I have to say that there is something very calming and meditative about doing repetitive work, It rests your mind and lets the intuitive creative part of the brain speak louder than the fearful angry part of the brain. So even if Cubase implemented some of these "time saving’ AI features(bugs), I personally would not use them. I would prefer for Steinberg to focused on stability. While I realize shiny new things keep a business profitable, I hope that Steinberg/Yamaha keeps a healthy balance between innovation and common sense.
P.S. I am not a complete Luddite. I use AI for mastering because my hearing aids can’t do a good job with the really high frequencies.
Sigh…the AI stole…erm sorry, used the museum’s art collection to make this new work, this is exactly what is happening with AI image creation from companies such as Midjourney and Co…They are doing internet image scraping of copyrighted materials and claiming them as theirs, artists are up in arms and lawsuits have been raging.
I understand and sympathize with the artists that say they are being ripped off by AI scraping–> “creation” of art in their style.
On the other hand, I can’t see a hard difference between AI scraping and humans being “influenced” when they create art … as much as I try, the difference seems to be only one of degree (and therefore one difficult to legislate or create rules around).
Some kid grows up in the 90s, and twenty years later writes songs that all sound like they could have been written back then because he was heavily influenced by songs of that era.
Where is the hard difference between that and an AI engine scraping 90s songs and “creating” its own songs in that style?