The topic of AI’s role in artistic creation is about as controversial as it gets. Yesterday, I posted my usage of a new plugin that incorporates Claude AI by Anthropic to generate sounds and synth instruments based on prompts that you feed it. This garnered quite a bit of attention, including someone giving me their thoughts that my public usage of the tool would be detrimental to bookings down the line. Where my opinion comes in: I’ve been creating electronic music for over 13 years now (far before AI implementation). What drew me to the space was the ability to create sounds and textures that I’ve never heard before. To utilize new technology in a way to create things that haven’t been heard before. In terms of the specific AI plugin I showcased, I don’t see it as being any different from utilizing a preset through a stock/third party plugin and using it as a starting point to further branch off of. From that starting point I can do a multitude of things (change the wavetable, change parameter settings, add/subtract effects, etc.). This method has always been a well-trusted way to further your creativity and get past writer’s block. Does one negatively judge a pianist’s artistic value because they didn’t build the piano themselves? New technology has and will always be judged based off how you utilize it. Autotune for example: you have artists that have utilized it in creative ways for an aesthetic purpose, and you’ve also had artists use it as a crutch because they can’t sing in tune. Both sides of the coin will happen with new technology regardless. Let me know what you think. What do you personally think about AI’s role for the creative and how are you utilizing it? #ai #claude #anthropic #electronicmusic

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories