Jump to content

Have you listened to Suno 3? we are in trouble.


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, UK_Andrew said:

Agents with financial heft who have up to now been prepared to pay a little for artistic contributions to their cultural enterprises mostly already don't care about the quality of the culture they engender (down to and including the audio-streaming platforms). They have noticed that what many audiences/consumers seem to want from their cultural experience is a constant re-engagement with the familiar. They are focused on creating services that deliver imitative, repetitive film/music/tv/games for that purpose, to consumers who have shown that they are willing to pay for such services.

In this kind of culture, the greed and ego of the entertainments (or AI) CEO is legitimated by the limited expectations of the entertainments consumer; "producers" and "makers" are already a commercial irritant, routinely chewed up in not-so-virtuous cycles of profiteering. What CEO wouldn't want to replace all of them with a single AI service for which their company pays a negotiated fee?

Could these be the reasons why why Spotify (for instance) has fudged around the issue of AI and musical culture, and continues to "experiment" with generic playlists (plenty of discussion of that elsewhere)?

On the other hand:

1. Might it not be more humane, in the long run, if it becomes practically impossible for human beings to dedicate their artistic efforts to the well-being of unaccountable corporations? Entirely produced by AI, the general culture might be artistic sludge, but no actual human being would have to endure the indignity of contributing to it.

2. It's possible to choose an artistic life precisely out of disinterest in the affirmative culture that follows capital. That is, not out of an expectation of being remunerated by corporations (for e.g.), and with full awareness that making artistic works that are not primarily aimed at capitalisation is a contribution to a selective kind of artistic culture.

3. Is this post is a little "overworked" for logicprohelp.com? 😈

“1. Might it not be more humane, in the long run, if it becomes practically impossible for human beings to dedicate their artistic efforts to the well-being of unaccountable corporations? Entirely produced by AI, the general culture might be artistic sludge, but no actual human being would have to endure the indignity of contributing to it.”

Jesus man. Speak for yourself. I’m not rolling over and exposing my belly like that. I’m not going down without a fight. 

frankly, this is about as depressing a take as I have ever read. Pure capitulation. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've listened to a couple of the "trending" songs featured on the starting page and to me they sounded rather bland and generic. Which isn't exactly surprising IMO because "originality" is comparatively hard/impossible to train. (We've been over this argument elsewhere before.)

The musical segment of stock or library music will probably be most affected by this. Outside this we can only guess.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, my first impression with creating a couple of songs is that the results feel extremely cheap and cheesy. Perhaps it was the way I prompted the machine.

That BTW is a job that is up-and-coming: prompt designer... I have to go make business cards... 😄 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jon Stewart made fun (or did shine a light on) about exactly this: "prompt engineers", as a Microsoft managers call them:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20TAkcy3aBY&t=574s

But back to a more serious note: To me, creating music has to a certain degree always been about individuality and originality. I do most of my work in education nowadays; and I am always fascinated that people "pick" their favourite music at least partly "off the beaten path". I know they don't consciously pick it - there's simply something that resonates with them. So both the act of creation and the act of listening are both highly individualized processes: What speaks to me doesn't automatically speak to you and vice versa. And that's the beauty of it; and I am convinced that that's also a limit for AI.

 

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@jmob You did kick off by suggesting that "we" are in trouble... but of course I am speaking for myself, especially on the question of what kind of artistic work is worth defending. Actually, I agree with you that "we" are in trouble, but because our culture is so full of imitative and generic stuff, not because that stuff might now be produced by AI rather than humans.

AI will replace what is eminently replaceable by AI. That makes me want to ask how and why so much of what we call culture has become so easily replaceable by generative tech. It's a political and cultural question, with a specific history.

It's obvious that tech and entertainment companies will use AI to cut out the human producer where they can, because - surprise! (not) - those companies are already like that. If consumers don't like the cultural outcomes of AI, they'll need to stop paying for them, and speak up. If that doesn't happen, makers will know that some AI-generated stuff is "good enough" for most people, and might want to direct their artistic efforts elsewhere. Again, it's a political question, about what artistic work is for, or can be for.

I don't think I am "capitulating," @jmob, but engaging with the important issues thrown up by AI, especially beyond the limited span of my own artistic life.

Finally, however, as the late Ian Dury put it: "A sense of humour is required, amongst the bacon rind".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder how long it would take this AI music generator to send out a copy of something it has previously produced for another request?

I really know nothing about how it actually works but I think that would be an interesting study. How much value does it place on uniqueness over the production of output? If as an untalented person I can “compose” a bunch of AI songs everyday, it would sure increase the chances copies being produced.

On a different note:

When it comes to TV, most of it seems to be rehashed stories that have already been rehashed a couple times. In the end it is all geared to get you to watch commercials that you have already seen a million times. As for me I still don’t want any of that crap they’re trying to sell me! I believe a lot of people are going to have a rough future in the TV/film industry and AI will expand its role and this going to make the content even more boring. But then again I doubt I will even see any of it because I barely watch any of it now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Spahr said:

I wonder how long it would take this AI music generator to send out a copy of something it has previously produced for another request?

I really know nothing about how it actually works but I think that would be an interesting study. How much value does it place on uniqueness over the production of output? If as an untalented person I can “compose” a bunch of AI songs everyday, it would sure increase the chances copies being produced.

On a different note:

When it comes to TV, most of it seems to be rehashed stories that have already been rehashed a couple times. In the end it is all geared to get you to watch commercials that you have already seen a million times. As for me I still don’t want any of that crap they’re trying to sell me! I believe a lot of people are going to have a rough future in the TV/film industry and AI will expand its role and this going to make the content even more boring. But then again I doubt I will even see any of it because I barely watch any of it now.

It’s great that you don’t watch TV but you do understand that television is one of the bedrock ways the composers can make a reliable income, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s why I said I think people in the industry are looking at a rough future.

Creative people “take” money out of the pockets of the producers who don’t really care about the people doing the work, they care about profit. AI will continue to work its way into TV, film and music. The current contracts with the unions just delay its march. People use to make a living developing and editing film with a blade. 

Not many years ago my wife made a nice living selling her music on CD, have them pressed for less than a buck and sell hundreds on a weekend for $15 each. 

I’m not looking forward to having AI on my iPhone either, but I think I can see the future and if history is any measure we’re asleep on the tracks and the AI train is coming at us pretty fast.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/5/2024 at 12:56 AM, Spahr said:

not looking forward to having AI on my iPhone either

You already do.

Logic has an amount of AI tech in it....and this will undoubtedly increase over time.

I'm personally not that concerned about AI, based on written language.
A great deal of "content" online is AI-generated/aggregated....and it is easy to spot/often gibberish.
Similarly, generative music tends to be "in a box"....with little outside the box.
This is where humans come into the picture...as they think/work outside the box.
There will always be an audience for this - in music, literature, art, film, etc. - and there will always be an audience for live performance.
Don't understimate the desire/ability of human beings to recognise/want a mix of perfection and imperfection.
At a core level, this accounts for our varied taste in food, partners, music, books, movies, art, and shows, etc. we like/dislike/prefer, etc.
You love the exquisitely prepared and flawlessly presented meal in a restaurant and equally love the rustic pasta knocked up by your nonna.
AI will give us an approximation of both meals....but it won't be the "same" visceral experience - and ultimately, music (along with other artforms) is....for many humans....an emotive thing.
Sure, many will accept/choose the "fast food" option, but there will always be those who won't.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, oscwilde said:

You already do.

Logic has an amount of AI tech in it....and this will undoubtedly increase over time.

I'm personally not that concerned about AI, based on written language.
A great deal of "content" online is AI-generated/aggregated....and it is easy to spot/often gibberish.
Similarly, generative music tends to be "in a box"....with little outside the box.
This is where humans come into the picture...as they think/work outside the box.
There will always be an audience for this - in music, literature, art, film, etc. - and there will always be an audience for live performance.
Don't understimate the desire/ability of human beings to recognise/want a mix of perfection and imperfection.
At a core level, this accounts for our varied taste in food, partners, music, books, movies, art, and shows, etc. we like/dislike/prefer, etc.
You love the exquisitely prepared and flawlessly presented meal in a restaurant and equally love the rustic pasta knocked up by your nonna.
AI will give us an approximation of both meals....but it won't be the "same" visceral experience - and ultimately, music (along with other artforms) is....for many humans....an emotive thing.
Sure, many will accept/choose the "fast food" option, but there will always be those who won't.
 

Yeah, no. Live performance? That's the same argument fans of Napster liked to use. I've run the numbers and, they don't check out for most of us. 
 

we all know our daws and plugins use ai. Suno is different and I think you know that. I work in TV. Sync to be exact and when they can replace us, they will replace us.
 

I don't understand how this is even a remotely controversial point of view. Yes, AI will lead to an explosion of creativity, but music for most of us, for the vast majority of us will cease to become a career. If someone can press a button and make something better than a composer, they will go with that because it will be pennies on the dollar  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, jmob said:

don't understand how this is even a remotely controversial point of view.

It's a perspective....rather than controversial.
That your particular role in the music biz "may" be more susceptible to AI is noted.

My point was/is that humans are infinitely variable and adaptable...this is evidenced in the different perspectives and thoughts raised in this very discussion, and in the music we create/prefer.
Music-making has changed/adapted with each new "technological" advance....for centuries/millennia. animal skins for drums and wind instruments, hollowed out wood, hair-stringed instruments, french horn, harpsichord/piano, P.A. systems, wax cylinders, PVA, tape, transistors, computers, etc.

Will AI change things in the way music is made/musical careers?...yep sure - but music and other artistic pursuits will not solely (or even mainly) be the domain of machines in future.
As a species, we're too divergent...creatively and as consumers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, oscwilde said:

It's a perspective....rather than controversial.
That your particular role in the music biz "may" be more susceptible to AI is noted.

My point was/is that humans are infinitely variable and adaptable...this is evidenced in the different perspectives and thoughts raised in this very discussion, and in the music we create/prefer.
Music-making has changed/adapted with each new "technological" advance....for centuries/millennia. animal skins for drums and wind instruments, hollowed out wood, hair-stringed instruments, french horn, harpsichord/piano, P.A. systems, wax cylinders, PVA, tape, transistors, computers, etc.

Will AI change things in the way music is made/musical careers?...yep sure - but music and other artistic pursuits will not solely (or even mainly) be the domain of machines in future.
As a species, we're too divergent...creatively and as consumers.

I wish I agreed with you. I think the kids coming up, my 12 year old kid and younger will adapt to and accept the majority of music and art being synthetic as that's what they will grow up with

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, jmob said:

I think the kids coming up, my 12 year old kid and younger will adapt to and accept the majority of music and art being synthetic as that's what they will grow up with

Is your musical taste the same as your parents, grandparents?
Kids/teens are gonna find their own thing....and access to music is a million miles from what we grew up with.
The Kool-Aid glass is half full.....and not being served in Jonestown 😉

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, oscwilde said:

Is your musical taste the same as your parents, grandparents?
Kids/teens are gonna find their own thing....and access to music is a million miles from what we grew up with.
The Kool-Aid glass is half full.....and not being served in Jonestown 😉

I hope you're right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems to me you are all correct, from different perspectives...

From @jmob's perspective of making a living writing music for TV, it's an enormous livelihood threat.  I'd feel the same way in that situation and stressed over forced reinvention.

From the perspective of someone who composes and performs as an avocation, it will alter the experience but not eliminate the visceral delight of creation or performance. The tech 'assistance' I now get when writing or performing was unimaginable when I started many decades ago; but the joy hasn't changed.  I suspect a similar impact from AI.  But, I don't make a living from it.

  • Like 1
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, oscwilde said:

It's a perspective....rather than controversial.
That your particular role in the music biz "may" be more susceptible to AI is noted.

My point was/is that humans are infinitely variable and adaptable...this is evidenced in the different perspectives and thoughts raised in this very discussion, and in the music we create/prefer.
Music-making has changed/adapted with each new "technological" advance....for centuries/millennia. animal skins for drums and wind instruments, hollowed out wood, hair-stringed instruments, french horn, harpsichord/piano, P.A. systems, wax cylinders, PVA, tape, transistors, computers, etc.

Will AI change things in the way music is made/musical careers?...yep sure - but music and other artistic pursuits will not solely (or even mainly) be the domain of machines in future.
As a species, we're too divergent...creatively and as consumers.

I still use a quite a bit of hollowed out wood (etc.)... sampled, now, of course.

Generally agree with your more serious points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zipfunk said:

I wonder if a similar conversation was had when they invented an arpeggiator.

”all they have to do now is hold down one key and the keyboard plays everything.’”

If you have listened to suno v3, you would not be making that comparison. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, jmob said:

If you have listened to suno v3, you would not be making that comparison. 

I have checked it out. 

Don't get me wrong, my arpeggiator statement isn't flippant or dismissive at all. The tech is incredible. I see how it threatens people's jobs in the industry. I write soundtracks so hitting beats and cuts and taking (sometimes vague) direction from filmakers is something that, for now, is still dependant on human interaction to get the job done.

I assume everyone here embraces tech (or they probably wouldn't be on this forum).

Lots of us replaced drummers really early on with drum machines and then later with Addictive Drums etc. But when I can work with a drummer (usually percussionist) they always bring a better product than what I do with everything I have.

I've 'replaced' an orchestra and choir and percussionists etc with tech out of necessity.

When I get a chance (which is very rare) to work with a real quartet, cellist, etc its so much better.

I have to hope that songwriters being forced to compete with tech like Suno will make them innovate and come up with something new and fresh and not just genre mashing 'hits' (again, no slight there either) or worse, just give up.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everybody here makes the right points and I agree with all perspectives.

All I would like to do is add a little more positive outlook to the discussion:

First of all - there is nothing wrong jotting a couple of words down and let the AI come up with a sketch and then use that to develop something out of it. Huge time saver!!

Second: remember the time when we did temp track guessing in 2000s ? Almost everything sounded the same, because everyone had used the same temp tracks over and over again and we'd be stuck in a creative loop for a couple of years.
Listen to films and series today: There really is a wide wide range of creative expression happening and there are new voices and aesthetics being used. My personal thinking is that this just has to do with the fact that the creators in the wider sense (the showrunners, directors even producers etc) realize very very strongly that only if they have an outstanding and specifically designed and recognizable overall "thing" they can set their work apart from others.
Yes, I agree - there are tons of "by-the-numbers" shows where even the stories and dialog seem like they were created with AI by giving it a list of parameters to include. But am I watching those shows? No. Only 1 episode as research to see what the thing is about and what kind of music they used.

Third: conforming music to cuts is another thing that is so highly specialized and poses a different challenge for each cue that I don't see it happening automatically - on the other hand, if there was metadata (sync points!) embedded this could be a huge time saver and also would reduce my RSI.

I agree, these new technologies are scary in a way, but at the same time experience shows that in the creative field there is space, but we will have to adapt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AI is too bad in continuity: a CGI pro said in public, they can't use it due to cuts, different shots etc. AI is never producing a correct follow up picture. Similar was said in this topic about music for picture: how do you react with your AI music if the director wants you to keep parts but change just little another part? Try it with the prompt, it won't work. Maybe it will in 3-5 years.

NY times actually agrees to get money from openAI. That means, the hero for people who feel threatened by AI just went on in a logical way: you used our archive, now pay the bill. 

Smaller artists indeed are fighting because they might be replaced in their visual styles. Let's wait what court will say. For these my hope and feelings and all my best wishes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/7/2024 at 8:16 AM, Sir Hannes said:

AI is too bad in continuity: a CGI pro said in public, they can't use it due to cuts, different shots etc. AI is never producing a correct follow up picture. Similar was said in this topic about music for picture: how do you react with your AI music if the director wants you to keep parts but change just little another part? Try it with the prompt, it won't work. Maybe it will in 3-5 years.

NY times actually agrees to get money from openAI. That means, the hero for people who feel threatened by AI just went on in a logical way: you used our archive, now pay the bill. 

Smaller artists indeed are fighting because they might be replaced in their visual styles. Let's wait what court will say. For these my hope and feelings and all my best wishes.

yeah but the thing is, that same director could give you ai music, tell you to redo it but with the changes they've specified and boom, you're just a subcontractor getting paid hourly with no publishing or writers share on the song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, wonshu said:

So again: it's our own colleagues that are going to stab us in the back by taking that deal. Those of us around long enough know better and may just as well take credit for it. The downward spiral begins yet again...

We will have to adapt, that's for sure, but I don't think all hope is lost...

not necessarily. The scenario I described was what the writers union fought against and won.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...