completely A.I. generated songs with singing are here (Udio/Suno)

[BONES]

Actually you typed text in a few seconds.

And how, exactly, do you interact with your DAW?

It's not that hard to surpass bedroom producers. A dead monkey could do it.

This isn't necessarily about production, it's bout the song writing and arranging. You don't honestly think anyone actually gives a shit who makes a song or what processes are involved, do you? People just want to listen to music they can enjoy and right now, today, Udio can do that amazingly well across an impressively broad range of styles and genres. For example, I am 100% certain Udio is more capable of creating a song I would like than you are.

- it's going to be a strange next 5-10 years for the creative industries...

I'd say 6-12 months. That's how long it will be until it's better at this than any human or human collaboration - i.e. musicians, vocalist(s), engineer(s) and producer(s) - living or dead. It's already most of the way there.

And it will be even better over time. Now I'm tempted to use the ideas from AI generated music.. which first gathered the ideas from real artists... ironic... but mostly depressing.

The first question we get asked in every interview we do is who are our influences so what's the problem with AI listening to other music and then using that experience to create its own music? It is EXACTLY what we all do.

There's a difference. If I stop subscribing to a plugin vendor, I can no longer open my old projects, unless I resubscribe.

That's a lie and I'm sure you know it. Projects will still open and, in many cases, the instrument will still play, you just lose the ability to dd it into new projects or edit it in existing ones. e.g. I stopped subscribing to Output's Arcade about 4 years ago but I can still open any project with Arcade in it and it will still play the part it always played.

In subscribing to an AI service, you eventually lose the ability to intuitively create.

That is a big assumption built on a smaller one. You assume any of us have that intuition and that we will lose it if we don't use it. I don't see why that would be the case at all. If anything, I find that taking a break from being creative means I come back more creative than ever. How is using AI to generate music any different from listening to music? It can be as much a part of your inspiration as anything else.

Humans are allowing AI to replace and render mute intuitive creativity.

What a load of absolute, f**king bullshit. AI allows me to offload the tedious, dreary tasks and concentrate on those parts of the process that are properly creative, allowing you to not only be more creative but also more productive.

apes are intelligent, but they don't play guitar.

That's just one reason we like them.

Now we need one that says 'Includes A.I.' or 'A.I. Free' or something similar depending on the content.

Why? There is no danger in exposing young minds to music created by AI, is there?

[davidka]

https://youtu.be/yuoFsi2iIi0?si=BpRoDmmUNHe6yWAp

This just made my day!

[VOODOO U]

Actually you typed text in a few seconds.

And how, exactly, do you interact with your DAW?

Why do you want to know those details? It has nothing to do with the point made.

You don't honestly think anyone actually gives a shit who makes a song or what processes are involved, do you?

Not at all. Milli Vanilli proved that years ago.

People just want to listen to music they can enjoy and right now, today, Udio can do that amazingly well across an impressively broad range of styles and genres.

So? Radio does that too but i don't turn on the radio and say I "made" the song that's playing.
If you have a problem with me getting my panties all wet because someone claims they "made" a song by typing text on a screen versus using human creative faculties well that's just too bad for you. Drink some root beer and get drunk if you have to.

I am 100% certain Udio is more capable of creating a song I would like than you are.

Glad I'm doing something right. I'd be depressed if there was the possibility of a 60 something year old virgin liking my stuff.

That is a big assumption built on a smaller one. You assume any of us have that intuition and that we will lose it if we don't use it.

Well, we all know you don't have that intuition bones. Novakill's intuitive creative talent is all with your band mate.

How is using AI to generate music any different from listening to music? It can be as much a part of your inspiration as anything else.

That's fine. But don't claim you are being "creative" by typing text on a screen and having a program do what the human creative faculties normally do when it comes to making a song.
There's a big difference between a programmer creating an app versus some.joe blow typing text on a screen for an app to borrow from prior created works.
There's much more involved within the human faculty to create versus using a calculator to add numbers. Using AI apps to have it build a song is pretty much like using a calculator.
And just for the record, I'm not opposed to it. Be f**ked and do what you want with whatever you have. I'm interested in AI but not to spoon feed me. I'm not into driving on cruise control.

What a load of absolute, f**king bullshit. AI allows me to offload the tedious, dreary tasks and concentrate on those parts of the process that are properly creative, allowing you to not only be more creative but also more productive

Cut the crap. AI has the potential to do what you claim if DAW and or plugin developers apply it but these AI subscription apps are f**king toys.
Mind you i do have my eyes on voice conversion but i still rely on my human creative faculties to make the vocal melody which builds the song.

[BONES]

Why do you want to know those details? It has nothing to do with the point made.

Of course it does - you use keyboard and a mouse, precisely the same tools you use to interact with the AI, thereby proving that your comment is ridiculous.

Not at all. Milli Vanilli proved that years ago.

So why all the fuss?

So? Radio does that too but i don't turn on the radio and say I "made" the song that's playing.

That's because no radio station is ever going to play any song you make. It take hundreds of people to make a movie but only one person, the director, is credited as having made that film. Directors alone are called "film makers" because it is their artistic/creative vision which brings the film to life. Similarly, an AI might be the tool that creates the song but there is always a creative/artistic person wielding their keyboard, creating the prompts to realise their vision for the piece.

If you have a problem with me getting my panties all wet because someone claims they "made" a song by typing text on a screen versus using human creative faculties well that's just too bad for you.

Is it now? I think anyone reading this discussion would see quite plainly that it's you who has the problem. You think that what you have is somehow special and it irks you that a computer program can do it better than you can. Get over yourself, you are not special in any way.

Glad I'm doing something right. I'd be depressed if there was the possibility of a 60 something year old virgin liking my stuff.

Yes, I'm sure your target market is 40 year old nerds who still live in their mother's basements.

Novakill's intuitive creative talent is all with your band mate.

You do understand that my bandmate spends about 6 hours a day in front of various AI interfaces, right? That the videoclip for our current single was made by him, using AI, right? And that it was his work with the Eleven Labs AI that got the vocals done for one of the other songs on our current album, right?

That's fine. But don't claim you are being "creative" by typing text on a screen and having a program do what the human creative faculties normally do when it comes to making a song.

Can you hear yourself? Do you not consider authors creative people? Because typing can be every bit as creative as playing an instrument. In fact, the vast majority of people who play an instrument aren't creative at all. They just learn how to play a few favourite things by rote and that's as far as they take it. Your idea of what's creative is not only extremely limited but wrong-headed at its root.

There's a big difference between a programmer creating an app versus some.joe blow typing text on a screen for an app to borrow from prior created works.

How do you think you create apps, if not by typing text onto a screen? In fact, AI has been really good at writing code for a while now. I reckon it will put Joe Blow out of work long before it does for us.

There's much more involved within the human faculty to create versus using a calculator to add numbers.

Yes, that's why creative accountants tend to end up in gaol.

Using AI apps to have it build a song is pretty much like using a calculator.

Right but did calculators put any mathematicians out of work? No, they didn't. This won't, either.

I'm not into driving on cruise control.

Ah, so not thinking things through is a common trait with you, then. I use cruise control all the time because it means I don't have to stare at the speedo constantly to make sure I'm not going to be caught speeding, which allows me to concentrate on the other aspects of driving like a maniac in traffic.

Cut the crap. AI has the potential to do what you claim if DAW and or plugin developers apply it but these AI subscription apps are f**king toys.

No they're not. As I mentioned, we used two different AIs to write lyrics and perform vocals on our last album and it worked a treat. And I used AI to inspire some of the other lyrics I wrote myself. It was also really good at finding rhyming phrases. It took all the drudgery out of writing lyrics and then doing a dozen takes until we're happy with the vocal performance. We told ChatGPT what we wanted to write about and it came up with much better lyrics than I would have, in a style I'd never have thought to use. Then, when I was having trouble working out how to fit the vox into the song, we used a different AI to perform them, just to give me some inspiration as to how to get it done. But it did such a great f**king job we decided to use it's vocal performance instead of bothering to do it myself. Far from stifling our creativity, it was a very useful tool in clearing creative roadblocks and helping our creative flow.

Mind you i do have my eyes on voice conversion but i still rely on my human creative faculties to make the vocal melody which builds the song.

That's probably why your music is so good you don't have a link to it in your signature. Try using AI, you might be able to create something you are proud to share.

[Bombadil]

https://youtu.be/yuoFsi2iIi0?si=BpRoDmmUNHe6yWAp

I hate when that happens.

I am going to do the same thing with this shit as I did with music after 1991. Basically, ignore it.

[igorius]

There's a difference. If I stop subscribing to a plugin vendor, I can no longer open my old projects, unless I resubscribe.

That's a lie and I'm sure you know it. Projects will still open

Okay, bad wording on my part. Projects will still open, but if you used a lot of plugins from subscriptions, you'll need to invest a lot of time to get it to sound like it did with the plugins that you can no longer use (unless you're willing to resubscribe). If you used instruments, you probably invested a lot of time tweaking the settings or finding the right preset. If you used effects, you might not have a comparable stock effect or you'll have a hard time reproducing the same effect. You do lose a lot if you lose the plugins you use. All the sound design, effects configuration,etc. It occasionally happens that I open old projects and I no longer have a plugin (not due to subscriptions but outdated version or so) and I find it very frustrating, already with just one missing plugin.

[igorius]

But if I stop subscribing to an AI service, I lose nothing.

In subscribing to an AI service, you eventually lose the ability to intuitively create. That's losing a lot because that intuitive ability is what allows one to operate an internal "compass" which guides.
AI is fine to *assist* the human capacity of creating, but that's not what's happening.
Humans are allowing AI to replace and render mute intuitive creativity.
Soon, organic intelligence found in humans will shift to other mammals and man will become ape.
Don't get me wrong, apes are intelligent, but they don't play guitar.
Soon they will though. Because nature perennially expands and that means human abilities will move to other sources.
The chipmunks will now really be a musical force.

Only if we stop creating our own music due to AI. Letting AI create music for you is like watching a game, making music yourself is like playing a game. Both are fun, but in different ways. You don't have to choose one over the other. You can do both.

[vurt]

Don't get me wrong, apes are intelligent, but they don't play guitar.

err yes they do.

Hmm. Gene Simmons? But he plays bass.
Jewel??
Shame on you. She's adorable.

i don't know who jewel is, but assuming she plays guitar, there's a 99.99999 % chance she is an ape.

[VOODOO U]

you use keyboard and a mouse, precisely the same tools you use to interact with the AI

Yes, and? It has nothing to do with my initial point. Go back and read so you get the proper perspective.

So why all the fuss?

I see. When bones posts in a thread, it's to make conversation, learn and grow etc etc.
When everyone else makes posts, it's a "fuss".
Noted.

AI might be the tool that creates the song but there is always a creative/artistic person wielding their keyboard, creating the prompts to realise their vision for the piece.

There's a big difference between AI creating the song using prompts you typed in versus creating a song using human abilities ie hearing a melody as an idea and playing it out. That is the initial point.
A monkey can type a prompt and tell AI to create a rock song. But it takes certain human abilities to bring to fruition a mental idea that is musical.

I think anyone reading this discussion would see quite plainly that it's you who has the problem.

Oh ok, so now bones speaks for everyone because everyone loves bones. Sure.
No problem on my end, just an opinion. As usual, bones thinks everyone elses opinions are bullshit and rubbish. Why all the fuss over my opinion bones?

You think that what you have is somehow special

Oh ok. Thanks for notifying me of how I think.

and it irks you that a computer program can do it better than you can.

There are humans that do it better than I can but that doesn't stop me from being a musician. I write what I like and thank God that I can actually do it.

Get over yourself, you are not special in any way.

But you just said I think what I have is special so how can i possibly get over myself?

Yes, I'm sure your target market is 40 year old nerds who still live in their mother's basements.

Aaw....did i hurt your feelings bones? There's nothing to be ashamed about being a 60 year old virgin. You just might qualify to give birth to the second coming of Jesus.

You do understand that my bandmate spends about 6 hours a day in front of various AI interfaces, right? That the videoclip for our current single was made by him, using AI, right? And that it was his work with the Eleven Labs AI that got the vocals done for one of the other songs on our current album, right?

Yeah yeah typical bones plugging the band. Anyhow, a vocal track and video clips doesn't mean AI created the songs. Your band mate made the music, not AI. So yes, he is the talented one and you're the groupie.

Can you hear yourself?

Not at the moment. I'm typing (obviously).

Because typing can be every bit as creative as playing an instrument. In fact, the vast majority of people who play an instrument aren't creative at all. They just learn how to play a few favourite things by rote and that's as far as they take it.

So playing a few favorite things on an instrument is not creative but typing is? If you say so.
If someone types in notes on a piano roll to create sequences, well then I can accept that as being creative because they are in control of piecing the music. That's creativity. But typing in, "Alexa. Please make a bananarama bass line using Bob Dylan's voice", sorry but that's not making the actual music.
It's like DJing, 99% of DJs don't make the music, they play the music.

How do you think you create apps, if not by typing text onto a screen?

I'm quite aware of that thank you very much. A programmer designing an app HAS TO type code on a screen to create an idea. Musicians do not.
It's getting redundant here but as I stated, typing prompts for AI to create the song does not mean you made or created the actual music.
A programmer creating an app types just like any joe blow typing prompts for AI to do all the creative output but I consider the former actually creating while the latter is not.
That doesn't mean that one cannot create music using AI btw. You can, but i don't consider subscribing to some online toy and typing in mumbo jumbo as actually making a song.

Right but did calculators put any mathematicians out of work? No, they didn't. This won't, either.

Who said anything about AI putting musicians out of work?

Try using AI, you might be able to create something you are proud to share.

I already stated I'd be interested in AI for voice conversion. And I don't need to put links to ny music in my sig or make shameless seld promotion threads to feel any worth.
I know what I'm capable of, damn proud of it, and that's good enough for me.

[VOODOO U]

Letting AI create music for you is like watching a game, making music yourself is like playing a game.

That's a decent way to put it.

[lotus2035]

Now we need one that says 'Includes A.I.' or 'A.I. Free' or something similar depending on the content.

Why? There is no danger in exposing young minds to music created by AI, is there?

Nothing wrong with musicians/producers using A.I. tools as a support in their own music to get certain results.
However, creating music using nothing but A.I. and none of your own musical abilities (if you even have any) is another thing entirely. I am sure there will be a lot of kids who will take both approaches.
Will the music industry allow it's market to be flooded with the latter type and will the public relate to it in the same way as human music? Too early to say.
As for the sticker I would like to know exactly what I'm listening to. If something is 100% A.I. created then IMO the 'artist' in that case is a kind of DJ/Manager for an A.I. musical project and might as well be releasing mixes on youtube or DJing in a club somewhere.
Of course you'll always get the kind of person with a huge ego who will use the convenience of technology to feed their narcissism and receive praise and credit for doing very little that required any real effort. ( Hey, like DJs ) But when has that never been a thing. Some will love them for it and some won't.
EDIT: Would they even be honest about their use of A.I.?

[BONES]

Yes, and? It has nothing to do with my initial point. Go back and read so you get the proper perspective.

No, it goes to exactly what you were suggesting - that using a (computer) keyboard was not a valid way to create music.

I see. When bones posts in a thread, it's to make conversation, learn and grow etc etc.
When everyone else makes posts, it's a "fuss".

No, the "fuss" comes from you contradicting yourself, walking back your initially absurd comments. Of course, it was a poor example anyway because nobody cared that Milli Vanilli were miming, artists have been doing that for TV appearances forever, so much as that they tried to hide the fact. That's the lesson to learn from them - if you are going to use AI, be up-front about it.

There's a big difference between AI creating the song using prompts you typed in versus creating a song using human abilities ie hearing a melody as an idea and playing it out. That is the initial point.

Just as there is a difference between hearing it in your head and stumbling upon it while you are practising or jamming. So what? Is it any less valid because you hit upon it by accident? I've probably written a couple of hundred songs over the years but I don't think any of them came from an idea in my head.

A monkey can type a prompt and tell AI to create a rock song. But it takes certain human abilities to bring to fruition a mental idea that is musical.

Which is why the prompts you use are an integral part of the process. The more care and effort you put into the prompts, the better the result will reflect your creative vision. So yes, a monkey could probably get an AI to write a rock song but it wouldn't be the rock song I want to hear from it. To coax that out requires knowledge, skill and experience, just like learning an instrument or a DAW.

I write what I like and thank God that I can actually do it.

It wont' be long before anyone can get an AI to write what they like, too. The barriers to creativity have been crumbling for most of my lifetime. If achieving anything in music today required you to be a musician, I wouldn't qualify, nor would I be interested in trying. I don't see musicianship as a worthwhile endeavour, nor has it been a requisite skill to do what we do for the past 4 or 5 decades. The Monkees weren't musicians, that was no barrier to their enduring success. It's a little late to start worrying about it now.

Get over yourself, you are not special in any way.

But you just said I think what I have is special so how can i possibly get over myself?

Your band mate made the music, not AI. So yes, he is the talented one and you're the groupie.

No, I actually put music in there, all he had was a wall of feedback and a bit of rhythm, which is why it works so well with the spoken word vocals from the AI.

So playing a few favorite things on an instrument is not creative but typing is?

I dunno, ask Stephen King what he thinks.
If someone types in notes on a piano roll to create sequences, well then I can accept that as being creative because they are in control of piecing the music. That's creativity. But typing in, "Alexa. Please make a bananarama bass line using Bob Dylan's voice", sorry but that's not making the actual music.[/quote]
You mean like using an arpeggiator or a chord tool? Or using the Peter Gunn bassline? Or the 303 acid sound? How many decent songs use Funky Drummer? Even in your example, who'd have thought of getting Bob Dylan to do Bananarma? It's a very creative idea that AI can make a reality for you, if that's what you want. How would that be any different from Stock, Aitken and Waterman doing their thing with a Bob Dylan song? I'm pretty sure they can make anything sound like Bananarama.

As with most things, creativity comes from how you use something, not from the thing you use. How is using AI to create your backing track any different from using a band or session musicians? It's not your creativity in any of those situations, but that doesn't stop people from doing it, nor does it make the results in any way worse. In fact, collaborations often lead to far superior results to going it alone. So why would that be any different with AI? You're still the one in charge, it's your creative vision that's being realised. You're just peeved because it means that people who you perceive as somehow being lesser than you might have the opportunity to express themselves.

It's like DJing, 99% of DJs don't make the music, they play the music.

And people love it. They are as successful as any top musicians you'd care to name. Their lack of musicianship has been no barrier to their success, they have used creativity in a different way to you.

A programmer designing an app HAS TO type code on a screen to create an idea. Musicians do not.

But they can and it won't hold them back in any way, with or without AI. Oh, and AI is apparently very good at creating code, programmers can type in a text prompt and get whatever they need.

It's getting redundant here but as I stated, typing prompts for AI to create the song does not mean you made or created the actual music.

So what? As long as it's good, why would I care who made it? I love performing covers, probably more than I enjoy playing my own music, just s I enjoy listening to other people's music more than I enjoy listening to my own.

[BONES]

you'll need to invest a lot of time to get it to sound like it did with the plugins that you can no longer use (unless you're willing to resubscribe).

What plugins is that true of? Arcade still works after your subscription lapses, it just doesn't allow you access to the GUI to edit anything or changes patches. If you want/need to edit it, just resubscribe for a month and have at it. Or render out all those parts before you cancel your subscription and keep the stems, which I found easier with Arcade in the longer term, given how much content you'd have to install to keep it functioning.

[VOODOO U]

No, it goes to exactly what you were suggesting - that using a (computer) keyboard was not a valid way to create music.

Your A.D.D. is really really strong. To the point communicating with you takes more effort.

No, the "fuss" comes from you contradicting yourself

Perhaps i have strong A.D.D. too because I fail to see where i contradicted myself. Show me. Show me where I contradicted myself.

Just as there is a difference between hearing it in your head and stumbling upon it while you are practising or jamming.

Well it all comes from the mental (or from the head as most would say). The physical aspect of the human being doesn't do any actions without some mental influence.
One jamming is caught up in a non thinking mode if you will and thus it doesn't seem as if there is any mental activity being the cause of any discovered likings. But there is mental activity; some would say it's subconscious and it's what causes happy accidents. Those happy accidents happen because your thinking ability got out of the way.
No physical actions can be done without the mental psychic aspect coming first whether consciously or subconsciously.

I've probably written a couple of hundred songs over the years but I don't think any of them came from an idea in my head.

Well they sure as hell didn't come from grandma's apple.pie.

Which is why the prompts you use are an integral part of the process. The more care and effort you put into the prompts, the better the result will reflect your creative vision. So yes, a monkey could probably get an AI to write a rock song but it wouldn't be the rock song I want to hear from it. To coax that out requires knowledge, skill and experience, just like learning an instrument or a DAW.

Yes I can see the possibility in that. A bit more effort with detailed prompts where there is more involvment in what the AI outputs is more respectable imo. This whole bullshit of "write me a house beat" and then sitting back smoking a stogie and claiming "I wrote a song" is a joke. And that was the intial point, one didn't "make a song", they simply typed some text.

I dunno, ask Stephen King what he thinks.

Thats a good example of the difference between typing in a creative way and not.
Typing text for AI to do all the work (borrowing from others work) and then claiming you "created" or "made" the song is not creative.
Authors, programmers designing their own apps....these are creative people who create by typing.

How many decent songs use Funky Drummer?

Zero.

As with most things, creativity comes from how you use something, not from the thing you use.

Creativity comes from the human mind. That's how you use something creatively. That's one context of the word creativity.
Then there's the claim that one has created something tangible. Like a song. If a DJ uses a song to spin, they did not create the song itself.
Typing a prompt here and there to have AI borrow others works and do all of the creative process doean't make the one who typed the simple prompts the creator of the song. I love repeating myself. God bless A.D.D.

How is using AI to create your backing track any different from using a band or session musicians? It's not your creativity in any of those situations,

Don't play dumb. There are thousands of songwriters who hire musicians to play their creations.
That's what score sheets, tablature etc. are for.
That's why, where applicable, there are separate copyright forms to protect sound recordings (SA forms) and those who create the actual song compositions (PA forms).

In fact, collaborations often lead to far superior results to going it alone.

There's a HUGE limit to that statement in my book. I get exactly what I want being in the drivers seat from start to finish vs collaborating from start to finish. i could use help in the mixing department, but ain't nothing to mix without a finished product and I got zero finished products being in bands. Meaning songs that i liked.
Too much ego and unnecessary input from bandmates who never considered what's best for the song.
Now, when I work with vocalists, it's those who trust me and I trust them. They trust I can do the writing and production and they can deliver what's necessary for the songs.

You're just peeved because it means that people who you perceive as somehow being lesser than you might have the opportunity to express themselves.

No one is lesser or better than me. I do me and you do you. Diversity. And yes, i can say if i like or dislike some works. So what. Everybody does it.

And people love it. They are as successful as any top musicians you'd care to name. Their lack of musicianship has been no barrier to their success, they have used creativity in a different way to you.

I never said i don't appreciate DJs. I was one.

I love performing covers, probably more than I enjoy playing my own music, just s I enjoy listening to other people's music more than I enjoy listening to my own.

Glad I'm not in your shoes.

[vurt]

stupid apes.