SynthID comes to audio.

Google is embedding inaudible watermarks right into its AI generated music::Audio created using Google DeepMind’s AI Lyria model will be watermarked with SynthID to let people identify its AI-generated origins after the fact.

  • Stern@lemmy.worldEnglish
    719·
    1 year ago

    People are listening to AI generated music? Someone on Bluesky put (paraphrased slightly) it best-

    If they couldn’t put time into creating it I’m not going to put time into listening to it.

    • tahoe@lemmy.worldEnglish
      331·
      1 year ago

      I think I’d rather listen to some custom AI generated music than the same royalty free music over and over again.

      In both cases they’re just meant to be used in videos and stuff like that, you’re not supposed to actually listen to them.

      • interceder270@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        1 year ago

        Fun fact: Steve1989MREInfo uses all of his original music for his videos.

        I think some royalty-free music is great (Kevin MacLeod), but a lot of it is abysmal shit. AI would do a much better job.

        • tahoe@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          1 year ago

          This is the ultimate YouTuber power move. Exurb1a and RetroGamingNow do it too!

        • ChunkMcHorkle@lemmy.worldEnglish
          31·
          1 year ago

          A number of Youtubers do . . . and some of it’s even good, lol. John at Plainly Difficult and Ahti at AT Restorations are two that use their own music that I can think of off the top of my head.

    • interceder270@lemmy.worldEnglish
      118·
      1 year ago

      Yikes. TIL you think music sounds good based on how much time went into making it, not how it actually sounds.

      Can’t wait for you to hear something you like then pretend it’s bad when you find out it was made by AI.

      • WillFord27@lemmy.worldEnglish
        61·
        1 year ago

        This assumes music is made and enjoyed in a void. It’s entirely reasonable to like music much more if it’s personal to the artist. If an AI writes a song about a very intense and human experience it will never carry the weight of the same song written by a human.

        This isn’t like food, where snobs suddenly dislike something as soon as they find out it’s not expensive. Listening to music often has the listener feel a deep connection with the artist, and that connection is entirely void if an algorithm created the entire work in 2 seconds.

        • interceder270@lemmy.worldEnglish
          23·
          1 year ago

          What if an AI writes a song about its own experience? Like how people won’t take its music seriously?

          • WillFord27@lemmy.worldEnglish
            5·
            1 year ago

            It will depend on whether or not we can empathize with its existence. For now, I think almost all people consider AI to be just language learning models and pattern recognition. Not much emotion in that.

          • Inmate@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            1 year ago

            “I dunno why it’s hard, this anguish–I coddle / Myself too much. My ‘Self’? A large-language-model.”

        • Meowoem@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          25·
          1 year ago

          That’s a parasocial relationship and it’s not healthy, sure Taylor Swift is kinda expressing her emotions from real failed relationships but you’re not living her life and you never will. Clinging to the fantasy of being her feels good and makes her music feel special to you but it’s just fantasy.

          Personally I think it would be far better if half the music was ai and people had to actually think if what their listing to actually sounds good and interesting rather than being meaningless mush pumped out by an image obsessed Scandinavian metal nerd or a pastiche of borrowed riffs thrown together by a drug frazzled brummie.

      • null@slrpnk.netEnglish
        46·
        1 year ago

        That’s not really a gotcha though. They’re saying they aren’t going to actively seek out and listen to auto-generated music. If they happen to hear some and like it, that wouldn’t mean they actively sought it out and listened to it.

          • null@slrpnk.netEnglish
            37·
            1 year ago

            Right, they’re not going to actively put time into listening to music generated by AI.

            Hearing music made by AI because it happens to be playing is different from knowingly listening to it. It’s alarming that you need this spelled out so much.

    • SweatyFireBalls@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      My own feelings on the matter aside (fuck google and all that) this has been something chased after for a long time. The famous composer Raymond Scott dedicated the back end of his life trying to create a machine that did exactly this. Many famous musical creators such as Michael Jackson were fascinated by the machine and wanted to use it. The problem was is he was never “finished”. The machine worked and it could generate music, it’s immensely fascinating in my opinion.

      If you want more information in podcast format check out episode 542 of 99% invisible or here https://www.thelastarchive.com/season-4/episode-one-piano-player

      They go into the people who opposed Scott and why they did, and also talk about the emotion behind music and the artists, and if it would even work. Because the most fascinating part of it all was that the machine was kind of forgotten and it no longer works. Some currently famous musicians are trying to work together to restore it.

      The question then is, if someone created their life’s work and modern musicians spend an immense amount of time restoring the machine, when the machine creates music does that mean no one spent time on it? I enjoy debating the philosophy behind the idea in my head, especially since I have a much more negative view when a modern version of this is done by Google.