Bored in Retirement? Try This.

[Music Guy]

Like you said earlier, AI is another tool in the plethora of digital production of music. There is no reason to use it. You can continue to use the tools your used to. If your goal is to make money, and promote your music commercially then maybe some form of AI assistance might be used. I have never seriously produced any AI music. It has all been experimental. I am retired now from music making, so it is really a non-issue.

No reason to feel deflated, your music stands in good stead on its own. To become successful, meaning getting lots of plays, might happen but in my experience, the thousands of digital music creators and even good music without AI, do no get enough views to become popular. So I forgot making music to be popular and did my best with what I had and that is good enough.

Wise words. Thanks.

 

[RobinWren]

I was going to start a new thread but this might be the thread to post in. I love music and I find some of the AI videos amazing. I do not know how to attach but please go and watch on youtube Kelly Boesch , I'd like to know what everyone thinks of them. I find the videos fascinating along with the music, this person has quite the imagination and I could spends hours watching them. With the world being the way it is and with some people being so nasty to one another watching these videos I forget about all that. I would like to thank Kelly Boesch for giving me so much enjoyment. Who would have thought. I hope you find them as enjoyable as I do.

 

[RobinWren]

I just saw the title of this thread , I don't do a lot but I am never bored.

 

[OneEyedDiva]

Thanks. These discussions on AI prompted me to check out a couple of AI music production websites yesterday. I really have not followed the latest AI technology very much. What I found was jaw dropping. The capability is truly amazing - one demo featured a short, simple little melody line played on guitar. With a push of a button, that incomplete little melody was turned into a complete and fully produced song. It left me feeling very deflated and defeated.

Wanna know what makes an artist feel deflated? Seeing in our accounts that we only make a fraction of a penny per stream! Sometimes not even that! It depends on the streaming platform and even which country. But those of us who make music because we love it, shouldn't even be worried about that sort of thing. If I was, I'd be deflated for sure.

No matter how great someone is...there's always someone greater (and apparently now) something better. I know incredible musicians who doubt their talents sometimes. Don't let AI make you feel less than.

 

[Music Guy]

Wanna know what makes an artist feel deflated? Seeing in our accounts that we only make a fraction of a penny per stream! Sometimes not even that! It depends on the streaming platform and even which country. But those of us who make music because we love it, shouldn't even be worried about that sort of thing. If I was, I'd be deflated for sure.

No matter how great someone is...there's always someone greater (and apparently now) something better. I know incredible musicians who doubt their talents sometimes. Don't let AI make you feel less than.

Wanna know what makes an artist feel deflated? Seeing in our accounts that we only make a fraction of a penny per stream! Sometimes not even that! It depends on the streaming platform and even which country. But those of us who make music because we love it, shouldn't even be worried about that sort of thing. If I was, I'd be deflated for sure.

No matter how great someone is...there's always someone greater (and apparently now) something better. I know incredible musicians who doubt their talents sometimes. Don't let AI make you feel less than.

Good words. I'm starting to realize there's no reason an artist should feel threatened by their brush.

 

[RareTommy]

Hi everyone. I've been retired from the Aerospace industry for 3 years now and started producing my own music videos. Here's an example of one I recently put on YouTube ---

I also have many other videos on my YouTube channel ---

Walter Franklin - New Music Undiscovered

I write, perform and record all of the music, as well as produce and edit the video. If you're interested in doing this, I'd be happy to pass along whatever tips I can.

Music Guy

Nice, you sound great!

 

[Music Guy]

Nice, you sound great!

Thanks

 

[Murrmurr]

Thanks. These discussions on AI prompted me to check out a couple of AI music production websites yesterday. I really have not followed the latest AI technology very much. What I found was jaw dropping. The capability is truly amazing - one demo featured a short, simple little melody line played on guitar. With a push of a button, that incomplete little melody was turned into a complete and fully produced song. It left me feeling very deflated and defeated.

And sadly, probably like 98% of young people can't hear the difference between digitally produced music and music produced by musicians using actual instruments and voices. Too many of them don't even care.

Worse than that, a lot of music owners, producers, and distributors are digitally altering music from before pitch, tune, and timing software was available. They are "correcting" classics from the 50s to the 90s; artists including Elvis, Freddy Mercury, CCR, Linda Ronstadt....all of them! You're hard pressed these days to find a recording or video that's got the purely original sounds.

From now on, possibly for forevermore, kids who are curious about the music gramma and grampa listened to when they were kids won't hear it. They're going to be forced to hear something else. That won't be Freddy's voice, Eric Burden won't sound like he's got the life experience and emotions of a 60 year-old at only 19, Harrison's guitar won't weep and Frampton's won't ask how you feel in quite the same way.

It's sacrilege, imo.

Digitally produced music is fine, but it should be its own genre, and everyone should leave the old stuff alone.

 

[squatting dog]

And sadly, probably like 98% of young people can't hear the difference between digitally produced music and music produced by musicians using actual instruments and voices. Too many of them don't even care.

Worse than that, a lot of music owners, producers, and distributors are digitally altering music from before pitch, tune, and timing software was available. They are "correcting" classics from the 50s to the 90s; artists including Elvis, Freddy Mercury, CCR, Linda Ronstadt....all of them! You're hard pressed these days to find a recording or video that's got the purely original sounds.

From now on, possibly for forevermore, kids who are curious about the music gramma and grampa listened to when they were kids won't hear it. They're going to be forced to hear something else. That won't be Freddy's voice, Eric Burden won't sound like he's got the life experience and emotions of a 60 year-old at only 19, Harrison's guitar won't weep and Frampton's won't ask how you feel in quite the same way.

It's sacrilege, imo.

Digitally produced music is fine, but it should be its own genre, and everyone should leave the old stuff alone.

Sadly, even most of the recording studio's are using digital. I was going to use a studio until I found that they basically use the same software as my lady friend. One of the studio guy's admitted that about 90% of what they produce now is digital vs analog. The reason of course is $$$$.

 

[Murrmurr]

Sadly, even most of the recording studio's are using digital. I was going to use a studio until I found that they basically use the same software as my lady friend. One of the studio guy's admitted that about 90% of what they produce now is digital vs analog. The reason of course is $$$$.

The industry even digitally corrects live concerts if they're recorded. And most recently, they give these recordings basically a blanket post-production treatment and put them up on YouTube and the performer's website where everyone can watch it for free, without ads. The only objective is to make a singer's performance (for example) sound perfect in order to keep sales moving. But to experienced ears like ours, the singer sounds robotic, uninspired, and no more talented or exciting than another singer.

It drives me nuts, man. I feel like music is already lost, and it's never coming back.

Idk, I guess it could. It probly will.

Maybe in a thousand dystopian years some guy will be walking through an acoustical canyon hunting game, and he'll pick up a hollow reed to blow a spider out of it, just because he's bored, and it'll produce a sweet, resonate tooot. And his hunting buddies will say "Woahhhh!" And that will resonate off the canyon walls, so they'll keep doing it. And the first guy will start blowing into different sized reeds while the rest of them say Whoahh 4 different ways. And then one of 'em will start smacking 2 rocks together to create a cadence, and pace everyone, and another will start tapping a canyon wall with a couple of sticks, for flare.

Next thing you know, bam!...canyon concerts are a thing.

 

[Music Guy]

And sadly, probably like 98% of young people can't hear the difference between digitally produced music and music produced by musicians using actual instruments and voices. Too many of them don't even care.

Worse than that, a lot of music owners, producers, and distributors are digitally altering music from before pitch, tune, and timing software was available. They are "correcting" classics from the 50s to the 90s; artists including Elvis, Freddy Mercury, CCR, Linda Ronstadt....all of them! You're hard pressed these days to find a recording or video that's got the purely original sounds.

From now on, possibly for forevermore, kids who are curious about the music gramma and grampa listened to when they were kids won't hear it. They're going to be forced to hear something else. That won't be Freddy's voice, Eric Burden won't sound like he's got the life experience and emotions of a 60 year-old at only 19, Harrison's guitar won't weep and Frampton's won't ask how you feel in quite the same way.

It's sacrilege, imo.

Digitally produced music is fine, but it should be its own genre, and everyone should leave the old stuff alone.

There can be a lot of grey areas here, but I generally agree about leaving the old stuff alone. I always think about the mid-1980's CD remix of ZZ Top's La Grange - they added a ton of reverb to the drums, I guess to make it sound more "80's". The original 1973 mix was perfect IMHO. In any event, the original mix represented the times in which it was recorded. However, other vintage recordings are just sonically poor in quality. Is a digital touch-up acceptable for these? It's an interesting debate.

As you implied, some of Freddie Mercury's vocals on the 2024 vinyl reissue of Queen's first album were pitch-corrected. Really? They pitch-corrected Freddie Mercury? Are you kidding me?

 

[RambleTamble]

And sadly, probably like 98% of young people can't hear the difference between digitally produced music and music produced by musicians using actual instruments and voices. Too many of them don't even care.

Worse than that, a lot of music owners, producers, and distributors are digitally altering music from before pitch, tune, and timing software was available. They are "correcting" classics from the 50s to the 90s; artists including Elvis, Freddy Mercury, CCR, Linda Ronstadt....all of them! You're hard pressed these days to find a recording or video that's got the purely original sounds.

From now on, possibly for forevermore, kids who are curious about the music gramma and grampa listened to when they were kids won't hear it. They're going to be forced to hear something else. That won't be Freddy's voice, Eric Burden won't sound like he's got the life experience and emotions of a 60 year-old at only 19, Harrison's guitar won't weep and Frampton's won't ask how you feel in quite the same way.

It's sacrilege, imo.

Digitally produced music is fine, but it should be its own genre, and everyone should leave the old stuff alone.

I hope some day, somebody fixes Bob Dylan's vocals in his live performances. I actually like his voice in his studio albums, but his concert vocals are atrocious! Same with Jerry's vocals in the Grateful Dead's concert videos. He was always way off pitch and painful to listen to!

 

[squatting dog]

Before auto tune, digital anything... Live... just a fantastic orchestra and a voice from God.

 

[Coconut]

I hope some day, somebody fixes Bob Dylan's vocals in his live performances. I actually like his voice in his studio albums, but his concert vocals are atrocious! Same with Jerry's vocals in the Grateful Dead's concert videos. He was always way off pitch and painful to listen to!

That is because Bob Dylan never was a very good singer.
just kidding.


I like Dylan but sometimes he sounds like a knife cutting through your ears.

 

[Murrmurr]

I hope some day, somebody fixes Bob Dylan's vocals in his live performances. I actually like his voice in his studio albums, but his concert vocals are atrocious! Same with Jerry's vocals in the Grateful Dead's concert videos. He was always way off pitch and painful to listen to!

Dylan knew he wasn't a singer. His singing voice was unique; 100% recognizable. Same with Eric Burden, a great singer. Digital "correction" eliminates the unique qualities of all singer's voices. That's why all singers sound the same these days and that's my issue.

I'd have no issue with cleaning up Dylan's voice and selling his music labeled that way. People who hate his voice but love his songs would know what they're getting.

I hope for a law requiring music producers and distributors to label altered music. Alternatively, all unaltered music should be proudly labeled "original sound."

 

[OneEyedDiva]

Music Guy, I've been rockin' out to You Better Go Home. The scenes in How Long To Right This Wrong are beautiful and visualizer would be the right word for that video (I notice visualizer is used on some YT videos and not others). Great job on the video and the song. I also checked out The Man He Never Knew, which tells a compelling story.

You are a very good writer and musician Walter. I can picture a crowd of people watching you perform and really diggin' your music, which is what I consider "soft Rock". You obviously have video production skills as well.

 

[Murrmurr]

There can be a lot of grey areas here, but I generally agree about leaving the old stuff alone. I always think about the mid-1980's CD remix of ZZ Top's La Grange - they added a ton of reverb to the drums, I guess to make it sound more "80's". The original 1973 mix was perfect IMHO. In any event, the original mix represented the times in which it was recorded. However, other vintage recordings are just sonically poor in quality. Is a digital touch-up acceptable for these? It's an interesting debate.

Remastering is a whole different thing, though. The process removes noise for a clean sound, and equalizes all the sounds for balance where it's needed - the music is cleaner and clearer without altering the artist's intentions. What was created is preserved.

As you implied, some of Freddie Mercury's vocals on the 2024 vinyl reissue of Queen's first album were pitch-corrected. Really? They pitch-corrected Freddie Mercury? Are you kidding me?

Can you believe that shyte? Yeah, Fil, the singer-guitarist from Wings of Pegasus, has a YouTube channel where he analyzes this sort of thing, and he proved that Freddy's voice was altered by the company that owns Queen's music as well as their official YouTube channel, and then posted the altered version on the official channel.

So, say today's kids want to know who Queen was and learn about their sound and style and all that; if they watch that video from Queen's official channel, they're not going to hear Freddy, you know? They're not even going to hear a real voice; they're going to hear what technology produced.

Why would you even, right? Remove the actual character of his voice...for what?

(the name of Fil's YT channel is Wings of Pegasus, if you want to check out how he does his analyses)