starting a new thread, since this is more MusicBrainz related, and the original thread was a more general/MetaBrainz topic
I foresee two different ways artists can credit an AI generator (be it musical, visual, or textual). either crediting them directly, like you would an artist (Cover by Midjourney or cover art generated by DALL-E and heavily edited in post), or crediting them as a tool (lyrics by Bill Smith using ChatGPT). so far Iâve only seen the former, so I see no issue crediting them as artists
weâve already got many other entries for software as artists, including many voice synthesizers and TTS engines, a few AI, and even one for Microsoft Windows⊠that last one has a credit for album artwork too, namely âalbum art by C:\Windows\System32\IMJP10.IME @ 569px wideâ, which I added, but someone else had added the artist originally.
Microsoft Windows - MusicBrainz is credited with MIDI files found in 90s-era Windows releases. MIDI files canât contain metadata AFAIK, so I think that the âMicrosoft Windowsâ credit just comes from the titles of YouTube videos uploaded by some random person with no connection to Microsoft. There are already works for these MIDI files that are properly credited to the actual artists who created them, e.g. Work âTrip Through the Grand Canyonâ - MusicBrainz.
GASHISOFT GXSCC - MusicBrainz has an annotation stating that itâs referring to MIDI-to-waveform software thatâs run by humans. Per Edit #12332891 - MusicBrainz, it sounds like the programâs name was only used in the credits since thatâs how the humans who ran the software decided to tag the files.
Google Assistant - MusicBrainz isnât credited with any releases, recordings, or works. I think that the only reason it hasnât been auto-deleted is because it has a few URL relationships. I donât see the reason for this being in MB; as far as I can tell, it doesnât have anything to do with music.
Google Translate - Relationships - MusicBrainz is similar â no releases, recordings, or works. It looks like you added a relationship to credit it with performing the voice of Kit - MusicBrainz (of type âpersonâ, which I donât completely understand â was this meant to be a character instead?). It sounds like Translate (or more realistically, one of Googleâs TTS voices) is being used as an instrument or tool here rather than this actually being an artist.
Green House Mastering - MusicBrainz has a disambiguation stating that itâs a company that does mastering, so Iâm not sure why this is included in a list of software.
Microsoft Paint - MusicBrainz did not gain sentience and release a punk cassette. It looks like this artist was created when this Discogs release was imported. As far as I can tell from the very limited data there, thereâs a one-off group of humans who called themselves âMicrosoft Paintâ.
that is a fair point. many of those I didnât create, so I canât speak to all of those, but I did create a couple and used one other.
Microsoft Windows: I explained above, thereâs a release which used the binary of a file (or something like that, not certain) for the album artwork. itâs credited to the file, and I figured that was the best way to enter that credit.
Google Translate: I think youâre right that Kit probably ought to be a character, Iâd been thinking the same thing, just havenât put in the edits yet⊠Google Translate provides the vocals on tracks of Kitcaliber. Iâd also seen this kind of relationship done before with other artists voiced by TTS engines. @RandomMushroom128 also mentioned on the Discord theyâve heard Google Translate as a voice on tracks
Google Assistant: I added this entity because Iâm almost certain that artists have used this voice like Google Translate above. I donât know of any offhand tho⊠I added it so thereâs a well-tagged, well-entered entity ahead of someone (possibly me) adding relationships to it. I may try and look for artists who use this voice in the next few daysâŠ
but weâre already getting a bit off the topic of how to handle AI in MusicBrainzâŠ
also adding that there was a lot of discussion on the Unofficial Discord about this topic starting about here and here (not sure if those links will work if you donât have a Discord account, but I wanted to link it either way)
lots of folks looking forward to a âSoftwareâ artist type (now with a ticket!), including @Jeluang, @iolomorganwg, @aerozol, @Victini, and myself, all with different approaches in the interim. thereâs too much to summarize beyond that, and I donât want to misrepresent opinions eitherâŠ
The disambiguation for Microsoft Windows - MusicBrainz says âUncredited composers of the built-in music within Windows OSâ, which is referring to a group of humans. I suspect that that Bandcamp albumâs cover image was created by a human taking a Japanese IME file from Windows and loading it as a bitmap. Crediting this artist with this cover image doesnât seem correct.
I donât understand why TTS engines should be treated differently from e.g. guitars. MusicBrainz doesnât have an âIbanez JEMâ artist thatâs credited with providing the voice of Steve Vai. I can understand an artist of type âcharacterâ for Siri or Alexa if theyâre explicitly credited as performing in a duet, though.
LLMs and their audio or visual counterparts can create (or parrot) works with limited direction from humans, so I think that more of an argument could be made that they could be credited.
I donât quite know why, but TTS and other instruments donât feel the same to me⊠they feel closer to Vocaloids than instruments⊠I dunno, maybe Iâm suffering from internet brainâŠ
also, just for clarity, whatâs LLM stand for? I tried Googling and didnât come up with anything helpfulâŠ
I understand that Drake had nothing to do with this and this is just AI kinda âreverse engineeringâ Drake? In that case, I would not link Drake in any way.
So, if âAIâ covers (where your favorite artist covers your favorite songs through voice cloning) become more popular we should not add any relationships to the âoriginalâ artists whose voice was used but what about âperformance ofâ relationships?
Are they âcoverâ performances of the work?
BTW, as expected the Drake âAIâ release has been nuked:
Rather off-topic, link to existing topic contained
If the new recording only replaces the original recordingâs vocal track, then Iâd say that this should be entered as a remix. If the backing tracks were also âredoneâ, then a âcoverâ performance-of relationship seems appropriate to me. As to who to credit the cover to, Iâd say the person who put it together, or [unknown] - MusicBrainz if theyâre anonymous.
Iâm sure there will be a gray area in the middle for people to argue over.
If anything comes of this, it sounds like her desire is to be credited directly:
would the title of such a song credit you as a featured artist, or how would you prefer it?
Sure - anything anyone wants. Im just curious what even happens and interested in being a Guinea pig.
(Aside: Nice of her to offer to split the royalties when (IFAIK, IANAL) itâs an unsettled legal question whether sheâs entitled to any royalties from a song that uses a model trained on her voice. Also, she followed up her request for 50% royalties by saying that she likes the idea of âkilling copyrightâ. )
Without any kind of guidelines adding âAIâ counterparts for artists seems a bad idea to me.
Wouldnât actual characters like SpongeBob need to be split it off into another artist(s) too?
Iâve been adding a few of those voice cloned recordings but so far resisted adding novelty artists. See this one for example which had its lyrics written by ChatGPT, video made by another AI tool (maybe Midjourney or Kaiber?) and the voice transformed:
It sounds like theyâre taking a âwait and seeâ approach, but they may be less affected due to policies banning music thatâs impersonating artists (I donât think MB has anything similar, but I could be wrong) and apparently also not including singles that are only available on free streaming services like YouTube.
Featuring GrimesAI or adding GrimesAI as a main artist, secondary or featured artist is the approved method of crediting Grimes when using the GrimesAI-1 voiceprint.
From the same page, it sounds like they want to gatekeep which songs are released. Good luck with that!
Title is : " ì¶í„ì°ê°" and the artist credit is to âzipmaâ
Couldnât find anything online about this âzipmaâ. The Bugs site has this comment:
âA song created with AI by excerpting part of poet Jeon Bong-geonâs long poem âChunhyang Love Storyâ.â
I assume this sort of AI generated music will be a âthingâ (This release shows up on Apple)
How to handle? Maybe like vocaloid (lately have seen references to Hatsune Miku in general insterest sites)?
)