Well here’s the thing: Not everything is the same. Also, just because one thing is now different doesn’t mean they all are.
In other words recording isn’t really the word you’re looking for, you’re looking for “performance”. And so there is nuance there. Yes, if I in the past played a melodic line on a synth and recorded the audio from the synth then every take would be unique. If I instead record the midi output from the synth then every subsequent playback will be the same performance - but it was still my performance. If I then take the recorded midi and quantize it we’ve taken yet a further step away from “me” creating something unique every time the song plays. And so on.
So I think there’s a ‘gradient’ from a true performance of artists, captured on tape, to the extreme opposite we’ll see in the future.
I also think it’s absolutely fair to say that a person programming a drum beat by drawing something on a grid in a computer is a lesser drummer than Steve Gadd or Porcaro or Purdie etc. So at some point we’re so far removed from playing we aren’t looking at players any longer. And in the future we’ll move away from composition as well.
So I stand by what I wrote: Today when we sometimes see people say they created something then I just have to wonder to what degree they did. Did they really create that thing or did the computer?
Even then it does something called ‘out-painting’ where it will generate new content where it is missing in an image. I took the pic below while traveling in India. I resized it so it only filled a portion of the frame and asked DALL-E generate some variations.
AI will leave everyone behind. Maybe there’ll be a market for ‘pure’ music by real musicians and composers, but most professional and paid work will be replaced I bet, regardless of whether or not people are “stubborn”.
I think there’s always been a market for the more “authentic” music lovers. Are there not people who strongly dislike heavy auto-tune, programmed drums, over-produced and over-polished sounds, singers and “artists” who don’t write their own music, etc?
Many people still prefer analog gear. If anything, the “imperfect and dirty” sound is as popular as ever.
Maybe I’m just an optimist and am totally wrong. But I don’t think anyone other than the lowest denominator of people will ever accept AI composed music.
It was the same said for AI-generated images and companies such as Midjourney. Now there are multiple lawsuits against said company and a fraudulent case of a CEO of such company has surfaced.
In the professional world, this won’t wash. I have signed a multitude of contracts stating that no sampled music should be used. I suspect ‘no AI-generated music’ will be added soon to protect film production companies.
AI will unleash a ton of copyright issues.
Sure, write a prompt, get a job, but be prepared for the consequences.
Meaning, no newly produced music needed due to AI, as a consequence, no musicians will be needed, musicians will be eclipsed, and as a consequence, there will be no need for DAWs.
I think there’s another misunderstanding happening, when you put “over perfect “ performance against human performance made by real humans, or under-achieved production values when not using ai. For me, the ultimate in perfection is, actually, by humans: do you think ai would outperform Bach, Beethoven, Stravinsky, Quincy Jones, or Simon and Garfunkel, or… you get the ideia? Or, in the performing part, ai would outperform the suplesse of a Itzak Pearl, or a Misha Maisky, or a Sviatoslaw Richter? Perhaps in the “didn’t miss a note” front, but music is so, so much more…
Of course we’re just here throwing our two cents, and this type of discussion is both needed, very interesting. and fruitless… The powers that be don’t roam forums like this, they exist in the rarified circles where corporate gains are imagined and pursued. It has always been like this, it will always be. Anyone who is passionate or at least interested in History can not nurture warm feelings and optimism towards human greed, and towards the need of the few overshadowing the needs of the many.
I’m guessing you’re thinking about music from an artist’s perspective though, like the ones who in the good old days wrote enough music for an album and then got that recorded and sold.
However, a lot of revenue for musicians and composers has come from other sources; radio play, advertising, film etc. A lot. Not only these “lowest denominator” people are the ones that consumed music indirectly via commercials etc. but most people have. When I started out as a music engineer in NYC a composer could still make $40-50,000 for music for a national ad campaign which often ran with a different ad / music in different markets, meaning a composer could get like $150k up front for the work… Then you had residuals that the musicians got paid every time that commercial aired with that music… And the composers for sure also played at least one instrument on that commercial.
“Everyone” heard that music, not just ‘the lowest’.
It doesn’t have to outperform humans in your sense in order to displace musicians, it just has to be good enough. Most consumers will settle for good enough I think and they won’t even know what they’re listening to.
As a full time dedicated mastering engineer I think AI has taken an estimated 5-10pct of my work in about 8-10 years. That is not very much, it’s my best estimate. Also probably the very least experienced of my clients in general who knew no better. I do not think this can be the benchmark on how AI will change professions. Like all big changes, some people will be severely affected and some very little.
As far as Cubase goes I think Steinberg would be best to focus on the lost art of quality. I was speaking about this when talking about a hat, a classic design that cannot be bettered in maybe 100 years. It is an art to know when something is working as well as can be… that is an art being lost, if it ever applied to software. It also suggests that most software when released is intentionally released imperfect. I suppose there are only so many features you can add to a hat.
Ok so it is not the best analogy you have ever heard but there is something in it.
This constant update/upgrade/add something new / keep up with the Jones’ is ultimately tiring.
Artificial intelligence can be utilized in various ways. For example, AI can be taught different types of rhythms and the appropriate quantization for each rhythm. The AI can automatically apply the suitable quantization once it analyzes the MIDI or audio file.
AI can also be used in implementing automatic audio correction within Variaudio, once it analyzes the utilized scale.
The possibilities are endless!
It’s not necessary for artificial intelligence to replace musicians and create music on its own.
^
^
^
^
My comment was written in Arabic, and I asked ChatGPT to translate it to ENG
Personally i would like to have assistance, it would be nice if Cubase could give me a few mixed versions of my songs based on my descriptions or help me with level matching or finding problematic frequencies that clash within tracks, the same goes for mastering, other people will have more ideas
i think even the most competent people would need a helping hand , if your abilities are let’s say A with AI you will reach A+ you will be faster and better so it is not diminishing anybody as many people think, if this AI is used as an assistant where is the problem?.. i know that this is unthinkable to ask things like that but this is already happening , it is not science fiction anymore.
How am I better if the technology is doing the work?? Isn’t this like saying you’re a faster cyclist if you use an electric bike instead of a regular one?
