I hope it's ok that I make this point

[PorterhouseMusic]

But we're at that place now where, when listening and possibly critiquing other's music, I have a natural curiosity to know how something was created. It's not about being critical of the source or the process. I just would like to know.

I've long been a believer of "the rules are: there ain't no rules" - relative to creativity. I just had no idea we'd be here. Where you can dump a few descriptors into a piece of advanced software and it spits something out.

I hope it's ok that I make this point. I listen to new music here, elsewhere, all over the place - and I'm increasingly curious - when I listen to certain material - about how it came to be.

Anyway - just wanted to say that. And if this should be in another sub-forum - feel free to move it, powers-that-be.

 

[Papanate]

I've long been a believer of "the rules are: there ain't no rules" - relative to the creativity. I just had no idea we'd be here. Where you can dump a few descriptors into a piece of advanced software and it spits something out.

There are rules or methods of doing things that are consistent - the people who think that you can do anything anyway you want are the reason there are so many bad recordings.

I hope it's ok that I make this point. I listen to new music here, elsewhere, all over the place - and I'm increasingly curious - when I listed to certain material - about how it came to be.

I tend to be that way too - I like to know how things were done.

 

[DM60]

I think it is a grand idea. I would hope, and we can defend, if someone gets butthurt we can pull them off the cliff. But I think this board is the perfect place for such curiosity and furthermore would be considered a compliment by many.

 

[shmaller]

Reading your post I first thought you were referring to AI-generated music, especially with this sentence:

I just had no idea we'd be here. Where you can dump a few descriptors into a piece of advanced software and it spits something out.

So I thought you kind of meant, "How much of this recording is 'organic', and how much is 'synthetic'?"

I think that's an important question to ask. AI tools are trained on hours of copyrighted music and often used to replace copyrighted music in order to pay artists less. A glaring example is Spotify training its AI model on hours of jazz tunes, and then making fake jazz artists to put on those playlists so they don't have to pay the human jazz artists royalties (they actually did this, you can look it up).

But with the development of any new technology there are artistic applications. Samples in hip-hop production are often copyrighted and not cleared with the original artist, and are used in an inventive way to create a new work of art. Through a certain lens, you could look at AI tools in the same way... Banning AI "unless it is used in a creative, artistic, and inventive way" is going to be a very subjective and fuzzy line.

But I dunno man, I'm gonna stick to sitting in my real studio with my real guitars and mics, like a caveman. I just have fun playing instruments and singing.

---

Now, if you didn't mean that at all, and are just talking about, "how'd you get that weird sound at 1:33?" - hell yeah, I spend so much time coming up with weird little sounds and licks that I'd be thrilled if someone asked me about them lol

s

 

[PorterhouseMusic]

Reading your post I first thought you were referring to AI-generated music, especially with this sentence:


So I thought you kind of meant, "How much of this recording is 'organic', and how much is 'synthetic'?"

I think that's an important question to ask. AI tools are trained on hours of copyrighted music and often used to replace copyrighted music in order to pay artists less. A glaring example is Spotify training its AI model on hours of jazz tunes, and then making fake jazz artists to put on those playlists so they don't have to pay the human jazz artists royalties (they actually did this, you can look it up).

But with the development of any new technology there are artistic applications. Samples in hip-hop production are often copyrighted and not cleared with the original artist, and are used in an inventive way to create a new work of art. Through a certain lens, you could look at AI tools in the same way... Banning AI "unless it is used in a creative, artistic, and inventive way" is going to be a very subjective and fuzzy line.

But I dunno man, I'm gonna stick to sitting in my real studio with my real guitars and mics, like a caveman. I just have fun playing instruments and singing.

---

Now, if you didn't mean that at all, and are just talking about, "how'd you get that weird sound at 1:33?" - hell yeah, I spend so much time coming up with weird little sounds and licks that I'd be thrilled if someone asked me about them lol

s

No you understood what I was getting at entirely.

 

[dobro]

No you understood what I was getting at entirely.

Ah - so that's what was behind your question to Manslick about his track in this forum?

So, what do you think of what Meter did on his track when he posted a list of what went into the arrangement?

 

[PorterhouseMusic]

Ah - so that's what was behind your question to Manslick about his track in this forum?

So, what do you think of what Meter did on his track when he posted a list of what went into the arrangement?

I'm good with it. I just want to understand how people are doing things.

 

[dobro]

In that case, why don't you ask an open question like: 'How did you put these tracks together?' instead of the kind of questions you've been asking:

"Is the music here "canned"?" [Which suggests that you think it sounds canned.]

"Please forgive me for asking - we live in at a time when it's a little uncertain.

Is this a multitrack recording that you created?"

[Which suggests you think maybe he didn't create his own tracks.]

In both cases, it sounds like you suspect they didn't record their own tracks (with the implication that that's second-best.) I think it's a bit insulting.

 

[shmaller]

I wonder if some kind of AI-use disclosure would be appropriate?

 

[dobro]

I guess it's a conversation to have. I'm wondering if it's a pattern for all sorts of production now.

"Completely original. No AI."

But if we go that route, maybe full disclosure for every production is the way to go, the way you have credits in a movie. For instance, I'd be really interested to know which mics people used, and whether their guitars went through a miked amp or Samplitube. But how deep do you want to go? Which plugins you used? Which DAW? How deep?

 

[PorterhouseMusic]

And I was thinking last night - a sort of obvious consideration under the umbrella of "the rules are: there ain't no rules".... at what point does the use of technology "require" (for lack of a better term) some sort of disclosure? What made me think this is that I have this kinda crappy old recording that I'm working on. And it's requiring a considerable amount of digital editing to clean up the bass performance. And this caused me to consider that to a degree - the final product will have a certain amount of "artificial-ness" to it. Does that make sense? That's just an example.

Anyway - I don't want to over think it. And I know this subject is not new. It's just interesting to consider all this as we further advance into the abyss with technology.

 

[Meter]

I think its a fair question to make. Both of interest and also if you suspect/whant to know if that specific track was created with AI. I got that remark regarding my latest song I posted here. Its no secret how I record my music so I just posted a screen shot of my working area. Case closed.

 

[RFR]

Anyway - I don't want to over think it. And I know this subject is not new. It's just interesting to consider all this as we further advance into the abyss with technology.

As we go further into the technology “abyss” the more skills we ourselves lose.

If every meal in your life is cooked or prepared for you by someone else…..well, sooner or later you can’t cook anymore.

 

[dobro]

Packaged food items are required to list their ingredients/contents so that the consumer can make an informed choice.

Should we do the same in this forum?

 

[shmaller]

Packaged food items are required to list their ingredients/contents so that the consumer can make an informed choice.

Should we do the same in this forum?

I would be in favor of that, just as I would be in favor of any member of this forum crediting the work of others when posting it here. For example, I would expect that someone recording their band in their garage would not take sole performance credit but rather say "performed by The Dusty Mustard" or whatever.

When it comes to AI-generated music which is replacing performances which could otherwise be done by capable human beings, I'd liken it more to a surgeon general's warning on a pack of cigarettes, given that, from the perspective of recording artists, the effect of these tools on the industry is likely to be akin to cancer.

We just saw a writers' and actors' strike in Hollywood against industry efforts to replace their work with AI. It's unfortunate how disparate and atomized musicians in the US seem to be in comparison.

 

[RFR]

We just saw a writers' and actors' strike in Hollywood against industry efforts to replace their work with AI. It's unfortunate how disparate and atomized musicians in the US seem to be in comparison.

A big part of that is the fact that there’s a whole industry of paid workers in TV and movies. And they’ve taken a lot of hits over the last decade or so.

Not so many paying gigs in the music business unless you’re in the big leagues.
AI isn’t really hitting the wallets of musicians…….Yet.

Reminds me of the old joke. How do you make a million dollars owning a recording studio? Spend 2 million

Most of us have probably spent more money on gear than we have earned.

 

[rob aylestone]

When i was the Principal Examiner for A Level Music Technology, a long time ago now, one of my roles was preparing examiner training material and my colleagues were pretty annoyed with me when I prepared a ‘cheat’ piece. The test was to record some live music, direct to stereo, no multitracking allowed. Lots of these sounded really awful when students did them. Trying to record a rock band, playing in a rotten room, to stereo. I often thought some better submissions were actually multitracks, so i created one to see if anyone could recognise them. A room full of examiners all gave my piece good marks, and when i revealed it was not a direct to stereo, they had to go back and readjust the bad and just OK ones as the ‘best’ was no longer in the running. It did not go down well, but made them all think about what they’d heard.

 

[DM60]

This is a tricky topic. I for one look at the old studio musicians back in the day. We will use Steely Dan (or my favorite group to dislike, the Beech Boys). They had hired guns. Yes they were "real", but they weren't "the band".

For me, I play most of my own stuff I record, but, drums for example. I use the grooves from SD. They aren't special, but they are solid. If I could afford or knew a drummer, I would much rather use a drummer. I have started using Scaler to help me augment some of my pieces, give a bit more depth. Once again, I didn't play it, "someone" else did. I see it as a session musician (in my head), and a tool to help me better structure my songs. It has more than just basic theory and really helps me go a bit more deeper. I may have a three chord progression, As I work through it, it gives me some suggestions, I try, I like and off we go.

In my head at least, I don't see most of this being any different than when people like the Beetles were in the studio and they George Martin, trained conductors, skilled technicians, helping them in the studio. We in the home recording just get to have a few more tools at our finger tips. We pay money (just like the studios) and we get some canned help, we tweak, and create.

It is a tricky topic, but presets give us a hint of where to start. I think some disclosure is good, but I am not sure how much.

 

[Steenamaroo]

It's an interesting discussion to have, for sure, and, of course, it's OK to make the point or ask the question.

I think, like so many things, it probably comes down to honesty and open communication.
Every tool or service or technique will have its haters and its supporters but, ultimately, as long as people are honest about what they're doing that's probably what's important.

In some ways its no different to plagiarism, or multi-take comping, using sampled instruments or autotune or, dare I say it, passing off someone else's vocal or musical performance as your own.
There's countless things a person could do in production to make themselves seem much better than they are,
but we trust, or hope, that the person will disclose.

I don't think there's much point talking about rules (site wise) or requirements for disclosure simply because it's damn near impossible to prove what someone did or didn't do,
but I can understand how vague responses and lack of detail can lead to suspicion, more and more.

I'm involved with a site that accepts software submissions either for free distribution or for sale.
The number of daily submissions we get which are entirely AI generated is shocking but the number of people who lie about it is probably more shocking.
It's easy to spot, for now, but that will probably change soon.

 

[PorterhouseMusic]

Yeah - I agree Steen. I certainly didn't bring this up with the intent of there being a consideration of some sort of rule or even expectation of creative disclosure. I just wanted to make that point that, now, when I listen to folk's music here (and elsewhere) - particularly with the intent of critiquing or offering advice if asked - I tend to want to know how it came about. And I admit.... I'm a little more interested in offering critique of music that is created through a more conventional multitrack process. That is absolutely NOT a knock or criticism of anyone's creative process or preferences or ability. It's just my preference.

Like I said and you mentioned above - where would you draw the line? And how would you police that? That doesn't seem useful or practical. I use EZDrummer 3. I've heard EZD and other midi drums where it's impossible to know whether that's a real drummer or not.

And what of the use of plugins and digital editing?? The whole subject gets pretty convoluted when including those considerations. So yeah... I'm not an advocate for forcing or even putting any heavy handed expectation that folks disclose their creative process. But it's a near certainty that I will ask from time to time.