Performing musicians who are already struggling with rising costs and shrinking budgets how have to grapple with a new challenge – the rise in popularity of AI Generated Music.

Rick Beato drives home this reality citing the example of AI generated singer Sienna Rose on Spotify.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XGct4rbYfI


Sienna Rose has over 4 million monthly Spotify listeners. Here are some of her tracks:


https://open.spotify.com/artist/6wq8iklwcF2dj0jtMpPvOJ


They sound captivating. Many of her fans are totally oblivious of the fact that all this music and her persona is 100% AI generated. Even if they knew, most would not care. Spotify is actively promoting this new genre of AI generated music because they do not have to pay any royalty fees. Spotify is not putting an AI label on this content to fool most listeners.

Paul Carman, Editor of Keyboard World Magazine mentioned that he is getting more business on his GiftTrax Personalized Songs than his regular content.

For £49 one can order a custom song embracing their personal memories and special occasions all enhanced with an AI generated voice and lyrics played over Paul’s own superb orchestration skills on arranger workstations. It is a clever mix of AI with raw musical talent.


https://www.keyboardworld.co.uk/product-page/gifttrax-personalized-song


The results are stunning and his sales figures prove this new trend.

The landscape of Music Performance is changing rapidly. There was a time when real musicians were hired for entertaining wedding guests, office parties and dance clubs. They mostly got replaced by DJ’s who charged a lot less. The audience did not care so long they could dance to a beat.

Many musicians still make a living by sharing their music on Spotify receiving royalties. They are on the verge of being replaced by AI generated music that is increasingly becoming difficult to differentiate from the real thing.

AI generated songs now make up nearly 40% of music uploaded to streaming services daily.

Consider the arc of evolution of the modern arranger. Real musicians playing in an orchestra were replaced by home organs with dual manuals and a pedal board. They came with auto-accompaniment styles that allowed a skill performer to mimic the sound of a full band.

They were bulky and expensive. They got replaced by portable arranger keyboards which were more affordable with better sounds and styles.

Creative individuals can get impressive results from a Yamaha Genos2 and/or a Korg Pa5x Pro with the clever injection of AI generated voices, choirs and backing tracks. Paul’s latest CD, “Dream Themes” is the best example that encapsulates this new trend. As Gunnar summarizes his impressions, “This album from Paul is simply medicine for both body, mind and soul.”

I concur 100%. I was blown away listening to the sophistication of the tracks enhanced with AI.

Question is, should we embrace AI to expand the envelope of what is possible or should this trend be universally condemned?

AI is still in its infancy. I can only imagine what may be possible 10 years down the road. Maybe, we would all be able to generate songs tailored to our taste or mood on the fly with just a single text prompt like, “Play me a happy party song celebrating my graduation in the voice of Lionel Richie.”

Tidal, Qobuz and Spotify may have a new section where members could request playback of custom songs on the fly. Imagine if you could have Sarah McLachlan sing a soothing lullaby addressed to you or have Alison Krauss sing a country song written just for you on demand.

The possibilities are endless.

The day an AI gets up on stage on my gig, I'll worry! I'm long past the age that I'd worry about it doing my studio gigs, and honestly I'm not much interested in 'producing' most of the vapid modern chart type stuff anyway! The minute I threw in a diminished chord I'd get bumped off the 'algorithm' anyway.

The only upside I see nowadays is, if AI completely destroys the commercial pablum crap pop music scene, talented musicians, instead of chasing after the pop brass ring and the money, may now concentrate on making TRULY 'original' music. Music no one's ever heard before. And if no one's heard it yet, AI can't copy it...

Because that's all AI does. It copies very well. But it doesn't have an original idea in its head. Because it has no head. No heart. No soul. It’s essentially a jukebox that plays stuff that's CLOSE to what has previously been popular.

So there'll always be room for originality. We may even see that more now than before when musicians who would have made unoriginal music because it paid well no longer have that option.

It's going to be an interesting next 10 years 😱🤣

All original music comes from what has gone before (That's how humans learn), so give AI your 10yrs and it could well replace real people. (And if it goes too far the Terminator could be come fact not fiction)

Bill

If we live that long, it might be interesting to see how it develops .... 🤔😁

I remember Roland E-15 / E-20 INTELLIGENT Synthesizers.

Hi Gunnar,

Yes, I do remember the Roland E-15 and E-20 Intelligent Arrangers. Keyboard Magazine published a glowing review on the Roland E-20. They said it took a flame thrower to get their hands off this additive toy.

I purchased the Roland Pro-E Intelligent Arranger along with the Roland MSL-15 Super Card. It was one of the most versatile backing devices back in those days. It was built like a tank with all metal construction. It still works flawlessly.

Arranger Workstations have steadily evolved with new features, better sounds, styles and onboard effects. This is a mature technology. The next logical step would be to add AI enhancements. This is inevitable.

While the AI creep into musical performances will continue, I still feel the audience will always recognize and appreciate raw talent.

Take for example the universal popularity of 22-year old singing sensation Lucy Thomas. She is redefining all the classics with her unique impeccable pitch perfect voice and vocal range that conveys genuine emotion and power with every syllable.

Here is Lucy singing Hallelujah. It got 72M views.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4hjgkvuKES8


Here is Audra Miller singing Sweet Child O’ Mine. This was an exceptional performance.
This got 74M views.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J61mtatKT1I


Here is Rousseau playing Chopin – Etude Op. 10 No. 1. Watch the precision, speed and flow of his flawless delivery.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JRgQgr4-at8



I think no matter how far AI advances there will still be an audience who would appreciate raw talent and pay to hear gifted performers. Individuals with exceptional capabilities will never be replaced by AI.

Assuming the audience isn't replaced by AI, as nobody will be able to afford to go out when all jobs have been replaced by AI robots. (And yes, it has already started)

Bill

That's right, Diki. I remember when disco was all over the place. Lots of musicians making their living playing live were working themselves into a frazzle. This was about 1980, I think.

While the kind of jobs available changed, there were still opportunities in the business. My opportunities grew tremendously. Because of advances in film editing equipment and production techniques, there was lots more score work. Research tells us that an original score (as opposed to needle drop material) used for support for titling, film highlights, mood changes, etc make the overall projects much more effective. They are much more expensive to produce. AI needs to advance significantly to be able to be used for message embellishment like we do with real instruments used to write and record scores that really add value to the project.

In my case, I do the proposed score to the latest version of the footage. Then, the sales prevention department (formerly known as the legal department) get with the masters of BS (usually known as the marketing department). The result is always a rewrite, which, if done by the script originators, makes the score not work precisely with the complete production.

I was head writer for a Fortune 500 company, so fitting a rewrite to a score and making the changes necessary is a difficult job, but one I enjoy and get paid for.

At 81, I have more work than I ever did.

And I have a sincere appreciation for the opportunities I have had and for the chance to participate in the exciting fields of music production and performance.


Be well, all,


Russ

Captain Russ

Always a pleasure to read your thoughts of wisdom over the years !!!!!!!! Hoping for more years to come

Ron ( a long time fan)

Hi Russ,

Thanks for sharing your decades of experience as a working musician in the film industry. Your skills cannot be replaced. You will always be in demand. I find it fascinating how SynthZone gives us a global platform to meet and learn from one another and share our unique perspectives.

I believe real talent cannot be replaced by AI. Consider Katherine Cordova’s cover of Viva La Vida by Coldplay. She captures the soul of this piece on just the piano.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxUhKY7jveE


Compare this to an AI recreation with a female voice backed by a full orchestra. I cannot find any fault with this AI version.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1OAjlr8eJw


Here is another AI version of I Will Always Love You by the same creator – Nada Semesta Official.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQGz9bcGwhU


Here is one more AI version of Can’t Help Falling In Love.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRRTN62jfD8


If this is the current state of AI, imagine what would be possible 10 years from now?

Here is Lucy Thomas singing Can’t Help Falling In Love.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0siyVtIxu4M


AI cannot quite match her. Not yet.
However, it is only a matter of time before AI catches up and surpasses what is humanly possible. Imagine an AI version of Mariah Carey that exceeds her iconic vocal range.

I can see a future where the audience may prefer to listen to a flawless superhuman version of a hit song. The human mind craves for perfection. This explains the demand for photoshopped models on glamour magazines. These magazines would not sell so well if original unedited photos were featured on their covers.

And therein lies the problem, those in magazines have consented to the alterations, whereas AI is being used to alter peoples looks and state of dress without their permission.

AI has great possibilities but humans always find a way to missus any new technology that comes out, and if not delt with will overtake anything good that comes from AI.

Bill