Pinned post
RAC
Verified account This account is verified. Learn more@RAC
grammy award winning recording artist ✨ m@r.ac
1.7K Following 55K Followers 29K Posts
Latest posts 5
given i'm the remix guy, figured i'd chime in here.
I know everybody in music just hates AI by default, but I find this to be mostly benign.
If people wanna create alternative covers of songs they like and try interesting combinations, I certainly don't care. I'll most likely enable the setting given it's opt-in.
The financials are interesting though and any added revenue stream is welcome.
I think Spotify is avoiding the generative backlash because it's portrayed as a "cover/remix", but it's the same exact models that generate music from text prompts. There is no difference.
Either a) they are training their own model from their catalog without permission or b) licensing an existing model.
I assume the latter, and those were still likely trained on Youtube.
This original post is a bit hyperbolic tbh, it's not gonna solve the underlying financial model, but if Spotify continues to add more social and superfan features, I think it's a step in the right direction.
I know everybody in music just hates AI by default, but I find this to be mostly benign.
If people wanna create alternative covers of songs they like and try interesting combinations, I certainly don't care. I'll most likely enable the setting given it's opt-in.
The financials are interesting though and any added revenue stream is welcome.
I think Spotify is avoiding the generative backlash because it's portrayed as a "cover/remix", but it's the same exact models that generate music from text prompts. There is no difference.
Either a) they are training their own model from their catalog without permission or b) licensing an existing model.
I assume the latter, and those were still likely trained on Youtube.
This original post is a bit hyperbolic tbh, it's not gonna solve the underlying financial model, but if Spotify continues to add more social and superfan features, I think it's a step in the right direction.
Spotify just announced a feature that could either save the music industry or destroy it.View quoted post on X
Starting as early as Q1 2027, Spotify Premium subscribers will be able to use AI to transform any participating artist’s song into a completely different version. Turn a folk ballad into a dance track. Make a hip-hop song sound acoustic. Generate a cover where one artist’s voice performs another artist’s song. Remix a pop hit into lo-fi study music. Create the version of your favorite song that only existed in your head until now.
The remixes will be uploaded directly to Spotify. They’ll appear in playlists. They’ll count toward the original song’s chart position. And most importantly the original artist will earn royalties every time someone listens to a fan-created remix of their work.
Spotify has already signed a landmark licensing deal with Universal Music Group the world’s largest record label. Negotiations with Sony Music and Warner Music are ongoing. The feature will cost an additional $4–$5/month on top of Spotify Premium. And analysts project 7–8% of American subscribers will adopt it by 2028.
This is not Suno or Udio generating music from text prompts. This is fans remixing real songs by real artists with the artists’ permission, on the world’s largest streaming platform, with royalties flowing back to the creators.
A music industry analyst who’s covered streaming economics for 15 years told her team something after reading the licensing agreement that reframed how she understood the future of recorded music.
“Spotify just turned 640 million listeners into 640 million potential remixers. The question isn’t whether people will use it they will. The question is whether paying artists for fan remixes solves the economics of streaming or creates a world where the original recording is worth less than the infinite remixes generated from it.”
Here’s what Spotify’s AI remix feature actually is, who wins, who loses, and why this might be the most consequential decision in the music industry since the launch of streaming itself 🧵
Seth Rogen says he and his wife are now more grateful than ever that they decided not to have children he’s not afraid to explain why.
He admits they used to question whether they’d made the right decision, but now their conversations have shifted to, “Honestly, thank God we don’t have children.”
His reasoning? They’re in the prime of their lives, understand themselves better than ever, and have the freedom to pursue their careers, enjoy life, and build the kind of relationship they’ve always wanted.
But Seth took it a step further, saying he sees people with children struggling to find the same time for work and personal enjoyment that he and his wife have.
“I seem to get a lot more active enjoyment out of not having kids than anyone I know seems to get out of having kids.”
That statement will probably divide people. Some see raising children as life’s greatest joy, while others believe a fulfilling life doesn’t have to include parenthood.
Do you think Seth has a point, or is there a kind of happiness you can only understand after having children?View quoted post on X
hello @cursor_ai, i really like @bot but this past week my experience has gone from barely touching 15% of weekly usage to hitting 100% in one day with literally no change in behavior. I've been a user since day 1.
I pay $200/mo for this and I even topped up an extra $40 to finish some simple tasks, and I'm back at 100% with 2 days to go.
What I liked about Grok Bot was that it just worked, and at this point, it's not usable. It's not lost on me that compute is expensive but this feels like a rug pull. I was willing to accept and pay for a subfrontier model, but this is forcing my hand to switch.
Judging from the conversation here, I am not alone.
I pay $200/mo for this and I even topped up an extra $40 to finish some simple tasks, and I'm back at 100% with 2 days to go.
What I liked about Grok Bot was that it just worked, and at this point, it's not usable. It's not lost on me that compute is expensive but this feels like a rug pull. I was willing to accept and pay for a subfrontier model, but this is forcing my hand to switch.
Judging from the conversation here, I am not alone.
been thinking about why AI coding and AI music feel so different. faster code lets me build things i couldn't before.
making 100 more songs doesn't give anyone 100 more reasons to care.
the value of automation depends on what you're making.
also, i actually like making music. there are tedious parts i'd happily automate, but the process itself is a big part of why i do it.
making 100 more songs doesn't give anyone 100 more reasons to care.
the value of automation depends on what you're making.
also, i actually like making music. there are tedious parts i'd happily automate, but the process itself is a big part of why i do it.
