Sayman is a native Spanish speaker, and his family is from Peru. As for Sayman’s own AI listening habits, his current favorite is “Por Que,” an AI duet between Rihanna and Bad Bunny. Does its existence mean that musicians will be getting ripped off in new ways? And is it worth a listen? We don’t yet know the answer to either, but for the latter we do have a burgeoning resource in AI Hits.Ĭurrently, Sayman is working on improving the search functionality and on fielding requests from AI Hits’ many impassioned users. The pressing questions over AI music are human ones. After kicking up a fuss over “Heart on My Sleeve,” UMG then moved quickly to embrace machine-learning technology by partnering with an AI company called Endel.Īll of which is a reminder that theorizing about worst-case scenarios ignores the bad-case scenarios that musicians and fans are currently facing. But writers are collectively saying no.” And DeFrancesco does have reason for concern.
#MY WAY USHER BACK COVER FREE#
“Any potentially interesting artistic uses of AI pale in comparison to the corporate domination of AI that will inevitably occur under our current music industry power structures,” DeFrancesco says. “The tech capitalist fantasy” in the music industry “has always been to cut out the artists entirely and remove the need for any royalty payments.”ĭeFrancesco points out that artists have successfully combated damages from emerging tech in the past: “Musicians in the 1940s went on strike to demand that the profits created by new vinyl record technologies be shared with musicians, and they won.” He also points to the ongoing Writers Guild of America strike, saying, “The big studios want free rein over AI so they can harvest writers' work then cut them out entirely. It could even unfurl a whole new genre of music.įor Joey DeFrancesco, a musician and organizer with the Union of Musicians and Allied Workers, what’s alarming about AI is how the major labels may ultimately utilize it. On a recent podcast interview, Ice Cube urged Drake to directly sue the creator of “Heart on My Sleeve,” and he has tweeted that he finds the idea of generating a song in the style of a dead artist without the approval of the artist’s estate to be “ evil and demonic.” But when looking past AI’s potential for legal or ethical blunders, other artists, from pioneering musicians like Holly Herndon to legacy acts like the the Pet Shop Boys, are bullish on AI as a creative tool. Spotify quickly took down “Heart on My Sleeve,” and UMG, Drake’s parent label, has pushed the company to purge thousands of other AI-made songs. That latter question, over the legality of the practice of AI music, is central. “And how does that even work, when you can make a hundred remixes of the same song?” “How do you search? Who are the creators? How do you attribute labels to them? What do those revenue splits look like?” he says. The landscape of AI music is endlessly, discursively messy, but as Sayman points out, we’re all present at the outset of a conversation that will unspool over years.
It’s a step toward the creation of a shared lexicon around all this stuff. This use of nomenclature may seem small, but it is significant.
In conversation, Sayman uses the term “voice” to refer to the artist being mimicked, and he uses the term “artist” to refer to the username of whoever created the song.
0 kommentar(er)
