Our Terms & Conditions | Our Privacy Policy
New Delhi/Siddharth N
The AI “artist” The Velvet Sundown has amassed over 1 million followers on Spotify which sparked a lot of ethical debates which derive from the concerns for musicians’ artistic authenticity and income.
AI Band The Velvet Sundown
Social media platforms have become a litter of these artificial “artists” making it nearly impossible to browse for long without stumbling upon content made by a generative AI.
When it comes to music, most artists on the internet who upload their music from their bedrooms or makeshift studios are at a risk of being plagiarised. This is not in their favour as of current, the use of their art by AI is not credited and in such a vast network of artists, the user is unlikely to identify the original artists. If their “creation” does well, the original artists stand a chance to lose out on potential followers and listeners which for most artists is the key ingredient when it comes to success in the field.
Generative Artificial Intelligence, or GenAI is a technological tool that allows users to create artistic and academic content through prompts. This tool has now been woven into a musical approach with the tool Suno AI.
This is of course without a doubt a tremendous achievement in technology but this is not without its own set of issues.
“This isn’t a trick – it’s a mirror. An ongoing artistic provocation designed to challenge the boundaries of authorship, identity, and the future of music itself in the age of AI.” Says the about section of the band on Spotify.
It further states that any resemblances to existing or deceased musicians is co-incidental. While this is true on the surface level, any AI solely depends on a database of information. This database is nothing but a storage of existing art, thus making it far from co-incidence.
Any generative AI, when given a prompt, develops its own database of referential information. It implements this collected information into something seemingly new. However, when it comes to art, information that these tools reference is more than likely art that has been created by other artists on the internet and any art that has been archived on the internet for the general public to experience.
For example, if you were to ask the image generating tool ‘Dall-E’ by OpenAI, in the style of artists Vincent Van Gogh and Pablo Picasso, the AI will sample art by these artists and create something that may seem new but is really pieces of original and authentic art joined together into something else.
The user could also make their own art and ask an AI to blend it with other styles, but this still causes concerns of plagiarism as the “other” art in this case is likely to be done by someone else.
It is true that specific musicans’ sounds coming through may be co-incidental. However, it is a surety that original art will come through in most sounds as that is a key ingredient in the very functioning of any generative AI.
Another event was a surge of popularity gained by an Indian AI band, Trilok which blends Indian spiritual music with the genre of metal. This project was launched by an organisation called Collective Media Network.
AI Band Trilok
“According to Vijay Subramaniam, founder and CEO of Collective Artists Network, the idea behind Trilok came from a personal place. He says it reminded him of his college band days. But the project is also meant to explore how creativity and technology can come together in new ways,” reported moneycontrol, a business news daily.
READ MORE: Dr Ejaz Ali: The doctor who charges ₹10 for consultation
While this is an important approach, and an innovative one, regulations to provide safety and compensation to the art of other musicians must be put in place for this reality to be attained by fair means.
Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.
Aggregated From –
Comments are closed.