[uncircle]

> Consumers are by and large not listening to AI generated music

Consumers are sadly too ignorant to tell. YouTube is brimming with AI music slop and people praising it in the comments because they are unable to tell the difference (and it is actually pretty easy once you know what to look out for)

[neonstatic]

Realistically speaking, why is that a problem? What is the point of music if not enjoyment? If these people enjoy it, what's wrong with it?

[lifeformed]

It takes away from real human artists who do their part to slowly advance human culture. Music will not develop without human artists. Maybe for this moment in time AI can fulfill some people's musical desires, but it's not going to keep up with the times. The point of art, in a general sense, is humanity. Automating away your artistic needs is like automating away your social needs. It's a one way "relationship" that is superficial and self-indulgent. It's a step towards an empty world.

[pixel_popping]

Why would music not develop without human artists? This isn't true at all, "AI" isn't necessary LLM as well, there is plenty of ways for AI to innovate, and let's be real, most musics from humans are a bit of copy-cat nowadays, ton of AI music actually made me vibe personally and stuff I haven't heard before.

Have you tried a day of listening solely to AI music? I feel you might change your mind, sure sometimes there is some serious off-tune (feels like an hallucination from the model) but we know this is temporary.

PS: I'm conscious of what it does to humanity, but there is also facts that AI does produce great songs, that's 2 different discussions.

[neonstatic]

That's the creator's perspective. From a listener's perspective, it's "do I enjoy it" or "do I not enjoy it". Everything else is intellectualization.

[card_zero]

But that means nothing. There's no raw "enjoy", except maybe drugs, and I have my doubts about that.

[neonstatic]

> There's no raw "enjoy"

What do you mean?

[Ferret7446]

Painters said the same thing about cameras

[Zopieux]

And turns out there is still room to enjoy both photography and paintings as their own art forms.

[RiverCrochet]

You hear a song with vocals that strongly emotionally resonate with you, reminding you of your mother who passed away recently after a long terrible illness. You want to know more about the singer that almost brought you to tears, only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated.

[slyall]

But if you did the exercise 10 years ago you'd find the lyrics were originally about the songwriter's daughter and the band tweaked it to be able the the band manager's hypochondriac ex boyfriend.

Then they hired a session singer to sing it and mixed in several takes and then adjusted the sound with various tools to produce just the right sound. Plus the Chorus was actually from some country song from 1972 that had been completely changed

and the actual "band" is actually just two guys who hire session players to do most of the music while they handle the keyboard and mixing

[userbinator]

Behind every AI-generated song is a human who wanted you to listen to its message.

[neonstatic]

So it does something good for you, then you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made. You are letting your mind overwrite a genuine response you had based on an opinion that "it should not feel good because it's AI made". As I said in another comment - intelectualization.

[Dylan16807]

> you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made

That is not what they said. This reads like you're replying to a previous post and ignoring the actual explanation they gave.

[neonstatic]

It's my interpretation of "only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated" in this context

[Dylan16807]

The key words are "there is none". It's not the label, it's the lack of the person writing those lyrics.

[card_zero]

It does something good for you emotionally, via cognition. Further cognition ruins this. Never meet your heroes, sort of thing.

[RiverCrochet]

Realistically speaking, why is that a problem? What is the point of money if not enjoyment? If these people enjoy it, what's wrong with it?

Mark finds $100,000 (something good for Mark), then finds out it's the inheritance of a family who's about to get kicked out of their house (label due to how it was made). Mark decides he should not keep the money because it belongs to the family (intellectualizing).

You're saying Mark should have kept the money because doing otherwise is intellectualizing.

[Lammy]

How can you trust that the commenters aren't AI too?

[agmater]

Could you elaborate? I can't tell with music and voice

[uncircle]

You won't tell from the music. It's obviously an AI generated mix when:

- the channel posts multiple mixes per week

- the thumbnail is clearly AI generated

- most importantly, the tracklist never includes any author, because there are none

If you search for "<genre> mix" on YouTube right now, 9/10 results fail these criteria.

[julianlam]

Lo-fi channels used to show the artist and song names. These newer ones don't bother with credits, or have made up song titles.

E.g. "funky chicken jam"

[threepts]

If AI music sells like you proclaim, it would be bad for spotify to NOT ban it, since it is printing money.

[petre]

It's like the MBS during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. Today it prints money, tomorrow it blows up in your face.

Yeah they put a blue check on it like Elon did. Until they get paid to put the check on slop. Rotten fish is still rotten even if you mix it with fresh fish and label it accordingly.