I give up..lol


#1

4 real seriously…


#2

If this means DJs are going to be spinning mixes of Guetta and Eifel then it’s not a complete loss.

I unironically love the original track. The new lyrics are just sad, and I’m sure everyone is going to keep those over the lines like “I live in the blue house with the blue window”.


#3

Guetta completely ripped off eifel…

Sample a pad ok…but the whole instrumental of a track seriously…

Also was he a part of eifel…to my knowledge, no…so he didnt make it.

Im guessing the label he belongs to owns the rights to the song…they probably took the song and rebranded it as a guetta remix collab to make more money…

It like me taking an aphex twin track and looping it for three minutes and then adding fart samples to it and labeling it as an original dubstep track…

The facepalm is strong with this.


#4

I would say it all depends on the fart samples.


#5

Secret on how to bass???


#6

I feel your fury because it’s a shitty cover, but sometimes a shitty cover is just what a song needs to come back into the limelight for a bit. There’s plenty examples of this happening in the rock world, no need to look farther than the JunkieXL version of “A Little Less Conversation” which is now legally required to play during any movie flyover scene of Las Vegas. You have to append your search with original version or you’ll only get this.

Aerosmith did it to the Beatles with “Come Together”, Guns’n’Roses did it to the Rolling Stones with “Sympathy for the Devil”, White Lion did it to Golden Earing with “Radar Love” (and in that case as in this one the Golden Earing version is undoubtedly the superior song).

Covers happen, I have to assume Guetta’s giving proper credit and Eifel 65 just got their biggest paycheck in a decade.

Also if you need help with those fart samples I can get some deep subby pants flappers for you :wink:


#7

Facepalm ≠ fury…

I am aware of junkie xxl…but at least he changes and adds drums to it…

Im under the assumption that he isnt though…lol

Also doing live covers takes some skill if your in a band.

Also the fart samples arent necessary ill just rip from yt vids.


#8

I’m pretty sure producers like DG are basically like asset-flippers of the EDM scene. It wouldn’t even surprise me if someone else entirely recorded the vocal track and he never even met the vocalist himself, probably getting stems at some kind of bulk sale price so he could sculpt new tracks out of them. And if they don’t fit, there’s always autotune and melodyne!

I’m probably wrong about all of this (I hope), but it’s better to not pay the EDM reptilian overlords any serious attention. They have no souls :smiley:


#9

It is funny to me that in house and techno fans/DJs argue about who is “too pop” and that tech house is basic Chad music yet it is all less commercial than DG et al…like what you like… I am just over here trying to bring disco vibes back.


#10

I should add…DG is fairly soulless lol


#11

IDM is to pretentious as EDM is to sellout. It’s all BS imo you like what you like and there’s good/bad stuff in any genre. Saw Deadmau5 perform in New Years and nothing can beat that, seriously.

Edit: didn’t mean to reply to anyone. :heart:


#12

these are the people AI will find it the easiest to replace.


#13

You sure they aren’t AI-made, already?! :smirk:

Then rather the silly stuff which is hard to watch but obviously they’ve put some “serious” work into their video stuff. The music on the other hand… uhm… youtube .com/watch?v=Ztq_9jcRhZw


#14

I find the whole AI thing so crass and tasteless, particularly when it comes to impersonating musicians that are no longer with us. The thought of Elvis singing “when Doves Cry” ( a song I love that should never be touched ) or David Bowie singing “barbie girl” ( a song I hate that should never have been touched ) is too ridiculous. They’re even talking about giving grammys to AI songs, which is just madness.

The potential for abuse within mimickry, is also a concern, particularly when it could be used to falsely incriminate someone, or defraud. The whole thing is a minefield.
I find it too much of a coincidence that AI image programs, ChatGPT and these audio things all arrived on the scene at the same time. It seems orchestrated or co-ordinated in some way


#15

I don’t think its orchestrated to any greater degree than the fact that computers just got powerful enough for cheap enough for a bunch of people to get their hands on them to make these things. I agree there’s not really merit to a lot of what AI is being used for right now, it is early days after all - like how the first movies were just of things like a train rolling towards the audience for 15 seconds. It took something like 7-8 years for ideas like “editing” and the rules of continuity to be established, for film to start to be able to tell new and interesting stories and not just be a moving picture. AI is there right now, and almost everything it’s currently being used for is going to be a historical footnote in 40-50 years.

I agree giving Grammys to AI is pointless, they have technical Grammys that could go to the programmers, but I don’t see the point (beyond marketing for whoever made the AI) in giving an award to AI - which is probably why it will happen. Can you imagine the sales pitch? “Our AI wrote a grammy-winning song for Taylor Swift so now you have no excuse!!!”

As far as the most abominable use for mimicry goes, I’ve been saying for a decade that enough people have had their voice recorded enough times (phone/video calls) that you could probably put together a decent mimic of most people these days. I say you combine that, a head-related transfer function, and lasers that can excite the air near the ear (a not too unrealistic sci-fi sort of speaker) to make people’s voices say stuff like “don’t forget eggs” while they’re at the grocery store. I wonder how many people would think they just thought that and not question if it was an ad or not?


#16

Something I find completely myopic about all of this is the tech magazines actively promoting the use of AI. I mean one particular magazine ( who I unsubbed from because of this ) were teaching their readers to go use that software to make their own fake drake or a Kurt Clonebain ( pretty sure I just created that ) and I see that as turkeys voting for Christmas. If they encourage people to use AI, the devs make AI better, faster, and then AI starts really putting people out of jobs. It doesn’t need to eat, sleep, take toilet breaks, go on holiday, have teabreaks, be sick, and crucially, doesn’t need wages…

That last one will see companies like the Discovery Channel ( who have already said they didn’t want to pay musicians for music ) completely cut out the middleman if they can get AI to make the music on it’s own… This is why google and apple are spending billions researching this.


#17

Most artists already don’t get paid well for stuff like this anyway, with licensing platforms finding ways to cut costs all the time to harm the creators and fluff up their inventory in the process (even stock photo websites nowadays are a joke, usually only paying you $.25 per picture while also having pretty high standards for what gets accepted in the first place).

Spotify is constantly shortchanging smaller artists, and plenty of indie bands are paying out of pocket just to be on the platform because “it’s what you do!” to get heard (and they’re also not wrong in assuming this).

Quality is just going to keep going down the drain until we all start valuing artwork a little higher than this, and the tight embrace of AI might be final nail in the coffin. Part of me hopes that it will eventually give birth to a new creative revolution, but we’re going to have to go through a really wicked storm first before anyone realizes what’s actually at stake here in multiple domains (obviously, art is the least-worrying).