There are already royalty free drum samples for days, and infinite possibilities of drum synthesis. No producer is hurting for snare samples. Why would I pay money for something I already have.
Tweaking drum sounds until they sound good is one of the more satisfying activities for a beat producer, and one of the primary ways I demonstrate my value. I’m not paying to turn that over to someone else.
I don't oppose synthesis or samples. But arguably Suno songs typically goes way little beyond that. If you didn't chose the samples, didn't chose the words, didn't chose the voice, but vibed for a few mins what you did is not made a song, you heard a song. And the songs suck.
Don't bother, the slop line has been drawn in the sand and people will stay on their side. I also think that slop is low effort and/or low/zero iteration output, but beyond that the sloppiness fades away, but good luck convincing the hardcore slop hunters to see things in a nuanced way (in before ocean boiling, that's usually where that argument goes next).
So you're saying your perception of what is or isn't art is ideologically motivated? That seems like the worse "tactical" argument.
Why don't we scrap anything that uses ableton because it makes art sterile [1][2]. Or maybe anything that uses autotune [3]. Maybe we can have stickers that say "AI free". Or maybe the fact that suno is a distribution platform that doesn't encourage creation of the _form_ of art that that I like is the problem [4].
It's a tool. Your view that art exists in some purist state and isn't for people to enjoy is extremist. This war has been fought and lost, continuously, about every innovation in music. People want to enjoy things. You can tell by their pattern of consumption.
If you are against most uses but want to introduce nuance, my argument is that doing so normalizes the use for the majority of cases you do oppose and makes it harder to organize opposition.
If you’re cool with AI in all cases we don’t have much to talk about.
I have thoughts on when AI is appropriate, but the conversations I want to be having is ‘how do we oppose AI’ and not ‘why is my specific definition of what is Ok better than your very similar one’.
Also, once Any AI is allowed, each step beyond that will be barely worth fighting for because it’s only just beyond acceptability.
I don't think I'm a hardcore slop hunter really. Suno was fun to play with, what comes out feels icky though. Perhaps that is because it is low effort though, my attempts certainly were.
I'm very bullish on AI, but low effort outputs just lobbed over the fence in my direction (be that code, music, text) irk me to no end. And that's not even considering if something is tasteful or kitsch. So yeah, for me it's definitely that. Someone who puts in real work, and produces output with intent, I might still not like because it's not my taste, but at least I don't consider it slop.
Funnily enough, slop AI video I still get entertainment value out of, just because it's often so bizarre and absurd.
That is an interesting point. I am not sure how to define Slop. I am 100% sure you could use Suno for something that doesn't feel horrible. I tried and failed bad. But maybe it is possible. Typically I just hear on the surface song like audio but without anything to make me care about the song at all.
I won't disagree that most use of AI is slop - Just like most people in a 'sips and strokes' class make slop.
The issue I raise is that we can critique the users of it without discarding the tool as used by an artist who produces something that is not slop with it.
Because if you can’t do that, and effectively articulate why AI media can’t be art when used as a tool by an artist to achieve their creative intent, I would claim the win on this. one.
You were going to claim the “win” on this one no matter what anyone says. That’s one of the features of being arrogant.
I have zero desire to get into a semantic argument over this. That would be very boring and is a poor refuge for anyone trying to have an honest discussion.
It’s not a coincidence that nearly all the people today with actual artistic talent universally despise AI. Meanwhile it’s all the talentless tech bros who won’t shut up about how they’re now incredible “artists” that love AI.
I don’t see prompting an AI as creating art in the same way that commissioning a painting doesn’t make you an artist. In this example, it’s the AI model that is the artist creating the “art”, but since AI models aren’t sentient (yet) then what they create isn’t art anymore than a sunset is despite being aesthetically beautiful.
Your “it’s just a tool” argument is especially ridiculous when you consider that the “tool” can create the same “art” in its entirety without you. It would be like if I googled the Mona Lisa and copy pasted it into Paint and then called myself an artist because I used Google and Paint as my tools.
In the case of AI models anything you can think to prompt is already embedded in the model so it’s not like you’re even creating anything. It’s already there. If you have infinite monkeys on a keyboard prompting AI they can generate every single possible image an AI is able to generate. Where is the artistry again?
I'll note I used no pejorative terms to describe you in order to make my points. I don't need to cast you as a villain or "unwise" individual to argue against the statements themselves.
--
Your framing of AI presumes that my proposal is prompt in >> art out. False frame.
You also state "near universal" disdain of AI from people with "actual" talent. A bold claim to make with little data, and at least for me, clear examples of being false.
I know award-winning directors, iconic creatives, and career/professional artists who are all excited by the technology, exploring ways to use it, and learning how to composite it into their work.
Perhaps you would propose that they have no talent and are not "true" artists! This is why I ask for the definition of art. It's not a "poor refuge" for an honest discussion, it's something that is the fundamental term upon which your argument is hinged. You can't gatekeep "art" without defining what the gate is.
The OP talks about Suno Studio - A DAW experience with recording, editing, generative tools, and generative restyling. This is, objectively, a different level of tool than a "prompt to music" generation experience.
Something that is composited through multiple decisions made by a human, toward some end that only they see, through an iterative process...
So you must really hate collage artists. All they are doing is cutting out images and pasting them into new images. Picasso really produced some slot I guess. You seem to have a very rigid definition of "art".