Nobody Cares If Music Is Real Anymore | “​​Rubber burns, the map fades away / Chasing the ghosts of yesterday.” Sure, fine.

Comments

• Fiivemacs@lemmy.ca ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  That’s a load of crap, but ok

  AI created music will be the reason I cancel Spotify. I haven’t been plagued yet but it will happen. And I will cancel

  source

  • Sergio@slrpnk.net ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I’m pretty sure the article is at least mildly ironic. I don’t think he literally believes that “nobody cares if music is real any more.” Towards the end he talks about how AI music is not really art, and it lulls you into oblivion. The writer’s a legit scholar with an academic interest in video games, btw: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Bogost

    source
• Skullgrid@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  no one has cared since record executives have been generating AI generated tier music by hand.

  What’s the fucking difference between a rich asshole comissioning music based around market resarch, to be made by some trendy female popstar, written by five different men, the singing gets autotuned, punch clock studio musicians play generic chord progressions and melodies, and it’s all straight ahead 4/4

  At least with imaginative gen AI, you can get cool stuff like Pho-que

  If you dislike Pho-que, you’ll probably dislike the human counterparts like Shining (Nor) or Naked City

  source

  • Broadfern@lemmy.world ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    What’s the fucking difference between[…]

    Multiple people are getting paid so they can make a living, more money flows through the economy and even if you don’t personally find it to your taste, it’s still the result of cumulative human efforts.

    Gen AI has its uses in personal entertainment but I will spit on the corpo who tries to make me pay for art a person didn’t actually compose/play.

    Spotify is no paragon of morality but at least I can find real, human artists via the platform and see/support them in other ways.

    When it comes to human expression, I only want my money to go to human expression (even if it’s deemed “soulless”).

    source

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip ⁨18⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      You still pay people, not AI. It’s people who do it, people who maintain it. People who maintain the AI itself etc. It just shifted from one tech-field to another tech-field.

      But I get your point.

      source
  • UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Jørgen is my spirit animal and Arctopus fucking rules but this take is hot as fuck my dude. Real people making real music with real instruments is art. Generative AI takes our art and makes emotionless, sloppy approximations out of it. If you despise cookiecutter pop now you’re going to be blown away by the absolute drivel that is already being pumped out thanks to genAI. The only reason the song you linked is ‘imaginative’ is because a real human already imagined it only to have it tossed into the slop pile for a computer to root through. Wouldn’t you prefer the ‘actual’ musicians making ‘actual’ music be recognized instead of being buried even further under exponentially growing pools of emotionless notes arranged into emotionless music? The musicians you and I both appreciate for their creativity and skill are having that skill and creativity stolen from them and you’re cool with it because pop doesn’t innovate? Because musicians with decades of knowledge of their instruments and a variety of styles want a paycheck? Record execs have leeched off actual creativity for a solid century now and you want to end them with an even more soulless product that still doesn’t pay artists? It might start with pop but if you think avante-garde, cerebral music will be ignored you’re mistaken.

    source
  • rmic@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The main difference is that AI can’t be innovative at all

    source
• expatriado@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  i stopped listening to new music in 1995, still haven’t finish exploring past records

  source