A comprehensive guide to ghostwriters, virtual pop stars, and the world to come.
Jaime this was a beautiful read. I feel like you can and should write an entire book on this topic. I don't want to fall in a reductionist view on this matter but it's hard not to see how corporations try to capitalize on "progressive" technologies to further their control on entire industries and I don't see how they eventually won't end up winning with Hatsune Miku already serving as a successful predecessor.
While I care little about Drake's personal success as a musician or businessman I don't think he or any other artist today can willingly accept this kind of technology taking over their likeness and control of their narrative as anything other than a complete monopolization of whatever they can consider as their "brand". If this technology is to become mainstream what other way is there than to use it against itself? Sort of like if banksy were to use LLM's to mass produce works based on his artwork and sell it to millionaires to then make the millionaires look like imbeciles for paying so much for something he hardly put any thought or time into.
good article, but there's something that doesn't sit right wrt your interpretation of louis armstrong's home recordings. of course armstrong was concerned with racism and minstrelsy; however, louis armstrong was one of *the* most boundary pushing artists of all time, and his use of new recording technologies -- which, i don't think a clear as a line as you think can be traced from home recording and AI -- prefigures a lot of the visionary use of splicing, DJ-ing, etc. by black producers (of all genres) in the 80s and 90s. i don't think it's entirely fair to minimize the artistic aims of armstrong's work to purely a critique of minstrelry when the legacy and complexity of jazz is already so misunderstood.
Unbelievable writing here. Thank you for this. Do you think Warren was exaggerating the effects of radio in the 1960s?
I think one of the best pieces of music writing I’ve ever read. Deeply satisfying to read something so lucid, informed and persuasive about music and the future.
This was an amazing, necessary read. We're not headed toward anything good, I fear, and what this means for artists and, as you point out, BIPOC artists in particular, is more than a little sickening. I think of it in contrast to a band like ABBA, whose music is still popular today, who always had smart business acumen and control of their image and went on very recently to create a digital/virtual version of their younger selves for a new tour. This was mostly given very positive press without a lot of curiosity over where this sort of tech would lead. The Disney-fying of art is so depressing.
I still think all the 5 million profiteers that are gonna jump into the "AI Music" space are gonna cannibalize each other; + poison each other's datasets, + through their almost certainly careless low-effort offerings they will begin to insult the audience's savvy and tastes so much that it'll take this fad most of the way down by 2026.
Yeah, the tech will hang around; but it ain't gonna destroy the whole industry like its hype men are claiming these days.
I'm sure there's great opportunity being between paradigms, as we are....but as an older artist I don't see myself capitalizing on it. At this point my artistic interest is in refining my art. My commercial interest (such as it is) is in creating products that fulfill a metaphysical need of the audience. I like to believe there's still an audience for that. But I do hope the younger musicians will take the responsibility to shape the paradigm of the future. As they say-- shape your paradigm, or someone else'll shape it for ya.
If U really want to know about generative 'art' then read this