[vlunkr]

There are millions of people making music in an ever-expanding set of genres. The idea that no one is making 80s or 90s style music is absurd. I guess she can listen to slop but maybe just look around a little instead?

Edit: slop not slob

[hombre_fatal]

It's not just look around a little. It's look around a lot. It's spend all your music-listening time looking around.

Have the ick for AI-gen, fine. But dismissing the things it solves puts you in a position where you'll never understand other people.

[vlunkr]

You can spend your time looking for music or you can spend it prompting Suno. Personally I'll always take the former, I enjoy it, but to each their own.

[vintermann]

That's a really ironic comment. I think accepting AI music as a substitute for all but the most unimportant background noise, is a sign that one doesn't really care about understanding other people.

[Barbing]

> It's spend all your music-listening time looking around.

Spotify algorithm not kind to everyone I suppose… I’m enough of a normie with music it works for me. Crate digging doesn’t feel too time consuming at all (as easy as throwing on quirky California college radio stations).

[a57721]

> quirky California college radio stations

I listen to SomaFM (https://somafm.com/) and FIP (https://www.radiofrance.fr/fip), they have online streams by genre. When something gets me interested, I look up the artist, and I keep discovering lots of new names, independent labels, etc.

[dahrkael]

Spotify is full of AI songs so not a good alternative in this case

[Cthulhu_]

It can be, but you'll need to look up the human made / curated playlists; definitely avoid Spotify's own (as they've been seeding them with their own songs for a while now, even before AI), and don't enable the auto mixing / radio feature.

[glitcher]

I agree with you when it comes to my own process of finding new music, but the example given was a lot more specific than just 80s/90s music. Who’s to say that person didn’t do extensive searches before using Suno? Sounds more like the classic discoverabity problem big platforms continue to do poorly with to me. But I agree with the sentiment, great stuff by real artists is out there if you’re able to find it.

[NexRebular]

> The idea that no one is making 80s or 90s style music is absurd

You can see new releases almost daily on e.g. NewRetroWave[0].

[0] https://www.youtube.com/newretrowave

[_carbyau_]

> just look around a little instead?

This seems harder than you suggest. I suggest things to my streaming platform and it reverts to what I call "cruisy shit" within 5-10 songs as though it's playing a game of "6 degrees" between my chosen starting point and what it wants to play.

For me, "The Algorithm To Engage" is more of a "the beatings will continue until morale improves Algorithm".

[giancarlostoro]

"Slob" / "slop" is thrown around so much I don't take anyone seriously who drops that word unless the output matches the commentary. There's definitely a lot of trash AI stuff out there don't get me wrong, but there's also insanely high quality AI generated things out there. Hell, I've sent people songs made in Suno, and they were surprised to learn that those were AI generated. If you open suno and type in "90s jazz song" then yeah, you're likely going to get a bit of generic AI slop. If you get into specifics, voice style, instrument types, how they're played, which chords, etc. You can get some insanely high quality music. Not only that but Suno has a whole DAW style extension to it they call Suno Studio which is very powerful, you can get AI stems, you can add your own voice.

Someone could get studio quality tracks for $10 a month, and add their own vocals and have a high quality sounding song. Is it slop if you pour hours of work into it tweaking every detail? At that point using a DAW is slop then (which I'm sure some people hate music made that way, but a lot of music is made this way).

[taneq]

I’ve been thinking the same thing about AI artwork (as opposed to “chat pls make me a funny picture” and seeing what comes out, although there’s some increasingly interesting things coming out of that approach). There’s often an insane amount of work going into the guts of the image generation pipeline. Sure, it’s not pencil-on-paper drawing things but to me, art is about creating and exploring. All the same vitriol was directed toward cameras, audio synthesisers, 3D rendering, Photoshop, digital cameras, etc. The hate is not about the technique, it’s about someone else getting the same results “easier” with a different workflow.

[habinero]

What? Those things were absolutely not criticized in the same way. Most of the time they weren't criticized at all lol.

The problem isn't about it being "easier", it's about people who want the praise and attention of being a maker but don't want to put any thought or effort into it. They have no thoughts and nothing to say and what they generate reflects that.

[slyall]

I've also seen people using the term "slop" for low quality human-generated content (lowbrow movies etc)

[sph]

It's a cultural affectation like attaching -maxxing to any adjective.

I smile when I come across the term 'qualityslop', which is an oxymoronic term to indicate very good human content.

https://i.redd.it/uvgtw725asfg1.jpeg

[Cthulhu_]

I don't mind it, because there already was a lot of slop before AI, which a lot of people seem to forget. But that's also because they weren't the consumers / target audience so it's off their radar.

[giancarlostoro]

This is my other problem, people calling things that aren't even AI as "AI slop" which cracks me up but is also concerning.

[Thanemate]

Now that AI is here, why read Hacker News comments? I bet you can generate quality content with AI! Do we even need to write anymore?

[platevoltage]

I just don't get it. Music isn't just what comes out of the speaker. There are artists, with lives and influences behind the music. There is personal expression in the lyrics. Even when the artist chooses to remain anonymous, or they choose to not have lyrics at all, there is still something personal behind it. A DAW is just a tool, and it's a tool that can be used badly, for example, over produced metal with quantized and sample replaced drums. Sure, AI can be a tool for music production just like a DAW can, but when it crosses the line into, lets call it "vibe-produced" music, it is indeed slop, and deserves to be referred to as such.

[vlunkr]

Yeah this is how I feel. People who like AI music seem to be a same people who would just throw on random "deep work" or "lofi" youtube playlists and let them run all day. That has never appealed to me. I like to learn about the artists and history.

[latentsea]

> There is personal expression in the lyrics.

Sometimes there is. Sometimes it's just made up shit with no real backing in the same way a lot of stories told in comedy routines are. Not all of it is genuine expression.

I love music and I frequently go to live shows, so the bar for me has kind of become "Can I go see this artist live, OR is it so good that I don't care that I can't?" If it passes that, I'll listen. I've found one AI generated song that has made it onto my top 100 favorite songs I've ever heard.

The thing that really shits me with AI music is when it outputs default ChatGPT sounding lyrics. There's certain tells and boy do they give me the ick.

[cameronh90]

> outputs default ChatGPT sounding lyrics

Aren’t you curious how a modern solar panel works so well with no moving parts?

[latentsea]

I'll bet you "neon" is somewhere in those lyrics.

[platevoltage]

> Sometimes there is. Sometimes it's just made up shit with no real backing in the same way a lot of stories told in comedy routines are. Not all of it is genuine expression.

I don't necessarily agree. Read the lyrics to the "irony is a dead scene" EP by the Dillinger Escape Plan and Mike Patton. It's nonsense. Still genuine expression.

Most Carpenter Brut songs don't even have lyrics and there is endless expression there. I know that I consume music in a very different way than most people, and that's probably why I have such a strong opinion here.

[Cthulhu_]

Thing is, did it take effort and creativity to make it? I suppose you could argue that fine-tuning a prompt takes effort, creativity and knowledge, but I argue against that that it's only a fraction of what it takes to make real music.

If it didn't take effort to make it, if you can repeat it a hundred times in a week, it's slop. It's a good descriptor, even if to an untrained ear it's convincing.

[harimau777]

Where would you look around?

Previously web search, YouTube, and Reddit would have been my go to but they have all been enshittified.

[latentsea]

YouTube is excellent. Aside from my main account I have one that I mainly just use to listen to music, and I just surf the algorithm listening to whatever is in the recommend list, which is usually a handful of songs I've got on heavy rotation, but YouTube also tends to cycle back some old favorites, and some new gems. I just keep surfing it day in day out letting it take me where it will as one of two main ways I listen to music. I regularly find new gems pretty reliably. All the gems then go to my playlist in Spotify, which I listen to during my commute.

[vlunkr]

I’ve had good luck with gnoosic. Or taking artists I like as a starting point and finding out who influenced them, and who they influenced.

[platevoltage]

I always found Last.fm great for this. I have no idea what it's like now.

[echelon]

> The idea that no one is making 80s or 90s style music is absurd.

The idea that only humans can make music is absurd.

> I guess she can listen to slob but maybe just look around a little instead?

The idea that AI generated = slop is absurd.

Humans create just as much, if not more slop. Look at 99% of "professional" output in creative fields. It's awful.

A human with taste steering AI tools can be better than a "classical" human with hard skills but no taste.

The old world is going to be run over:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWZYP5jn5w4

Completely. Run. Over.

[zfoong]

Rather than genuinely enjoying a well-made/actually entertaining AI content, people are just gonna blindly hate on anything AI-generated.

[harimau777]

Until AI companies pay for all the content that they stole, I think that is a reasonable response.

[userbinator]

Until humans pay for all the "content that they stole" and learned from, I think that is reasonable response.

[dahrkael]

AceStep XL is a music generation model trained on an open dataset. is the content generated with that one okay with you then?

[Balinares]

What dataset? (Honest question! What's in it?)

[echelon]

I don't mind that ChatGPT and Claude were trained on my HN and Reddit comments.

I don't mind that Opus and Codex were trained on my code.

I don't mind that Seedance and Veo were trained on my YouTube videos.

I benefit from the models.

[platevoltage]

As they should. AI can't create art, because AI doesn't have a sense of expression.

[userbinator]

You're right, there's always a human driving the AI to create art.

[echelon]

Good thing humans know how to use AI and make kick ass content with it.

AI is a tool.

Artists and engineers using AI as a tool can get further than people not using it at all.

[platevoltage]

Are you an artist by chance?

[xphos]

I think the cost pressures just make most AI generated stuff slop. Its not that AI can't make good stuff its that the slop to good ratio is 100s of times worse with AI published music than with human stuff. Simply because AI generation cost is essentially zero.

Purely a economic argument but also the rare good music from AI I am still looking its generally speaking not that cohesive and for unremarkable. A lot of human work is that to but the discovery of good music from people feels much less daunting

[vlunkr]

Was that video supposed to convince us that AI music is good?

[f4]

That video isn't helping your case.

That's not to say you can't make effortful novel content using AI, but this is just lazy hollow stimulation. Like all the laziest of AMVs, nothing to say outside of "isn't this cool?".

We want to see the person underneath and what ideas they explore through the medium - AI is just a fancy new tool of the times.

Who cares what brush or canvas Vincent used to make Starry Night? Without his name on it, it's just another oil painting.

[echelon]

I don't have to convince the lot of you anti-tech "yelling at cloud" engineers.

Social media already shows people love this stuff. It's only the 1% of terminally online whiners that have to project their take on it.

And I've worked with enough artists that kick ass with these tools to know this is the new normal.

[f4]

Hype for the tool is, and forever will be, cringy. People are too busy praising the fact that it exists that they miss what artists are doing with it. I like the fun skits https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AI9Rx5DqTvA and interesting projects https://old.reddit.com/r/StableDiffusion/comments/1pt19u6/ti...

People on social media follow creators who make novel content irrespective of how they made it.

AI generated content will always be lower quality because the entry level is literacy, hence YouTube intervention with their "it's probably not worth your time" label.

[halestock]

Huh, I wonder what happens when people stop making real music for AIs to train on, then.

[userbinator]

I did not expect that one to show up here on HN, but it's definitely a human artist using AI. He has a few others which are just as entertaining.

[Griffinsauce]

Run over in what way?

[hooverd]

Like the levees surrounding a lagoon of pig shit in the South breaking and flooding the nearby community.

[jeltz]

In that the avalance of slop will make it impossible to find quality stuff, human or AI.