4 ms·

> Consumers are by and large not listening to AI generated music Consumers are sadly too ignorant to tell. YouTube is brimming with AI music slop and people pr

> Consumers are by and large not listening to AI generated music Consumers are sadly too ignorant to tell. YouTube is brimming with AI music slop and people praising it in the comments because they are unable to tell the difference (and it is actually pretty easy once you know what to look out for)

Lammy 5mo ago
How can you trust that the commenters aren't AI too?
agmater 5mo ago
Could you elaborate? I can't tell with music and voice
- julianlam 5mo ago
  Lo-fi channels used to show the artist and song names. These newer ones don't bother with credits, or have made up song titles. E.g. "funky chicken jam"
- uncircle 5mo ago
  You won't tell from the music. It's obviously an AI generated mix when: - the channel posts multiple mixes per week - the thumbnail is clearly AI generated - most importantly, the tracklist never includes any author, because there are none If you search for "<genre> mix" on YouTube right now, 9/10 results fail these criteria.
neonstatic 5mo ago
Realistically speaking, why is that a problem? What is the point of music if not enjoyment? If these people enjoy it, what's wrong with it?
- lifeformed 5mo ago
  It takes away from real human artists who do their part to slowly advance human culture. Music will not develop without human artists. Maybe for this moment in time AI can fulfill some people's musical desires, but it's not going to keep up with the times. The point of art, in a general sense, is humanity. Automating away your artistic needs is like automating away your social needs. It's a one way "relationship" that is superficial and self-indulgent. It's a step towards an empty world.
  - neonstatic 5mo ago
    That's the creator's perspective. From a listener's perspective, it's "do I enjoy it" or "do I not enjoy it". Everything else is intellectualization.
    - card_zero 5mo ago
      But that means nothing. There's no raw "enjoy", except maybe drugs, and I have my doubts about that.
      - neonstatic 5mo ago
        > There's no raw "enjoy" What do you mean?
  - Ferret7446 5mo ago
    Painters said the same thing about cameras
    - Zopieux 5mo ago
      And turns out there is still room to enjoy both photography and paintings as their own art forms.
  - pixel_popping 5mo ago
    Why would music not develop without human artists? This isn't true at all, "AI" isn't necessary LLM as well, there is plenty of ways for AI to innovate, and let's be real, most musics from humans are a bit of copy-cat nowadays, ton of AI music actually made me vibe personally and stuff I haven't heard before. Have you tried a day of listening solely to AI music? I feel you might change your mind, sure sometimes there is some serious off-tune (feels like an hallucination from the model) but we know this is temporary. PS: I'm conscious of what it does to humanity, but there is also facts that AI does produce great songs, that's 2 different discussions.
- RiverCrochet 5mo ago
  You hear a song with vocals that strongly emotionally resonate with you, reminding you of your mother who passed away recently after a long terrible illness. You want to know more about the singer that almost brought you to tears, only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated.
  - neonstatic 5mo ago
    So it does something good for you, then you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made. You are letting your mind overwrite a genuine response you had based on an opinion that "it should not feel good because it's AI made". As I said in another comment - intelectualization.
    - card_zero 5mo ago
      It does something good for you emotionally, via cognition. Further cognition ruins this. Never meet your heroes, sort of thing.
    - Dylan16807 5mo ago
      > you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made That is not what they said. This reads like you're replying to a previous post and ignoring the actual explanation they gave.
      - neonstatic 5mo ago
        It's my interpretation of "only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated" in this context
        Dylan16807 5mo ago
        The key words are "there is none". It's not the label, it's the lack of the person writing those lyrics.
        5mo ago
threepts 5mo ago
If AI music sells like you proclaim, it would be bad for spotify to NOT ban it, since it is printing money.
- petre 5mo ago
  It's like the MBS during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. Today it prints money, tomorrow it blows up in your face. Yeah they put a blue check on it like Elon did. Until they get paid to put the check on slop. Rotten fish is still rotten even if you mix it with fresh fish and label it accordingly.

Lammy 5mo ago

How can you trust that the commenters aren't AI too?

agmater 5mo ago

Could you elaborate? I can't tell with music and voice

julianlam 5mo ago
Lo-fi channels used to show the artist and song names. These newer ones don't bother with credits, or have made up song titles. E.g. "funky chicken jam"
uncircle 5mo ago
You won't tell from the music. It's obviously an AI generated mix when: - the channel posts multiple mixes per week - the thumbnail is clearly AI generated - most importantly, the tracklist never includes any author, because there are none If you search for "<genre> mix" on YouTube right now, 9/10 results fail these criteria.

neonstatic 5mo ago

Realistically speaking, why is that a problem? What is the point of music if not enjoyment? If these people enjoy it, what's wrong with it?

lifeformed 5mo ago
It takes away from real human artists who do their part to slowly advance human culture. Music will not develop without human artists. Maybe for this moment in time AI can fulfill some people's musical desires, but it's not going to keep up with the times. The point of art, in a general sense, is humanity. Automating away your artistic needs is like automating away your social needs. It's a one way "relationship" that is superficial and self-indulgent. It's a step towards an empty world.
- neonstatic 5mo ago
  That's the creator's perspective. From a listener's perspective, it's "do I enjoy it" or "do I not enjoy it". Everything else is intellectualization.
  - card_zero 5mo ago
    But that means nothing. There's no raw "enjoy", except maybe drugs, and I have my doubts about that.
    - neonstatic 5mo ago
      > There's no raw "enjoy" What do you mean?
- Ferret7446 5mo ago
  Painters said the same thing about cameras
  - Zopieux 5mo ago
    And turns out there is still room to enjoy both photography and paintings as their own art forms.
- pixel_popping 5mo ago
  Why would music not develop without human artists? This isn't true at all, "AI" isn't necessary LLM as well, there is plenty of ways for AI to innovate, and let's be real, most musics from humans are a bit of copy-cat nowadays, ton of AI music actually made me vibe personally and stuff I haven't heard before. Have you tried a day of listening solely to AI music? I feel you might change your mind, sure sometimes there is some serious off-tune (feels like an hallucination from the model) but we know this is temporary. PS: I'm conscious of what it does to humanity, but there is also facts that AI does produce great songs, that's 2 different discussions.
RiverCrochet 5mo ago
You hear a song with vocals that strongly emotionally resonate with you, reminding you of your mother who passed away recently after a long terrible illness. You want to know more about the singer that almost brought you to tears, only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated.
- neonstatic 5mo ago
  So it does something good for you, then you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made. You are letting your mind overwrite a genuine response you had based on an opinion that "it should not feel good because it's AI made". As I said in another comment - intelectualization.
  - card_zero 5mo ago
    It does something good for you emotionally, via cognition. Further cognition ruins this. Never meet your heroes, sort of thing.
  - Dylan16807 5mo ago
    > you decide to put a label on it due to how it was made That is not what they said. This reads like you're replying to a previous post and ignoring the actual explanation they gave.
    - neonstatic 5mo ago
      It's my interpretation of "only to find there is none and that the song was AI generated" in this context
      - Dylan16807 5mo ago
        The key words are "there is none". It's not the label, it's the lack of the person writing those lyrics.
        5mo ago

threepts 5mo ago

If AI music sells like you proclaim, it would be bad for spotify to NOT ban it, since it is printing money.

petre 5mo ago
It's like the MBS during the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis. Today it prints money, tomorrow it blows up in your face. Yeah they put a blue check on it like Elon did. Until they get paid to put the check on slop. Rotten fish is still rotten even if you mix it with fresh fish and label it accordingly.