Should I buy a DAW or use AI to make my music?

[Synthman2000]

Shall I give AI a second's consideration beyond the manipulative advertising and ultimately (in best case scenario) manipulative thought control it will become, or not ? That is the real question.

It's a no from me I want an actual real life thanks.

I enjoy freedom and like to choose my tech tools. I don't want to be in a technological prison which it is fast becoming, just think about your smart phone. I do the very least I can with that thing. Soon you won't be able to be a functioning person in society without
it glued in front of your eyes.

[BONES]

The thing is, you can't claim rights over AI generated stuff, i don't know if it's already penalized but it's mostly not permitted unless you work over the stuff yourself and give it your personal touch to claim it as yours, so yeah, you have to work anyways.

So what? I see no problem with that, if you didn't do the work, you shouldn't want to claim it's yours.

most AI generated tracks sound pretty much the same

You could say the same about arpeggiators but people still find ways to make them sound unique. You're also talking today, how much better do you think AI will be in a year? 2 years? 5 years? It's just a matter of time until they are better at it than we are.

you can never become a good producer by using AI

That doesn't mean you can make good music. I've only learned because I've had to, it's not a skillset I ever wanted.

how can you know if the AI is doing a good job without enough experience?

The same f**king way you know a good song when you hear it on the f**king radio. What a dumbass question.

It can make music for you, but it can't make Your music. That's on you.

It can if you tell it what to make, just as you'd get a session muso to play your guitar parts or basslines or drums, or even as you'd patch synth to make your sounds. It's all a simple matter of degree.

“With electronic music, it’s so hard and it takes so much time to infuse emotion in the machines. To write a chord or a melody and have human beings play it and have this instant emotional quality to it, is really quite exhilarating. It’s not the fight you have against machines. My priorities in the world in 2023 are on the side of the humans, not the machines. I have absolutely no desire or intentions to be a robot in 2023. ”

Thomas Bangalter (Daft Punk)

A bit of an about-turn from a man with no face. And mostly bullshit. It's the easiest thing in the world to impart emotion with synths, even into a single note.

I want an actual real life thanks.

Me too and just imagine how much more of it I could have if I left it to the machines to write and produce all my music for me! It'd free up 4 or 5 hours a day.

I enjoy freedom and like to choose my tech tools.

So why not choose AI?

[Synthman2000]

A real life engages you, not just press 1 button and what the hell is that, even ? It is not creation, creativity, human endeavour, fun or valuable. It will be worse than the worst music that will never be heard and have even less value than even bad music made by humans.

Meaning is one of the greatest things to find in life, that is sacred, we all know it is sacred.. as we live it, or strive for it and should be considered with the utmost care and respect. Don't give that up.

I don't think it is time saving to make impersonal, inhuman junk spewed out in a thoughtless talent less, effortless manner, I think it is wasting time, wasting your life.

AI is ultimately likely to be programmed with bias and ulterior motives. People will maybe ask AI for advice, along with traditional means like friends and relatives. Then their minds will be torn between AI and human advice. As the many (and many will be highly dubious) financial incentives of AI gain pace it will become biased, manipulative and thought controlling at the very least.

Who owns the AI and the motives will become extremely important. It can change our world for the worse just like social media has done, ultimately influencing politics and what people think. And this is the most benign dubious use.

It is quite strange to hear programmers, computer scientists and coders being optimistic about AI, I suppose they have no choice as disciples of the Kool AI'd. In short order it will be doing their job. We know it can code and from I heard it can code pretty well. Initially it is arguable that AI seems to have the potential to take jobs in reverse, music, art, visual design etc seem to be under threat. However the real threat and this is why I believe their is a suggested pause in the pipeline.

The real threat is to what society covets the most. Cold logic, maths, data, analysis, statistics, vast memorization and patterns.

We all know this is where computers real strength and power lies. This is where the threats lie.. so designers, architects, coders, mathematicians, scientists that rely on numbers, this is the real threat. Art, music that is fair game for governments, that can be sacrificed. But numbers... where the real money is that is going to be the big change.

Musk et al know this is going to change our world beyond recognition and very likely for the worse. This is why there is a suggested pause. The change of pace of AI development is likely exponential so before we know it we cannot keep up as a society floundering around. I am fairly sure I heard that the Chinese made AI do the work of a person for a year in 1 day and some task set that was expected to take 7-8 years was resolved in 14 days ! The big issue is the developers and the general public, governments have no idea what the consequences of AI will be. There is a responsibility to global citizens and it is unclear how individual governments will respond, and they all fear losing benefits if there are any, so the risk is loss of control of AI without regulation.

Even the developers/programmers don't know what is going on themselves.

Mass unemployment is going to be a serious challenge for society. Governments will no longer be able to pay the social security bill, so destitution is on the cards for many.

Not many humans want to end up as useless, valueless pieces of inadequate meat.

Be cautious.

[Michael L]

“With electronic music, it’s so hard and it takes so much time to infuse emotion in the machines. To write a chord or a melody and have human beings play it and have this instant emotional quality to it, is really quite exhilarating. It’s not the fight you have against machines. My priorities in the world in 2023 are on the side of the humans, not the machines. I have absolutely no desire or intentions to be a robot in 2023. ”
Thomas Bangalter (Daft Punk)

And mostly bullshit. It's the easiest thing in the world to impart emotion with synths, even into a single note.

Yes, if you are able to express only the same simple emotion over and over again: GRRRRRRR!

[BONES]

It's a song, it only needs one theme. The next song can have another sound to express a different emotion, if that's what you want to do.

[Michael L]

It's a song, it only needs one theme. The next song can have another sound to express a different emotion, if that's what you want to do.

Bangalter was comparing Daft Punk's performance on a midi-controlled synth to that of a professional violinist.
He believes that the violinist can be much more expressive.
So do I.
But it's music, so you can totally disagree and also be right!

[Aloysius]

I don't think Anwar Ibrahim (AI) knows one end of his flute from the other.

Anwar Ibrahim: Prime Minister of Malaysia since 2022

[BONES]

Bangalter was comparing Daft Punk's performance on a midi-controlled synth to that of a professional violinist.

OK, I missed the context but what he's written is still mostly horseshit and I'd hardly rate Daft Punk as the most emotive of electronic artists.

He believes that the violinist can be much more expressive. So do I.

Well, if we are talking specifically about Daft Punk, then it's hard to argue but since they broke up, things have changed quite a bit -

But it's music, so you can totally disagree and also be right!

You can disagree with anyone about anything, but if they are right, you will be wrong. Always.

[Michael L]

Very cool. Truly a Seaboard virtuoso!

The Seaboard is certainly better than Daft Punk-era controllers (and Osmose may be better) but when you compare these covers to the original guitar performance you can feel the difference.

My original point was in "DAW vs AI" you can make an artistic choice of "None Of The Above" cuz neither a DAW or AI could be as expressive as a performance by Hendrix, and even MPE could not be as expressive as Marco

I am right

[BONES]

Of course but could Hendrix have done as good a job of a piano concerto?

With AI, again, you are talking about today. If you think this is as good as it will ever be, you're kidding yourself. It won't be 5 years before Ai is indistinguishable from a human virtuoso and in 10 AI will blow every human performer who ever lived off the stage. It's inevitable.

[Michael L]

Of course but could Hendrix have done as good a job of a piano concerto?

With AI, again, you are talking about today. If you think this is as good as it will ever be, you're kidding yourself. It won't be 5 years before Ai is indistinguishable from a human virtuoso and in 10 AI will blow every human performer who ever lived off the stage. It's inevitable.

Right now you can program a percussion track in a DAW that no human could ever play with two hands, or instrumental tracks that no human band could play.

What can a human musician do that AI could never do? You are kidding yourself that eventually the answer will be "nothing."

A unique living human in its ever-changing environment will always be way more complex than any programmer could ever code.

That is what art is all about. Are you suggesting there will be no more art? If so, you have an unrealistic faith in technology

[lobanov]

aiTunes, the killer of iTunes...

[lobanov]

Of course but could Hendrix have done as good a job of a piano concerto?

With AI, again, you are talking about today. If you think this is as good as it will ever be, you're kidding yourself. It won't be 5 years before Ai is indistinguishable from a human virtuoso and in 10 AI will blow every human performer who ever lived off the stage. It's inevitable.

And we all will become listeners. After 20-30 years AI that sumulates listener' experience will appear. It will be even able to write exalted reviews in New Musical Express. And read them, yes. It's inevitable.

[liquidsound]

Why is everybody arguing about “The Inevitable”. It’s pathetic.

[dune_rave]

Imho you should use HI (Human Intelligence) to create music. So if you suck with creating music then hire someone...