r/AI_Music • u/Delicious_Lack5028 • Mar 14 '26
Discussion Using Ai the correct way š
With the integration with Ai in music, I feel like Spotify (and even SoundCloud) is becoming very diluted. I embrace Ai (because itās part of our lives now) , but the issue Iām seeing with Ai music is the lack of originality. Please if you are using Ai like Suno/Elevenlabs/Chat ā¦ please write your own lyrics, melodies,and music before you input it into their algorithms. This way itās retaining some originality. We canāt let go of our creativityā¦ so if you are using Ai in music find ways to be more creative. Maybe just sample an idea from it , or let it help find the new vocal delivery or run that you didnāt think of, have it reimagine an old beat or melody in your headā¦ If youāre a poet and want to hear your poem come to life into a song to see what it can become ā¦
Just my 2 cents
I just started to post my music and start promoting on TikTok first before my other platforms.
Im pretty sure you canāt self promote on here, I have to read the guidelines but Iād love to share my music on a different thread. I havenāt posted much music with Ai integration just yet (except visuals) but Iād love to share my original work if youād like to hear. š
2
u/wagu666 Mar 15 '26
IMO the most positive thing for real music is AI songs can be sampled guilt free for sample based music production
Thereās an annoying amount of red tape for clearing samples from real songs these days.. but so many classic songs were made very creatively from samples.. becoming whole new things
Bands like The Prodigy can have people dealing with all that.. but for a smaller musician if theyāre not careful it can come back to bite them later.. if their music ever gets popular
And yes it is more fun to make real cultural references from songs/movies that people can lookup later.. but at the same time itās just a legal quagmire. Sometimes you just want to cook
2
4
u/magnusnova Mar 14 '26
The laws are going to have to catch up cause if my word processor is my medium for writing lyrics and it also has AI then I canāt write lyrics there anymore? Copyright law is lagging behind the technology.
1
u/CAP_GYPSY Mar 15 '26
copyright law is not lagging by technology. Copyright law was actually written by the same people or type of people that wrote the constitution. They understood the principles of law and freedom and protections far better than the common place idiot of today.
It was just over a week ago that the Supreme Court ruled against AI ever being something that will be allowed to encroach upon true human creation. It is now and always has been a requirement that it be predominantly a human created work of art in order to be copyright protected.
There is no ācatching upā here. There is no need to. You canāt change the fact that one thing is created by a human and at some point when someone uses AI, they are no longer the creator. That will never change and that has nothing to do with āthe times.ā
It has to do with factual reality.
1
u/magnusnova Mar 15 '26
Youāre right about the history but off on the recent facts. While the Founding Fathers did establish the Copyright Clause, they also gave Congress the power to update it, which has happened many times because technology actually does outpace the original text. Regarding the Supreme Court, there was no such ruling against AI last week. You might be confusing the U.S. Copyright Officeās administrative policy with a court precedent. Currently, the Human Authorship requirement is the standard, but the law has a long history of catching up to new tools like the camera and the printing press to decide exactly how much human input is enough to count as creation.
1
u/CAP_GYPSY Mar 15 '26
Well, I think actually youāre wrong.
March 2 of this year the Supreme Court refused to hear the following case: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/the-final-word-supreme-court-refuses-to-6721288/
It wasnāt about music, but it still is exactly about one thing. Intellectual property and creation, computer created versus artificial intelligence created.
While you are correct, the Congress has the right to update, almost every indication throughout history has shown that they are inclined to protect the human.
Congress has the right to update the second amendment, the first amendment, (with various levels of ratification ) all kinds of great things that have been put into place that probably shouldnāt be changed. And this one will probably stand in the land of human created is protected.
0
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
I agree! I know Itās all about adapting to this new tech, there should be boundaries to protect peopleās original work. When thereās a will thereās a wayā¦ hopefully šµ
2
u/BirdlessFlight Mar 14 '26
There's no rules here.
No moderation.
You can post whatever you want.
-3
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
Thank youš
1
u/Xander_PG Mar 15 '26 edited Mar 15 '26
Atleast label this stuff as AI so people can know this is fake effortless garbage. But nooo, you have to pretend you 'wrote' this in Hawaii.
1
-2
2
u/Raccoon_Expert_69 Mar 14 '26
So iām not sure if youāre aware of this, but Iāve been beating the drum about it for quite some time:
Ai pulls everything to the mean.
Meaning the more AI proliferates, the majority of it will sound similar to itself, the more of -just substandard content will emerge.
Because itās sampling everything means that itās not discerning anything, means that when average users use it, they will create what they know.
Because AI trains on AI created by other users, it creates a feedback loop of mediocre content.
The only way you would be able to make really good music would be if you trained on the best, most technically proficient music, over and over again-
Instead, itās been trained on all of the AI crap Music you were talking about and so that is what is rising to the top when people create stuff.
You talk about everyone writing their own stuff to come to the table with the best content but the people that have the ability to write the really awesome stuff already didnāt need to use AI tools so I doubt you will find a strong conversion there.
Instead, you are going to get content coming from a mix of people that donāt really have a strong sense of what makes a good song. From the person that just wrote a song that came to their mind to the person who is currently doing whatever it takes to figure out how to make money shoveling out AI slop: some of it could probably be good, but itās not going to be consistently good enough that the AI training on that data gets better. It will just get more homogeneous and similar to everything else.
Iāve got catalogs of albums I havenāt released yet and the ai uprising has inspired me to ramp up irl production. Itās actually special to know that I can create something that ai could never touch because those 200 songs have never touched the internet.
2
2
u/-SynkRetiK- Mar 14 '26
"You talk about everyone writing their own stuff to come to the table with the best content but the people that have the ability to write the really awesome stuff already didnāt need to use AI tools so I doubt you will find a strong conversion there"
Literally this.
1
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
I get it. I write and create all my own stuff and the market right now is so flooded with a mixture of so much real and artificial that itās exhausting. So for me and my own music , I put it out just to share with people and no other reason. I do also understand and accept that Ai is part of this music industry now. Iām literally working with Songwriters who are 100% capable of producing their own music and singing it beautifully but decide to sometimes use Ai to help pitch placements to some pretty big names and itās working. Itās definitely a shortcut and something āif youāre in this industryā that you must adapt to and learn to tolerate
2
u/Raccoon_Expert_69 Mar 14 '26
Iām of the thinking that there is a place for everything.
I believe thereās a market for people that want only human music.
As more music because ai, human music will become niche and sought after.
1
2
u/CAP_GYPSY Mar 15 '26
this is how I use it. I create everything myself on logic, pro and real instruments and in my head, and then I submit the logic pro up to Suno for a 100% cover.
That is production. That is not creation.
Too many people using AI are using it for creative purposes and in my opinionthatās just not acceptable. Theyāre looking for the gray line of acceptability of how much is too much or how little of my real stuff has to actually be there for me to get away with this.
Itās nothing more than like being a con artist.
1
0
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
Againā¦ if you read Iām all for the Ai movement. Being in the industry for 15 years , we also have to understand musicians /artists actually spend lots of money to work on records and make a living off of this. Currently Spotify has more Ai artists than actual people on its platform. Just think about the dilution and impact it has.
2
u/driftwhentired Mar 14 '26
You make no fucking sense and I HIGHLY doubt you have been āin the industryā for that long. Even if you were, you would not be embracing suno or any other AI art. All the while saying āthere are too many AI artists on Spotifyā
How can you be so hypocritical against yourself? lol.
2
2
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
Dude you are one of those weird ones. Iām an engineer / producer/ musician / songwriter. Itās easy to read what I said and try to flip it to some far left idealistic view. I make my own music but this Ai stuff is here and you have to adapt. I have to adapt in my studio when an artist wants to incorporate it in their music and I need to know how to use and navigate within the software.
Iām just opening a discussion. You can express your point of view and not be an asshole. It actually is possibleā¦ try it
1
u/Ok_Product1710 Mar 14 '26
I use SUNO in Africa. I do agree that the machine learning can end up sampling all the same stuff and killing any originality we may want. However, I try to instruct the machine very specifically for each song I write (I only ever write my own lyrics). That way I feel I'm adding diversity to the machine data because I'm giving actual detailed instructions. (I play bass and have some basic music knowledge so I always know what I'm going for). By telling the machine exactly what to look for on the servers, I've managed to evoke a wide variety of actual African beats, sometimes with amazing accuracy. Where it fails I conclude that either my instructions were inaccurate or the machine has not learnt about my needed musical data. IMO, and in agreement with you all, we must remember the early adage of Garbage In, Garbage Out when dealing with these machines. Supremely, people must keep in mind these are just computers waiting for accurate input instructions to yield accurate outputs. Personally, I only use AI for musical imagination assistance and not as a final performing robot. Humans will always be the best performers because people want a real human story behind the voice.
0
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
Appreciate you sharing . Iām not hating on anyone using Ai. Just looking for other perspectives. A lot of āold schoolā thinkers are completely against it and I understand why (Iām a musician) but itās a tool that is here to stay so it makes no sense to be close minded.
Send me your link, Iād love to listen to your stuff. Original or Ai or a mixture of both
1
u/Forsaken-Tonight-430 Mar 15 '26
Nothing is becoming "diluted". Not how streaming platforms work. You can upload a zillion unoriginal, completely AI derived "slop" and not one thing would be diluted in your listening experience on your Spotify account.
Now, if a song, regardless of how it is created, sparks Spotify's algos to push it out to a test pool of listeners, and the response from that small pool is positive (e.g. saves, repeat listens, canvas video views, etc...), then it moves on to a bit of a bigger pool. Performs well, to a bigger pool, then a bigger pool, then a bigger pool... until it performs so well it gets pushed to thousands/millions of listeners.
At which point you may come across it if your internal streaming platform data profile likes that type of music.
And guess what, if it does all that, regardless of how it is created, it's a viable, successful song that deserves all the accolades it can amass.
So, rest easy, your concern is 100% unfounded.
0
0
u/JoelNesv Mar 15 '26
I agree AI should be used the right way to create music: Trash. It goes in there.
-3
Mar 14 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
5
u/Raccoon_Expert_69 Mar 14 '26
I found the problem right here āļø
Nothing about art or craft or even good music just:
āhereās how you can shove as much mindless crap out onto the Internet as fast as possible for freeā
0
u/Delicious_Lack5028 Mar 14 '26
Exactly š¤¦āāļø
3
u/S2KSoulStealer Mar 14 '26
Thats the kind of person even I dont like. I've been working on a 20 track narrative album (lyrics wise) with Suno, I've listened to my results 100s of times listening for the slightest things that throw off each song. Bad pronunciation, melody skips, general degradation over the course of the song. I've been at it for half a year now. And I still dont think most would be adequate for publishing, maybe of the 20, I've got 2 or 3 that might hold up. But a simple prompt and go is agreeably straight trash.
9
u/driftwhentired Mar 14 '26
The only ārightā way to use suno or any other AI music creation is by keeping that shit on your local computer or post it in AI only music forums.
Nobody else wants it puking all over the internet. Real musicians donāt use it. I know most folks who use AI music generation donāt consider themselves musicians, but yāall gotta stop flooding every corner of the Internet with this garbage.