1975; “Check out this song I made…” Puts in cassette, plays back recording from 4-track of a composition they composed performed with instruments they played. Impressive.
2023; “Check out this song I made…” … did you though?
3 Likes
Well this thread took a bit of a turn overnight.
Spoiler Alert: The number of Angels that can dance on the head of a pin is 42…
Any approach a person wants to use to create art is a legit approach. It may or may not successfully produce art, but it is a valid way to work. Self-styled art cops who attempt to decree what is and isn’t acceptable are best ignored. If a method or technique works for you, then use it - if not don’t.
2 Likes
I know some people get annoyed hearing objections to using technology a certain way when “creating” and perhaps this is more of a semantic discussion about the definition of “art” and “creating”.
I will say though that people devalued art and artists because they didn’t fully understand what went into the creation of it. I’ve lost count of how many times me and others heard objections to how much a band charges for something, as if there are no costs that go into becoming a professional musician. The instrument. The rehearsal space(s). The thousands and thousands of hours spent… Well, now, when ‘anyone’ can ‘create’ ‘art’ on a computer using AI etc. that’s just going to get worse.
Professionals will suffer even more, and I would argue so will cultures in general as this appreciation for ‘real’ art fades.
If that makes me an elitist I’m ok with it.
Totally ok with it.
3 Likes
imagining I agres with you - wich I don’t - then who is producing that “art”? Where does ir stop being you? Do you have a clear boundary where you’re Just rearranging puzzle pieces? I can have a puzzle of the Mona Lisa, so if I put it together I’m entitled to some kind of artistic recognition?
You were talking about the “art cops”. Well, it seems that your sentence on what are valid pathways resembles a lot a decree, a final and irrevogable truth. Like some kind of law, enforced by the… Police?.. Hmmm…
Sorry I wasn’t clearer, the post you are referencing was NOT specifically about AI. It was about how when humans make art, different people use a variety of approaches. And all these different ways that people use to make art are legitimate. However, humans sometimes can be judgmental. So some folks (aka art cops) end up saying that other folks are not really artists because they don’t meet some specific criteria like using a brush to apply paint rather than throwing it, understanding harmonic theory, or using the ‘wrong’ colors. A lot of the posts above had some variant of if you don’t know/do/think XYZ then you’re not legit going on in them. That’s what I was talking about.
Well a century ago Marcel Duchamp would likely have answered yes, depending on your intention. That discussion has been going on a long time without any satisfying conclusions.
1 Like
Yeah, historically folks suffer when any type of work becomes more automated. The real carnage will occur in the areas where budget is more important than quality, e.g. Hallmark Rom Com soundtracks, local commercials, etc. It’s good that the current writer’s strike includes AI as an issue.
I am a bit doubtful that appreciation for real art will actually fade. Maybe even the opposite - a bunch of pleasant-enough sounding second rate Mozart knock-offs might only highlight the superiority of the original.
I think a key advantage that humans have is that we are naturally innovative. While Machine Learning by its nature is constrained to what currently exists. So while an AI may be capable of writing counterpoint I suspect it can’t invent counterpoint.
2 Likes
I have asked AI to make an embrio into a daw, we talked for about 5 hours, and I wanted AI to make a script to begin with. I gave ai a lot of information for it to read through, like all the cubase and all other daws manuals and handbooks to understand what I wanted, as well as work through different ways of coding where we used powershell and other coding programs. But it ended up saying that it is extremely difficult to make a daw. And it takes a long time and is a very sophisticated program, which requires experts. then adaptation to soft and hardware and other things.
that I asked was from the beginning, that I wrote exactly which hprdware I had in my computer and external hardware and make an optimized daw for this. and optimize the computer for the hardware I have in a powershell script.
I sent the script to a friend who is a high level programmer, and he said that there were a lot of breaks in the code and things that were directly bad for the computer and windows.
AI can stay away for a while, however, AI learning can increase in plugins to get faster start results and a good starting point to start with. like all presets in cubase. there you should be able to have a button that adjusts the channel strip or track pressure to the audio file for a good and quick start. but it is far in the future.
first we need the whole cubase with vst and mixer etc. to be scalable, so you can buy a 4k screen and scale it so it fits you perfectly, so you don’t have to scale the screen to 1080p when maybe 1620p is absolutely perfect for my eyes. this is actually priority 1 for me as I quickly get tired in my eyes at 1440p. and 1080 is too big and 4k is too small. and if you scale 4k, it will still be blurry.
if steinberg had done this, we would have had a super crisp daw where you can see all the little buttons to scale up vst or something else to your personal size so you can work longer before your eyes get tired 
just a little offtopic
1 Like
100% agree , the minds in charge of this technology are blinkered , their only goal is to push as far as they can before it breaks , but what is the break ? Cost of Humans …again ?
Exactamundo
it’s all about sound and transferring with tools the sound you want to create from your grey matter but with Ai the building blocks will be removed and you’ll just end up with an automated finished product , as you say whether it’s art is another thing
Nailed it.
THIS is my point. A fellow member of this forum wrote, no matter the medium it’s the art that counts and the outcome.
Well, not anymore, not since prerecorded drums, basses, chord packs, etc. flooded the industry.
Gone are the days when people with very expensive synthesizers (referring to an earlier post) would slave over the machine to create sounds. Vangelis didn’t know much if any music. He was magnificent, but he performed his own soundtracks.
What you hear in his music, is Vangelis. NOT a chord pack.
James Hetfield from Metallica has no idea what some of the chords/progressions he is playing (however, he took piano lessons when young). But he is playing his instrument and by doing so he is in the biggest metal band (well arguably) of all time.
I stated in another answer here, that one needs to learn their craft. You don’t have to be a classically trained musician. You are dealing with music, learn music.
You don’t want to? Fine, find other ways, OK. But AI-created music, MIDI packs written by other people, and pre-orchestrated music is NOT your music.
1 Like
Evolution is a funny old game , mention this to a teenager and they will most probably laugh at you , you could also say , since the dawn of Midi , you personally haven’t made any true recordings if using a sequencer , if you want to go back even further you could say the Radio Electronic Work Shop was not art or music , due to splicing , editing and automation of the day , it’s all subjective . No reason to be denounced , we are all individuals (thankfully ) .
Whatever the argument, if it’s not your music, it’s not your music…
I agree with you , but who knows what tech is round the corner that may evolve the whole process into being your own personal composition again ? Do you ?
All new tech with older generations gets met with resistance because we don’t like change , that is a fact , it is changing , we don’t run the world any more , the youngsters are the new custodians , if they think midi packs are they way forward then our ways well become all old timers approach and looked back on as history pioneering ways leading too …
I Use the chord assistance if i am struggling to find 1 chord out of 8 , i’m not a maestro but does that mean only 7/8’s of the content of the track is mine , even with all the drums ,leads , percussion and what not ?
I just hate the fact( and hate is a strong word ), that the powers that be know where this Ai is going, they have been warned but are still going there so i completely jumped off the band wagon at beta testing
Ah, ok! You know, this is the kind of discussion that is, at the same time, rather pointless and very interesting!
I’m not an art expert, so I really can’t comment on Duschamps’ work, although I have a very definite impression on the current state of affairs that he precipitated, so he’s not warmingly received around here
But that’s part of the problem with modern art: who is really an expert, that can say with property “this is art”? The art world has become the feud of curators and gallery owners, and those have become the ipso facto authorities - money makes the world go ‘round and all. Actually the problem is twofold: the aforementioned characters and the interdependence of the work and its creator: you can have two perfectly identical lines on two canvases; one made by me and the other made by a famous name. You get the picture, right?
1 Like
Progress and evolution…two different things hey?
It is true, things are changing to progress or evolution. Who can tell these things?
Anyway man, it’s an argument precious to each other. Can’t be going rounds forever, I made my point so did you.
Glad to see you are not supporting AI. I have a lot of friends who are in the creative graphics department and are seeing the consequences of Midjurey and the rest. It’s catastrophic. However, said AI companies are now in court over gross copyright infringement for scraping the internet and using copyrighted material to create new images…
1 Like
I had another look at those DallE pics above. The first two with the dancing coctails are not bad at all. I mean, for an abum cover or a song picture to go in whatever streaming platform, I would certainly use it. (I wouldn’t, I just want to say that for me it passes the mark, it’s good enough. Personally, I’d rather grab my camera and shoot a lamp or something with a 200mm lens and call it an abstract day.)
And that’s the problem. I will obsess if a 20" dark ride is good for the song, or if should use a 20" hhx instead. But when it comes to painting (that I know nothing about), hey, it’s good enough, why shouldn’t I use it!
I can see an artist that wants to expose a tableau digitally, in a very slow video slideshow for example, using AI music, thinking hey, it’s good enough, why shouldn’t I use it!
Essentially, the same project can be run like this. A sicko cinematographist wakes up at 4 am, they lug their gear into the forest to catch the first light, the broken twig carried by a clear stream. To catch a silly bug trying to climb a tree trunk. All these things. They get back, they do the editing. The video is done. Ok, now let’s see what music we can slap onto it.
A sicko muso like us, spends time trying to solidify the mist of pictures just behind the eyes into music. They have a great composition, all in order, proper techniques, slick orchestration, a good mix, it’s great music. Now, let’s see what footage of nature we can slap onto it.
This final step is the crucial one. Because in both cases, it is not specifically stated, but it is inferred that appreciation for “that other thing” outside our expertise is, well, not that big of an appreciation. We take pride in what we do, and what we deem important, but what about the stuff that others deem important?
Have we become islands of creativity with no raft in sight? We’re about to find out.
3 Likes
There are ramifications in the professional world though. It’s not that simple.
Lawsuits can be hefty about copyrights and companies are armoured to the teeth about such things. It’s a very uncertain territory and governments are already reacting to the threat of AI.
AI-created image companies have been already sued.
2 Likes
Correct. AI will wipe out the unmusical content creators, simply because it does it better.
1 Like
I hearted this, but, this is very apocalyptic.
Yes it is we have to adapt and steinberg must help.
AI will wipe out a lot of musical content creators as well because it will do that just as well but cheaper.
Don’t be fooled into thinking that humans are so unique that machines won’t be able to create art that we think is sufficient for what we want to consume.
1 Like