A.I. - I Just Bust A Nut In My Pants

[AROIOS]

The speed "AI music" has been improving at lately is truly impressive.

https://www.udio.com/songs/2G19zjD3rMHon3xvqbTdAv

[ElmerJFudd]

I just "wrote" a song - Silent Mystique

 

[Docbop]

Remember going to amusement parks and getting a caricature drawing of yourself that's what this AI music sounds like.  Someone should tell AI computers.... Grids are for kids. 

 

No most this AI stuff is like the 99cent Store (RIP)  version of a expensive product.    AI  amazing now to some, but I think in long run people will want the chaos and imperfections of human made things especially in artistic matters.    

[J.F.N.]

This took about 60-90 seconds for suno to generate, my input was the genres, and the song title...

 

https://cdn1.suno.ai/616f4326-bf48-44bc-9b09-161720f2a89e.mp3

[ElmerJFudd]

I read an article this morning where corporates are already hesitant about using Adobe’s Firefly AI to generate their commercial artwork needs because about 12% of the artwork that Adobe trained firefly on is not royalty free material.  So, what transpires when laws catch up to the technology?  
 

It’s obvious that suno and udio have been trained on copyrighted material.  What that means going forward.   🤷‍♂️ 

[J.F.N.]

1 minute ago, ElmerJFudd said:

I read an article this morning where corporates are already hesitant about using Adobe’s Firefly AI to generate their commercial artwork needs because about 12% of the artwork that Adobe trained firefly on is not royalty free material.  So, what transpires when laws catch up to the technology?  
 

It’s obvious that suno and udio have been trained on copyrighted material.  What that means going forward.   🤷‍♂️ 

 

I am sure the AI services machine learning on music is lots wider and versatile than my narrow listening habits. Set the AI to write ten songs, and me to do the same, then have a copyright team analyze all of it, I'm sure there would be more stuff in my songs busted than in the AIs...

 

 

[MathOfInsects]

I don't see a problem with AI training with copyrighted material. We all did that, right? We played existing songs of all styles until we got good at whatever is we do. 

It seems certain that some of the future musical landscape will be AI-related, forever. I can foresee entire Sirius stations that play AI-generated music. I will think that's pretty cool. I just want it labeled as such, so people can still seek out people-generated stuff too. 

[JamPro]

"I think in long run people will want the chaos and imperfections of human made things especially in artistic matters."

 People said similar things when loop-based "techno" music first appeared.  Now the stuff is ubiquitous.

[MathOfInsects]

4 minutes ago, JamPro said:

"I think in long run people will want the chaos and imperfections of human made things especially in artistic matters."

 People said similar things when loop-based "techno" music first appeared.  Now the stuff is ubiquitous.

I don't see the contradiction. No one thought it wouldn't continue to exist as a genre. Just that it wouldn't be the death of all other music or performance forever. 

[cphollis]

12 minutes ago, MathOfInsects said:

I don't see a problem with AI training with copyrighted material. We all did that, right? We played existing songs of all styles until we got good at whatever is we do. 

It seems certain that some of the future musical landscape will be AI-related, forever. I can foresee entire Sirius stations that play AI-generated music. I will think that's pretty cool. I just want it labeled as such, so people can still seek out people-generated stuff too. 

 

Agree completely.  Musicians have been shamelessly copying each other forever.

 

I'm sure there will be branded AI-generated music on the shelf for consumers to choose from, just like all the other choices.

 

That being said, none of the AI efforts to date do a good job of sounding like it's human generated: the music, the photo, the movie, the text -- whatever.  It's all got a synthetic vibe which people will either like -- or not.

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, J.F.N. said:

 

I am sure the AI services machine learning on music is lots wider and versatile than my narrow listening habits. Set the AI to write ten songs, and me to do the same, then have a copyright team analyze all of it, I'm sure there would be more stuff in my songs busted than in the AIs...

 

 

I’m not exactly sure how it works, but I believe the AI is “scraping” the recordings it was “trained on”.   In that sense it is akin to sampling.  

[drawback]

1 hour ago, MathOfInsects said:

I don't see a problem with AI training with copyrighted material. We all did that, right? We played existing songs of all styles until we got good at whatever is we do. 

It seems certain that some of the future musical landscape will be AI-related, forever. I can foresee entire Sirius stations that play AI-generated music. I will think that's pretty cool. I just want it labeled as such, so people can still seek out people-generated stuff too. 

 

1 hour ago, cphollis said:

Agree completely.  Musicians have been shamelessly copying each other forever.

 

I'm sure there will be branded AI-generated music on the shelf for consumers to choose from, just like all the other choices.

 

That being said, none of the AI efforts to date do a good job of sounding like it's human generated: the music, the photo, the movie, the text -- whatever.  It's all got a synthetic vibe which people will either like -- or not.

People already like it. I don't see a radical departure from the trajectory of electronica since the '80s, rather as a "natural" progression. In fact, I think AI designed music based on everything that's ever existed would be fascinating.

 

Should it be labeled? I dunno – is AutoTune? Would we recognize it?

 

I just read a news article today that Adobe will be releasing an AI version of Photoshop this year, that will respond to human editing desire and make its own decisions. Potentially more ominous than music.

[ElmerJFudd]

1 hour ago, MathOfInsects said:

I don't see a problem with AI training with copyrighted material. We all did that, right? We played existing songs of all styles until we got good at whatever is we do. 

It seems certain that some of the future musical landscape will be AI-related, forever. I can foresee entire Sirius stations that play AI-generated music. I will think that's pretty cool. I just want it labeled as such, so people can still seek out people-generated stuff too. 

Non GMO music.  

 

When we learn from recordings or from a teacher or from watching, listening, etc. we sit down a record ourselves, ya?  Or use royalty free or licensed samples for building arrangements, making a new recording.  I’m wondering how much of an AI generation is newly recorded or if samples used are being licensed.  
 

But these are ideas that we are familiar with in our culture and governance.  There are plenty of regions in the world where IP isn’t a thing.  

[AROIOS]

1 hour ago, ElmerJFudd said:

I read an article this morning where corporates are already hesitant about using Adobe’s Firefly AI to generate their commercial artwork needs because about 12% of the artwork that Adobe trained firefly on is not royalty free material.  So, what transpires when laws catch up to the technology?  
 

It’s obvious that suno and udio have been trained on copyrighted material.  What that means going forward.   🤷‍♂️ 

That sounds like a business opportunity for SoundHound and Shazam. In addition to helping users identify songs, they can help copyright owners scan A.I. generated music and then charge/sue the users/creators at scale.

It'll also enhance user experience for their existing users and finally achieve what Pandora and Spotify should have done better: "Finding songs that feature elements that resemble the one I'm listening to."

For example, here's a short list of songs that "ripped off" "What a Fool Believes". I've always wanted a software service that compiles lists like this automatically. But both Pandora and Spotify fall short of achieving this level of intelligence.
 

Robbie Dupree - Steal Away

Fenis Henderson - Making Love

Joe English - Midnight Angel Choir

[ElmerJFudd]

13 minutes ago, AROIOS said:

That sounds like a business opportunity for SoundHound and Shazam. In addition to helping users identify songs, they can help copyright owners scan A.I. generated music and then charge/sue the users/creators at scale.

It'll also enhance user experience for their existing users and finally achieve what Pandora and Spotify should have done better: "Finding songs that feature elements that resemble the one I'm listening to."

For example, here's a short list of songs that "ripped off" "What a Fool Believes". I've always wanted a software service that compiles lists like this automatically. But both Pandora and Spotify fall short of achieving this level of intelligence.
 

Robbie Dupree - Steal Away

Fenis Henderson - Making Love

Joe English - Midnight Angel Choir

I think that’s what I am trying to ascertain.  Is there a difference between recycling compositional elements and recording anew vs. sampling and actually reusing the inspired by recording?  
 

For example, Taylor owns her re-recorded albums.  The original masters are owned by Scooter Braun.  There is some confusion there between mechanical and publishing rights.  

[AROIOS]

Biologists, Mathematicians and Physicists are already using A.I. to develop insights in science. In other words, A.I. is discovering new theorems, formulas and protein structures formerly unknown to human.

What I anticipate is:
1) A.I. creating novel/exciting harmony that no one has heard before. Music has been largely stagnant on this front since the 70's.
2) A.I. creating synth patches/presets by simply "listening to" a snippet of a particular sound. Some companies are already offering software along this route.

[AROIOS]

4 minutes ago, ElmerJFudd said:

I think that’s what I am trying to ascertain.  Is there a difference between recycling compositional elements and recording anew vs. sampling and actually reusing the inspired by recording?  
 

For example, Taylor owns her re-recorded albums.  The original masters are owned by Scooter Braun. 

It'll likely open the floodgate and exacerbate the already litigious state of our society.

There's only so many interesting combinations of melody, harmony, rhythm and timbre out there after all.

[ElmerJFudd]

Just now, AROIOS said:

It'll likely open the floodgate and exacerbate the already litigious state of our society.

There's only so many interesting combinations of melody, harmony, rhythm and timbre out there after all.

That’s true - particularly obvious in popular music.  So - what’s the answer to that?  Maybe there is no answer. Recording and publishing aren’t a viable business.  Back to concerts and merch.  

[jazzpiano88]

2 hours ago, MathOfInsects said:

2 hours ago, JamPro said:

"I think in long run people will want the chaos and imperfections of human made things especially in artistic matters."

 People said similar things when loop-based "techno" music first appeared.  Now the stuff is ubiquitous.

I don't see the contradiction. No one thought it wouldn't continue to exist as a genre. Just that it wouldn't be the death of all other music or performance forever. 

 

I remember in the 70's many people thought that Disco was going to supplant all other music forever once the YMCA sent BTO packing.     Fortunately Gordon Lightfoot saved us. 

[Stokely]

To be just as equally crude as the OP, "AI"* can **** off.  As can anyone or any company spouting about it.  If I never hear those two letters again  it'll be too soon.  

Even my coworkers are infected with the nonsense.  Well if it takes my job, it takes it.  I'm relatively close to retiring.

*As a sci-fi buff, it's not AI.  Not even close to it.  That makes it even more annoying.

[jazzpiano88]

.

[David Emm]

30 minutes ago, jazzpiano88 said:

I remember in the 70's many people thought that Disco was going to supplant all other music forever once the YMCA sent BTO packing. Fortunately Gordon Lightfoot saved us. 

 

Saved us? As I recall, there was a brief uptick in sensitive troubadour types who caused the birth rate to dip because that stuff gave a lot of men raging ED.

 

There's a time & place for things. For example, Billy Connolly draws a clear line through the world of rock.

 

It gets cut off just as the gratifying last line comes out, which is (sorry) "I am the Devil and I wanna **** your motherrrr!!" Its very jovial, trust me!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQb3v5N-xsY

[jazzpiano88]

8 minutes ago, David Emm said:

Saved us?

 

It was the first thing that came to mind.   Some alternatives....   Kiki Dee,  Kenny Rogers, Jimmy Webb (Mc P).

My main point was that Disco was in the process of the inflection point of jumping the shark trending to crash&burn, where the mainstream thought it was going to be a hyperbola trending to infinity. 

[David Emm]

33 minutes ago, jazzpiano88 said:

My main point was that Disco was in the process of the inflection point of jumping the shark trending to crash&burn, where the mainstream thought it was going to be a hyperbola trending to infinity. 

 

I believe it was Frankie Knuckles who said that House music was Disco's revenge. I concur, as evidenced by how quickly I click away from 4/4 demos of almost anything. Its rare for that not to utterly distract me from the rest of the piece. That's also partly just MY darned problem. Its a fundamental heartbeat/sexbeat with its own merits. It simply has a certain *aroma*, because I was bopping around attending many a concert at the time. THUD THUD THUD THUD ride crash 😱 

 

It couldn't touch the shoe tops of seeing Bruford, Parliament/Funkadelic & Nektar live. It raises your standards, so you have to remember not to get all uppity! 

[Stokely]

Eh I like (some) disco.  Granted it was just slightly before "my time".

I like it better than "AI" that's for sure.

[jazzpiano88]

5 minutes ago, Stokely said:

Eh I like (some) disco. 

 

Me too.   But this was the among end in the coffin, fortunately:

 

 

[zephonic]

 

[TommyRude]

7 hours ago, AROIOS said:

I Just Bust A Nut In My Pants

Phenomenally outstanding title!  Thank god, all is looking well in our AI future!

[DeltaJockey]

The Ops song is scary real!

 

I tried it for the first time. Wanted to create an instrumental track without lyrics, which it did. But it sounded more like a finger held down for a few minutes on the keys of an ethereal synth pad. Pretty rubbish actually. I suppose it expects more mainstream genres of songs with words! Not game to let anyone hear it👇

 

Jeez, I so want to hate this, and yearn for it to fail!

[Anderton]

8 hours ago, JamPro said:

"I think in long run people will want the chaos and imperfections of human made things especially in artistic matters."

 People said similar things when loop-based "techno" music first appeared.  Now the stuff is ubiquitous.

 

But unlike AI, it does take skill to get on stage at 3 AM and play a 4-hour set, read a crowd's mood and adjust a set accordingly, for 4,000 Germans whacked out on ecstasy🤣. I'm sure AI could get the beat-matching right, but how could it improvise based on reading the crowd? 

 

Anyway...AI can create the look and feel of music, but I have yet to hear an AI-generated song with lyrics that tell an actual story as opposed to a stream-of-consciousness word salad around a topic. Not saying it can't, just that I haven't heard anything remotely like a well-crafted song, let alone a future "standard." Maybe it's just not getting the right prompts...