Actually, That AI Drake and The Weeknd Song Is Not Eligible for a Grammy

Comments

• Treczoks@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  They are way more afraid of the fact that this is non-copyrightable than anything else. I mean, the junk music the companies distribute will soon get adequate competition by AI generated junk music of comparable low quality. What will they be able to sell then?

  source
• DingleBoone@reddthat.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  I went and looked it up because I had to hear what an AI-made song nominated for a Grammy sounds like… really? This is award-worthy music? No part of this song sounds any different than the million other songs out there already in this genre.

  Actually, now that I say that, I’m not surprised it’s AI generated, considering how unoriginal it is

  source

  • DingoBilly@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Gotta agree. If anything it very much sounded like a sub-par song, the one you’d skip on an album as it’s mediocre.

    source
  • elbarto777@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    I’ve never had any respect for the grammy’s. I recognize the artist’s efforts, but their music has always been “eh” at best.

    source
  • dustyData@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Well, that’s what most awards are. How good of a friend the nominee is with the people casting the votes/assigning the prizes. There’s zero transparency among most popularity awards. The art died decades ago. It’s all about celebrity culture and that record label money. There’s some extraordinary music around being produced, but it’s not winning any Grammys.

    source
  • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    His other song with Travis Scott is better, but I believe it’s more the production of it rather than the impact. It’s just a very well done song from a technical standpoint. However tonally it’s pretty mediocre.

    source
• iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

  Reactionary nonsense. May as well disqualify anyone using anything other woodwinds and stringed instruments.

  source

  • Fisk400@feddit.nu ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Sorry, humans still set the rules for competitions and we are allowed to set arbitrary lines to keep the competitions fair and relevant. That’s why we allow shoes but not bikes when people run the marathon.

    source

    • alienanimals@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      We don’t even allow all shoe types in marathons. Certain Nike shoes are considered “too good”.

      source
    • iforgotmyinstance@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      Cycling is an entirely different sport than running. Your comparison is faulty.

      This is like telling engineers they can’t use calculators to complete their task.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

    Yeah, right, it’s like all those people forbidding doping and other forms of cheating in sports competitions. Why should you actually need to be good at something to participate in a competition right? /s

    source

    • Peanutbjelly@sopuli.xyz ⁨1⁩ ⁨year⁩ ago

      The AI in that song is just used as a tool to emulate the sound of drake’s voice. The rest is standard artist composition.

      While I don’t particularly care for the song, comparing it to doping is not reasonable.

      Same with all AI art tools. Actual artists can make reasonable use of these tools to more efficiently convey what they had wanted to convey.

      This is just like when cameras were invented. Or people started using digital mediums. Or when people started making 3D art.

      Even simple prompt only stuff like midjourney is improving to allow artists more control over the image they are trying to create.

      If we end up with a holo-deck style experience where artists can craft entire worlds to share a they had imagined, is that still not art?

      source

      • -> View More Comments