AI disqualifies anyone as a musician! It's like playback.

[BONES]

You did hear the part where this guy said he's afraid to use his calculator, right? The man is obviously a loony but I suppose that's right up your alley. I stopped watching at that point but what I'd seen up to there looked like shit anyway, which I will guarantee is no fault of AI but of the "creative" mind directing it.

[eassae]

[enroe]

Using AI to compose a song or to create the lyrics disqualifies you
as a musician. Totally.

Being a musician is impotent and the endless crates of garbage an A&R rep has to endure to maybe find half a good hook is an example of that. How many here in KVR are qualified as musicians? A lot. And they produce vomit as far as output.

Mmm ... to put it gently: You are confusing "artist" with "commerciality"
here — a faux pas that, unfortunately, completely disqualifies you.

As a true musician, you struggle – with feeling, with great effort
and sweat – to create a composition, making many changes
sometimes through the night.

I'll dismiss the word "true" and say this is not the case at all with me and therefore not the case for thousands of others like me. I can come up with a song in minutes that could invoke strong emotion ...

What was that about "arrogance" again?

But please: Do not reply, for I am now adding you to my
"ignore list." Good luck to you!

[enroe]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

AI disqualifies as a musician!

Two comments on this:

1. This applies, of course, only to intrinsically creative musicians —
that is, those who compose music — regardless of whether it is
classical, pop, rock, dance, trance, or hip-hop. This statement has
no bearing on "performing musicians" — those who perform, sing,
or cover songs. By definition, they remain "musicians" — even if
they utilize AI to assist with specific parts.

2. This only applies to the use of AI for the recomposition of songs
or song parts. It does not apply if AI is simply used as a tool for
mixing or mastering.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

If we take (1) and (2) into account — and please, let us distinguish
between them — then I can only reiterate:

If you use AI to compose — and operate solely via text prompts —
then you have effectively ceased to be a musician or artist. You
have thereby struck a pact with the devil and completely
withdrawn yourself from the world of human art.

[pdxindy]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

What about someone who creates their own midi and uses AI to generate sounds from it?

[Tiles]

At this point, “AI disqualifies as a musician!” isn’t even an argument anymore, it’s just your loading screen.

The funny part is that the only person disqualifying himself here is the one speedrunning “ignore every counterargument any%”.

You can dislike AI in music all day long, that’s fair. But repeating the same sentence 40 times while dodging every point isn’t philosophy, it’s a broken NPC dialogue tree.

[enroe]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

What about someone who creates their own midi and uses AI to generate sounds from it?

Well, that is perfectly clear: The composition lies within the notes — in this case,
the MIDI notes. If AI is then used for the sound, I see no problem with that. In
that scenario, AI serves as a tool — much like a synthesizer with presets. The
musician remains, and will always remain, the creative artist here.

[Tiles]

So after several dozen posts of “AI disqualifies as a musician,” we have finally arrived at:

“AI is fine as long as I personally decide which part counts.”

Interesting journey.

At first, AI supposedly destroyed human art entirely.
Now AI is apparently just “a tool,” like synth presets, depending on where the MIDI notes came from.

So the actual thesis was never “AI disqualifies musicians.”
It was “I’ll keep moving the goalposts until my own workflow still qualifies.”

[enroe]

So after 200 posts of “AI disqualifies as a musician,” we have finally arrived at:

“AI is fine as long as I personally decide which part counts.”

Interesting journey.

At first, AI supposedly destroyed human art entirely.
Now AI is apparently just “a tool,” like synth presets, depending on where the MIDI notes came from.

So the actual thesis was never “AI disqualifies musicians.”
It was “I’ll keep moving the goalposts until my own workflow still qualifies.”

But you’ve already acquired the basic skill of reading—for instance, in school—haven’t you?

[BertKoor]

intrinsically creative musicians — that is, those who compose music

If only we had a proper word to describe these people.

the recomposition of songs or song parts

hmmmm

[Tiles]

Ah, so we're moving seamlessly from completely ignoring the arguments straight into trolling and offending now? Pathetic

Argumentum ad hominem attacks are usually used when you run out of arguments. Well, you never had any, so consequently this is the only thing that's left to you.

Just to remember, your thesis from the beginning was that everybody who uses AI is no longer a musician.

And the first thing I pointed out in the discussion was that you completely lack any distinction. Which you completely ignored. Now you do, for the first time after ten pages of discussion, admit that we need to distinguish here. Moving the goalposts to your needs.

Great, that's at least progress. Now let's see how long it takes until the rest of the facts and arguments reach your stunted mind.

[pdxindy]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

What about someone who creates their own midi and uses AI to generate sounds from it?

Well, that is perfectly clear: The composition lies within the notes — in this case,
the MIDI notes. If AI is then used for the sound, I see no problem with that. In
that scenario, AI serves as a tool — much like a synthesizer with presets. The
musician remains, and will always remain, the creative artist here.

And if someone who is not a drummer, uses AI to generate the drums, but otherwise, they record their own guitar and vocals on top, are they still a musician?

There are so many shades on the spectrum that I would find it hard to declare anything... not that I have an interest in labeling you or anyone, a musician or not.

[VOODOO U]

Mmm ... to put it gently: You are confusing "artist" with "commerciality"
here

I'm not talking about "commerciality" I'm talking about musicians. The point is you claim using A.I. disqualifies one as a musician and I'm saying well boo f**king hoo where's mommy? Being a musician doesn't mean shit. It's what you do with that skill that matters. You're a musician? Well f**king good for you. What output are you delivering besides unenthusiastic garbage that doesn't even qualify as toilet paper? Regardless if it's commercial or not.

Good luck to you!

Thanks. Good luck with penciling in midi notes in your sequencer you talented true musician.

[zerocrossing]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

What about someone who creates their own midi and uses AI to generate sounds from it?

Well, that is perfectly clear: The composition lies within the notes — in this case,
the MIDI notes. If AI is then used for the sound, I see no problem with that. In
that scenario, AI serves as a tool — much like a synthesizer with presets. The
musician remains, and will always remain, the creative artist here.

And if someone who is not a drummer, uses AI to generate the drums, but otherwise, they record their own guitar and vocals on top, are they still a musician?

There are so many shades on the spectrum that I would find it hard to declare anything... not that I have an interest in labeling you or anyone, a musician or not.

Right. People are looking at this as some binary choice, and it’s not. Before the day of the computer, most of us were forced to pick a focus or two. There were few people like Prince who could do it all, and even he had help with various aspects of music production.

Ultimately, it’s a moot point. Getting shamed on the internet isn’t really going to change many people’s minds. People who like drumming are going to drum. People who like programming sampled drum kids are going to program sampled drum kits. People who don’t want to do either are going to use some AI drum generation technology. Then there are the people who don’t want to do anything. They’re going to use a prompt based system like Suno.

I have hope, though. There are tons of people still making music the old fashioned way. They’re not making a ton of money, so it must be for the love of it. I also don’t understand why anyone would watch a live stream of someone playing video games, but it’s hugely popular, and people are still playing video games.

So, I’m going to do what I always do. The things that I like to do, I’ll keep doing, and if there’s some technology that can do the things that I don’t like to do, I’ll use it. I guess my curse is, I like to do a lot. I’m already used tools that utilize machine learning to do things like voice, cello and some mastering tasks. I’m finding that I have a very hard time listening to my tracks with a critical ear. I even used a wrong file for a video and didn’t even notice it. I’m really good at autocorrect. I’d love to pay a good mixing and mastering engineer to give things a second pass, but considering I don’t make money on this, I’d rather not pay someone else for it. Maybe that’s cynical, but that’s where I’m at. I know my core love is for composition and improvisation. Second, production and sound design. If I get a lucrative record contract, I’ll hire session musicians and a rent a studio, but until then, I’m sticking with my methods.

[BONES]

So — many arguments have been put forward and discussed —
and yet I still think that the fundamental thesis holds true:

AI disqualifies as a musician!

Sure, and I think only a complete f**king idiot would cling to such a fundamentally daft notion in the face of cogent arguments having been put up in refutation of such a ridiculous premise. At it's most basic, it is clearly possible for even the most well established and respected musician to use AI in any way he or she likes and still remain a musician. After all, it's not as if all the skills acquired over the many years it takes to become an established, respected musician suddenly desert you because you typed a few word into an AI prompt. The two things are completely separate and in no way mutually exclusive.

2. This only applies to the use of AI for the recomposition of songs
or song parts. It does not apply if AI is simply used as a tool for
mixing or mastering.

Why not? There are a lot of audio engineers who would see using Ai for mastering as just as big a cheat as using it for composition and many of them would also consider themselves musicians.

If we take (1) and (2) into account — and please, let us distinguish
between them

But your distinctions are arbitrary, there is no sense to the lines you have attempted to draw.

If you use AI to compose — and operate solely via text prompts —
then you have effectively ceased to be a musician or artist.

I would suggest what people in that situation never were musicians, never considered themselves musicians, probably never wanted to be musicians and certainly don't hang out at places like KVR. So you are basically shouting into the void.

You have thereby struck a pact with the devil and completely withdrawn yourself from the world of human art.

That sounds like a noble pursuit to me. f**k THE WORLD OF HUMAN ART if it inhabited by pathetic, closed-minded, blinkered fools like you and the kind of derivative, shit music you make.

What about someone who creates their own midi and uses AI to generate sounds from it?

Well, that is perfectly clear: The composition lies within the notes — in this case,
the MIDI notes. If AI is then used for the sound, I see no problem with that.

IN that case you are a worthless hypocrite because it is the SOUND that a MUSICIAN makes. The MIDI (music) is created by a COMPOSER. At this point I don't think even you know what you are trying to argue about.

People who like drumming are going to drum. People who like programming sampled drum kids are going to program sampled drum kits. People who don’t want to do either are going to use some AI drum generation technology. Then there are the people who don’t want to do anything. They’re going to use a prompt based system like Suno.

Even that's missing several in-between situations, like using drum loops. Everything is a continuum and where any of us draws the line is purely arbitrary. e.g. I don't consider myself a musician, because I know I can't play an instruemnt properly, but all my friends, work colleagues and neighbours definitely do think of me as a musician because their concept of what a musician is is very different from my own. To them a musician is someone who makes music, to me it's some wanker who thinks he's better than everyone else.

I have hope, though. There are tons of people still making music the old fashioned way.

You're not one of them, you're using Ai to do your vocals. That makes you nothing more than a big, fat hypocrite.

I’m finding that I have a very hard time listening to my tracks with a critical ear.

I struggle with the opposite - I can't help but listen to our music with a critical ear.