Dr. Dre says only people who see AI as a threat are those who have trouble creating

[MACATL 2,146]

1 hour ago, Bronco said:

He's right people opposed digitized instrumentation.

But that's where it ends. 

Those digital tools all rely on the user's skill and ability to use them. 

In fact, the synthesiser was only successful because of human creativity in its use through the New Romantics/New Wave generation of artists. 

Those tools didn't rely on preexisting artistry to work. And they weren't capable of autonomy. They were only useable by creatives actively using them. 

Meanwhile, LLM based GenAI is a replicator. It replicates the datasets fed into it. Which feeds itself into a death loop that kills uniqueness and creativity. 

Look at the growth in AI made digital business flyers we're seeing across social media. 

Line then up side by side. And look at the homogenised design, the only difference is the specific wording for each business. Everything else is identical.

There’s a simple way to take a stand against it if it bothers you - don’t listen to or buy it.  Then let what will be, be. 

[LGAte 1,002]

I’m kind of in the middle. I think some people use it stupidly and some people use it creatively.

 

If you educate yourself about prompts you actually can use it very effectively. 
 

it’s not all just….”what’s this cough I’m experiencing from?” 
 

it can get sophisticated.

I really hate AI in terms of generating physical art and stealing ideas. But I also think we have always kind of used AI it was just a really analog version of it and quite frankly there are rich people who don’t want you to use AI because then you might learn how to do something that they want to monopolize for themselves. 

[Duella Dvil 11,719]

GOD I HATE EVERYBODY AND EVERYTHING

[PEZ 6,608]

I challenge his premise. Who are the people who "see it as a threat" to their own musicianship? They speak up because it sounds like caca, not because they feel threatened or intimidated by its (lack of) artistry    I don't like the insinuation that anyone who's against AI in music is uncreative or insecure

Edited 2 hours ago by PEZ

[ChicaSkas 24,047]

3 hours ago, PartySick said:

On the one hand, I think there is a way to use generative AI creatively. There are a lot of guardrails and regulations that need to be in place first but further down the road it could provide some incredibly interesting soundscapes when guided by a human artist's hands.

On the other hand...no

It's not just about having to compete with products that are literally created via algorithms to be consumable, it's about protecting existing work from being poached and twisted.

It's also creatively bankrupt until genAI takes that step into protecting humans over generating profits.

Music takes love, algorithms don't love.

I want it used for specific purposes under expert hands. Like when they isolated John Lennons voice from an old reel to reel cassette tape, and isolated his accapella out from under all the layers of instruments on the tape  -- that was a very good use of ai subtracting what we wanted to reveal underneath the sound. That was positive. I want to see AI in medical sciences to kill cancer and run tests the human mind can't. But the crappy art ai or creative ai isn't where it's at, unless it's helping someone else come up with organic inspiration. 

[bxr 2,502]

1 hour ago, Bronco said:

He's right people opposed digitized instrumentation.

But that's where it ends. 

Those digital tools all rely on the user's skill and ability to use them. 

In fact, the synthesiser was only successful because of human creativity in its use through the New Romantics/New Wave generation of artists. 

[Purrrrrr 18,292]

36 minutes ago, MACATL said:

It’s replacing real musicians in the studio maybe?  Currently only the vocalist is real, and yes I want that to remain as-is, but even that is often ao digitally altered, that it’s not real either.  

are you saying digital music production is replacing 'real' musicians?

if you opened up a digital music software right this second, could you make a song that sounds good? 

You could open a gen AI and type in what you need and that would make a song that sounds pretty good..

Difference is one you actually have to make it and the other it makes it for you, literally incomparable

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,741]

I'm seeing them manufacture consent and I see it slowly working. The masses really have no brain or backbone. Disgusting. 

[27monster27 15,963]

Dr. Dre is supposed to be a foundational music mogul btw. This is embarrassing.

[onTheBrink 1,536]

Imagine broadcasting that you're not even creating your own stuff. 

[nATAH 57,528]

1 hour ago, MACATL said:

It’s replacing real musicians in the studio maybe?  Currently only the vocalist is real, and yes I want that to remain as-is, but even that is often ao digitally altered, that it’s not real either.  

if you had any of that equipment in front of you, could you use it to create a professional sounding piece of music?

you still need skillmanship as a musician to use these things

anyone can open photoshop, only an artist with any sort of skill can use it to create

Edited 1 hour ago by nATAH

[Roughhouse Dandy 13,741]

37 minutes ago, nATAH said:

you still need skillmanship as a musician to use these things

👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

Edited 1 hour ago by Roughhouse Dandy

[gagzus 24,083]

As a creative person who can design, create music, write, paint and think critically about art and entertainment eat my ass old man.

[nATAH 57,528]

9 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

You really don't though; all you need is command of a 5th grade level vocabulary. 

maybe to press a button, you still need skills on music to create a finished piece either digital or analog

Edited 1 hour ago by nATAH

[Bronco 26,661]

11 minutes ago, Roughhouse Dandy said:

You really don't though; all you need is command of a 5th grade level vocabulary. 

Think you misread the comment. Natah wasnt talking about AI.