Using AI to give Axl Rose´s voice back

[wendirosez]

I agree that measures need to be put in place . Artists who are alive who appreciate this kind of technology .. could give their approval, and then that makes things alright. 

But what about the deceased ones ? 

[koldweather]

11 hours ago, axlvai said:

Sounds very good in some songs. Estranged rocks.

 

 

Yeah, what's clever is that the AI is clearly trying to mould the vocals from the source shows around the rock in rio vocals in terms of length. It generally does a decent enough job, though coma ending is a debately even more of a disaster than normal.

To the person who said this was just a simple paste job, its clearly not that simple. For a start you've gotta erase Axls vocals then replace them with appropriate vocals that match the time that note is sang. It's  amicably overdubbing several hours of singing, and when the AI picks appropriate choices, I've gotta say it does sound really quite good. Particularly slower based songs I find.

[StrangerInThisTown]

45 minutes ago, wendirosez said:

I agree that measures need to be put in place . Artists who are alive who appreciate this kind of technology .. could give their approval, and then that makes things alright. 

But what about the deceased ones ? 

Why would there be an issue if they are deceased, they already don't give "approval" to any other type of content being made with their face, footage, voice etc. Deceased ones can't give their approval to use their face or voices in memes and parody videos and other type of content either. I can cut together a video and audio of Elvis Presley saying "I shit my pants" and put it out there, that's not "approved" by him either.

The only issue is if people try to make money off it. This "stuff" doesn't get sold, it just lives on the internet. It will be just one more thing that's out there. But IF the artist is alive, then he can choose to promote it and make actual money with 0 work. You're born with a voice and people will literally give you money if they want to use it, kind of like an instrument, and you have to do jack shit. Sounds like everyone profits here.

Edited May 4, 2023 by StrangerInThisTown

[StrangerInThisTown]

49 minutes ago, invisible_rose said:

I totally see your point, but also - Isn't that just like going to see a gig only for it to be lip-synced? Where do you draw the line between integrity and progress?

The way I see it, artists will keep on releasing music the way they always have, nothing changes or is lost in that regard. There is only something added to it, in that people can now create their very own, for example, Nirvana songs. And if the stuff is good, the artist or their estate can choose to promote and endorse it, because a Nirvana album in the style of Nevermind which sounds like it's the real thing can make millions in money. Artists will never truly "die" this way, their sound will live on.

Edited May 4, 2023 by StrangerInThisTown

[Sweersa]

The ultimate form of this is somehow acquiring additional or alternate albums from different timelines.

Imagine a double album for Chinese Democracy from 2004. Or CD2 from 2010. The full Sean Beavan album from 1999, etc. 

A 1995-1996 GN'R album with Slash and Duff.

 

[wendirosez]

I'd like to hear Axl's opinion on this on the upcoming tour . Would be interesting to see how he  might view such technology.

I wish more artists would speak their mind on this , so at least there would be a start of things going in a right direction according to music and the integrity to their art.

I know that Warner music is pretty much on board with AI. Well  Max Lousada is!

 

"THE FIRST WAY WE THINK ABOUT [AI] IS HOW DO WE PROTECT OUR ARTISTS?”

Lousada also touched on one of the biggest talking points in the modern music business today: artificial intelligence.

He said that, in his view, “The first way we think about [AI] is how do we protect our artists?”

He added: “If we’ve got machines that are learning from our copyrights or we’ve got people using deep fakes and name and likeness, there’s a lot there to unpack.

“We’ve got to figure that out. We need to get it right. I said it earlier, creativity in tech is what wins.

“And I think, the best creatives engaging with AI will probably make the most compelling collision of music, but it’s a fascinating thing that’s unraveling.”

 

The full interview :

https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/max-lousada-on-warners-dance-strategy-ar-ai-and-the-art-of-whats-possible-with-technology/

 

I felt this part :

"CONSUMERS DON’T SUBSCRIBE TO MUSIC SERVICES “TO LISTEN TO MUSIC THAT [THEY] HAVE NO IDEA OF WHAT IT IS”.

Commenting on the challenges of breaking and promoting artists in the streaming and social media age, Lousada said that “Now, it’s about a demand curve and creating scarcity when there is no scarcity”.

He added: “That is some of the philosophical things we’re trying to tackle, how do we create demand, how do we create moments, how do we create memories of purchase.

“I’m probably older than most of the people in this room but I have memories of when I bought my first A Tribe Called Quest record, when I first heard Goldie drop his record at the Blue Note, I have all of these distinct memories that create loyalty and repeat listenership.

“You don’t subscribe to a service to say, ‘I’m subscribed to this service to listen to music that I have no idea of what it is’. You go, ‘I’m going to do it because I love this artist and that artist.’

“Our job is to keep on making sure that those artists and those experiences are talking back to each other.”

Edited May 4, 2023 by wendirosez
Insert link

[wendirosez]

22 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

A.I. cobbled "art" is a mockery of art and the human spirit itself. Created by soulless algorithms which were created by nerds and engineers who possess no artistic talent, who aren't as clever as they think and lack foresight. A human infant's poorly done crayon drawing has infinitely more merit than the finest still-birth piece an A.I. can churn out.

There needs to be extremely aggressive regulations on A.I. especially when it has anything to do with impersonating or replicating people and/or art in any way. You legally should not be allowed to make any money from A.I. "art" at all and the repurcussions for ripping off actual human artists, deceit etc must be immense.

Art is human expression and integrally important in many ways for mankind; surrendering it to another species whether that's tomorrow or in 1,000 years, is an unforgiveable further plunge into a faker more artificial existence for human beings. It is intellectual, artistic, spiritual holocaust.

 ! I think this reply is the most in depth & truest explanation i have ever actually read regarding this subject. Thanks alot lovely ! @Oldest Goat 

 

It is the lack of soul & integrity which really bother me concerning AI in our human musical creations.

& if that makes me an 'old fart' in that way of thinking then , so be it.

[StrangerInThisTown]

I can see how on a philosophical spectrum, it might cause a butthurt in some people. But I don't go and write philosophical essays on the in my opinion, completely soulless garbage modern pop artists put out. Sure they had actual people write it but that doesn't make it a better audio to listen to, or make me want to listen to it at all. As Liam said, even an AI Oasis album is better than 90% of the snizzle currently on radio. As I said earlier, actual recordings won't ever be "replaced", AI will simply be another section of it. People will want to write and record songs until this earth blows up.

In the end music is supposed to make you feel things. If the sound you're hearing makes you feel a certain way, then that is great art. No matter how it was produced.

Edited May 4, 2023 by StrangerInThisTown

[Gordon Comstock]

7 hours ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

No, this is fucking awesome. More music for the world is always a win. I was just waiting until this was picked up here somewhat. In what world do people live in where they are angry at more albums with Axl Roses voice to listen to. Don't get the people crying about it, sucks for you to be stuck in the past. Some people need to realize they are now turning into the old farts angrily shaking their fists at new tech, and that's always how it's been. You for one can go and listen to the same album for the 1000th time and jerk off to it with the lights down, but don't go and criticize and ruin other peoples enjoyment who have an open mind and are not stuck in the time they grew up in.

I don't care about the -history- of the audio I'm listening to. It's fucking audio. It's made to be listened to, not have deep thoughts about "how did they record this". I don't care who recorded what when or how the process of it was made, all that counts in the end is what arrives at your ears. And that is more music to enjoy from your favourite artists, in this case peak Axl vocals, without the artist even having to put in any work himself.

Once this is figured out with "official" releases of this kind requiring the artists blessing in the future, this is nothing but a fucking win for everyone. Fans get more music and the artist will make bank by doing fuck all except approving it. I think there will be an "AI" section on artist streaming platforms in the future where they have albums and tracks approved and liked by the artist.

 

For comparison here, this is making the rounds currently - an entire new Oasis album by the 1995 lineup made with AI vocals. This band wrote songs in the Oasis style, recorded them, and put an AI Liam Gallagher as vocalist. The third song 'Alright' is absolutely mindblowing, it sounds like a direct track from Definitely Maybe from 1994. It's literally indistinguishable.  If people can make something that sounds like this RIGHT NOW, imagine the possibilities in the future, this tech is only in its infancy at the moment.

Just read the mindblown fan reactions in the comments to being suddenly blessed with a new classic Oasis album out of nowhere. Liam heard it and tweeted "I sound mega" lol

 

 

Man, this is just sad. We'd all like to hear more albums from Axl... but only if it's actually Axl. I don't know how you can think that people who don't want fake recordings are "stuck in the past"... a lot of people on here rarely even listen to the old albums anyway.

For example, evader's version of The General was interesting to listen to, but it's not the kind of thing I'd listen to more than once or twice, and AI songs are way less interesting. I thought it was odd that people had Rock The Rock in their playlists, but being so desperate for new Axl recordings that you'll listen to AI songs is just weird. There's too many bands still making good music for me to have any interest in AI "music". I really don't get the recent obsession with things like this or chatgpt.

[invisible_rose]

17 minutes ago, StrangerInThisTown said:

I can see how on a philosophical spectrum, it might cause a butthurt in some people. But I don't go and write philosophical essays on the in my opinion, completely soulless garbage modern pop artists put out. Sure they had actual people write it but that doesn't make it a better audio to listen to, or make me want to listen to it at all. As Liam said, even an AI Oasis album is better than 90% of the snizzle currently on radio. As I said earlier, actual recordings won't ever be "replaced", AI will simply be another section of it. People will want to write and record songs until this earth blows up.

In the end music is supposed to make you feel things. If the sound you're hearing makes you feel a certain way, then that is great art. No matter how it was produced.

I think that's the thing though dude, an AI generated song isn't going to make most people get goosebumps like say, Talk Tonight, Sad Song or Estranged would. There is just something soulless about it. I could almost understand/deal with a pro-tools type AI vocal improvement for vocalists that are struggling with their voices - M Shadows for instance almost lost his voice. But generated lyrics and hooks - nah, that's not for me personally. Music, instead of being written from the heart and with passion from writers like Noel, just becomes as bad as disposable pop.  

[StrangerInThisTown]

16 minutes ago, Gordon Comstock said:

 

Man, this is just sad. We'd all like to hear more albums from Axl... but only if it's actually Axl. I don't know how you can think that people who don't want fake recordings are "stuck in the past"... a lot of people on here rarely even listen to the old albums anyway.

For example, evader's version of The General was interesting to listen to, but it's not the kind of thing I'd listen to more than once or twice, and AI songs are way less interesting. I thought it was odd that people had Rock The Rock in their playlists, but being so desperate for new Axl recordings that you'll listen to AI songs is just weird. There's too many bands still making good music for me to have any interest in AI "music". I really don't get the recent obsession with things like this or chatgpt.

I don't know what exactly you're asking, I thought the post explained quite well why.

And to the point of "We'd all like to hear more albums from Axl... but only if it's actually Axl.."

Not what the majority of people will think once they hear a well done song with an AI Axl. For proof, just read the Youtube comment fan reaction to the Oasis album I linked, for reactions and comments from more "normal" people than a forum of elitists like us. Millions of people would fall out of their chair if a well produced album like that came out from GNR. Especially from GNR. Where fans have been starved for music on unimaginable levels. Like my post explained, I don't care about the "recording history" of the audio file I'm listening to. All that matters is what arrives in peoples ears, and if they find get joy from it, that's all that really matters. Artists arent robbed of expressing themselves, that will always go on, until the end of time

8 minutes ago, invisible_rose said:

I think that's the thing though dude, an AI generated song isn't going to make most people get goosebumps like say, Talk Tonight, Sad Song or Estranged would. There is just something soulless about it. I could almost understand/deal with a pro-tools type AI vocal improvement for vocalists that are struggling with their voices - M Shadows for instance almost lost his voice. But generated lyrics and hooks - nah, that's not for me personally. Music, instead of being written from the heart and with passion from writers like Noel, just becomes as bad as disposable pop.  

I think you're right we're still far away from the point where AI will create actual good art by itself. The perfect combination seems to be actual music written by people with the AI component simply being the voice of someone, used like another instrument.

Edited May 4, 2023 by StrangerInThisTown

[StrangerInThisTown]

Here's a great video on the topic:

 

[Gnrcane]

On 5/3/2023 at 4:16 AM, wendirosez said:

mate its going to cause war (if it gets in the wrong hands, which it will , which it has ...a.k.a. youtube  )    they are currently on the cusp of completing the transition to the second stage - AGI, in which the intelligence of machines can equal humans.  

Thankfully AGI is at least decades off from being possible.

Current level AI also has many negative consequences and is something civilization needs to consider putting limits on.

There are some good applications like using AI to replace human security bag screeners and guards watching video monitors. I have no doubt AI will be much more effective at identifying threats.

[wendirosez]

According to what i have been told this morning ~  Sony and UMG are actually coming after people now ...From another forum (not Axl related ) some stupid  mf  placed their .....song...on spotify  and yeah  accounts  are getting shut down. 

Just a heads up to those who engage.

[SoulMonster]

I wouldn't mind AI music. If it's good, it's good. I don't care how it was made if it gives me joy. 

[Spoon87]

What have we come to...

[ChristmasFnatic]

Kinda scary how AI/technology will really change things, esp as someone said, if it falls on the wrong hands.

That said, I am torn about AI Axl. Until now, unlike some of you, I really cant like Mickey voice. Some say it sounds better live, but to my ear it doesn't.  Good thing I attend concerts mainly for Slash.

[SoulMonster]

12 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

"I don't care about thinking, ethics, philosophy etc. I don't care about the human impact. So long as it brings me joy."=Not a perspective worthy of any respect.

What are you going on about? I didn't say I don't care about thinking, or that I don't care about ethics, or that I don't care about the human impact. I said I wouldn't mind AI music. And if it brings my joy then it would surely bring others joy. Win for me and win for them. 

[SoulMonster]

2 minutes ago, Oldest Goat said:

You just said you don't care how it's made so long as it brings you joy. And you don't rate higher thinking(philosophy). So that's what I'm going on about.

People advocating A.I. art. Attending lip synced faux live performances. Fat positivity. These sorts of things are so dismaying.

I have absolutely no idea how my disdain for philosophy has any relevance to this discussion. Care to explain to me? 

Again, I have never said I don't care for thinking (what an absurd thought), or that I don't care about ethics (what a weird thing to say), or that I don't care about the human impact (are you high?). In fact, being in favor of AI music if, and only if, it brings people joy, means I care about the human impact. That's exactly what it means. 

Lip syncing? Fat positivity? What on earth are you going on about?  Let's focus on the topic at hand, if you are able. 

[Zeppelin]

Even AI-generated GNR music won't come out.

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

You have 'absolutely no idea' how your dismissal of philosophy(higher thinking, ethics etc) has 'any' relevance when the topic is those very things? Fucking hell.

"My thoughts on A.I. are; does it amuse people/bring them joy? if so, I'm all for it and actually this means I'm pro-humanity. " Fucking hell.

Anyone who's perplexed about how lip syncing relates to this is braindead imo and I'm just not going to bother explaining that.

I mention fat positivity because it too is a self-absorbed, misguided, unhealthy, ugly perspective that affects more than the individuals who feel that way. Similar to this topic, there seems to be an insidious pseudo-intellectual attempt to cobble together a defense when it and its defense are unworthy of respect.

If you've given up and want to feel as positive as you can about being 500lbs then alright fair enough but be decent enough to accept the realities that come with that like you probably shouldn't have priority in hospital waiting lists, normal people will feel an element of disgust etc etc.

If you get joy from going to lip synced concerts then fair enough but be decent enough to accept that's rather cringe and you're a bit of a tourist/phony.

If you're into A.I. art and not into thinking that much, maybe be gracious enough to have some self-awareness and not dismiss the concerns of people who actually do know how to think.

I don't even know where to start 

 

[SoulMonster]

1 minute ago, Oldest Goat said:

Then don't. I'd rather tap-out now tbh. Because in order to discuss anything with you I have to do the thinking for the both of us while juggling your pedantic madness and it's a miserable experience. It's probably for the best I just put you back on ignore.

And then on to ad hominems 

[Billy Cundy]

Death of music. Streaming put the industry on life support. AI will kill it dead. I think the whole thing is despicable. Soulless. Enjoy your dystopia, call me a butthurt old fashioned Luddite, but yeah. Sad state of affairs. 

Before streaming, labels, (like banks), had the money to take a chance on lunatics like Axl, Lennon, Lydon, Page, and Gallagher. They had the budgets to pair these wonderful creatives with serious engineers and producers in proper studios to create jaw dropping albums. Streaming can not sustain that expenditure or investment. You have to look like Dua Lipa, be 100% obedient to the label like Harry Styles, and hit the bullseye first time with a hit for a label to invest even a penny into you. They haven’t got the money to take risks anymore, because no one is buying or consuming music in a cost effective way. All that is left is touring, and syncs - I.e. a show/film/ad using a song. 

So now AI… Think of all the musicians who write film music or library music? All out of a job. Another blow to studios and music industry. Why pay a human when AI can do it? 
 

Not to mention how fucking sad it is. Your kids having a first dance at their wedding to an AI generated track. Being put in the ground to some AI approximation of a human’s work. Truly atrocious.

Edited May 5, 2023 by Billy Cundy

[DeNfr]

"I guess you guys aren't ready for that yet...but your kids are gonna love it"

[janrichmond]

2 minutes ago, DeNfr said:

"I guess you guys aren't ready for that yet...but your kids are gonna love it"