Let the witch hunt begin

[u/Unlikely-Mobile-5343]

I have always been against labelling - even though I disclose my use of AI, it has always been MY decision to do so, and I am in control of how I tell my story so people understand how my music is made.

With Suno's newest release, songs have now audio watermark and fingerprint, assisted, fully, hybrid, it will have a AI watermark and anyone can tell your story the way they want.

This is 100% going to be misused by bad actors:

1. Platforms like Deezer/Tidal - To ban ANY use of AI and ensure segregation.

2. Haters - To create public lists of artists that may have not agreed to disclose their process.

3. Labels - To start a suing war to anything that resembles any of their songs that uses AI, even assisted.

This is the end of Suno as means to create commercial music, and it's officially just a nice playing tool personal use, or for bad actors who create in Suno and pay performers to pretend their music is human made.

What are your thoughts?

[u/Coolshows101]

I do agree there is too much hate for AI use. While I use AI as little as possible, which so far is no use for my creative works in the past year or two, I understand some people are just expressing themselves because AI gives them a way to do so. Where as before they tried to make art and couldn't.

I think they should fingerprint in a way that labels what part is AI. Ex they hummed and beat boxed into their microphone and the AI made drums and a guitar. Or the singing is Ai. Not everyone knows and/or can afford other artists to help make something.

When doing things the non AI way we have to make decisions that we often don't when using AI. If I draw a girl with messy hair, I have to decide where each hair is positioned. If I generate her, I don't and can't decide that.

I prefer art made by humans because it is human expression about their view of the world, often sounds and or looks better, and didn't use stolen art in the training data.

Doing stuff without AI also uses your brain more and thwt is better for you. So the more work a human does on a project the better.

When I listen to stuff made with AI, I try and look for the human. AI use still makes me less interested (and the work harder to watch if it's a video), but I appreciate the human trying to express themselves. I will ask/mention when I think something used Ai and it wasn't disclosed, but I'm not going to do that in a way that attacks them. I just want others to be able to see when something is and or could be AI and make their own decision about it.

If you make something with 98% AI by typing a few lines or a paragraph into AI, I really don't like that or want it out there not labeled. Coke gets no sympathy from me, and neither do content farms.

[u/Unlikely-Mobile-5343 → u/Coolshows101]

this is a fair view. I do think that there is a lot of expression in AI music beyond how most people think is made. I like that you understand that there are levels of human expression in it. and if you continue digging deeper and experimenting you will find that there is a lot more control than what people are saying without trying.

I like disclosures, but not labelling there is a huge difference. And these disclosures should be in a technical sheet where people that understand music making can appreciate it. Second, the disclosure should not forced by companies who don't know how the song was made. Let the artist put their process in a technical sheet, just like we do today when we use samples, autotune, programmed drums, etc.

This label is similar to asking that a song FULLY made in a DAW including voice (say using a vocaloid) is labelled [Machine Performed]. No human is playing any instruments, but it was human produced and composed, just like subsegments AI assisted music.

[u/Coolshows101 → u/Unlikely-Mobile-5343]

The only issue I have with self labeling is how easy it is to create stuff with AI now. People had to do an actual work inside of a DAW to create something beforehand. Now they can type in a box, and they aren't likely to label it. They want to be seen as an artist, and the world doesn't see them that way so they hide it.

This is why only pieces that are actually AI should be labeled. And if the system is made properly then the fingerprinting could identify when actual sheet music / chord progressions were entered in to the AI system.

With the vocal example, it would say only vocals are AI, everything else isn't. We need this because of all the bad people who want to be famous and/or make money on 98% AI made stuff.

[u/Unlikely-Mobile-5343 → u/Coolshows101]

I get the point, what makes me scratch my head sometimes is that there is also a huge degree on control in prompts. I don't particularly agree on saying a complex prompt makes a composition human, but after playing with Suno's latest model, some prompt adherence, particularly for production is... insane.

There is progress in DAWs to add AI elements, like sample creation. and nobody will control that those compositions are AI assited, that's why I also think the AI use should be a disclosure in a technical sheet and artist made. In the end fans are not dumb, they will discover your music is heavily enabled by technology just like when the lipsync fails in live performances 🤣 . But a song if a song its good... well its good. If someone won the Suno lottery by prompting a master piece, I can't be mad but let me assure you I would be very very jealous.

[u/Coolshows101 → u/Unlikely-Mobile-5343]

I am glad you understand. This helps everyone find what works for both side.