David in WV

Um . . . no one said anything about requiring that all collaborators be members to post a song for critique, and I think it's kind of weird that you seem to have taken my post in that way. I just expressed that I'd be in favor of a guideline that the poster disclose who their collaborators are - be they a member, a nonmember, or AI - so that I won't waste my time offering feedback about a contribution to the song made by a collaborator who isn't here as a member or isn't human to be part of the song's critique conversation. And no, I don't think that's at all ridiculous.

I agree. And, I think the lyricist's agreement with the music collaborator should be in writing (always a good idea) and expressly prohibit the use of generative AI in the music's composition (a good idea in today's AI world). Otherwise, the lyrist would still not be justified in being confident that the song with their lyrics that they shop/publish/distribute has music that is also fully protected by copyright. In other words, don't trust that music collaborator won't in turn rely on AI for the music without disclosing that to the lyricist, and make not using AI a contractual promise. A minefield indeed.

I just wanted to point out, FWIW, that songs posted in the critique forum by a member who only did the lyrics with the music being done by human composers who are not also members of Songstuff, is likewise a post of a song for critique where the writer of the music is not really part of the song critique conversation. Personally, I wouldn't waste my time giving feedback regarding the music of any song posted for critique where the music was done by AI or by a non-member of Songstuff, and I would very much be in favor a guideline for the song critique forum that the poster disclose his/her contribution to the song, disclose the contributions of other Songstuff members, and if AI and/or non-members also made contributions, to disclose that too. Though such a guideline would most often be enforceable only by the honor system, I thinks it's a fair, appropriate, and worthwhile guideline to have for the critique forum.

I predict that if there be a White Knight coming to rescue musical artists from the enemy of generative AI, the sword the knight wields will be the copyrights of the artists, labels and publishers protected by the big kid on the legal block - the U.S. Copyright Office enforcing U.S. copyright law. Under current U.S. copyright law, there is no copyright protection for an "idea" and no protection for any work not authored by a human being. In my opinion, a person's "prompt" to a generative AI program is just an "idea" not protected by copyright, and the Copyright Office is already taking the position that lyrics and/or music generated by an AI algorithm is not a work of authorship by a human being and thus, not protected by copyright. Also in my opinion, a musical work having no or severely limited copyright protection is essentially a musical work with little or no commercial value, and labels and publishers are not going to be interested in replacing human-made musical works having commercial value with AI-created works having little or no commercial value. But again, this just my prediction. P.S. Labels, publishers and even some major artists are already suing generative AI companies for the AI company's non-fair-use infringement of the copyrights in the published recordings of songs the AI company used to "teach" their generative AI's algorithm.

I use my trusty Shure Beta 67A to record both vocals and my Rainsong six-string dreadnought - my only acoustic guitar. I think it's a great sounding mic for both purposes, and though it's a condenser, it a has a smaller size diaphragm with a supercardiod polar pattern that does a great job of not picking up sound not coming directly at the mic. And unlike so many condenser mics, the Beta 67A is a pretty tough mic because it's designed to be a handheld live mic. I can attest to its toughness, because I have dropped it down to a hard floor more than once and my dog has even gotten ahold of it and knocked it around. I think Shure discontinued it for the Beta 87A.

I don't gig, and I don't post my music anywhere for any approval or promotion, and I only upload my music to my website, and my website, like my music, is also a creative work that I enjoy making, and also like my music, it is forever a continuing work in progress! LOL I sometimes post a link to my new works here on Songstuff (and on just one other forum where I am also a member) in a non-critique forum, because I consider members here (and there) to be my brothers/sisters/friends/peers and I sometimes like to share my new stuff with my peers here (and there) like I sometimes like to share my new stuff with my real-word friends who also do music or create other art, and like they likewise sometimes like share their new stuff with me - not for the approval of the other, but just to share it and I suppose, reinforce our artist-to-artist connection. That's a very special connection I can only feel with others who are doing something creative. I quite cherish that special connection, and I miss it when I don't have it. This hasn't always been "me." But, this is me now. Who knows who I'll be tomorrow.

Sometimes I read posts like these and wonder if I'm actually existing in a similar yet very different artistic reality from others here. Nothing stops me from doing my best under whatever circumstances I'm facing, except maybe laziness. Do I always think I could have done this or that "better"? Of course, because perfection is an end goal that I can never reach. But I know that, so I have no basis for feeling anything approaching "fear" or "self-doubt" about my work, especially since I honestly don't care what anyone else thinks about it. And the reason I don't care what anyone else thinks about my work is connected to the reason of why I create musical works in the first place - I create for creation's sake. Not because I need to express myself to anyone else or even to myself, and not to leave a testamentary legacy. I create music simply because I derive pleasure by that act of creation itself - imposing my vision of something on reality as I perceive it. I suppose it's my way of playing god. And, what kind of god would I be if I cared what others think of me or was afraid or self-doubtful? I'm not going to let your folks spoil my "god time." What a buzz kill! Edit: No. I'm still doing my best under the circumstances even if I'm feeling lazy. Because if I'm feeling lazy at the time, that's one of the circumstances in which I'm working.

What a truly wonderful post, Greg . . . and a well written too. Bravissimo! David

I've been writing and recording music/songs for a long, long time, and of course, my "process" has changed over the years. One aspect of my process that has remained constant though, is that when starting a new work, I always start with something musical - something on a guitar, some sound in my DAW or synth, or some drum/percussion pattern or loop. When I start with something on my acoustic, I also finish it on my acoustic. By that I mean, I come up with the complete acoustic guitar part and the complete lead vocal arrangement (which also means I complete the lyric) before I start any recording or do further arranging for the song. Sometimes I'll record it as a guitar+vocal 1+1 and leave it that way as a finished recording, and sometimes I enhance the guitar+vocal 1+1 by adding further instruments/sounds and/or vocals to the arrangement. How do I decide what to add to the arrangement and when to add it? I think that probably varies from song to song. But I'm sure it significantly involves a lot of trial and error guided by my musical intuition, which in turn, is probably grounded in years of experience listening to good music and writing and recording my own. In other words, I'll try this or that, and if I like what I hear, then I keep it and move on to what else might sound good to me., until I get to the point when I consider it done . . . for the time being anyway. When I start a song with a sound in my DAW, then by default I'll record what I'm doing with that sound. So I'm starting with an initial recording of something musical, and as I continue the process for that work, there really are no distinctly separate writing, arranging, or recording phases. It all kind of meshes together. And again, it involves trying this and that and listening to the results. I've been doing this long enough to believe that what I might imagine is most often a mirage tempting me to go down a rabbit hole trying to bring it into reality. What truly inspires me, is how something actually sounds to me - not something I only "hear in my head." That includes lyrics. A big factor in deciding what words I want to sing, is how the words sound in the arrangement as I sing them in various ways. I've been doing this musical creativity thing for so long that my process is now pretty efficient, and many, if not most of my songs, take less than 48 hours from that first musical snippet as a start to a fully produced recording of a finished song, and I often I finish in the same "session" that I started, because once I do start, I get a bit focused on it - perhaps obsessively so. Even the trial and error aspect of my process is fairly efficient. I know almost immediately when something sounds good and when something doesn't, and when something that sounds pretty good might sound even better with a change. I also know when I sing words whether they are conveying what I want to convey in the way I want to convey it, and I know when I'm not meeting that goal. For example, "I want to leave" sounds okay, but if I sang "I have to go" and held "go" with that long "o" vowel sound, and added harmonies, that would sound killer and better convey my emotions. * Disclaimer. The one instrument sound that I do rely on what I imagine it sounding like during my process until I actually record it, is my singing voice. It's just too physically tiring (and embarrassing if another is within earshot) for me to actual do a bunch of singing out loud when I'm trying to come up with a vocal melody and lyrics. I know my voice pretty well and what it will sound like when I sing out loud. But I confess, sometimes I am surprised when I actually go to record my vocals - Shit! It's out of my range! <heh-heh> I doubt any of this is of any use to you, Mahesh. So let me close by saying this. However you arrange and mix a recording of one of your songs, always make sure your singing is center stage. You're a fine acoustic player, Bro. But when you play the instrument of your voice, you're a virtuoso, and the sound is glorious. David

The 32-Bit Float audio recording revolution and its HUGE headroom before clipping (making clipping and gain staging for it a thing of the past) is underway. DAWs and VSTs have been using it a long time for internal processing. Zoom may have have been first out of the gate with a consumer audio interface - this one:. https://www.amazon.com/Zoom-UAC-232-Converter-Interface-Headphone/dp/B0BW1VDHNS/ref=asc_df_B0BW1VDHNS/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=647293221758&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=9200862543381157809&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9009415&hvtargid=pla-1968708094295&psc=1&mcid=df63d616fb4f3e5bbf09b08b69b770d6

Hi, Mark. I'm David. Welcome.

LOL Sorry, but I really thought that was pretty funny.

If you do get that guitar, get the see-thru purple sunburst version of it. I think it looks the coolest. it may also be the least expensive of the colors available for it. Double-plus!! ++ ++

Wes. Dude. There is only one Bruce Hornsby. Listen to him . . . do it multiple times a day if need be. Ignore all the rest. The rest pale in comparison.

WTF? I'm supposed to be having fun doing music? Hmm. I must be doing it wrong. Welcome to my nightmare, Palmiro. David