Deezer says consumption of AI-generated music on the platform is still very low, between 1-3% of the total streams, and that 85% of these streams are detected as fraudulent and are demonetized.
I don’t think it belongs on platforms like Deezer but it’s silly to not call it music.You can hate how it’s made but the bar for something to be music isn’t dependant on the fact. Downvote me I guess.
If I steal someone else’s song and put my name on it nobody reasonable would say I made it.
People were saying the same thing about sampling in hip hop. Yeah if you do a 1 to 1 copy of a song then that’s not making art but if you take elements from a song and rearrange them then that is.
My issue is more about not calling it music. Imo, if it’s groovy and my brain enjoys it, it’s music.
There’s some music I seriously don’t enjoy as well but I still consider it music because someone does.
That being said, I don’t label AI stuff as “made”. I’m quick with making the distinction when sharing with friends and stuff. I agree with that part. Although it becomes blurry at times. Making something with samples is still making it, what about making it with AI generated samples? I don’t consider it stealing in any case, much too transformative imo.
I think we should separate the platforms but I’m not sure where certain things should land. It’s all music for me though.
Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself! I wanted to jump in to potentially clear up a difference of semantics, y’all are just using different interpretations of a phrase and I think it’s worth exploring.
If I take the person you originally replied to and continue the thought on my own, I think “it shouldn’t be called music” is trying to express that “this content should be fundamentally distinct from music because it displaces artists who, as a group, are finding it increasingly hard to sustain themselves on their art alone”.
If your relationship with music stops at something to tap your foot to, then you may or may not appreciate the value music has for society in the form of things like expression, protest, criticism, unity, and faith. Every time we listen to a bot-generated song, it takes a listen away from a human artist and pushes us toward a world eventually devoid of those artistic contributions.
Whether or not it fits into the same musical category as human-generated media isn’t really the point worth talking about (it’s trained on that after all, of course it’s similar!). What we need is a way to keep it from displacing human-generated art, and I don’t think calling it music or not is enough.
Sure thing DJGPT, whatever makes you happy
I don’t think it belongs on platforms like Deezer but it’s silly to not call it music.You can hate how it’s made but the bar for something to be music isn’t dependant on the fact. Downvote me I guess.
On the contrary that soulless shit belongs to garbage platforms that is killing the music industry.
I am not debating with you what music means to me, please understand that MR. DJGPT
If I steal someone else’s song and put my name on it nobody reasonable would say I made it.
This whole AI-art fucktrain is entirely propped up by people who never made art before suddenly thinking they know something.
People were saying the same thing about sampling in hip hop. Yeah if you do a 1 to 1 copy of a song then that’s not making art but if you take elements from a song and rearrange them then that is.
My issue is more about not calling it music. Imo, if it’s groovy and my brain enjoys it, it’s music.
There’s some music I seriously don’t enjoy as well but I still consider it music because someone does.
That being said, I don’t label AI stuff as “made”. I’m quick with making the distinction when sharing with friends and stuff. I agree with that part. Although it becomes blurry at times. Making something with samples is still making it, what about making it with AI generated samples? I don’t consider it stealing in any case, much too transformative imo.
I think we should separate the platforms but I’m not sure where certain things should land. It’s all music for me though.
Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself! I wanted to jump in to potentially clear up a difference of semantics, y’all are just using different interpretations of a phrase and I think it’s worth exploring.
If I take the person you originally replied to and continue the thought on my own, I think “it shouldn’t be called music” is trying to express that “this content should be fundamentally distinct from music because it displaces artists who, as a group, are finding it increasingly hard to sustain themselves on their art alone”.
If your relationship with music stops at something to tap your foot to, then you may or may not appreciate the value music has for society in the form of things like expression, protest, criticism, unity, and faith. Every time we listen to a bot-generated song, it takes a listen away from a human artist and pushes us toward a world eventually devoid of those artistic contributions.
Whether or not it fits into the same musical category as human-generated media isn’t really the point worth talking about (it’s trained on that after all, of course it’s similar!). What we need is a way to keep it from displacing human-generated art, and I don’t think calling it music or not is enough.