNO can blow such cat-scratchings up into a truly good and well produced recording.

Once done, such a songwriter can call themselves a "songwriter." That would be a literal fact.

But I doubt that the vast majority of people actually in the music industry would see them as anything other than a pretender or a tag-along.

Beauty is in the eye. It comes down to what a person wants to believe.

This can be good as long as it don't turn pissy.

I'm not against pure songwriters, there's tons of skill involved in writing a song. And I've done it away from any instrument in my head

Maybe you don't have a voice, or can never play again due to arthritis or something

What im saying is in a world full of ai artists, people are now going to write off alot if what they hear, suspecting some businessman used ai to do the song.

Its not real musicianship if Ai is composing and playing it.

That will be highlighted when live music is played.

I think I understand your point better now, Marty. And I suppose I'm one of the people you're describing. I don't sing particularly well, my keyboard skills are limited, and I use tools like Melodyne or do MIDI programming to get the result I hear in my head.

But I don't see that as making me a “pretender” or a “tag-along.” I'm a songwriter who happens to have limited performance skills. If I had more money, I'd simply hire better musicians and a better singer. Technology allows me to do more of that myself.

And that's where I disagree with the premise that “good music comes from good musicians.” Good performances come from good musicians. Good songs come from good songwriters. Sometimes they're the same person, sometimes they're not.

Suno and similar tools simply make that separation much more obvious. They allow people who aren't great performers to turn their songs into convincing recordings. Whether the songs themselves are good is still a completely separate question.

I think I understand your point better now, Dom, and I agree with part of it.

If AI composes and plays everything, then obviously the person using it can't claim that musicianship as their own. And I can see why, in a world full of AI-generated music, people may become more skeptical about what they're hearing. Live performance can certainly demonstrate that someone is actually capable of performing.

But I don't think that tells us who created the song. Someone can write the lyrics and melody themselves and use AI for the musicians, vocalist and production. The songwriting is still theirs; they just shouldn't claim the AI's musicianship as their own.

And I think that's where this gets interesting. I don't think the question will simply be “Is this AI or is this real?” There will be many more shades in between: human-written/AI-produced, AI-assisted, human-performed/AI-written, completely AI-generated, and everything in between.

Maybe the real issue isn't figuring out what's “real,” but being honest about what each person actually contributed.

Certain artists, who wrote it is everything. If bruce or Billy joel, or anybody of that magnitude were caught saying they wrote something when Ai did, end of career.

Probably even Taylor swift.

I dont think Ai can write lyrics with their perspective, and can communicate the way they do.

Music, I don't think Ai can write elaborate pieces, but very good at mediocre.

Maybe nobody will care in the future, or maybe they'll rebel.

Might make a good cinceot album, the struggle beyween old school and new school clashing.

I think if talent is not a factor at all, that's where the music industry dies.

Has to be a way for talented people, or just creative people to stand out. Live is one way

The music business and the illegal drug trade are both rooted in triggering the production of endorphins and similar substances.

It doesn't matter whether the nature of the stimulus source is "Hey Jude" or Rusty the Robot's song.
When DJ's became a celebrated entertainment form, I regarded that as empty, strange and a low bar for talent. But some DJs became big stars that drew crowds.

The results are far from in with regard to what Rusty the Robot can get done.
If he can drive endorphins, dopamine, et al...then Rusty will be a spectacle and a star.

But what's triggering the release?

So take any 4 guys, and they are the next Beatles?

You couldn't explain what The Beatles did to people.

Songs, voices, musicianship, creativity, charm, stage presence, looks, likability, production techniques, enthusiasm. All talents

You'd be hard-pressed to replicate that through Ai, to like the Beatles is to be human.

Your paying to go hear music, your going to hear some person play and perform their music.

Google Gemini can explain that better than me.

Rusty the Robot is not real.
You can talk to a human artist. When you talk to Rusty, you’re talking to the guy who invented Rusty. He pushed a button for the lyrics, pushed another button for the music, then invented a fake biography.
“Rusty grew up poor in West Texas, playing his daddy’s old guitar.”
Bullshit. Rusty grew up Tuesday afternoon on a laptop.
And people are buying it.
Then everybody cries, “AI took my job!”
Well, hell, you bought tickets to see Rusty.
I think a hooker has better business ethics.
At least there’s truth in advertising.
“I’m a hooker. You’re paying for sex.”
Fair enough. Nobody gets halfway through and discovers she was generated by Suno.
Meanwhile, Nashville burned to the ground over robots.
I left my heart in Nashville.
Unfortunately, Nashville is now a data center.
BREAKING NEWS:
The fictional owner of Suno was found murdered in a country song last night.
Police have identified several imaginary suspects: three guitar players, a drummer, two songwriters, and a steel player who said, “I was never here.”
Details at 11.
In related news, guitar sales went up 50 percent.
Voice lessons doubled.
Songwriters across America suddenly screamed:
“[naughty word removed]! NOW I HAVE TO SING IT MYSELF!”
One man complained, “I don’t know if I can do that. I’ve gained 300 pounds since Suno was invented.”
Go jogging.
“I can’t sing while jogging.”
You can’t sing standing still either. You’ll be fine.
Look at Elvis Nash.
“That guy sucks.”
Exactly. Yet somehow he keeps singing.
“How old is he now, 90?”
Nobody knows. Carbon dating came back inconclusive.
In other news, Bible sales dropped 30 percent.
Andy Atheist was reached for comment.
“No comment.”
“Why not?”
“I’m an atheist. What the hell do you want me to say about Bible sales?”
And finally tonight, scientists have confirmed something humans apparently forgot:
Nothing beats real music.
Except maybe a damn good joke about it.
This has been Rusty Robot News.
None of our anchors are real.
Neither are our ratings.
Details at 11.

ELVIS NASH sings like he has hemorrhoids. horrible person . Ugly as mud on a fence. Always bragging about younger women , Guy has no morals at all

.

Ben-Frank-Lin,

The thing is...Rusty the robot is real, just not human.
And Rusty's music is a fact not a fiction.

Some of the best examples, that I have seen of Rusty's collaborative efforts are the music that you have posted. Your music went from "fine" to "damn good" after you and Rusty "got-together.:

Anecdotal...
I was in a small bar/apparel store having a beer a couple of months ago. It was about 9:30pm.
A couple of women, prolly in their 40s, came in a few drinks later.
The bar used a commercial Spotify subscription.
One of the women asked the bartender to play a particular song that she loved.
When It played, I immediately told the bartender..."thats AI."

Btw..the song was good. I could see why the woman liked it.
Sounded "outlaw country."

For better or worse, the robots aren't going back in the box.

I'm working on an article bout my opinions and experience with Ai, and where we stand.

A few sticking points.

Mediocre is doomed.
Before Ai, mediocre was common, but not to this extent. it took alot of skill and hard work and talent to be "good".

It was still difficult to achieve success by being "good".

The difference is now everybody has access to good.

Good has always been easy to find, but instead of a million good new songs each week, there is a billion, with a billion new so called artists in the fray

So, the bar has been raised. You need to write great songs, not good.

Great is the new good.

In some ways it hasn't changed. Mainstream music has been mediocre at best, for 30 years, bordering on horrible.

Horrible to mediocre has been nailed, got that down, don't need you for that, unless your extremely lucky.

You need now to be great. Write great songs. Your not going to hear Ai write a ...wichita lineman, or a hotel California, or a bohemian rhapsody,, or a yesterday or Eleanor Rigby.

Not going to by itself creat a Tommy, a Quadrophenia a who's next, not going to by itself innovate, and show guitar playing like Eddie Van Halen came up with.

Here's the good news.

There's still room to write your own signature songs, with your unique pov, your own unique style of song, your own unique set of things you tend to write about.

Maybe youll never be Paul Simon, but at least you can do you, and do it well

Finally, if your just in it for fun and nothing else,
at least its a creative way of spending your time.

Free tine can be spent alot worse

What would you know about a hit . you push buttons and pretend it's you. then demoralize anyone who sings one. you come off like some expert . but never stepped in a recording studio . thats like a man with hammer but never built a house . Then lecture carpenters that have built house. This site is so full of robots songs , Even the robots are nauseated . what you humans that lazy ? Who came up with Udio a Russian spy ?

Dom?

Did your therapist change up your meds.
You made some very good and lucid points in your last post.

Ben-Frank-lin?
Onward thru the fog.
Are you and the robots working up some lyrics at the present time?

Nobody's lecturing anybody.

I'm not sure what your complaint is.

Your logic..600 dollars spent in a room called a recording studio, somehow makes your song better?

The 7 people here listening, do not appear to be blown away by your masterpieces.

What did I say?

Good is common. Write better songs, record them better, sing them better.

Then come back

MP3 section looks like graveyard in 1786 . Why don't you sing one and show us how great you are ? No does make me better . Just means I didn't sell out to Suno like you. Isn't your finger tired from pushing that button ? Are you on Welfare on New York City to spend the 600 to be an artist . Well enough jokes , Need berries for oatmeal

Cause if I showed you how great i am, you wouldn't learn anything.

Yes its a graveyard, so why the fack... does it matter what you post?

600 dollars to post it here?

Are you catching any of this?

Dom, you regularly post AI-generated songs here at JPF, and you’ve told us that you write lyrics, play instruments and sing. I have no reason to doubt that, and I’m not questioning it.

But what we actually hear from you here are pure AI-generated performances. So when you say you’ve “done both,” I simply have no way of knowing that from the material you’ve posted. And that’s why I found your comments in this thread about live performance interesting. If your point is that, in a world of AI-generated music, it will become increasingly difficult to know who is actually behind a recording, then I agree that live performance may become more important.

But that applies to all of us who use AI to create recordings - including you, Ben and me. Ben, for example, often uses AI as part of his writing process, and if he likes the result, he takes the song into a studio and has professional musicians record it, while he usually sings the vocals himself. So what exactly is “his” musicianship there? He’s clearly the vocalist and the songwriter/creator in some sense, but the instrumental performance comes from other musicians and the initial musical ideas may have come from AI, at least partially. I don't know.

A live performance only proves that someone can perform. It doesn’t tell us who wrote the song or how the recording was created.

That's pretty good, Ben goes off on a mindless incoherent rant, against robots...ai, and you use them exclusively, yet you want to argue wit ME?

Does it matter if you've heard both from me?

why would I waste time, when every song i post is ignored anyway?

You hail Guy as a great singwriter

I'm not going to debate somebody with that level of sincerity.

I suggest you argue with Ben

Dom, I think you’re taking my point more personally than I intended.

You asked whether live performance matters in a world of AI-generated music. I said I could see why it might matter, but that it still doesn't tell us who wrote the song or how the recording was created.
You say it doesn't matter whether I've heard you perform. I actually think that's exactly the point: if I haven't heard you perform, I can't judge your ability as a performer. And if all I hear from you here are AI-generated performances, I can't determine how much of what I'm hearing comes from you and how much comes from the AI.

That's not an accusation. It's simply the limitation of what can be established from the material posted here.
Isn’t that what this thread is about?

I have said over and over again, that. That there is no way to prove you wrote something . Ai or not, a timestamp does not prove authorship, it may prove ownership, in select cases.

Consistency in songwriting is one way to get the benefit of the doubt.

You may have stolen one, but 25, 50, 200, ?

posting a lyric online timestamps it but dies not prove you wrote it. Can still lose a case having a timestamp.

As I said Consistency helps prove it, as does knowing your craft. If you can explain the process of how you wrote something, it can help prove your case.

Instead of any Ole work tape, I suggest documenting how a verse became a bridge, how you started with a chorus, and the chorus stayed for a year, until you came across this for a verse. Where you got yiur idea from, how it came into being

Perhaps recording yourself in the process of writing the song can help to.

The more detail you can muster the better.

That said, the issue about Ai is not just what did suno do...

In fact suno could probably tell more about how a song was written than anything else

The issue of are you a real songwriter if suno does it all. That's the point. Can anybody do the same thing?

Fortunately to date suno hasn't written a song clearly better than all its orhers. Very mediocre

Okay, I think I understand your point better now.

You’re not really saying that a live performance proves authorship. You’re saying that, with AI capable of creating an entire song, we’re going to have a much harder time knowing who actually wrote the song. And I agree with that.

I also agree that a timestamp by itself doesn’t prove authorship, and that a history of songwriting, drafts and being able to explain how a song developed can all add credibility.

And this is where I think your own posts actually illustrate the problem quite well. You’ve posted hundreds of songs here, and you’ve told us that the music was generated with Udio and that you wrote the lyrics. You’ve also said that the quality of the songs is largely because of the quality of your lyrics. I have no reason to say that isn’t true. But none of us actually knows whether the lyrics were written by you or generated with AI. And I’m not making any claim either way. That uncertainty is precisely the issue you’re talking about.

Where I still disagree is with the idea that the question is simply, “Are you a real songwriter if Suno does it all?” I think there’s a huge difference between someone entering a prompt and accepting whatever Suno gives them, and someone who actually writes the lyrics, melody and structure and uses AI as part of the realization of the song.

And the same applies to the recording. If AI provides the musicians, vocalist and production, that doesn’t make those musicianship skills mine. I shouldn’t claim them as mine. But it also doesn’t automatically erase whatever creative contribution I made as the songwriter.

So maybe the real question isn’t whether someone is a “real songwriter” or an “AI songwriter.” Maybe it’s: what did the human actually contribute to the song?

Yes and maybe suno knows better than anybody what we did.

I'm pretty sure suno with data saving, would know I entered external lyrics for the hundred songs I did it would also know god knows how many takes i listened to to determine my fit, and how I carefully did the same thing for each section.

As far as Me proving my lyrics, and not suno, timestamps do matter.

I have lyrics posted from 20 years ago here, suno could not have generated them. As Ai has only been around a few years

Plus I think ai detectors could give us ideas.

I also have lyrics saved from 20 years ago, impossible for suno to write them.

Proves suno didn't write, them, but doesn't nessarily mean I didn't steal them from somebody else

And yes, I totally belive that the quality of the lyric makes a better trigger for the music. The ai will often find a great atmosphere for what you entered.

Particularly story songs. It can help tell your story better through the music.

For new songs? Musical ideas, I will make sure i include good demonstrations how I write it before i enter music into it.

I also don't object to giving suno credit, they may write something that fits what I dud perfectly.

Transparency

I think we're actually getting closer to the heart of the issue, but there's one thing I would distinguish.

Generating multiple versions, listening to them and choosing the one you like best, or working section by section, demonstrates creative decision-making. But it doesn't necessarily demonstrate songwriting. If Udio is generating the melody, harmony, arrangement and musical ideas, then Udio is doing the musical songwriting part of that process. You're making the decisions about which AI-generated result you want to keep. That's not necessarily a criticism. It's simply a different creative role.

And that's why I think the question you raised - “are you a real songwriter if AI does it all?” — is actually the interesting one. If the AI creates the lyrics, melody and music and the human simply selects and edits the results, I'd have a hard time calling the human the songwriter. If the human writes the lyrics and melody and uses AI to realize them, that's a very different situation.

Your point about transparency therefore makes perfect sense to me. I'd just extend it one step further: transparency shouldn't only be about proving that you entered something into the AI. It should be about what you actually created yourself and what the AI created.

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.

For those people making big money from writing and performing songs, who may ever get accused of stealing someone else's stuff and end up in a lawsuit...they will need dated documents.

Even if the person who was accusing them of stealing, is the actual thief, who stole the song from the defendent...if the thief has dated registration documents showing the first occurrence of any part of the song...they will be hard to beat.

"I remember clearly writing these lyrics days before my wife's birthday in 2021, and I have 5 mullets that will say I played them at her birthday party" ...won't be a dated registration.