9 ms·

Well, from listening to several on the first page, I say musicians and composers have nothing to worry about in terms of AI competition for some time. As amazi

• blondin 4y ago
  i am sorry but we (i make music in my spare time) need to worry. to echo what the comment above is saying. not because this AI generated music is good. but because it is good enough for the vast majority! and this concerns other fields as well. the consumption economy has set the bar for music and entertainment in general very low. most people don't know (or think) that the bar is low. because they have not experienced anything better and probably never will. what's gonna happen next will be sad.
  • z9znz 4y ago
    The thing is, and this applies to any other human made vs computer made thing: there will always be people who cannot or don't care to discern between quality and "whatever" (aka "good enough", but where "good" is a very low bar). The people who would be satisfied with AI generated music are people who would not have paid for human made music in the first place. You as a good musician will never lose a sale to an AI music source, because that buyer wouldn't have bought your music in the first place. Now if you make your living providing easy listening background music, then you will eventually be replaced.
    • frankzander 4y ago
      Not even that I think. Even background music has more purpose than AI generated one. But you are right ... some people may have a low threshold with being satisfied and hear this kind of music.
  • 6stringmerc 4y ago
    Look at Max Martin - his songs are massive hits because they are highly engineered and use a proved Swedish recipe / formula / composition techniques (ex: balanced lines) that on paper are actually quite simple. On paper. If it were as simple as it looks, everybody would be a Max Martin or somebody would train an AI on his canon and maybe actually have something decent. Music is based in emotion, and the bits and bytes aren’t close to simulating anything close other than probably raw schizophrenia. The current state of AI music? There’s no amount of money you could pay me to listen to it for an hour a day for a week. No way. It’s that bad. Counterpoint: a moderately musically inclined person with Propellerhead’s Figure can come up with more pleasing and coherent music on their third or fourth try that would put any of these to shame. It’s just reality at present.
  • raffraffraff 4y ago
    My wife is an illustrator, and she got really depressed when I showed her the image AI tools available today. Again, none of this stuff would replace her unique work, but it devalues the entire profession.
    • alaintno 4y ago
      > but it devalues the entire profession This. All the previous comments made really good statements, but, in the end, it's the value we give to art that might suffer from AI generated content, and the people who produce "real" art.
      • krapp 4y ago
        I'm sure textile weavers a century ago said the same thing, and the world replied that if a machine can do what you do even adequately, your profession was always overvalued. In the end, it's an iron law of post-industrial capitalism that the market value of human effort eventually approaches zero.
• rockarage 4y ago
  Yes, I'm just going to quote my previous comment from 7 years ago (about a similar startup) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10707049 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10707049 "This is a business I know well. Jukedeck is an example of how founders and investors do not conduct appropriate market research. There is a limited market demand for low-cost royalty-free music for videos. One could argue there is an oversupply* of royalty-free music relative to buyers. The quality is not good enough to disrupt the billion dollar Production music industry that is top heavy, a relative small amount of creators at the top get the majority of the money, the rest compete for the little that is left. Jukedeck has raised enough money ($3million #) to be around for a few years if they control their burn rate. But Jukedeck in its current form, is just another music startup destined for the Deadpool."
  • ildon 4y ago
    Well jukedeck has been bought by TikTok, so their product was indeed valuable for someone. I guess the point with such AI systems is not to replace existing creators, but rather fill in new market needs
    • p1esk 4y ago
      I predict that in 2 years half of the music people listen to on Spotify will be AI generated.
      • JohnHaugeland 4y ago
        Ray Kurtzweil predicted this in the 80s Predictions rely on everyone forgetting how wrong you were
      • 6stringmerc 4y ago
        Wanna bet? Cuz I think I’m 2 years Spanish language tracks will increase streaming by 20% and AI won’t even break 10% of listened to material. You know how I know? The Rolling Stones are still touring. Most people don’t go to Spotify or YouTube for discovery, they go for convenient on demand.
• babyshake 4y ago
  > for some time. As we have seen with text-to-image, sometimes AI models can improve at an astonishing rate.
  • amalgorithm 4y ago
    Image generation models didn't improve. Someone figured out how to use them to do something new. Anyway models have been improving for a long time but when was the last time you saw a news item about the progress in machine translation? That was probably around 2016-17 when the hype cycle for neural machine translation was at its apex. You don't hear anything more about it in the news because the hype cycle has now dipped to its bottom-most pit of indifference and the hype about being able to speak to a machine and communicate with any human on the planet in their native language has been replaced with, for example, the hype about being able to generate human-like art. My point being, just because performance increased in the past in one particular task, it doesn't mean that it will improve in all other tasks, or, indeed, that it will keep improving in the same task. For all we know what we've seen so far of image generation is all we'll get for the next ten years or so. I don't have a crystal ball, but I do have history books, so I don't make predictions. We can't even speak about the past with confidence, let alone the future.
• avodonosov 4y ago
  Maybe you are biased because you know that's AI? A blind test would be better. A musical Turing test - whether you like music and can't tell if that's AI or real composer.
  • frankzander 4y ago
    No really ... it sounds shitty. It's the same with images ... if a human would compose it a "story" or "intention" is behind the product. AI can't provide that because it's just a A without real I .
  • tgv 4y ago
    Not flying. There are tons of bad and mediocre "producers" out there whose "beats" can't be distinguished from this garbage.
• barbariangrunge 4y ago
  Midjourney improved so much over the summer, it was staggering. Arms no longer grow and point wherever the wind blows them. Tables are covered in identifiable objects instead of nonsense shapes. The gap between 'okay' and 'really good' is smaller than we think