[huehehue]

There's a massive piece of the music scene that I can't imagine AI ever replacing. Some genres are formulaic by design, but the draw for so many others is the human experience and the inventiveness. Many people follow artists because they connect with material that could only have come from the artist.

One reasonable concern is that tech supplementation will lead to a deluge of derivative work, nullifying the efforts of the actual creators. That's always happened in some form or another, and does it really lead genuine fans away from artists they care about?

There's a comment in another thread about generating a song that includes Kurt Cobain, which is such a weird example because a computer could not have dreamed that up in a thousand years. A computer couldn't write a punk song, and mean it. It will never replace the open mic, the buskers, the songs passed across generations, the Zappas of the world, and millions of others.

[midoridensha]

>Some genres are formulaic by design, but the draw for so many others is the human experience and the inventiveness.

Those genres are safe (for a while), but they're also a puny portion of the market. American pop music is totally going to be replaced by AI. It's been nothing but awful, formulaic crap for the last 25 years, so there's no way that AI-generated music could possibly be worse.

[jdkee]

I believe it can and ultimately will, given enough training data.

[stemlord]

By the time it does, it's no longer a "computer" it's a form of life, and that's not "training data", that's "experience", thus by all intents and purposes it's a "person" and so it is still true that a "computer" cannot possess the free will required to express ones self creatively