Someone has to add an AI album because he likes it or has other reasons. Kilotons of AI albums can exist and not get added to the database because nobody has interest in them.
10 Likes
As somebody who has personally dealt with a lot of AI-generated stuff on MB, I think it should be allowed, simply because it is history, and it is “music” produced by people that has been released.
I always tag every entity with both ‘ai’ and ‘ai-generated’ and SAMBL shows a warning for AI-generated content:
https://sambl.lioncat6.com/artist?provider_id=2dFQXT5upaXL54K1LWUqSX&provider=spotify&artist_mbid=5b796896-d1d0-4435-ace5-d3b076bef41b
I personally add it occasionally strictly for the purposes of marking it as ai with tags, that way anyone using the API can check. Editor “Lioncat6” - MusicBrainz
Another commonly used tag is ‘ai cover art’ which falls into a similar category but since the artist released it, it is still actual cover art, but we can at least mark it with a tag. Perhaps some official tags could be adopted for this purpose, instead of adding an entirely new system
(To clarify, I also hate AI stuff and it’s gross)
11 Likes
I’ve personally been working on a way to extract info from deezer about AI-generated albums, but unfortunately, ATP in time it’s not available in their public API data last I checked.
3 Likes
I have some ethics and as I love people making music, I don’t want AI.
Why did you remove AI comments from recordings, releases and release groups?
I think they were useful, especially on recordings, in case they later appear on some Various Artists compilations, together with original music.
Maybe we could just tag as “ai” (less work)?
I’m not sure what SAML is, but this banner is nice. 
Maybe we could put quotes around “artist”, or write so called artist?
I think ai-generated is more concise… considering I’ve come across ‘ai personalities’ where it’s essentially the artist larping as an ai of sorts, but they still release human made music.
TLDR: ai - ai themed, ai-generated - made with ai (maybe?)
5 Likes
I have a very similar mindset, I wish we could just get rid of all AI generated content on the internet, but I also see the benefit of using MB as a way to identify (and therefore safely ignore / blacklist) AI content.
Oh, and then we could perhaps also do the same with rap “music”.
This is why we should ban those AI, worse than thieves.
Why just AI? Why not for instance Timbaland who is known for stealing music and passing it off as his own? Or pretty much all rap that use stolen beats.
2 Likes
based on previous discussion, I haven’t shied away from adding AI-generated content (tho I also haven’t sought it out to add either, to be clear). I also don’t listen to AI-generated music as a general rule, but I still think it belongs in MusicBrainz too, along with all the other controversial music I don’t listen to
I think the MusicBrainz database should not try and say anything about the quality (or lack thereof) of the music it holds data for, outside of ratings (and even so, that could be moved to CritiqueBrainz)
actually, I have added at least one AI-generated song because a real established artist covered it (because “the ai leak was too funny so i had to make it myself so it wouldn’t be ai anymore”):
sounds like it’s time for someone to create a userscript to hide or note AI stuff more prominently on MusicBrainz and ListenBrainz
6 Likes
You’re misunderstanding our grudge against AI music.
The problem is not the result. The result I’ve heard is super slick, it’s exactly archetypal of what you’d like to listen to, on purpose.
The problem is the AI scam.
The music was generated thanks to a big corpus of real recorded music by real people, based on real works written by real people.
And here in 2 clicks, AI has looted these people, stolen their work without citing them, without asking permission.
It did not even say it’s AI.
These people can get reduced listenes and AI increasing listens, thanks to its endless flooding of streaming platforms.
So, in the end AI steals work, steals intellectual property, appoverishes the style by streamlining it, and steals money off creators.
And musicians have always been poor, but if their audience gets more and more reduced, there is no more reason to be motivated.
Listeners will not even know if your music is really made by you or by some fucking AI.
Once upon a time we used to write (mine were shitty) computer music, sharing the “source code” of the tunes (it’s called modules) so that everyone learns from eachother (like the open source spirit).
But now, with fucking AI, it’s horrific, I wish I could delete all modules so that fucking AI does not benefit from this golden era of sharing.
3 Likes
The music was generated thanks to a big corpus of real recorded music by real people, based on real works written by real people.
You are of course wrong, most of the AI music (at least the one I listen to) is put out by small, grass roots artists. It’s certainly written by real people, even if it’s not always performed by real people. But then that’s nothing new. MusicBrainz for instance have software listed as an “artist”, for instance 初音ミク - MusicBrainz
AI has looted these people, stolen their work without citing them, without asking permission.
Artists have always taken inspiration from other artists. That’s nothing new. The only difference is that isn’t done in software instead of wetware.
there is no more reason to be motivated
If you were only motivated by money, then music is probably not for you.
6 Likes
a lot of AI music is, but I know there are some artists who use AI more ethically, like training a personal or self-hosted AI on only their own music or voice (tho I can’t remember offhand who it was, and the forum search is failing me right now), or only music they actually have the rights to
2 Likes
People also said that photography is “art’s most mortal enemy”
Coincidentally it was a French person 
4 Likes
After all, if it weren’t for progress, we’d still be living in caves. Which is cool too.
It’s more clear with the full quote, but I did not express it really good, indeed.
It was not really about money :
If no one appreciates your music, drowned in kilo shit of AI generic sounds, or think your music is not fine by you but by some AI double-click, that’s a serious loss of motivation.
Some people are 100% self-centered but otherwise, motivation for creation is often about sharing what you did, is getting received, acknowledged in this world, even by just 20 people.
Being heard is such a wonderful feeling.
But of course, if you don’t have a job besides music, AI is also a new threat to your basic means of living.
Whuat!? 
So, I don’t understand what AI is, if it is original music written by humans.
Why would they shoot themselves in the feet, with their lame AI attire?
OK so, after this brief hallucination, let’s edit something normal and see if it ends up getting corrupted by AI shit, in the future…
2 Likes
Maybe we used to be on the rise, but these days it’s more of a downward spiral.
1 Like
Once upon a time, you stood under a girl’s balcony and played guitar for her. Today, you walk up to her and turn on an AI-powered boombox.
2 Likes
Yes, I see that.
Different artists of course have different workflows, but the one I’ve seen it seem that they write the lyrics and then create the music using AI. But there are other examples. For instance a singer-songwriter that writes the lyrics and sings, but use AI as the backing band. Or people who co-operate with AI to write lyrics. Or people using AI to add things to the basic melody. Or use AI for mixing or mastering.
3 Likes
Ah ok, so it’s still lame, as I thought.
I’d rather do nothing or crappy things myself than “better things”, done by automatic rip off, in my name.
I don’t like pretending.
3 Likes
That is your choice. But you shouldn’t attack people because over their choices of tools.
4 Likes