18
top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] lasta@piefed.world 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

From Deezer’s website, the detection system tags songs that are either fully AI generated rather than produced or mastered with the help of AI tools. You can also appeal if you believe your music was falsely flagged.

I strongly oppose the use of generative AI in art but if it has to be done, it should at least be labeled as AI (ideally by the “creator” themselves).

I wonder how accurate the AI detection tools are though, considering how common are posts where AI detection tools used in schools falsely flagged student assignments.

There was a song I quite liked which had several million views on YouTube which I was surprised to see was flagged as AI generated. No one I showed it to it could hear any obvious signs of AI. The main red flags were that the artists released several albums in a short time span and had no online presence on any platform you would expect to see musicians on (Bandcamp, Discogs, etc) besides YouTube and the streaming ones.

[-] MurrayL@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago

I strongly oppose the use of generative AI in art but if it has to be done, it should at least be labeled as AI.

I know I’m mostly preaching to the choir here, but I don’t think there’s any situation in which AI ‘has’ to be used in art.

[-] Blaster_M@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

With good mastering post, you can mostly eliminate the "Suno shimmer", but other than artists using local models, the big ones (Suno, Udio, et al) have digital fingerprinting in the audio file... which is also part of the reason for the "Suno shimmer" sound.

Also, Suno is partnered with WMG since November... their model has license.

[-] Marshezezz@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 1 month ago

Maybe they should stop allowing it

[-] minorkeys@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

They're probably the one doing it. Of course the distribution owners would try and cut out the content makers.

[-] Forsho@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Tunes generated by LLM bots should never considered as music.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world -4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Same thing my grand father says about EDM. Personally, if I can tap my feet to it, it's music. I doubt you would be able to tell the difference in a blind test in any case.

[-] Forsho@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago

Sure thing DJGPT, whatever makes you happy

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

I don't think it belongs on platforms like Deezer but it's silly to not call it music.You can hate how it's made but the bar for something to be music isn't dependant on the fact. Downvote me I guess.

[-] BigJohnnyHines@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago

If I steal someone else’s song and put my name on it nobody reasonable would say I made it.

This whole AI-art fucktrain is entirely propped up by people who never made art before suddenly thinking they know something.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

My issue is more about not calling it music. Imo, if it's groovy and my brain enjoys it, it's music.

There's some music I seriously don't enjoy as well but I still consider it music because someone does.

That being said, I don't label AI stuff as "made". I'm quick with making the distinction when sharing with friends and stuff. I agree with that part. Although it becomes blurry at times. Making something with samples is still making it, what about making it with AI generated samples? I don't consider it stealing in any case, much too transformative imo.

I think we should separate the platforms but I'm not sure where certain things should land. It's all music for me though.

[-] techt@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Thanks for taking the time to explain yourself! I wanted to jump in to potentially clear up a difference of semantics, y'all are just using different interpretations of a phrase and I think it's worth exploring.

If I take the person you originally replied to and continue the thought on my own, I think "it shouldn't be called music" is trying to express that "this content should be fundamentally distinct from music because it displaces artists who, as a group, are finding it increasingly hard to sustain themselves on their art alone".

If your relationship with music stops at something to tap your foot to, then you may or may not appreciate the value music has for society in the form of things like expression, protest, criticism, unity, and faith. Every time we listen to a bot-generated song, it takes a listen away from a human artist and pushes us toward a world eventually devoid of those artistic contributions.

Whether or not it fits into the same musical category as human-generated media isn't really the point worth talking about (it's trained on that after all, of course it's similar!). What we need is a way to keep it from displacing human-generated art, and I don't think calling it music or not is enough.

[-] Not_mikey@lemmy.dbzer0.com -3 points 1 month ago

If I steal someone else’s song and put my name on it nobody reasonable would say I made it.

People were saying the same thing about sampling in hip hop. Yeah if you do a 1 to 1 copy of a song then that's not making art but if you take elements from a song and rearrange them then that is.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

And there have been a lot of discussions over the decades over artists/"aritists" who overly sampled a song and became orders of magnitude bigger than the original artist.

Its a balancing act. Most people aren't going to get too annoyed if someone uses generative AI to help build a backing track or a beat to go with their song.

The issue is that so much of this slop is "make a song like this" from scratch. And while there is a lot to be said about manufactured acts and the role of major labels... one of the few good things about spotify et al destroying the music industry is that it has become so much easier for smaller independent artists to get a foothold.

And all this does is add more slop to push them back out. And the difficulties with detecting slop will mean people will be a lot less likely to ever check out a smaller band when they can instead listen to whatever the latest major act that beyonce et al vouched for is.

[-] BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I have no idea what Deezer is, and I'm afraid if I ask, somebody is just going to say "DEEZER NUTS!!!" and I will realize it was a big prank.

[-] Atropos@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Self-gottem

[-] Jiral@lemmy.org 2 points 1 month ago

It is a less shitty alternative to Spotify, while costing less. They are also paying artists considerably more.

[-] XLE@piefed.social 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The last sentence is a little scary to me, not because it's a bad thing, but because it's probably catnip to scammers/AI generators. I hope they can do a good job of detecting it and keeping those scammers at bay, and not paying them for unaware listeners' mistakes

As far as I have read they do a lot to prevent that. AI "artists" (shartists?) don't show in the all tab when searching, don't get added to radio mixes, and dont get any payments from Deezer. Their AI generated tagging seems pretty accurate, I just wish it was exposed in the API so other projects could use it

[-] Jiral@lemmy.org 1 points 1 month ago

Not necessarily, if they are more hostile towards that kind of "content" than in this case Spotify, it isn't necessarily more attractive to AI scammers.

[-] frongt@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 month ago

You couldn't infer from the headline?

[-] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago

You can infer Deez Nuts.

[-] BoxOfFeet@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago

From the headline? No. But I could have just searched for it, or read the article. But it's more amusing to make a slightly amusing comment.

[-] TryingToBeGood@reddthat.com 1 points 1 month ago
[-] TheGreenWizard@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

Fuck me man, I guess I'll just never consume art again.

[-] NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

This (moreso for youtube music, since Deezer seems to not have a lot of East Asian labels signed) is a huge part of why I've been building out a selfhosted Navidrome.

Obviously there is the old school way of getting music. But Bandcamp is WAY more beneficial to the artists and ebay and Half Price Books are also awesome for grabbing music.

And combine all that with musicbrainz for scrobbling and discoverability of new bands.

[-] Jiral@lemmy.org 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I personally started to use Qobuz. Their algorithm isn't great, their target group is more the more distinguished music listener but their library is pretty much as big as any others plus they do have the largest library of hi-res music too and they actually sell also hi-res and CD lossless music if that is of interest to you. Most importantly though, they have a "ban-AI-music" stance on their platform. Soon enough, one will have to rely on platforms like that if one does not want to wade through a sea of AI slop.

The downside is that Qobuz is a bit more expensive than others (while paying the most to artists however, as far as I know).

[-] manxu@piefed.social 0 points 1 month ago

Music is a weird art form, because something sounding familiar is very important to our ear. Many people have a really hard time liking music that is too foreign to their taste and end up sticking with only a select few genres.

Where familiarity is important, AI can deliver easily. I would think as much as we hate the idea, there is a pretty significant market for AI-generated music, specifically because it's so predictable and follows convention to a tee.

[-] NekoKoneko@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

There is indeed a market for people who don't care what is playing or who made it, and just want to hear the same familiar generic chords, rhythms, and vocals of whatever genre(s) they've grown up listening to. Not to be too blunt, but some people have no taste, and yes, they can eat slop and not notice the difference. Ok, good for them.

But those people are throwing fertilizer on AI weeds that will consume all the water and sunlight that nurtures actual music. That is really a problem.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I messed around with udio for a bit. What surprised me most is actually how easy it was to blend stuff together and have it sound fun. It does stuff that isn't cookie cutter pretty well.

I think where it's going to hit hard is in terms of personalisation. It's nice that I can turn a song with a unique style into essentially a whole album of it. I also had a lot of fun writing my own lyrics. It hits harder when I wrote it and it's specifically about my experiences, as well as listening to something close to professional quality, but it's basically only for me.

It's like having your own personal band waiting on you.

[-] FG_3479@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

They are using DRM now. They clearly do not care.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Ya, right after getting bought out by a record company. Worst case scenario by far.

this post was submitted on 20 Apr 2026
18 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

84922 readers
1269 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS