JPF Home Page Forums General Messages General Message Forum Problem I foresee with ai

Dom

I think that your viewpoint on the issue of AI and songwriting lacks clarity. it may be that you are skewing your viewpoint in order to glamorize the Dom.

Sound - Sing - SONG.

A song cannot be a song If there is no sound. musical sound.
“Lyrics,” not coupled to a musical sound, is merely a “writing.” It is not a song.
Lyrics written with the intent of becoming a song, are still not a song.

I recently used AI to develop a Melody for me. I coupled that with a lyrical theme.
AI did a surprisingly good job of writing lyrics to a pleasing melody.
If someone had posted it on this site, I would have genuinely complimented it.

Legally that song (musical work) may belong to me, but I don't consider it my song. It only exists because AI created it.

Sound - Sing - SONG

You may have years of personal writings that you consider lyrics.
But until AI coupled them to a musical melody, they were not even lyrics.
They were writings, rhyming and poetically inclined.

I know you claim to hear the melodies in your head.
In my head, I can put on Superman’s cape and fly, but if that is the only place that it exists…then it doesn’t exist.

AI turned years of your writings into actual “songs.”
Your several songs of the last two weeks exist only because of Udio.

Udio is the musician(s) , the arranger, the primary producer.
You are the contributing poet, more or less.

Give credit where credit is due.

My songs exist because I wrote them. As I go through lyrics and songs here your errand and other songs were posted years apart which means you have written only a couple in years.
I been writing constantly.

Why don't you give ME credit you refuse to do that. Your in deej s thread who couldn't post without band in a box, no mention of that.

You can't post a demo without toontrack so what the fuc are you trying to say,?

If this could take music I'd be doing that too, and yd still have to open your jealous mouth.

Your just mad that while you thought your arguments beat nine thinking I don't know what I'm doing. I was right about songwriting you were wrong

Do you wanna do a capella challenge?

It's it like Brian says, it's a tool, you aren't going to make good music being talentless

It's an absolute enhancer, and it's blowing me away. Absolutely it ups my ability to post songs.

I don't know why your arguing about it being my artist, when you haven't mentioned one word.
Admiration from afar?

Let me know when you wanna do a caoella challenge ur acoustic, ok big shot?

All that time you arguing with my views, and you were the one needing the advice.

Stay off your motorcycle and on your meds

I kind of agree with Marty here. According to my dictionary a song is a piece of music which contains lyrics or words. If you only wrote lyrics, you don’t have a song. You have a song lyric. I have to admit that I’ve never heard a song from you which wasn’t generated by AI. Feel free to repost them, if you have any.
I give you credit for writing some pretty cool lyrics. Udio is a generative AI model that produces music based on prompts. You don’t need to be a songwriter to use it. As you may have noticed, other lyricists (who don’t play instruments) are posting their Udio results here as well and they are just as good or bad as yours. The big difference is that they say they used Udio when they post their song. You often don’t.
I’m with Marty. There is nothing wrong with using AI or other tools but give credit where credit is due.

Please if I wasn't saying what I'm using Marty wouldn't be talking about it

I've posted tons sings it's quite clear

I heard one song from user in udio. That's awful.

But good for him, maybe he can expand his limits with it. Like songwriting the more u do the better you get.

Hasn't helped you though

Fdem,
over the past decades I‘ve collaborated with tons of talented people. Sometimes I write music for their lyrics, sometimes I contribute lyrics to their music. I call that co-writing. What you have in the end is called a song. What you demonstrate here is actually one of the problems I foresee with AI. People co-write songs with AI generated composers/producers/mixers and take the credit for things they can’t even influence. In Udio you can’t define chord sequences or melodies. It randomly generates music for you. You have zero control over the music production. If you don’t like what it generated you just tell the model to do it again and again and again. Eventually, with a little luck, it will come up with something that you like. The results have nothing to do with your songwriting capabilities. If you co-write with AI shouldn’t you admit that your song is a co-write? In my opinion, Fdem, you are taking credit for the AI generated music and that is a problem I foresee with AI. You are demonstrating this quite well actually.

So when Bernie taupin writes a lyric and gives it to Elton John , he has nothing to do with the song?

So you see how ignorant that is? The concept, the hook, the story, the relatability, the structure, the entertainment Value, the sound of the words

Your insulting lyricists. you are not one, and you don't have a clue, what good ones do

I ain't taking credit for anything, am I charging you? Do you see my with a copyright next to it?

My lyrics have already been posted, and they are copyrighted just by doing that

Your just clueless on so many levels. That's why your songs are bad, you think it's all about cutting and pasting music into your daw

Your not a composer at all

If Mike z started posting songs you and Marty would be kissing his balls, so just go away until you dont know what you're talking sbout

Fdem,
a good lyricist writes lines that have a song structure, a rhyme scheme, a story, a hook, etc. When a good composer reads such a lyric, he or she often hears how the words flow, which in turn makes it easier to write a melody. Words and a melody are all it takes to create a good song. The rest is ear candy. I’m not insulting lyricists or composers here. Both play an important role in creating a song.
I previously gave you credit for writing some pretty cool lyrics. But your AI music on the other hand is randomly generated. You can’t influence the results in any way. You keep claiming that your AI songs sound better than others because you are a good songwriter. Explain please why your randomly generated music is better others. You just press delete and start over more often. Is that a creative process? Hey man, give credit where credit is due.

I can't help if it sounds good can I? I have hundreds of songs, do I try record them?

Do I spend tens of thousands on demos?

This was introduced to me, it's been an eye opening experiment, and can actually show you where your weaknesses are.

I just did a song where I realized I had too many verses. And take them out. .its a testing ground, your are treating it as an attack on your domain

You can learn from good writers you dint show any interest.

So be it, just get off my ass, your still mad about the U2 comment.

No more talking work to do

Fdem,
exactly. No, you can't help if it sounds good and you can't help it if it sounds bad either because you have no control over what is generated. The output is generated randomly by AI.

This thread is not about me or you. It's about problems we foresee using AI. I've always had problems sharing credits with people who didn't give a song added value. And in this case, I have issues with people wanting to take credit for music material that was randomly created by AI. Unfortunately for you, you are a good example. But I know a lot of people, like you, might see this differently.

My lyrics are not generated, so right there that's 50% minimal.

And if you knew how hard I have to dig to get what I want out of it. I'ma musiciati.

I hear it no matter how it happens.

You don't even know what key your songs are in, or what chords are being played. You really got alot of nerve trying to talk

Your just choosing piano from toontrack, and your taking credit for being a songwriter

You do nothing other than cut and paste.

Play one in of your songs on acoustic .

And as of defending, people will be using ai, whether I do or not.

You can't even tell how bad your own song ae they sound decent

Just stop,

Fdem,
again it looks like you know much better than me how I write and record my songs. Everybody who records songs can hear that no midi-based Toontrack or Band in the box tools were used on my recent track "It's About Me". I did that recording in 2011. EZ Keys didn't exist back then.
Tell me, since when does a songwriter have to be able to perform live? Did Michael Jackson or Whitney Houston ever play an instrument on stage?

But your challenging somebody who generated an arrangement, which band in a box does and toontrack does . everybody here loved it. The thing decides what the rhythm will be, you just tell it what chords, and half people here dont know any theory at all, so how could they possibly get good results.

I heard your songs, I know how you do it.

It doesn't matter, the idea is to have a good song.

Your song is boring, contrived, souless.

And such generic melody and lyrics, that you might as well use ai.

At least Marty songs have a dash of realness to them. A smidge of humanity

My suggestion would be start with the song.

Melody and lyric, tech feeds on something to use.

But I'm spending too much time with you.

Dom

A dash of realness.?
A smidge of humanity ?

That's the nicest thing that you ever said to me.

LOL

your songs have a dash of Intel and a smidge of Hewlette Packard.

LOL

Right the thread is on the pit falls of AI , I'm sure its going effect the music industry where a Return On Investment is important and required to keep professionals doors open.

Yes but interestingly, the tone of this thread was much different when Mike z was here with the exception of John , who had the same opinion, since the get go, which I admire

Since I started using it, and getting good results, then the rest started getting negative.

As if I'm just somebody who hangs around a site but doesn't write, as is the case for many here.

Here's the thing. If you think my input into udio, which includes, my lyric, my ear, my knowledge of music and what each song needs, matters, then, I don't know what to tell you

Most people based their opinion on how it sounds.."sounds great"

But that's like saying two women wearing the same dress are equally beautiful. They can all be passable dressed the right way.

Now, some may think one woman is prettier, while others think the other, there always that, and subjectivity is what allows people at any level to make music.

But objectively, if you let 100 random listeners listen to two songs done with udio. The better sing is going to get picked. Not experts either, just listeners

at end of day if what your making is liked by people, then you are just as valid as anyone else

But you may need a million people to listen to really know if "people like it".

Not 4 people here, or your neighbor

New technology like AI always gets people up in arms . like the horse and the first car by Ford. Elon Musk has a warning on AI in the future

People were up in arms about drum machines.

When I worked at a music store in the early 80s, I remember the owner freaking out thinking drum machines would ruin his drum sales.

It turned out drum machines were just a way for people who didn't play drums to have drums available.

But kids still walk into music stores, asking Dad to buy them a drum set. That's not going away.

Drummers will drum, because there's beauty or horror in playing them

It's like a rollercoaster, u can simulate a rollercoaster, but the thrill of riding a real one will still bring people to the amusement park

right drum machines , Now it a profession with guys in Nashville that's all they do , Drum samples for majors
A Nashville writer was telling me a few weeks ago , the producer had a real drummer do the part , then used a machine to copy it , for whatever reason I forget
So the feel of a human translated usin AI toys for whatever sound that producer was wanting for that song, that makes sense .

Because as far as software has advanced, there are still nuances of a real player that can never be emulated. Real players don't play in perfect time. Machines do

When playing real instruments over a drum machine there is a subtle disconnect that may not be explainable.

It also saves hours of programming time if a real guy can just come in and in one take it's done

Plus a real drummer knows drums better than a producer does. But they can certainly get good results with a drum machine.

Depends on the genre and what type of authenticity you need

Dom,

Seems to me, your consistent mantra until MZ brought Udio forward was...ain't no machines and software never gonna make real music like real humans.

But then...
Udio made your decades long stack of unfinished songs complete-able within minutes and hours, and with a few lyrics and a handful of prompts.

All of a sudden you are Mr AI?
And now, AI is a legit co-writer with all the credit going to you, the "prompter."

Seems like you make it up as you go.

Prompt---to assist (a person speaking) by suggesting something to be said:

Operative word---"assist"

It was, I stand by my statement about band in a box, it's a good practice tool.

I am blown away by the quality of what results I got from udio

I was wrong about it. But I gave it an honest try, and realized I was wrong.

But on the other hand, it wouldn't have produced any song of mine without me. My lyrics, my guidance, my need to hear what I wanna hear

End of day people have to like the sing, regardless of how it's done. Sounding good is not good enough.

Why people like some songs is a mystery, but to me, I've always connected with people who were speaking to me

I listened to some of the editor picks in udio, my gud they are so bad. So not sure what they are judging on, perhaps what they believe udio is responsible for

They can't claim my songs

This is better than band in a box mainly because it sounds so much better, like radio ready songs

I don't have anything new to say. I just hate to see this controversial thread die.

John

Well John , I was thinking about it today while on the toilet.

We've had some of the greatest composers if all time already, and all in the past. In fairness there could be somebody in SoundCloud that nobody will ever hear, but I'm confident in this statement.

Classical we've had Bach, Beethoven, Mozart , Schick...
In early folk, we've had Steven Foster and Woody Guthrie, Seeger and Dylan.

Blues we've had Robert Johnson, the three kings BB, Freddie and Albert.

Jazz Louie Armstrong , Coltrane, Miles Davis

Rock n roll we've had Jerry Lee Lewis, Elvis , The Beatles, Hendrix

Great song interpreters like Sinatra and Tony Bennet

Singer songwriters like James Taylor, Tom Waites., Billy Joel, The Boss

Pop innovators like Prince, Sting, Eddie Van Halen

It's not getting any better than that. It's just not,
And it hasn't in decades

Definitely good stuff, but nothing the world couldn't do without.

So it's not getting better organically.

The only thing that may happen is "different"

I do some contract work in offices, and some kid does a song challenge , puts lyrics in the chats, and people try to guess

Some are so God awful, and nobody notices it, they just accept it as ..those are the lyrics.

I guessed a Tom Petty song few weeks ago, and they were like who? I let them have fun but I can't believe how bad some of it is

Anyway, ai or not, it's not getting better, been getting worse for a long time

As Liam Gallagher if Oasis said, when asked what he thought if an ai album of his band Oasis was put out "it's better than half the shite on the radio today anyway

And that's the thing, as music has turned to shite ai will be used and be at least as good

So I think music is not going to get better, it's just going to have to get different.

This is different.... Yet ironically it's all based on what's been done already

It's going to grow and I'm sure udio will be boring in a short time. New stuff will emerge.

I remember Jazz drumming great Steve Gadd saying that he can't get upset itf how drums have changed, and what's relavent, he just has to find a way to adapt, and be a part of it

My thought is people can be purists and never change, there's still time for anyone alive to think that way and never adapt.

But it's going to exist whether we embrace it or not, and it's not going to matter how something was created, all thats gonna matter is if any one likes it, that's always been the case .

Well, thanks FDE, but I wouldn't be on that list. But there are many more that would be, like Rachmaninoff, Brahms, Gershwin, Ravel, Debussy, and so & so on...

John

Haha you caught that. Oh yeah , and from what I've heard they all regarded Haydn as the best ever

Yeah, I left alot of people off the list, id still be writing if I included all lol

I think the mentioned is a good thumbnail sketch

I think I'm about done with Udio.

If you write music and melody, and not much lyrics this is really not for you. You can't use any of your musical ideas, and frankly while it sounds better, it's not better than my own songs Just different.

It's a nice fast demo, but if it's not satisfying what good is it.

If you're a lyricist this could be alit if fun and useful for you. It's just remember your demo is probably a replica of somebody famous.

Fir me it's a possible reference but I'm already bored with it

Interesting

Hey remember in this thread is said some genius would invent a way to tell if something was created by ai?

So it would seem having a term paper written by ai would be detectable. I guess the idea is to use as a reference not t as a piece.

It's already been invented

https://app.originality.ai/signup/

Below is taking from OPEN AI (CHATGPT) ...Terms of Service

Content
Your content. You may provide input to the Services (“Input”), and receive output from the Services based on the Input (“Output”). Input and Output are collectively “Content.” You are responsible for Content, including ensuring that it does not violate any applicable law or these Terms. You represent and warrant that you have all rights, licenses, and permissions needed to provide Input to our Services.

Ownership of content. As between you and OpenAI, and to the extent permitted by applicable law, you (a) retain your ownership rights in Input and (b) own the Output. We hereby assign to you all our right, title, and interest, if any, in and to Output.

Similarity of content. Due to the nature of our Services and artificial intelligence generally, output may not be unique and other users may receive similar output from our Services. Our assignment above does not extend to other users’ output or any Third Party Output.

Sounds like a legality nightmare.

My take is that it is possible for someone to be writing a paper or book, ask AI a question and receive an answer, that bears enough resemblance to another author's work, to be actionable. Even if, the answer was derived from thousands of source documents.

Looks like a duck.

ChatGPT will let you have the rights to what they give you, but will not guarantee that it isn't plagiarism to use it.

Funny

Basically they're saying , if you get caught you're on your own.

They use to say stealing from one is plagiarism, stealing from many is research

For the paper to make sense, it would have to borrow from somewhere at some level.

If a teacher uses an ai detector, and those things work, ai won't be allowed, just as kids can't use phones or Internet while taking tests

From what I've seen the lyrics udio puts out are weak, and kinda of disconnected.

That's interesting they mention input and output being content. If you enter interesting lyrics or entertaining lyrics, you end up with similar music.

Can take a while to find a good match.

I think with udio or anything similar the way to use it is not...this is my product, or song ,cause they are clearly borrowing vocal styles of famous singers, clearly borrowing musical styles and production styles from famous artists.

So not only will you have to worry about plagiarism issues for content, but also look like a fool publishing a song with James Taylors vocals, and Hendrix guitar.

So as is it's a fun toy. But I think the real way to use ai, is to see if it's melody is better for your song, or ...oh yeah I shoulda gone there.

Most of the time I find it's just different than my take, not better. Other times it's close to mine.

But better to take all ideas yours or ai, and make them into your own song. You do have to worry still about copyright, cause they ain't telling you where it came from.

They will be legally fine, you will be the one responsible.

I guess you never really know if your own melody is stealing from someone else.

I think more time is needed to know what can be done and what can't

Good Summary Fdemetrio.

Thinking positively....the AI created music scene will boost the lyric writers world, with its quick turnaround.

Also, musicians will be working 24/7 to keep up w all the new songs generated. someone needs to take them on the road afterall.

Bill

Excellent point . Thers already too many God damn songs in the world, so many we could never listen to them all.

Now there will be a gazillion more.

Yeah I posted that before, it will have to be me that saves us

Funny thing he talks little about ai, and more about cycles in music, he predicts current music will have no choice but to be gone when it gets to such a low.

Which if you turn on the radio, damn, were almost there

He talks about how Spotify used a 1000 or(some number like that) A! songs by Spotify to make money for Spotify, Not artists who use session players of there own songs, All generated A! Lyrics and music. So AI is destroying the music industry like BS streaming services. It really dosen't take much to make a song , practice with a guitar hire a few session players and Wa La . instead of getting Walmart fat and lazy with AI like you mentioned before F it takes some (work) to get it done without AI.

It doesnt matter.
The people with access to the markets can use AI to make money, cut their costs and eliminate all the issues that come along with dealing with multiple people.

Why would they not?

Unless you can perform your music live and get paid for it, the future looks difficult.

Cuz they're lazy and don't wanna put the time in to create a song and don't support the music community and session players that feed their family's . Heaven forbid you'd have to talk to real musicians to create a song , Lets use phoney robots. oh yeah it doesn't matter .


https://www.youtube.com/shorts/juS91wqz2q4

It appears that real musicians are coming upon a time when the only way to get paid for their services is by a real audience that paid to actually see them.
The "music industry" will be whatever it evolves into.
Bemoaning what we wish it to be, will be howling at the moon.

That will depend on the consumer, not ai.

If the songwriter or musician,vir producer wants ai music, then yes. Likewise the listener.

If they want real people, great musicians who blow ai out of the water, then no.

Real musicians are still much better right now.

No matter how many times you run band In n a box, or ai, or toontrack, it doesn't spell greatness

It will ultimately come down to the consumer realizing what greatness is

But there is no doubt ai is here to stay

Then again Taylor swift just broke a record fur record sales and can sell out any arena, cause of who she is.

The people thing is the key

It will come down solely to whether listeners like what they hear or not.
If they like it, they wont care how it was produced...only that they like it.
Think video games. Users identify with animations. The most twisted amongst them take that identification out into the real world with real guns, blending video games and reality in their minds.

TS and others can put live butts in seats for a price and a profit, because people want to go be part of something on a night out. Enough to pay for it.
TS got her fan base to critical mass years ago, long before any mention of AI. It's hard to predict what the music world will look like going forward.

They want the communal experience of being with tens of thousands of other humans who want to see ts and be a part of her message

Same thing with Springsteen , 60 year old men arm around each other in front row singing his songs

And women still with their boobs out

So is a long way from replacing humans, as I predicted earlier I think live music. Will come rioaring back

Dom

I don't think that you read my posts.

I did, I don't think you nailed it. It's always been about people, the najer and the listener.

I don't think humans can evolve from a primal need for connection over night

Ok. Now you have provided proof that you dont read my posts.

I can change gears on a point if u don't agrree right?

You can't think you have all the answers can you?

You use AI to create songs , you're part of the problem , You already said its a lot of work to create songs the traditional way , You're right it is. So instead of investing in humans , you invest in robots .

No I use ai to demo songs and to see what results I get.

I'm a Songwriter that's why I have alot of songs to try.

My ai demos are not my product, it's my ideas in action

Using a snow blower to shovel snow is alot better than using a shovel.