Grammys CEO: Music Containing AI-Created Elements Eligible 14
An anonymous reader shares a report: Last month, the Recording Academy announced a series of changes to the Grammy Awards to better reflect an evolving music industry. Of those newly instituted guidelines, protocols involving technological advancements in machine learning sparked headlines: "Only human creators" could win the music industry's highest honor in a decision aimed at the use of artificial intelligence in popular music. "A work that contains no human authorship is not eligible in any category," the rules read in part. As the music industry continues to come to terms with this new technology, so too will the Grammys, says Recording Academy CEO and President Harvey Mason jr. "Here's the super easy, headline statement: AI, or music that contains AI-created elements is absolutely eligible for entry and for consideration for Grammy nomination. Period," Mason told The Associated Press. "What's not going to happen is we are not going to give a Grammy or Grammy nomination to the AI portion."
If an AI or voice modeling program performs the lead vocal on a song, the track would be eligible in a songwriting category, for example, but not a performance category, because what is performing is not human creation, he explains. Conversely, if a song was sung by an actual human in the studio, and they did all the performing, but AI wrote the lyric or the track, the song would not be eligible in a composition or a songwriting category... As long as the human is contributing in a more than de minimis amount, which to us means a meaningful way, they are and will always be considered for a nomination or a win," he continued. "We don't want to see technology replace human creativity. We want to make sure technology is enhancing, embellishing, or additive to human creativity. So that's why we took this particular stand in this award cycle."
If an AI or voice modeling program performs the lead vocal on a song, the track would be eligible in a songwriting category, for example, but not a performance category, because what is performing is not human creation, he explains. Conversely, if a song was sung by an actual human in the studio, and they did all the performing, but AI wrote the lyric or the track, the song would not be eligible in a composition or a songwriting category... As long as the human is contributing in a more than de minimis amount, which to us means a meaningful way, they are and will always be considered for a nomination or a win," he continued. "We don't want to see technology replace human creativity. We want to make sure technology is enhancing, embellishing, or additive to human creativity. So that's why we took this particular stand in this award cycle."
Ni**as in Paris ft. Trump, Obama, and Biden (Score:2)
I guess this track is eligible.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:1)
AI Eminem of 2021 (Score:2)
The slim shady of 2021.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
No choice (Score:2)
There's no choice here. It's absolutely impossible for them to determine the process through which the music was composed. At least they are smart enough to not create a rule that it is impossible for them to enforce.
Re: (Score:2)
Even it was a frappe of previously used ideas--you put your name on it and it becomes one of another millions of shameless, lazy, rip-offs. I put 100 words in a jar and randomly pull out 5 and make a song lyric. Does "Grammy" need to know that? No. Does anyone? Well, I think that's probably how they write Rick and Morty
Too late (Score:2)
How is AI different than Auto-Tune or synthesizers?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
How is AI different than Auto-Tune or synthesizers?
How is a synthesizer different than a drum or guitar?
All are instruments, with skill required to extract good music.
Auto-tune classified as singing is deceptive. But auto-tune as an instrument you play with your voice? Again, just as valid as any other instrument.
Sampling is bit different, though if you've actually transformed the sampled work into a legitimately new song it's still a creative process to create new music. Similar with covers.
The issue with generative AI is it can start supplying some of the
Not human (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
All "popular" recorded music is machine-corrected to be "perfect." It's been that way for like 20 years by now. Yes, one of the many reasons it is boring and sucks.
Re: (Score:2)
Covers (Score:2)
What's going to happen when an AI just does a cover?
The old guard (somewhat) accepting something new? (Score:2)
Honestly, this is more than I expected them to admit, given how neophobic entertainment award academies tend to be. Remember that a movie can be ineligible for an Oscar unless it's released exclusively in an glorified fast food joint. [youtube.com]*
*They temporarily lifted this rule [nytimes.com] during COVID, but it looks like they're trying to bring it back. [giantfreakinrobot.com]
Irrelevant organization struggling to find niche (Score:2)
Music is an art, and Art and Industry do not mix.