Randy Travis Uses AI For New Song

KeithE4 said:

In a few years, holograms and AI will be put together. Even if I'm still around to see it, I don't want to.

Click to expand...

That puts us dangerously close to the Holodecks of Star Trek: TNG. I've always thought they were super neat, but seeing as now that some version of that fictional concept is actually approaching reality – in this super commercialized world – I'm not looking forward to it, because all the multi billion and trillion dollar tech companies are going to do everything they can to monetize and commercialize it to the fullest, creepiest extent possible, at the general public's expense, which is something that I find quite disgusting. So much so, in fact, that I'm starting to wonder if the world would've been better off if the Internet had never been invented. Commercialization was bad enough before, but it was manageable. Now it's just absolutely insane.

c

Just Wow

Here is one of many examples. Michael Jackson never recorded or to the best of my knowledge sang “Yesterday Once More” when he was alive. Can his estate sue and stop the distribution of this song? Alternately can they ask for royalties for his AI created vocals? Unlike the Randy Travis song the artist (or estate) had no involvement nor did they give permission for this track to be created and shared.

Here's a link to the story that aired on CBS Sunday Morning:

Larry said:

Here is one of many examples. Michael Jackson never recorded or to the best of my knowledge sang “Yesterday Once More” when he was alive. Can his estate sue and stop the distribution of this song?

Click to expand...

They can try. There are new laws being discussed that would address this directly.

From a capitalist perspective I don't have problems with artists continuing to make money off their art, but using A.I. and vocal synthesis to recreate a voice that can no longer sing in the pursuit of more money? It almost seems a little (for the lack of another term) phony, or fraudulent.

Kelly A said:

From a capitalist perspective I don't have problems with artists continuing to make money off their art, but using A.I. and vocal synthesis to recreate a voice that can no longer sing in the pursuit of more money?

Click to expand...

If you look at Randy in that piece, he's in pursuit of his personal joy of music. This is someone who has lived his life around music, like a baseball player who lived his life on the field. He wants to be on stage, he wants to be in the studio, and this is the only way he can. He shows up at concerts, at the Opry, just to be there.

I'm reminded a bit of Dick Clark after his stroke, who still wanted to host shows and do things even though it was very difficult. The mind is still there, but the body doesn't respond.

TheBigA said:

If you look at Randy in that piece, he's in pursuit of his personal joy of music. This is someone who has lived his life around music, like a baseball player who lived his life on the field. He wants to be on stage, he wants to be in the studio, and this is the only way he can. He shows up at concerts, at the Opry, just to be there.

Click to expand...

And that's all great. I'm sure Joe Namath, Joe Montana, and Peyton Manning still watch and attend NFL games. But all have retired and past their ability to play. Most people know if any tried to play a game again they would likely be seriously injured.
Just like professional sports players, sometimes musical artists should just hang it up and enjoy retirement. I understand that Randy's career was cut short by health issues, but the same could be said for other artists and athletes also who aren't trying to use tech as a synthetic comeback.

Kelly A said:

Just like professional sports players, sometimes musical artists should just hang it up and enjoy retirement. I understand that Randy's career was cut short by health issues, but the same could be said for other artists and athletes also who aren't trying to use tech as a synthetic comeback.

Click to expand...

As for the money part of it, he's been open about the fact that he lost a lot of money in a bitter divorce, and didn't have insurance to cover this disability. He wrote about it in his book a few years ago. So could the money from a new record help resolve his situation with his record label? Probably.

TheBigA said:

As for the money part of it, he's been open about the fact that he lost a lot of money in a bitter divorce, and didn't have insurance to cover this disability. He wrote about it in his book a few years ago. So could the money from a new record help resolve his situation with his record label? Probably.

Randy Travis Reveals a Dire Financial Forecast

Randy Travis didn't say he's broke but during an interview he describes his financial situation as dire.

tasteofcountry.com

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, in my mind, this is potentially like finding a genie in a bottle for record companies. We both know that the percentage of sales of synthetic Randy music won't go just to Randy. He might make a single-digit percentage of sales. I'm sorry that he's broke, but maybe the creation of a book, or speaking engagements would be a more genuine form of income for his success as a music artist rather than creating something done by software and only approved by Randy.
That means if sales of Randy's synthesized music do decently, expect to hear about keepers of the Michael Jackson and Prince estates being approached to create new music from the grave.

Kelly A said:

I'm sorry that he's broke, but maybe the creation of a book, or speaking engagements

Click to expand...

He already wrote the book and he can't speak. It's up to the fans to decide if they accept it or not. That would be the case regardless of how the music was accomplished. They're being very open with the process. They're not hiding anything. It's really only fraud if they try to hide the process. They're not.

This is why I like old vinyl records. You can be absolutely certain that for any record made 30, 40, 50 or more years ago, whatever music or sounds that are on that record were somehow recorded by genuine people in some fashion, not by a software-generated imitation.

But all this new streaming stuff? Who knows where it came from anymore. Odds are most of it is real, but there's an increasing chance that it may actually be fake.

c

cc333 said:

This is why I like old vinyl records. You can be absolutely certain that for any record made 30, 40, 50 or more years ago, whatever music or sounds that are on that record were somehow recorded by genuine people in some fashion, not by a software-generated imitation.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure. There have been studio tricks employed since Les Paul recorded How High The Moon over 70 years ago.

TheBigA said:

He already wrote the book and he can't speak.

Click to expand...

Neither could Steven Hawking, but he sure did a lot of speaking engagements.

TheBigA said:

It's up to the fans to decide if they accept it or not.

Click to expand...

That's true, but I also see this as a way for record companies to take advantage.

Kelly A said:

That's true, but I also see this as a way for record companies to take advantage.

Click to expand...

That's why you have lawyers. And once again if the fans agree with you, then it won't matter.

TheBigA said:

That's why you have lawyers. And once again if the fans agree with you, then it won't matter.

Click to expand...

And paying high-priced lawyers to protect yourself from vultures means you make even less of the proceeds in the end.

Kelly A said:

And paying high-priced lawyers to protect yourself from vultures means you make even less of the proceeds in the end.

Click to expand...

That's how the game is played. Once again, everybody knows the rules.

TheBigA said:

That's how the game is played. Once again, everybody knows the rules.

Click to expand...

I would argue that creating music from singers who can't sing using software, or potentially long-dead music artists, amounts to a whole new set of rules for a game just being created.

Kelly A said:

I would argue that creating music from singers who can't sing using software, or potentially long-dead music artists, amounts to a whole new set of rules for a game just being created.

Click to expand...

Which is why it's a topic of discussion, and why politicians are looking at new laws, one of which I linked in post #25.

The state of Tennessee, where this song was recorded, has become the first state to pass a law regarding AI:

TheBigA said:

I wouldn't be so sure. There have been studio tricks employed since Les Paul recorded How High The Moon over 70 years ago.

Click to expand...

Right, but my point is that those tricks were deliberately created by a real human being (Les Paul, in this case), not an AI-driven computer algorithm pretending to be a human being.

Kelly A said:

I would argue that creating music from singers who can't sing using software, or potentially long-dead music artists, amounts to a whole new set of rules for a game just being created.

Click to expand...

I would suppose that for a living artist who, like Randy Travis, has lost their voice for one reason or another, if there exists a tool that enables them to bring back that voice, then it should be OK for them to use that tool if they want to, provided they are up front and honest about it, as Randy seems to be in this recent case.

However, I feel that resurrecting the voices of dead artists to "sing" new material, is extremely questionable and should be carefully regulated, if not banned outright, because it can easily become a legal and ethical quagmire, not to mention the fact that it's creepy.

c