Raw LLM Responses

As someone who’s both a musician and a machine learning developer, I think it’s entirely possible that AI may be useful as a tool to help artists in their own works, but it will likely never completely replace them. Technology in the art world has already faced several degrees of Luddism and it has ended up working in the artists’ favors in the long run. For example, when recorded music on phonograph records was starting to become a thing, musicians were up in arms about the implications it had for them and their lack of demand to keep playing music, but around the same time, music prerecorded onto rolls of paper similar to music boxes was also a thing and various instruments could use these sorts of rolls to mimic what one or many humans would play. There have also been gripes about MIDI, which people said could have done harm to large bands of musicians, but from my experience, it has only helped me in composing and arranging music for large ensembles. With artificial intelligence on the rise, I think we may see similar tools being evolved similar to Google’s Magic Eraser and Photoshop’s Content-Aware Filler. Because of this, art that is 100% AI-generated will likely always be second-best to a human’s in the best case scenario, since machines have historically been unable to fully complete tasks meant for humans. There is also the perspective that the use of antiquated techniques and technologies is met with a degree of prestige, since it takes significantly more effort to create using the old ways. For example, a recording of an acoustic grand piano or Yamaha CP-80 would likely loom higher in the regards of musicians and maybe even those who listen to them when compared to that produced using a sampled or modeled digital piano.