Established artists petition AI is used fairly in music

[ElmerJFudd]

“A chorus of disapproval has risen from the music industry. Over 200 musicians, including legendary names like Pearl Jam, Jon Bon Jovi, and Stevie Wonder, have joined forces to protest the use of AI-generated music. This coalition, organized by the Artist Rights Alliance, is taking a stand against what they see as a threat to human creativity and fair compensation.

In a powerful open letter, the Alliance calls on AI developers and tech companies to ensure that their creations don’t undermine the rights of human artists…”

 

Concerns include training AI on their works for copy cat recordings without permission and then using these sound-alike recordings to dilute royalty obligations.  
 

https://killthedj.com/200-artists-sign-a-petition-against-ai-using-their-art-for-training/

 

[Anderton]

"ARA shared an open letter called 'Stop Devaluing Music' that implores developers and tech companies to cease 'the assault on human creativity.'"

 

A lot of good that's going to do.

 

Music started the devaluation process when Napster appeared, and the iPod ran with it. Then streaming services put the final nail in the coffin. Like Amazon says on their packaging, "millions of songs for free!"  That says it all.

 

The music business is on life support, and AI will remove even that. The only hope is if consumers develop more refined musical tastes, vote with their dollars for the non-AI-generated music, make a conscious decision to support their favorite artists, and the people explolting generative AI say "hmmm, maybe this is wrong and we shouldn't do it." I'd place the odds of that series of events happening at 1,000:1 against.

[KuruPrionz]

54 minutes ago, Anderton said:

"ARA shared an open letter called 'Stop Devaluing Music' that implores developers and tech companies to cease 'the assault on human creativity.'"

 

A lot of good that's going to do.

 

Music started the devaluation process when Napster appeared, and the iPod ran with it. Then streaming services put the final nail in the coffin. Like Amazon says on their packaging, "millions of songs for free!"  That says it all.

 

The music business is on life support, and AI will remove even that. The only hope is if consumers develop more refined musical tastes, vote with their dollars for the non-AI-generated music, make a conscious decision to support their favorite artists, and the people explolting generative AI say "hmmm, maybe this is wrong and we shouldn't do it." I'd place the odds of that series of events happening at 1,000:1 against.

Our other option, at least up here for now - is to support the live music scene. There are quite a few local venues who hire musicians to play in the evenings. I've yet to see any of them go all electronic. People still want to hear the real thing. The music scene has always gone through changes, a fair bit of that is caused by technology. Of course, there are musicians who are simply giving their art away, the market is flooded, etc. 

[David Emm]

No petition ever stopped a bully from jamming your own fist in your face and repeating "Why are you hitting yourself?" You have to kick them firmly in the yarblockos and thus dissuade them. Last time I looked, AI has no such appendages we can kick. Marketing is one of the early tools of SKYNET. I'm already assimilated and so are you. Look where we are!

 

No one ever tries to include an ethics/morality sub-routine. The unavoidable onslaught of shareholders won't give a rat's what Steve Wonder thinks. The day they can clone "Isn't She Lovely" for a popcorn ad, you'll know its time to put on your apocalypse poncho. HAL-9000 was an AI who offed 4 co-workers and look how well THAT went!      

[KenElevenShadows]

 

11 minutes ago, David Emm said:

 

No one ever tries to include an ethics/morality sub-routine. 

I probably shouldn't even get into this, but there are some AI programs that attempt to be ethical. 

 

I get what you are saying, but some do try to be ethical or moral. To say "no one" is incorrect.

 

Adobe Firefly does not train their algorithms on anything other than images where people have consented. Numerous other AI-generated art algorithms refuse to produce likenesses of existing people and have strict routines that don't produce violent, exploitative, demeaning, racist, etc. images, and so forth.

 

My intention of pointing this out is not to get into the overall merits of AI or not, but simply to set the record straight. I am not an AI apologist and recognize all the very nasty and dangerous aspects that AI has the potential to do. 

[Notes_Norton]

AI is after a lot of jobs in a lot of industries. I doubt it can be stopped.

I agree with KuruPrionz, support live music. One thing AI cannot replace (yet) is a musician or group of musicians, in the flesh, playing music and reacting with to entertain an audience. 

There is something about the human to human connection between the entertainer(s) and the entertained. A good entertainer not only plays music, but reacts with the audience to have a dialog with them. 

The good entertainer knows when to play a particular song, what to follow it with, and the next, by reading the crowd. He/she knows when to talk on the mic, and what to say, whether it's serious or a lame joke. He/she knows when to crank the volume up, and/or when to keep it mellow. And this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Entertaining takes intuition, experience, and the ability to react to changing conditions of the gig, and the differences that come with each and every gig.

 

When AI takes over songwriting and videos, it'll be our last foothold. 

Some day, probably sooner than I'd like, I'll be playing AI songs recorded by an AI 'artist' to an audience of live people who won't even know the difference. If I do the job correctly, they will have a great time and come out to see us again.

I'm glad I chose to hone my performance and entertainment chops instead of songwriting chops. The mortgage is paid, I have zero debt, and I'm living a happy life doing what I love to do.

 

"The supreme accomplishment is to blur the line between work and play."
Arnold J. Toynbee, historian (14 Apr 1889-1975) 

We had a gig this morning through lunch, and then went out and supported the musicians at the local jazz/blues society. It was a very good day.
 

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[Anderton]

  

7 hours ago, KenElevenShadows said:

I probably shouldn't even get into this, but there are some AI programs that attempt to be ethical. 

 

Yes, you should get into this, because there will be some companies where the people involved need to sleep at night. They deserve props. But they'll find out soon enough that some hot shot programmer in Belarus sleeps very well, without giving a damn about who he's stepping on. And maybe some people in the company feel the same way. 

 

Read the mission statement from any huge US bank, and try to reconcile that with such activities as paying $39 billion in fines for securities abuses, deleting 47 million emails that were required to be maintained and accessible to regulators (and suspiciously relevant to ongoing securities investigations and regulatory inquiries), criminal felony counts, ongoing money laundering, looting of public funds in countries like Malaysia and Venezuela, paying $185 million in fines for opening 1.5 unauthorized checking accounts and 500,000 unauthorized credit card accounts, and on and on. And those details relate to only two banks. 

 

Companies can say anything they want. We'll see what they actually do.

 

"Oh no, we would never, ever base our images on photos by someone named Ken Lee. We don't even know who he is! Surely the extreme similarities are just a coincidence. Who are you gonna trust, us or your lying eyes?"

 

 

[KenElevenShadows]

Well, I was more saying "I probably shouldn't even get into this" because I quite frankly do not have the time or inclination to get into protracted arguments where it's this never-ending spiral of "prove it" and then I take my time providing links, only to have the person ignore me or pivot from those points. But then again, this forum is probably different from the idiocy of other social media, so maybe I will be spared that.

 

If I sound jaded, it's only that I'm seriously ground down from the constant "All AI is bad. It's SkyNet. All of it is evil. We are all going to lose our jobs." And I'm not saying that some of that might not come to pass, but it's just seriously wearisome when arguments are couched in "all AI is _____." This is exacerbated by the fact that most people don't know what AI is, understand that most of it is based on machine learning rather than any sort of actual "thinking", that people use AI every single day and don't realize it, or that AI consistently helps with medicine, science, and technology, looking for patterns and sifting through immense amounts of data so we can all benefit.

 

In short, i would love to see more nuanced conversations about AI that are better informed and aren't the histrionic "the sky is falling" sort of crap.

[Anderton]

11 hours ago, KenElevenShadows said:

In short, i would love to see more nuanced conversations about AI that are better informed and aren't the histrionic "the sky is falling" sort of crap.

 

Well, so far I see this as a discussion. None of the following is an argument, it's a series of viewpoints that I believe are grounded in reality. I expect the discussion will keep going in that direction. In fact I know it will, because I can lock threads 😎

 

The problem is that AI is a tool and as the old saying goes, you can use a hammer to build a house or murder someone. Bad people will use AI in horrible ways and cool people will use it to solve problems. I'm not worried about the people who use it to solve problems. But I do worry about the people who use it to figure out ways to shut down a nation's electrical infrastructure, or invade physical or artistic privacy. So it's not surprising that most discussions revolve around things with the potential to damage us. Think of it this way: I don't think about cars a lot, but I sure as hell would think about a car that was bearing down on me while I was crossing the street.  

 

There are also some things that don't lend themselves to nuance, like music being devalued. I don't think anyone would question that has happened. Of course, all the digital technology that has enabled music to be devalued has been a boon to those who have home studios and like to make music. And as I've said in other threads, maybe not being able to make a living from recording music will mean people will get back to a personal view of music, or live performance.

 

But for me,  music has always been about an expression of the human soul. As Huxley said, "after silence, that which comes nearest to expressing the inexpressible is music." The AI-generated music I've heard so far is ideal for people who like to sit down and listen to Muzak, which at least IMHO is where the slippery slope started.

 

You're right this has been going on for a long time. Think of all the musicologists who felt that by feeding enough Bach and musical rules into a computer, it would come up with a Bach string quartet. Ultimately, anyone who was familiar with Bach could tell the difference. But today's public is so accepting of lies and fakery they probably won't be able to tell the difference between the real Billie Eilish and a fake one, which devalues what Billie Eilish brings to the table, even if it doesn't affect her financially. 

[ElmerJFudd]

It sounds like music loving humans have to decide for themselves - stream human made music and ignore AI generated material.  If there is little interest in AI generated music it will be relegated to low budget background music.  

[KenElevenShadows]

2 hours ago, ElmerJFudd said:

It sounds like music loving humans have to decide for themselves - stream human made music and ignore AI generated material.  If there is little interest in AI generated music it will be relegated to low budget background music.  

 

It will be.

 

If it becomes really good, it will devalue what we do (except for hopefully live music).

 

For right now, I would say that if it is really biting into our music endeavors, then we might want to look into stepping up our game.

 

In several years, though? It just might make music that is as good as good songwriters/musicians. And look out if when that time comes.

 

(since I do more immersive, odd atmospheric music, I'm probably in little danger of any of that because I feel like I step outside this to a certain degree, but of course, my interest and concern is not just for what I do)

[KenElevenShadows]

5 hours ago, Anderton said:

But today's public is so accepting of lies and fakery they probably won't be able to tell the difference between the real Billie Eilish and a fake one, which devalues what Billie Eilish brings to the table, even if it doesn't affect her financially. 

 

I suppose it's a combination of people who don't care, people who want to save money, people who can't tell the difference, and people who have bigger worries on their plate, like how they are going to hang on to their second job so they can make their rent.

 

What helps artists like Billie Eilish for now is that they are quite original, and at this point, it's difficult for anyone - human or circuits - to really touch them.

 

That could change, though.

 

And yes, I agree with your other point. I've been saying this for several years about AI/machine learning: It's not AI that concerns me as much as who is creating and using it.

[Notes_Norton]

Direct long distance telephone dialing put operators out of work.

 

Phone answer bots put receptionists out of work

 

Chatbots put technicians out of work.

 

Assembly line welding machines put welders out of work.

 

Self-checkout lanes put cash register operators out of work.

 

Turbo-tax put accountants out of work.

 

License plate readers put toll-takers on the highway out of work.

 

AI is putting photographic models out of work.

 

'Smart' electric meters put the meter readers out of work.

 

DJs already put thousands of musicians out of work.

(When I was young, every singles bar had at least a 4-piece band — playing recordings didn't draw a single customer.)

 

AI will put songwriters out of work.

 

And the beat goes on (cue Carol Kaye's bass line here).

Right now, it seems that corporate industry is trying to minimize the number of employees they have to pay. After all, less labor costs means more profit for the shareholders.

 

But that raises the question, “When workers are all replaced, who is going to have the money to buy the products they produce?”

 

In the 1800s, the Luddites destroyed the looms when the punch-cards put the weavers out of work. They protested against manufacturers who used machines in “a fraudulent and deceitful manner” to replace the skilled labor of workers and drive down wages by producing inferior goods *. But the automatic looms are still here and there aren't many weavers employed.

 

* Wikipedia

 

Can we stop AI from taking the jobs of songwriters? I doubt it. It didn't work for the Luddites or anyone I know of since.

 

There still will be songwriters, but the number of them who can make a living at that craft will be a fraction of what it is today.

 

I don't want to sound all doom-and-gloom, but history does repeat itself, and it looks like this time it's going to affect our industry again.

 

Survival of the fittest is survival of the adaptable. We all need to constantly be on the lookout for how to survive the ever changing world.

 

 

Insights and incites by Notes ♫

[David Emm]

 >>> I sound jaded, it's only that I'm seriously ground down from the constant "All AI is bad. It's SkyNet. All of it is evil. We are all going to lose our jobs." And I'm not saying that some of that might not come to pass, but it's just seriously wearisome when arguments are couched in "all AI is _____." This is exacerbated by the fact that most people don't know what AI is, understand that most of it is based on machine learning rather than any sort of actual "thinking", that people use AI every single day and don't realize it, or that AI consistently helps with medicine, science, and technology, looking for patterns and sifting through immense amounts of data so we can all benefit.

 

Fair points, all of 'em. AI is just the most recent buzzword for what's been around for a long while now. The ethical uses don't stand up and yell; they just work. Not seeing that more clearly is a societal group failing, not a tech issue. Moral people generally don't get headlines the way our werewolves do.

 

I stand by seeing it as pre-SKYNET, not as a doomcryer, but as a fatigued pragmatist. Things that were once easy online have become clogged by hackers and excessive security measures. A couple of years ago, I joined Twidder out of curiosity. Within 90 days, I was outta there. Too bad, because the fun moments were memorable. I hate seeing such amazing technology burdened by porn, hacking and infighting. Well, maybe the hacking and infighting.   

 

There's also the unavoidable maxim about a hammer being good for both building and murder. I won't name my first DAW, because the company all but had me in despair, thinking the odd abuse and dysfunction were the norm. I left them in the dust once I located those that were their antithesis. Apple exhibits some suckage, but they're also broad & stable. I'm locked into companies like Focusrite and Cherry Audio, who could easily be applying AI to simply up their game(s). I'm going to keep them in mind and do less painting with so broad a brush.  

 

I do need to fold a little more of Ken's view into my thinking. I just can't get this great Harry Nilsson ear worm out of my head...

 

Good for God
He goes and makes the planet blue
 and all the thanks He gets from you
  is look at all that poo-poo in the yard.

 

 

[ProfD]

Established artists petitioning for a governor on AI ultimately provides more profits to the wealthy corporations holding their copyrights. 

 

IOW, the artists are rallying on behalf of the very same entities withholding their earnings i.e. their bosses. 

 

AI will definitely replace those who produce any type of background or incidental music.

 

IMO, live performance will remain the permanent domain of artists and musicians capable of entertaining an audience.😎

[ElmerJFudd]

19 hours ago, ProfD said:

Established artists petitioning for a governor on AI ultimately provides more profits to the wealthy corporations holding their copyrights. 

 

IOW, the artists are rallying on behalf of the very same entities withholding their earnings i.e. their bosses. 

 

AI will definitely replace those who produce any type of background or incidental music.

 

IMO, live performance will remain the permanent domain of artists and musicians capable of entertaining an audience.😎

The established artists did succeed in the business model as it has been.  It’s unfortunate that their income from recorded music is not what it once was.  Their income from live shows is significantly better (but so are the expenses). 
 

Should an AI recording miraculously become a hit, the owners will figure out how to present it live to earn on it.  Holograms, light shows and the like.  But, how will they front the money for a tour?  They’ll need a corporate backer. 

[ProfD]

26 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

Should an AI recording miraculously become a hit, the owners will figure out how to present it live to earn on it.  Holograms, light shows and the like.  But, how will they front the money for a tour?  They’ll need a corporate backer. 

A novel idea is they could form their own corporation using angel investors.😉

 

As I've mentioned before, the Jamband scene is proof that artists and musicians or an AI act doesn't need a record label or that type of corporate backing in order to be successful.

 

The biggest obstacle facing most artists and musicians is a lack of business knowledge. 

 

Too many artist/musician types would rather make art/music and let someone else do the heavy lifting i.e. selling it. That situation is drying up fast.😎

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

A novel idea is they could form their own corporation using angel investors.😉

 

As I've mentioned before, the Jamband scene is proof that artists and musicians or an AI act doesn't need a record label or that type of corporate backing in order to be successful.

 

The biggest obstacle facing most artists and musicians is a lack of business knowledge. 

 

Too many artist/musician types would rather make art/music and let someone else do the heavy lifting i.e. selling it. That situation is drying up fast.😎

I was just reading what Taylor takes in on a show where she sells out an 80,000 seat stadium.  But also the money that goes out. Whew.  It’s expensive and everyone wants a piece of that pie.  

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

The biggest obstacle facing most artists and musicians is a lack of business knowledge. 

 

Another issue is lack of venues for playing live.

[ProfD]

9 minutes ago, Anderton said:

Another issue is lack of venues for playing live.

There's no lack of venues for playing live if the artist/musician/band is willing to rent a facility.😉

 

Again, it ties back to thinking like a business instead of waiting for a promoter or a venue to providing booking.

 

Too many folks are stuck in the old mentality of relying on someone else to hire them for gigs.

 

Those days are long gone especially for music that isn't in demand.

 

Sometimes, gigs have to be created for an artist/musician/band that does not have a following already.

 

It really helps to understand how the business of music works.  Takes a certain level of effort to sell it.😎

[Anderton]

1 hour ago, ProfD said:

There's no lack of venues for playing live if the artist/musician/band is willing to rent a facility.😉

 

That's the approach I'm trying for "The Deadful Great" Halloween one-off, with revenue sharing with the theater. But finding a venue with good acoustics, parking, proper zoning/licensing, and seating isn't always easy. Some of the best places would be the auditoriums in colleges where I give seminars, but they're often not available for rent to the public. I guess they want to keep out the riff-raff

[ProfD]

12 minutes ago, Anderton said:

 

That's the approach I'm trying for "The Deadful Great" Halloween one-off, with revenue sharing with the theater.

Overcoming the logistical hurdles is just another test of how much you're wiling to put into the live act. 😎

[Anderton]

2 hours ago, ProfD said:

Overcoming the logistical hurdles is just another test of how much you're wiling to put into the live act. 😎

 

For a one-off, I only need to get over the logistical hurdles once. At the moment, anything else seems like it's not worth the effort. OTOH, if the act goes over really well, tweaking my goals may be in order...

[Notes_Norton]

20 hours ago, Anderton said:

 

Another issue is lack of venues for playing live.

True. It's not what it used to be.

 

When I turned pro, every hotel from a Holiday Inn up had a live band, at least 5 days per week.

 

The market has changed, DJs took most of the singles bars and much of the wedding and party business. Plus sports bars, karaoke, open mic nights, and so many other things have appeared where it used to be the domain of bands. 

 

To add to all that, bands have had to downsize. I had to go duo to keep making a living, as the 5-piece band I was in before that, couldn't get more money as inflation made everything more expensive, and eventually lost gigs to duos and trios.

 

No, the number of venues is only a fraction of what it once was.

 

It takes more business sense, and you have to work to be better than your competitors if you want to make a living performing music.

 

But it's probably tougher trying to write music and break into the star market. 

 

I chose live performance to make a living, and so far, it hasn't let me down. I'm old enough to retire, but have no plans to do so. You can still make a living by playing music live, if you are good enough at both the music and self-promotion.

 

Notes ♫

 

 

[ProfD]

29 minutes ago, Notes_Norton said:

You can still make a living by playing music live, if you are good enough at both the music and self-promotion.

Truth.  It definitely takes a level of effort=work.😎

[Anderton]

Here's one reason why there are fewer live venues. The sports bar/restaurant down the street used to have live music every weekend. Then they stopped. When I asked why, they said when people were performing, those sitting at tables stayed to catch the set and they couldn't turn tables around as fast. As usual, it's all about the money. Can't blame them, they're in the business of turning tables and selling drinks, not entertaining their customers.

 

Then again, maybe live music was the reason why people were coming in the first place.

[ProfD]

15 hours ago, Anderton said:

The sports bar/restaurant down the street used to have live music every weekend.

Live music as loss leader can be replaced with something else.

15 hours ago, Anderton said:

Then again, maybe live music was the reason why people were coming in the first place.

Decades ago, local bands benefitted when just having live music was a draw. Even better if it was *good* music.

 

Competing forms of entertainment have flipped the script. TVs, DJs and karaoke nights are alternatives to live music.

 

However, artists/musicians/bands with a following will bring people to any establishment they're playing.

 

In addition to door charge profit-sharing, food and drinks sell too. Money is made. 

 

A  venue can have live music between certain hours and clear out afterwards in order to turn tables. 

 

The bottom line to business owners is that if it doesn't make dollars it doesn't make sense.😎

[Notes_Norton]

On 4/19/2024 at 1:08 PM, Anderton said:

Here's one reason why there are fewer live venues.

Here's another.

 

Giant Hi-Rez TVs with Hi-Fi sound in the living room.

 

In the days of Black & White and later CRT Low Rez TVs, you got less than realistic picture and very tinny, mid-range audio. Plus, before CATV, there were only a few channels available.

 

Face it, we have a lot more competition now.

And for those who want to be recording stars, without the labels and radio stations being the filters, the competition is astronomical. Anybody can put up a YouTube video or put their efforts on a streaming audio service. Being discovered by a potential listener is like being that needle in the haystack.

 

So we have to find a way to adapt to the changing times.

 

 

Notes ♫