The article criticizes AI-generated music and argues the music industry is legitimizing artificial content at the expense of real artists.
But who and what are "real artists"? Much of the boring BS (i.e. "slop") the record monopolists serve us on the charts via Spotify etc. composed and played by "real musicians" is so monotonous, standardized, and superficial that it hardly requires real musicians, and I certainly wouldn't call these creators "real artists."
For me, true artists are not only people who have mastered their craft to perfection, but those who advance culture and humanity and create new things that the world has never seen before, and which therefore often do not appeal to the masses. It's a joke anyway, considering that most of today's popular artists don't even have to compose, arrange or play "their own" music anymore; there are even prominent cases where the "artists" move their lips, but someone else is actually singing. So we cannot even be sure, who actually is the real artist.
Ironically, as a musician myself (used to be a professional musician and producer twenty years ago, still making music), I find the arrangements and solos that Suno has generated from my uploaded pieces much more creative and even "human" than most of the stuff that the record monopolists serve up these days (see e.g. https://rochus-keller.ch/?p=1428).
In my view, the real danger is not so much that AI music will become "legitimate" (most people can no longer distinguish between human and machine-generated music anyway), but rather that the record monopolists, with their market power achieved through lobbying and other shady practices, will crush innovative companies like Suno (ironically, ostensibly in the name of the musicians whose exploitation enabled them to gain this power in the first place) and then use this technology themselves to improve their margins even further by eliminating other cost factors such as composers and studio musicians. Since more and more people are consuming anonymous playlists without ever caring about the musicians who made the songs, nobody will notice. But they will continue to pay for their Spotify subscription, most of which will continue to go to the record monopolists.
There would't be a problem if there was transparency and clear boundaries. The future is simply enjoying what you want, but we have to get there past these first steps.
> Another issue, as I’ve pointed out in the past, is that these AI-generated songs are taking attention – and money – away from actual songwriters and artists
Sorry, no, I find this all to be a bit too precious by half - I don’t think country fans have the discerning musical taste that the author somehow expects here. Attention and money is “taken” away? No, dude, people are giving their money and their attention, willingly, eagerly even, to this “ai slop.”
People used to support “actual songwriters and artists” because they had no choice, there was no other source of music! Not because they thought there was something special and worthwhile about the songwriters and the artists themselves, by and large.
I don’t think you have any right to be ‘infuriated’ that your romantic ideals about how people consume entertainment didn’t get born out over time as technology shifts and the market follows.
The reality we’re all been shown is: most people simply do not care for authenticity, for ‘real’ or for what is true… they just want something that makes them feel the way they expect, and they aren’t interested in thinking about it any further than that.
Why should this be true literally everywhere else, but not country music?
> I don’t think country fans have the discerning musical taste that the author somehow expects here
I'm not sure he assumes this, the author (Aaron Ryan) also was briefly interviewed at NPR [1] where the wording is neutral
And I think that's more so in country music than other genres, which have depended on computers a lot more. Country music has really prided itself on the authenticity in songwriting and in music. And there's a large segment of country music fans that don't even like things like Auto-Tune, and so I think asking country fans and artists to accept AI is a big pill to swallow for a lot of people.
The mystery of who is behind it is not solved, but for another AI artist, Xania Monet, there is more information. In this CBS News fragment [2], the real author of the AI hits, Telisha "Nikki" Jones, defends herself and even shares how she actually works with Suno to create the songs. It’s interesting because, this time, the lyrics are human-originated. To me, she seems like a mix of a music manager, music producer, and co-author all in one. Probably, after her talent is recognized, the label might offer her co-authors, musicians, and others to collaborate with and create hits with real people. But without this first step, when she had to rely on her own skills and opportunities, it wouldn't have been possible. Like an example from AI-less era - without the $7,000-made "El Mariachi," there wouldn’t be Robert Rodriguez as we know him.
too harsh by half
even if you are correct
the picture I get from your words is a population bravely huddled , and making the best of these, there last moments,chirping along to cozy lyrics,shivering, before a horrible doom befalls them.
and so yes, I am not also not a fan of things that encourage nebbish behavior.
though as I did go to school for sound engineering, with courses in acoustics and music theory, music business managment, etc, the inevitability of our current musical landscape's inevitability is clear, but still "infuriating"
The genre constantly ridiculed for having a rotation of five trops is outperformed by AI? I'm shocked.
If artists want to outperform AI, the solution is simple: create better songs. This may finally force the genre to innovate.
I guess if it leaves the "rotation of five tropes", most people won't buy it anymore.
The article criticizes AI-generated music and argues the music industry is legitimizing artificial content at the expense of real artists.
But who and what are "real artists"? Much of the boring BS (i.e. "slop") the record monopolists serve us on the charts via Spotify etc. composed and played by "real musicians" is so monotonous, standardized, and superficial that it hardly requires real musicians, and I certainly wouldn't call these creators "real artists."
For me, true artists are not only people who have mastered their craft to perfection, but those who advance culture and humanity and create new things that the world has never seen before, and which therefore often do not appeal to the masses. It's a joke anyway, considering that most of today's popular artists don't even have to compose, arrange or play "their own" music anymore; there are even prominent cases where the "artists" move their lips, but someone else is actually singing. So we cannot even be sure, who actually is the real artist.
Ironically, as a musician myself (used to be a professional musician and producer twenty years ago, still making music), I find the arrangements and solos that Suno has generated from my uploaded pieces much more creative and even "human" than most of the stuff that the record monopolists serve up these days (see e.g. https://rochus-keller.ch/?p=1428).
In my view, the real danger is not so much that AI music will become "legitimate" (most people can no longer distinguish between human and machine-generated music anyway), but rather that the record monopolists, with their market power achieved through lobbying and other shady practices, will crush innovative companies like Suno (ironically, ostensibly in the name of the musicians whose exploitation enabled them to gain this power in the first place) and then use this technology themselves to improve their margins even further by eliminating other cost factors such as composers and studio musicians. Since more and more people are consuming anonymous playlists without ever caring about the musicians who made the songs, nobody will notice. But they will continue to pay for their Spotify subscription, most of which will continue to go to the record monopolists.
(originally posted here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45876674)
There would't be a problem if there was transparency and clear boundaries. The future is simply enjoying what you want, but we have to get there past these first steps.
Previous
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45878415#45878963
Why?
> Another issue, as I’ve pointed out in the past, is that these AI-generated songs are taking attention – and money – away from actual songwriters and artists
Sorry, no, I find this all to be a bit too precious by half - I don’t think country fans have the discerning musical taste that the author somehow expects here. Attention and money is “taken” away? No, dude, people are giving their money and their attention, willingly, eagerly even, to this “ai slop.”
People used to support “actual songwriters and artists” because they had no choice, there was no other source of music! Not because they thought there was something special and worthwhile about the songwriters and the artists themselves, by and large.
I don’t think you have any right to be ‘infuriated’ that your romantic ideals about how people consume entertainment didn’t get born out over time as technology shifts and the market follows.
The reality we’re all been shown is: most people simply do not care for authenticity, for ‘real’ or for what is true… they just want something that makes them feel the way they expect, and they aren’t interested in thinking about it any further than that.
Why should this be true literally everywhere else, but not country music?
> I don’t think country fans have the discerning musical taste that the author somehow expects here
I'm not sure he assumes this, the author (Aaron Ryan) also was briefly interviewed at NPR [1] where the wording is neutral
The mystery of who is behind it is not solved, but for another AI artist, Xania Monet, there is more information. In this CBS News fragment [2], the real author of the AI hits, Telisha "Nikki" Jones, defends herself and even shares how she actually works with Suno to create the songs. It’s interesting because, this time, the lyrics are human-originated. To me, she seems like a mix of a music manager, music producer, and co-author all in one. Probably, after her talent is recognized, the label might offer her co-authors, musicians, and others to collaborate with and create hits with real people. But without this first step, when she had to rely on her own skills and opportunities, it wouldn't have been possible. Like an example from AI-less era - without the $7,000-made "El Mariachi," there wouldn’t be Robert Rodriguez as we know him.[1] https://www.npr.org/2025/11/10/nx-s1-5604320/breaking-rust-i...
[2] https://www.cbsnews.com/video/creator-ai-artist-speaks-amid-...
too harsh by half even if you are correct the picture I get from your words is a population bravely huddled , and making the best of these, there last moments,chirping along to cozy lyrics,shivering, before a horrible doom befalls them. and so yes, I am not also not a fan of things that encourage nebbish behavior. though as I did go to school for sound engineering, with courses in acoustics and music theory, music business managment, etc, the inevitability of our current musical landscape's inevitability is clear, but still "infuriating"