Former Beatle and artists including Sam Fender, Kate Bush and Hans Zimmer record silent LP Is This What We Want
Frankly astonished he’s alive although
Wait… This isn’t posted in The Onion?!?
WTF, Paul McCartney want’s to pay him royalty’s for the silence?
Yes exactly, Paul McCartney want is to pay him royalty is for the silence, as a form of protest against Spotify paying out “AI artists”.
Great message, but weird way to protest. What are the optics even?
I won’t be listening to that.
Thanks for the chuckle this morning internet stranger.
So an album full of covers of John Cage’s 4 33.
Don’t most artists, except a few already wealthy ones like Paul, make basically nothing on record sales and streaming?
AI can’t do live performances, yet.
There’s been attempts for AI-like performances, just infantile starts. Like the one time there was a Tupac concert and it was just a digitized version of himself. That’s probably what the future entails, but AI looking to improve it.
I was watching the new David Attenborough show here in the UK Kingdom and I realised that all the orchestral work that is done to align with moments on screen will probably be AI soon. The tech is defo there already and it’s an easy way to cut budget. A shame.
deleted by creator
It suggests that if AI companies unfairly exploit musicians’ intellectual property to train their generative AI models, the creative ecosystem will be wrecked and original music silenced.
I kind of disagree with this.
There may be less people making music when money is their main motivator. But there will still be people making music.
Maybe we will lose low effort artists but gain great music by passionate people.
I’m not a musician, but these protests are going to be completely ineffective.
So you are telling me that in your ideal world only people that excel in their field should be compensated?
While also telling that musicians should make music just for the pure joy of it and not for living?
Bear in mind that most stars had a lowly start, by replacing entry level jobs with AI you will likely destroy a lot of potential.
My ideal world does not use money.
So how much work are you willing to do for free?
Is it that your ideal world does not use money, or you’re the only one who can get paid?
As for me, since it begs the question, I was raised on Star Trek, so I too like the idea of an ideal world where money isn’t needed. But I also have bills to pay, and I’m not ashamed to admit I would not work for free, because that would mean getting my lights and Net cut off, and losing my home. Some people do crazy things for their ideals, risking their very safety and lives. Like Greta Thunberg a month or two ago bringing humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people (or rather attempting to do that; she was caught, detained, and ridiculed by the Israelis for it). Most people wouldn’t risk it though. But it’s okay to talk about it online, but in real life? We all gotta pay the bills.
Musicians, too.
Maybe we will lose low effort artists but gain great music by passionate people.
This is such a bizarre take.
I wouldn’t characterize musicians who depend on some financial return as “low effort” at all. Almost all the best musicians, going back to classical music and beyond, were dependent on their music as a source of income.
If anything, the people who do music as a side hobby are usually more “low effort” than those who actually make it their main career. And if artists can’t make money of their music anymore, we’ll really only get music from rich people who can afford the lessons, instruments, recording studio, production, etc. as an expensive hobby rather than a source of income.
And if artists can’t make money of their music anymore, we’ll really only get music from rich people who can afford the lessons, instruments, recording studio, production, etc. as an expensive hobby rather than a source of income.
Ding ding ding
deleted by creator
we’ll really only get music from rich people
Aren’t most successful musicians already the children of the wealthy?
No.
I’m not a musician, but
Exactly.
Yes, when you are not trying from time to time to make something - digital art, music, software, - you might feel as if this opinion were valid.
When you are trying, eventually you gain understanding. Specifically that you have far more time to do what you want if you get paid for that.
Though I haven’t ever sold an intellectual work. Using my vacations and weekends for these things. But I perfectly understand people who are, eh, trying to do more than toying around once half a year.
‘Oh it’s ok, they’ll still do it for the of it despite being poor, I’ll still get my music.’
This sums up modern society so well. I don’t even think it’s ill intentioned, just that the Epstein class has convinced us that individualism is ok. Conveniently.
I think what it’s saying is that if AI is what starts making money, the music industry will exploit the hell out of that.
Imagine making millions of dollars, from a band that doesn’t exist, that you created, that you keep all money from their sales.
What would be your motivator to pay human artists? Why sign any?
Wouldn’t put it past them to try.
The recording industry loves making money off of artists who are long dead. Reminds me of that opening to Ministry’s Ghouldiggers, where the singer is talking about how some artists are being sold off in pieces. Kurt Cobain. Janis Joplin. So many more.
What would be your motivator to pay human artists? Why sign any?
I mean, the internet has given artists a way to spread their works and profit off them without any major record labels. So what artists will lose by that are exploitative companies whose only benefit is that your music will be sold by major retailers as physical CDs or Downloads.
But what about live performances?
