4 ms·

> “What about the next Taylor Swift?” he asked, arguing that a “relatively unknown artist” whose work was ingested by Meta would likely have their career hamper

by RajT88 1y ago

> “What about the next Taylor Swift?” he asked, arguing that a “relatively unknown artist” whose work was ingested by Meta would likely have their career hampered if the model produced “a billion pop songs” in their style. I have this debate with a friend of mine. He's terrified of AI making all of our jobs obsolete. He's a brilliant musician and programmer both, so he's both enthused and scared. So let's go with the Swift example they use. Performance Artists have always tried to cultivate an image, an ideal, a mythos around the character(s). I've observed that as the music biz has gotten more tough, that the practice of selling merch at shows has ramped up. Social media is monetized now. There's been a big diversification in the effort to make more money from everything surrounding the music itself. So too will it be with artists. You're starting to see this already. Artists which got big not necessarily because of the music, but because of the weird cult of personality they built. One who comes to minds is Poppy, who ironically enough built a cult of personality around her being a fake AI bot... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppy_(singer) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poppy_(singer) You've definitely got counter-examples like Hatsune Miku - but the novelty of Miku was because of the artificiality (within a culture that, like, really loves robots and shit). AI pop stars will undoubtedly produce listenable records and make some money, but I don't expect that they will be able to replace the experience of fans looking for a connection with an artist. Watch the opening of a Taylor Swift concert, and you'll probably get it.

atrus 1y ago
I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs. If people like Max Martin can pump out multiple hit songs for multiple groups, it kinda shows that who wrote the song doesn't matter. Has making music for a living ever not been tough?
- RajT88 1y ago
  > Has making music for a living ever not been tough? Fair. > I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs. That accounts for the big artists on the radio (yes some people listen to that). But, what about everyone else? I would posit that most artists (the one-hit wonders, the ones without radio success, etc.) write their own songs. It seems like there's such acts who make a go of it just fine, who write their own songs and really nail the connection with fans. I would point to a regional band near me: Mr. Blotto.
reverendsteveii 1y ago
counterpoint: Gorillaz is a band specifically designed around the idea that the artist doesn't have to exist in order to do all of the things you mention above. Gorillaz has an image, a style, a mythos, all of that. Granted, when they started at the time (2000) there needed to be human creativity in order to create all of that but with AI everything about this can now be generated. I suspect it won't be long before all of our theorizing goes out the window because someone actually did create an act where everything, the music, the stage show, interviews, looks, all of it, is just AI-generated. That's when we'll get dollar votes on whether AI can actually generate a meaningful musical experience that people want to have.
- RajT88 1y ago
  Very relevant point. My own counter-example of Hatsune Miku is not totally AI generated - just generated using very sophisticated musical tools (see: Vocaloid). There's some very impressive youtubers who are claiming to be generating new music with AI. The one I listen to the most I very much doubt has everything 100% generated - he probably generates a bunch of melodies and other bits of track and stiches the best candidates together. They do crank out a new album basically every 2 weeks though - and has just a scant few thousand followers. They are not making money, but the music is pretty on par with bands which sell hundreds of thousands or millions of albums. This is part of what makes me think it's the people who can cultivate the mythos, the personality, the whole experience, who are going to be the big winners in the AI music economy. Sure, maybe Gorillaz obfuscates the identity of the artists (side note: do they though? it's well known to be a supergroup), but it still is a curated experience that human creativity was leveraged to create the whole experience.
  - codedokode 1y ago
    Every "Hatsune Miku" song has a talented person behind that avatar. Miku is just a synth and 3D model.
thomastjeffery 1y ago
Would Taylor Swift be famous without the support of her label? I sincerely doubt it. How many equally talented artists We should be careful not to conflate the affects of copyright to the affects of advertising.

by RajT88 1y ago

atrus 1y ago

I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs. If people like Max Martin can pump out multiple hit songs for multiple groups, it kinda shows that who wrote the song doesn't matter. Has making music for a living ever not been tough?

RajT88 1y ago
> Has making music for a living ever not been tough? Fair. > I think that argument is further hampered (taylor being an exception) by the fact that most pop stars already don't write their own songs. That accounts for the big artists on the radio (yes some people listen to that). But, what about everyone else? I would posit that most artists (the one-hit wonders, the ones without radio success, etc.) write their own songs. It seems like there's such acts who make a go of it just fine, who write their own songs and really nail the connection with fans. I would point to a regional band near me: Mr. Blotto.

reverendsteveii 1y ago

counterpoint: Gorillaz is a band specifically designed around the idea that the artist doesn't have to exist in order to do all of the things you mention above. Gorillaz has an image, a style, a mythos, all of that. Granted, when they started at the time (2000) there needed to be human creativity in order to create all of that but with AI everything about this can now be generated. I suspect it won't be long before all of our theorizing goes out the window because someone actually did create an act where everything, the music, the stage show, interviews, looks, all of it, is just AI-generated. That's when we'll get dollar votes on whether AI can actually generate a meaningful musical experience that people want to have.

RajT88 1y ago
Very relevant point. My own counter-example of Hatsune Miku is not totally AI generated - just generated using very sophisticated musical tools (see: Vocaloid). There's some very impressive youtubers who are claiming to be generating new music with AI. The one I listen to the most I very much doubt has everything 100% generated - he probably generates a bunch of melodies and other bits of track and stiches the best candidates together. They do crank out a new album basically every 2 weeks though - and has just a scant few thousand followers. They are not making money, but the music is pretty on par with bands which sell hundreds of thousands or millions of albums. This is part of what makes me think it's the people who can cultivate the mythos, the personality, the whole experience, who are going to be the big winners in the AI music economy. Sure, maybe Gorillaz obfuscates the identity of the artists (side note: do they though? it's well known to be a supergroup), but it still is a curated experience that human creativity was leveraged to create the whole experience.
- codedokode 1y ago
  Every "Hatsune Miku" song has a talented person behind that avatar. Miku is just a synth and 3D model.

thomastjeffery 1y ago

Would Taylor Swift be famous without the support of her label? I sincerely doubt it. How many equally talented artists We should be careful not to conflate the affects of copyright to the affects of advertising.