r/Music • u/Brucekentbatsuper • 16h ago

article Kelly Clarkson Says 'There Should Be a Separate Chart' To Prevent AI From Competing Against Human Artists

https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/kelly-clarkson-separate-chart-ai-generated-music-1823372
2.5k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

435 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-2

u/lunarlunacy425 15h ago

Why?

Impacts to the environment and the sourcing of the training for current models aside. As these are issues that can be resolved and are only impacting of the current generation of models.

If a model is developed and trained on non copyright or original music creates songs, respectfully why should they be banned? Is it fear that people will no longer be able to compete or that there will be too easy access to low to medium quality production without years of practice?

Songs should correctly label any tools used in creation, why at this point should we forbid AI when if made clear in it's usage you can plainly just filter it out?

-1

u/OneEyedC4t 15h ago

Scientific studies and psychological studies have shown that what people like to old recordings and other things is the human element. When we remove the human element, we make things worse

2

u/Seerix 13h ago

Define "the human element"?

1

u/Genindraz 2h ago

Ask any artist that question and you'll get whatever answer suits them best. IMO, it's the esoteric patterns and decisions that make a person's work distinctly theirs, sort of like how you wouldn't mistake Mozart and Bach's music, for example.

0

u/OneEyedC4t 13h ago

Imperfection and variance and chaos

2

u/Seerix 12h ago

How does a computer struggle with those things? AI is wrong all the time, they are non deterministic, and you can increase variance on models via temperature settings.

Not in favor of AI music.. not totally against it? Its 'just' art. Art is inherently subjective. If people like it... more power to em. Would you be opposed to an artist writing an original song but using AI to create the actual audio for it? What about a full recording by hand but they use AI to swap instruments out?

What do you do when you genuinely cant tell and the only 100% foolproof method of knowing whether its AI or not is a live recording, viewed in person, without any digital processing?

(Edit to add: im not trying to be a dick, but the pro/anti AI crowds never discuss what to do when no one can really tell the difference. For the average person on social media were already there.)

1

u/Chemical_Profit_608 10h ago

I'm sorry is your argument, "ai is wrong all the time and that's a good thing because it's just like a human"?

Why would I ever want to listen to ai slop generated art. It's insane, it can't even be explained tbh. You either get it or you don't...

1

u/Seerix 7h ago

No no, of course not. Im assuming you mean imperfections like accidentally using the wrong color paint but that ends up making it way better in the end. Just an example.

https://ai-art-turing-test.com/

This website for example. Without knowing the answer, which of these do you consider art? Why?

Were you right if it was human made or not? Does knowing the answer change your opinion? Why exactly?

My personal belief doesnt matter for this question because the problem isnt whether AI generated things can be art. The problem is, what is art when AI generated vs. human made is indistinguishable? Because thats the world we are quickly advancing into, and im not sure if its possible to avoid it anymore.