The most stunning Beach Boys AI I've heard yet

[HeyJude]

Had AI been around in the 60s, might Brian have considered using it?

I'm going to go with no. There would have been zero reason to use it back then, as they all had fully intact voices.

When we're talking about "AI" here, I think we're mainly talking about fake "soundalike" vocals. (If we're talking about generating *new* music from the ground-up using AI, that's a WHOLE other ball of wax, and to me even more goofy and pointless). And in the realm of vocals, Brian *could have* (and probably DID) sing "Guess I'm Dumb" back in 1965. He didn't need AI.

There was a point in the 80s and even 90s when some musical artists spent MORE time (and probably money) futzing around with programming drums instead of just having someone come in and PLAY them. And I think there's a lot of that happening with AI right now, especially with AI visual art, where people have zero interest putting *any* manual work into it. They type a description and their PC does the rest.

Each time a new thing comes along, people, understandably up to a point, compare it to some previous tech.

I just don't think using technology to make alterations to someone's work (e.g. autotune, any number of effects, machine-learning-enhanced audio splitting/separation, etc.) is the same thing as some random person singing into AI software to try to emulate what a *real* person would have sounded like under whatever the circumstances may be (and it seems to often if not usually be a younger version of the same singer).

An autotuned Brian is still *Brian's* voice run through whatever it may be.

With the AI vocals, it's some *other* person singing, and then using a program that has gobbled up many examples of Brian's voice, and then spits out an artificial, computer-generated voice guided by that random person singing.

Everybody has a different "line" I guess. Sort of like some people say the Beach Boys ended with Dennis's death, others say Carl's death, others say they're still *THE* Beach Boys now.

My cutoff on "Fake vs. Real" is the point at which the "voice/singer" in question plays no active role in what I'm hearing.

Make no mistake, it's "interesting" on some level to hear like Al and Mike filling in "Smile" vocals based on Brian's 2004 "Smile". Undeniably. It gives a bit of the flavor for what might have been. I recall hearing, pretty early on in the "AI vocal" fad, over a year ago at least, a 1980 Paul McCartney singing "Beautiful Boy." Did it sound like Paul? Not really, but it was as spot-on as "AI vocals" can get, and it was interesting as a curiosity to hear once, to briefly get a taste of imagining what the real thing would have been like.

But I can't live with the stuff, it doesn't work to actually continually listen to.

[guitarfool2002]

Had AI been around in the 60s, might Brian have considered using it?

Since it's all hypothetical, I'll say yes - with exemptions.

Consider how Brian in his teens, after getting a reel-to-reel tape deck as a gift, was using that technology which at that time in the late 50's was pretty much a decade old, and that's it. We have home tapes of young Brian stacking his voice through overdubs to replicate the sound of his beloved Four Freshmen. Listen to Brian's trademark high-range vocals: It's damn near the same as Bob Flanigan, in tone, phrasing, and general overall timbre to carry the high voice lines in that vocal stack. It can be uncanny at times to hear Flanigan and compare it to a 60's Brian vocal, circa 61-64. But it isn't actually uncanny when we consider Brian modeled his voice and vocal technique after Flanigan's with the Freshmen.

So breaking down all notions of reality and the time/space continuum, if that young Brian were using new and developing technology at that time to recreate the vocal sounds of his favorite group, why wouldn't it be probable that if a technology existed which would allow him to recreate those vocals as the AI programs are doing now, he'd be at least messing around with it and experimenting? Let's call it "analog Brian", and say if he were trying to have his own "Four Freshmen" in the form of overdubbing himself on a reel-to-reel in his teens singing other material, why wouldn't he do the same thing if another tool existed to do that same thing?

Remember that fragment of Smile which became known as Dixieland? That was a vocal game the Boys used to play in the car and elsewhere where each voice would riff on improvised lines like a Dixieland jazz combo, with the voices as the instruments. Now if tech existed where Brian could actually manipulate what those voices were doing and actually have the voices turn out sounding like a clarinet, trumpet, etc...don't you think he would have at least tried it?

Brian's willingness to work with new technology, new techniques, and new ways of recording music throughout the 60's and into the 70's is sometimes left out of the discussions. One of his favorite albums is and was "Switched On Bach", if that adds anything to the discussion. A totally "new" sound using one of the first commercially available Moogs to exist, and I think it inspired Brian's use of synths well into the 70's where some would consider him like a pioneer of synth-based pop tracks with the Love You album.

If a new technology came out that allowed him to experiment with sound, I'm sure he'd be all in. Would he use it on commercial recordings when he became a professional producer actually cutting records? Who knows...if it served a song he was working on, perhaps so. But if the teenage Brian was trying to recreate the voices and sounds of the Four Freshmen using the high tech recording device of its day, why wouldn't it make sense that he would experiment with similar technology if it existed.

[Zenobi]

There will never another Brian Wilson.
I'm so happy for Carnie.

Edit: sorry, this was for another thread, don't know how it ended here, too.

[SMiLE Brian]

Had AI been around in the 60s, might Brian have considered using it?

He could fire myke Luhv- in honor of oldsurferdude!

[HeyJude]

I think even the staunchest Mike detractors would have to admit Mike did his *best* work on those group vocals in the 60s and early 70s.

And honestly, some of the moments on even something like "That's Why God Made the Radio" where it stops sounding like Brian solo stuff and starts sounding like *THE* Beach Boys is when Mike's bass voice is in the mix (and Al in the mid-range of course).

The group vocals that they executed for Brian in the 60s, especially obviously the 64-67 era, are so beyond reproach and so KEY to that material that it's goofy to even suggest in jest that Brian would have wanted to use AI instead of them. This was the era where they were MOST integral to Brian's music.

AND, the fact that, as we've heard from some "stack of Brian" vocals from that era where he clearly *could* do it himself, Brian CHOSE to bring Mike and the other guys in to do the vocals proves how important he felt those voices were.

If you want to complain about Mike being a dick in some 2013 interview or something, have at it. But 60s Mike vocal work is like some of the most integral, important stuff the guy ever did. 

[Don Malcolm]

It needs to be said: this is getting tiresome from both sides. There is no resolving such different perspectives. No one is going to "win" here.

I seriously doubt that more than 5% of those who listen to AI-generated tunes become so enamored of them that they prefer them to the originals. That argument is such a pathetic strawman that I'm shocked it came from someone who is ordinarily one of the most intelligent posters here.

If a few folk go over the edge in that way, it's because some portion of the population will do so with anything. (Hell, a lot higher percentage of the US population has gone over the edge with respect to far more pressing issues, and possibly we should be focusing on that danger as opposed to the "specter of AI" ruining our lives.)

I absolutely love what Dae Lims has been doing. Do I think it replaces or supplants the original recordings? Of course not. I'm a fan of Dae Lims in the sense that GF alluded to--admiring the work of a man with significant talent, sensitivity and expertise who is paying his form of tribute to a band that he loves just as much as any of us. That tribute should be seen as a sincere effort to replicate a sound that no other group of individuals can recreate for us--it is not coming to us from some cabal of "pod people" gestating in someone's basement, but from someone who's carefully studied the band for some time, and who's making a sincere effort to respect the underlying aesthetics at work.

Do I think that he's achieving 100% success? Of course not--but, then again, neither did the band. Do I prefer some of Dae Lims work to some portion of the band's actual output? I can't say for sure at this point, because I've had half a century to make up my mind about the relative quality of the band's music. But I seriously doubt that Dae Lims has any illusions about his work somehow supplanting the band's recorded legacy. Enough with the spookifying already! Do I like Dae Lim's "Our Happy Home" more than, say, "Cuckoo Clock"? Absolutely--even as a "fake," it's better sung, and it's an intriguing and quite beguiling reimagining of "Our Sweet Love," a much more sophisticated track than what the band (and Brian) were capable in their very earlv years. So shoot me already! 

We can either agree to disagree and move on, or we can keep bickering about something that already is totally out of our control. Regardless of what anyone thinks about this issue from any possible perspective, the momentum of AI is relentless and will have more effects on the future than what is occurring here in this little cocoon of ours.

Let's just not get as intractable as the misanthrope over at the Nearest Faraway Place, who probably would (if he could) send a ragtag mob of hooligan purists over to Dae Lims' studio to put a halt to all this. That won't stop it, either, and it would just deprive us of the one person who does this with a palpable sense of artistry.

Just remember: no one has to listen to it if they don't want to! 

[Don Malcolm]

One quick postscript: I agree 100% about what Jude said about Mike and the band's vocals in the "golden era" time frame. And that is exactly the part of what makes it so hard to replicate this band. If we can separate Mike's (perceived) personality from his singing skills--and we should--then we can separate the sincere, sensitive user of AI from the more invidious aspects of it as it manifests itself elsewhere. Let's go for the "glass half full" approach in these instances whenever possible--remembering that, despite the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the past eighty years, we've not yet managed to blow up the world... 

[bonnevillemariner]

It needs to be said: this is getting tiresome from both sides. There is no resolving such different perspectives. No one is going to "win" here.

I seriously doubt that more than 5% of those who listen to AI-generated tunes become so enamored of them that they prefer them to the originals. That argument is such a pathetic strawman that I'm shocked it came from someone who is ordinarily one of the most intelligent posters here.

If a few folk go over the edge in that way, it's because some portion of the population will do so with anything. (Hell, a lot higher percentage of the US population has gone over the edge with respect to far more pressing issues, and possibly we should be focusing on that danger as opposed to the "specter of AI" ruining our lives.)

I absolutely love what Dae Lims has been doing. Do I think it replaces or supplants the original recordings? Of course not. I'm a fan of Dae Lims in the sense that GF alluded to--admiring the work of a man with significant talent, sensitivity and expertise who is paying his form of tribute to a band that he loves just as much as any of us. That tribute should be seen as a sincere effort to replicate a sound that no other group of individuals can recreate for us--it is not coming to us from some cabal of "pod people" gestating in someone's basement, but from someone who's carefully studied the band for some time, and who's making a sincere effort to respect the underlying aesthetics at work.

Do I think that he's achieving 100% success? Of course not--but, then again, neither did the band. Do I prefer some of Dae Lims work to some portion of the band's actual output? I can't say for sure at this point, because I've had half a century to make up my mind about the relative quality of the band's music. But I seriously doubt that Dae Lims has any illusions about his work somehow supplanting the band's recorded legacy. Enough with the spookifying already! Do I like Dae Lim's "Our Happy Home" more than, say, "Cuckoo Clock"? Absolutely--even as a "fake," it's better sung, and it's an intriguing and quite beguiling reimagining of "Our Sweet Love," a much more sophisticated track than what the band (and Brian) were capable in their very earlv years. So shoot me already! 

We can either agree to disagree and move on, or we can keep bickering about something that already is totally out of our control. Regardless of what anyone thinks about this issue from any possible perspective, the momentum of AI is relentless and will have more effects on the future than what is occurring here in this little cocoon of ours.

Let's just not get as intractable as the misanthrope over at the Nearest Faraway Place, who probably would (if he could) send a ragtag mob of hooligan purists over to Dae Lims' studio to put a halt to all this. That won't stop it, either, and it would just deprive us of the one person who does this with a palpable sense of artistry.

Just remember: no one has to listen to it if they don't want to! 

Very well said.

[Zenobi]

Maybe I'm too simplistic, but when listening to such gems as Dae Lims' "Our Happy Home" I simply bask in the bliss. Don't care about AI, autotune, authenticity, name it. If it is good music, I just thank Heavens that it exists, whatever the reason it exists.
Heroes and Villains, Part II, is a patchwork, but it is also one of my favourite pieces of music ever.

[HeyJude]

It needs to be said: this is getting tiresome from both sides. There is no resolving such different perspectives. No one is going to "win" here.

I seriously doubt that more than 5% of those who listen to AI-generated tunes become so enamored of them that they prefer them to the originals. That argument is such a pathetic strawman that I'm shocked it came from someone who is ordinarily one of the most intelligent posters here.

I was wary of it coming across as a strawman argument. But..... this is a thread full of people who dig the AI stuff. That's what I've been talking about. If I had started a thread absent pages of enthusiasm over these AI vocals, then I'd be in strawman territory.

I don't want to run this into the ground either. I will say that the board ain't exactly hopping with activity recently. The "AI Thread" is one of the only active threads of recent time here. As I've mentioned, I haven't belabored the point often over the last year or two since these AI vocals have become more prevalent. Rather, I do think an occasional check-in and discussion and perhaps even the *occasional* existential question concerning the AI stuff is worth delving into. And interesting.

I don't *think* I ever said *anybody*, not even 5%, "prefer them (AI vocals) to the originals."

Rather, what I was saying is that it *seems* like there is a contingent of fans who undoubtedly have not *run out* of real Beach Boys music and have still turned to AI recordings.

In other words, yes, I'm saying I'd rather listen to, and I'd encourage other fans to listen to, like "MIU Album" before a fake '66 Brian vocal. That's what I mean. And no, I'm not saying every person that digs AI vocals haven't listened to "MIU" (or fill in the name of whatever), I was just offering a bit of perspective in light of what *seemed* to be a case of losing a tiny bit of the plot.

The Beach Boys, and all of the off-shoot stuff, offer a MILLION hours of real music. Such that I don't think ANYBODY, including myself, could ever exhaust that supply such that they'd need to start listening to artificially generated recordings.

*Obviously*, some feel they can do both. What I'm saying is that, since again I don't think *any* of us have exhausted the existing supply of actual real music, then there are people who are choosing artificially generated music over the real thing. And really, I'd extend this all past BB music on to *any* real music.

I think there is an absurdity to listening to artificially generated music when an *endless, bottomless* well of real music is sitting right there. Hence the Simpsons fireplace gag.

I'm not saying people can't make it or listen to the stuff. I guess I *am* kind of, sort of saying they *shouldn't*, but not that they can't. I'm just taking the "AI conversation" into another corner, if only briefly.

What we listen to, how we absorb and consume this music, is part of how we related to each other in conversations.

I think it can be important to know if the person I'm talking to has every 1999 Beach Boys concert audience recording but has never listened to "Sgt. Pepper." And thus it can be important to know, and perhaps *occasionally* talk about, a case where some fans are listening to artificially generated "Beach Boys" music while leaving some real music by the wayside. None of these things make anybody bad people. It doesn't even mean I'm suggesting we shouldn't still have Beach Boys discussions with each other.

But maybe, just *maybe*, when the board is pretty quiet and one of the only active threads is about artificially generated music, then *maybe* there's something askew going on with the fans, or fandom, or the fan base, whatever we want to call it. And maybe, on occasion, I may be so bold and risk sounding elitist or snobby or whatever, if I say some variation of "Go listen to real music instead! Because I know NONE of us have run out of it!"

We only have so many hours, days, etc. To borrow and adapt a phraseology I find kind of amusing but also apt, time spent listening to artificially generated music is time spent NOT listening to something more worthwhile.

But to reiterate, I'm not out to convince anybody of anything, or change any minds. I'm kind of advocating for people to change this particular listening habit I suppose, but I'm not under any belief my words will actually do so. This is more just a series of thoughts, of *slightly* philosophical blurbs that involve this AI stuff.

I'm okay living with the knowledge that some people listen to this stuff and generate it, and they apparently may or may not be okay with the knowledge that I think doing so is *a bit* absurd and something where I would (likely fruitlessly) advocate an alternative. All the meanwhile, I think it's fun and interesting and worthwhile to discuss it while knowing we're not changing any minds. It's still interesting!

[rab2591]

I think all of us here know that there is an endless supply of real Beach Boys tracks, whether in bootleg form or YouTube, you-name-it. I mean heck, most of us younger-ish fans probably all downloaded an infinite number of bootlegs from the same mediafire/blogspot blogs. We are all well aware of the recordings so I’m just not sure who you’re advocating to. It’s not like we’ve been asleep for the last 30 years and are intentionally ignoring every release and every bootleg that has surfaced/released.

For some of us, listening to a couple AI Beach Boys tracks, created by people who love this band, is more sonically rewarding than hearing Mike Love croon out ‘Surfin USA’ at the 1984 Olympic Gala. And perhaps many of us are listening to obscure live bootlegs from ’77 and we just don’t feel the need to talk about it on a message board. Whereas when someone uses modern technology to create a near perfect ‘Let’s Put Our Heart’s Together (1966)’, I feel like that is something that is obviously worth talking about (especially in the context that this type of thing was utterly impossible just 2 years ago).

I’m dumbfounded that the simple act of someone enjoying a piece of music is so unsettling to you that you need to write a 15 paragraph post in an attempt to “advocate” that these people need to listen to certain type of music. You claim that people who listen to AI are wasting their time, but yet all I see here are people who are just simply enjoying what they are listening to (so to them it’s not a waste of time). It’s just kinda weird that you’re attempting to “encourage” & “advocate” that people enjoy a certain type of music. Also kinda weird that you’re dictating what is and isn’t a waste of people’s time.

[bonnevillemariner]

I’m dumbfounded that the simple act of someone enjoying a piece of music is so unsettling to you that you need to write a 15 paragraph post in an attempt to “advocate” that these people need to listen to certain type of music. You claim that people who listen to AI are wasting their time, but yet all I see here are people who are just simply enjoying what they are listening to (so to them it’s not a waste of time). It’s just kinda weird that you’re attempting to “encourage” & “advocate” that people enjoy a certain type of music. Also kinda weird that you’re dictating what is and isn’t a waste of people’s time.

His disdain-- not just for "fake" music, but for those of us that don't share his opinion on this matter-- is palpable.

[HeyJude]

Whereas when someone uses modern technology to create a near perfect ‘Let’s Put Our Heart’s Together (1966)’,

This is perhaps an illustrative example of what I was mentioning in my previous post. I don't believe a "fake 1966" version of "Let's Put Our Hearts Together" is "near perfect." Indeed, I feel, especially in the case of a track like that, it's entirely missing the point. Listen to that 1976 Brian demo tape. *That* context for him writing and performing the song in 1976 is *part* of that song.

I won't belabor that point, but what I was trying to say, in part, in my previous posts, is that I was commenting on how we fans relate to each other based on the opinions, preferences, priorities we bring to how we listen to the Beach Boys. I guess what I was trying to say is that it's jarring to learn that maybe some of the fans I talk to are not as much on the same page on this whole Beach Boys thing as I thought. They may be a bit more fixated on certain things, prioritize certain things, and that changes how we talk. Which is okay. But worth discussing I think. It's a bit meta I admit, to talk about how we talk.

I feel like that is something that is obviously worth talking about (especially in the context that this type of thing was utterly impossible just 2 years ago).

I agree! And that's what we're doing! You just have to be prepared for that emerging discussion of this new frontier to include not all positive or affirming comments. And I have to be honest; I feel like I've gone pretty light on actually castigating the core of "AI music", meaning I haven't even really delved into the broader ramifications that countless people have already written thinkpieces about. All the "this is scary technology" pieces, etc. I haven't ever burst in saying this stuff is evil and needs to be stopped. Rather, I've just dealt with its existence with the comments I've made, namely that it seems weirdly empty and superfluous to me beyond a one-time experimental listen.

I’m dumbfounded that the simple act of someone enjoying a piece of music is so unsettling to you that you need to write a 15 paragraph post in an attempt to “advocate” that these people need to listen to certain type of music. You claim that people who listen to AI are wasting their time, but yet all I see here are people who are just simply enjoying what they are listening to (so to them it’s not a waste of time). It’s just kinda weird that you’re attempting to “encourage” & “advocate” that people enjoy a certain type of music. Also kinda weird that you’re dictating what is and isn’t a waste of people’s time.

Yeah, I mean, that is kind of what I'm doing. I *am* coming in here, just on occasion (and obviously I didn't intend my initial post in this latest round to then elicit further posts and lead to more posts from me; although I'm fine with that and welcome the discussion) and just offering a quick kind of semi-rhetorical "Do you/we want to burn time listening to fake music?"

As for "15 paragraphs"; setting aside how multiple paragraphs complaining about another post with too many paragraphs is always a bit of head-scratcher, long posts is often what I do. It's my jam I guess. I'm not into clicking "like" on forums or quick "yeah, what he said" type of posts. This is one of the last places around to talk about the Beach Boys that hasn't been stripped down to basic grunts and quick sentences like Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, etc. And Reddit isn't much better, and actually kind of worse. So you're going to often get a number of paragraphs from me. It's my thing. I figured that was always kind of obvious from my zillion posts over the years.

[HeyJude]

I’m dumbfounded that the simple act of someone enjoying a piece of music is so unsettling to you that you need to write a 15 paragraph post in an attempt to “advocate” that these people need to listen to certain type of music. You claim that people who listen to AI are wasting their time, but yet all I see here are people who are just simply enjoying what they are listening to (so to them it’s not a waste of time). It’s just kinda weird that you’re attempting to “encourage” & “advocate” that people enjoy a certain type of music. Also kinda weird that you’re dictating what is and isn’t a waste of people’s time.

His disdain-- not just for "fake" music, but for those of us that don't share his opinion on this matter-- is palpable.

Gosh, I feel like disdain is too strong a word. I'm not a fan of it, and I was initially incredulous and then I suppose in disagreement over making the fake music and listening to it in any substantial amounts. That in turn, as I've said *multiple* times, can sometimes sound kind of condescending or snobby, etc. All I can say is that I acknowledge it can *sound* like that, but I truly don't mean it that way. It's a disagreement, a difference in preference, on an admittedly kind of fundamental, existential element of the subject/topic/thing we all love. I can only hope, given the nearly 20 years I have here on this forum and the many, many discussions I've engaged in with good intent and good faith, that people will believe me when I say that.

Believe me, it would be very easy to burst into the metaphorical room here and be very cranky, mean, condescending, and dismissive on this topic. I've *tried* to find a way to A) Express my opinion on the matter, B) Do so without being insulting and C) Indicate that I'm not only open to but in fact *like* continuing the discussion on these matters.

[rab2591]

I’m very surprised at your posts in this thread, HeyJude. While we don’t always see eye-to-eye (though usually I think we do) I have respected your knowledge and opinions through the years. But goodness I don’t get how you can post what you’re posting in this thread. My qualm isn’t that you have negative opinions about AI tracks - I have said myself that I have reservations about this technology and I have spoken negatively about certain tracks that don’t cut it for me.

My qualm is that you’re belittling people - and you can’t even see or acknowledge that you’re doing it. No one’s personal tastes need to be called or related to the word “absurd”, no one needs to be re-educated as to what music they should or should not be drawn to. No one needs to be told what they should be listening to. You’ve used hyperbole and analogies that don’t paint the listener in a nice light.

My qualm isn’t that you wrote 15 paragraphs. My qualm is that you wrote 15 paragraphs that belittle the listener into a different/lower class of fan. You’re claiming that it is “jarring” that some fans like to listen to an AI creation of The Beach Boys over other real beach boys tracks - and you seem to imply that this puts them in another category of fan/listener (as you literally put it “not on the same page”). Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds? We’re now mentally segregating posters because they’d rather listen to Dae Lim’s Smile than some Cocaine session material?

If Zenobi likes to listen to AI tracks, this “changes how we talk” with him? You cannot be serious.

[Zenobi]

I have been a rabid Beach Boys fan since childhood. They are my undisputed fav group, Brian Wilson is my fav musician, they all are among my fav singers. Listening to Mike's bass always sends shivers thru my spine.
Have listened to every Beach Boys (and related) music I "could put my hands on", physically or otherwise. Have listened to literally dozens of SMiLE mixes, Adult Child mixes, Paley session mixes etc.
All this is for context, now to AI.
The only AI music I listen to is Dae Lims' creations, and love most of them. Yes, not the Beach Boys, I know, but IMHO it's excellent Beach Boys related stuff. This to say that I don't think that liking Dae Lims makes one a lesser Beach Boys fan. I like what he does BECAUSE I am a Beach Boys fan.

Fun fact: the first few times I saw title topics with "AI" I thought that they were about Al Jardine.

[HeyJude]

If Zenobi likes to listen to AI tracks, this “changes how we talk” with him? You cannot be serious.

A little bit, yeah. It doesn't mean we can't still discuss stuff, and as much as it *sounds* like passing judgment, it isn't really. It's a piece of information I can't help but use.

If someone tells me they're a huge music fan and they collect vinyl, but they leave it sealed and never listen to it, that might also impact how I approach how and what I discuss with them.

As I believe I mentioned before, if someone tells me they listen to "Summer in Paradise" on repeat but have never heard "Sgt. Pepper", then that might impact how I approach talking to them.

This is all probably being overstated in that, to be clear, I don't really retain every interest, fetish, or possible peccadillo of everybody here. Especially these days with sprawling threads, with gaps of time with little activity, etc. So I'm unlikely to remember, and I'm certainly not taking notes, on which person expresses which level of breathless enthusiasm for artificially generated music. When we're over on a "Smile" thread or whatever, the AI "issue" is probably not even going to enter my mind.

So when I say that things like a preference for AI might change how I have conversations with people, I'm probably speaking in a more general, abstract way. Something more likely to happen in a 1-on-1 discussion. Or, obviously, a thread specific to AI.

This is all a two-way street. I interjected my thoughts on issues related to artificial Beach Boys music and how or when people listen to it. If people don't give a s hit, then that's where it ends. If people want to litigate the issue, or I guess, litigate what I meant, or what they think I meant, or what they think I think they meant, etc., I'm usually happy to keep chatting about it.

[MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm]

I have been a rabid Beach Boys fan since childhood. They are my undisputed fav group, Brian Wilson is my fav musician, they all are among my fav singers. Listening to Mike's bass always sends shivers thru my spine.
Have listened to every Beach Boys (and related) music I "could put my hands on", physically or otherwise. Have listened to literally dozens of SMiLE mixes, Adult Child mixes, Paley session mixes etc.
All this is for context, now to AI.
The only AI music I listen to is Dae Lims' creations, and love most of them. Yes, not the Beach Boys, I know, but IMHO it's excellent Beach Boys related stuff. This to say that I don't think that liking Dae Lims makes one a lesser Beach Boys fan. I like what he does BECAUSE I am a Beach Boys fan.

Fun fact: the first few times I saw title topics with "AI" I thought that they were about Al Jardine.

This makes perfect sense to me. I'm not someone who would ever seek out AI music but I've really enjoyed the Dae Lims stuff as well.

The analogy to tribute bands also makes sense to me. We are all fans of 60s/70s music here, and the chances to hear that kind of music performed by the original artists continue to slowly dwindle. I used to turn up my nose at tribute bands in general, but last year caught an amazing performance by Laurel Canyon, a CSNY tribute band. The music was performed with warmth and reverence and emotion and hit all the feels for me. In Beach Boys terms, it might be kind of analogous to an epic performance by The Wondermints more so than e.g. a bar band playing early 60s Beach Boys songs while wearing striped shirts. A band that considers themselves lucky to carry on this great music, and wants to continue giving people enjoyment from it.

The Beach Boys saga is fascinating too because there are an absolutely endless number of what-ifs and paths not explored, and it's strange for me to even be typing this but I do think AI can play a role there when used properly. Something like the AI version of Holy Man is beautiful music, but it's also an interesting way for us fans to *experience* something that sadly didn't happen -- what a full Dennis track backed by The Beach Boys would have sounded like.

[Zenobi]

What I like most about the  Dae Lims "Holy Man" is the kind of production. It is not after the typical "chamber music" Brian approach, it's more epic and symphonic, like Dennis would probably have done it. However, "Holy Man" is one of my favourite songs and there can never be too many "takes" on it.

[Zenobi]

Had AI been around in the 60s, might Brian have considered using it?

Since it's all hypothetical, I'll say yes - with exemptions.

Consider how Brian in his teens, after getting a reel-to-reel tape deck as a gift, was using that technology which at that time in the late 50's was pretty much a decade old, and that's it. We have home tapes of young Brian stacking his voice through overdubs to replicate the sound of his beloved Four Freshmen. Listen to Brian's trademark high-range vocals: It's damn near the same as Bob Flanigan, in tone, phrasing, and general overall timbre to carry the high voice lines in that vocal stack. It can be uncanny at times to hear Flanigan and compare it to a 60's Brian vocal, circa 61-64. But it isn't actually uncanny when we consider Brian modeled his voice and vocal technique after Flanigan's with the Freshmen.

So breaking down all notions of reality and the time/space continuum, if that young Brian were using new and developing technology at that time to recreate the vocal sounds of his favorite group, why wouldn't it be probable that if a technology existed which would allow him to recreate those vocals as the AI programs are doing now, he'd be at least messing around with it and experimenting? Let's call it "analog Brian", and say if he were trying to have his own "Four Freshmen" in the form of overdubbing himself on a reel-to-reel in his teens singing other material, why wouldn't he do the same thing if another tool existed to do that same thing?

Remember that fragment of Smile which became known as Dixieland? That was a vocal game the Boys used to play in the car and elsewhere where each voice would riff on improvised lines like a Dixieland jazz combo, with the voices as the instruments. Now if tech existed where Brian could actually manipulate what those voices were doing and actually have the voices turn out sounding like a clarinet, trumpet, etc...don't you think he would have at least tried it?

Brian's willingness to work with new technology, new techniques, and new ways of recording music throughout the 60's and into the 70's is sometimes left out of the discussions. One of his favorite albums is and was "Switched On Bach", if that adds anything to the discussion. A totally "new" sound using one of the first commercially available Moogs to exist, and I think it inspired Brian's use of synths well into the 70's where some would consider him like a pioneer of synth-based pop tracks with the Love You album.

If a new technology came out that allowed him to experiment with sound, I'm sure he'd be all in. Would he use it on commercial recordings when he became a professional producer actually cutting records? Who knows...if it served a song he was working on, perhaps so. But if the teenage Brian was trying to recreate the voices and sounds of the Four Freshmen using the high tech recording device of its day, why wouldn't it make sense that he would experiment with similar technology if it existed.

Creative artists usually use the existing technology to the utmost, and sometimes instigate new technology.
Bach was one of the first musicians to use the piano. Mozart invented the glockenspiel to get the sound of tuned sleigh bells for the "Magic Flute". Wagner invented the Wagner tubas, used tuned anvils as instruments, stacked different instruments to get never heard timbres.
In the 90's Prince issued an interactive CD video of his music, structured like an adventure video game (it was a masterpiece).
I can well imagine Mozart using AI to get the glockenspiel sound, and Brian using AI to get the sound of, say, a prepared piano.

[HeyJude]

I often find the “so-and-so used groundbreaking methods in the 60s, I’m sure they’d be up for X” a bit of a wonky supposition.

I’m not saying there are zero parallels between artificially produced AI voices today and any number of tech developments of the past. But I also think it’s pretty reductive to just assume that “Brian liked new recording methods and tech in the 60s; I’m sure he would have also used fake AI voices as well if he could have.”

I realize that often what people are talking about in these hypotheticals is Brian using AI for like an instrument sound or something. And sure, that would essentially equate to another method of creating samples for a synth.

What we’ve been largely talking about here are AI *voices*. A person faking Brian’s voice with software is far different from a theoretical scenario where Brian uses machine-learning to get a specific piano sound for a synth, where he or some other human would still be playing the instrument.

To believe that sensitive artists wouldn’t perhaps see a difference between tech made to enhance HUMANS making the music (e.g. synths, effects, etc.) and an *artificial* computer-generated voice, isn’t really thinking much of those artists.

But really, considering people *today* often don’t understand what or how these AI vocals (or AI generated art of any medium) are generated, it’s hard to even imagine how someone in the 60s would have wrapped their head around a PC, let alone AI software trained on other recorded examples.

But frankly, we have *some* insight into this now, because there are a number of artists from the 60s and 70s who are still making music today who also *can’t* sing like they did back then. How many of those artists have used AI to create fake versions of their own voice? They’d have *more* motive (and theoretically knowledge) to alter their voice now than they would have in their prime.

That all being said, I would also say an artist doing something with their OWN voice (or image, etc.) with AI would be somewhat different from a third party doing it. If Paul McCartney wants to sing into a program and guide AI software trained on *his own voice*, then at least this is all being done with the person’s approval and everything we’re hearing is based on that person’s voice. Not ideal by any means; I don’t need artists to do this. But I’ll take that over some random person doing it, especially if the artist had some specific and perhaps unique prompt in approaching doing it, as opposed to the fake AI vocals from fans which are essentially aural fanfic.

*That* all being said, I did take some time in the interest of renewed open-mindedness and continued good faith to go back and re-listen/listen to a good deal of the Beach Boys/Brian AI stuff, and I hope to post some thoughtful, non-cynical, yet honest comments on those shortly. 

[guitarfool2002]

I often find the “so-and-so used groundbreaking methods in the 60s, I’m sure they’d be up for X” a bit of a wonky supposition.

I’m not saying there are zero parallels between artificially produced AI voices today and any number of tech developments of the past. But I also think it’s pretty reductive to just assume that “Brian liked new recording methods and tech in the 60s; I’m sure he would have also used fake AI voices as well if he could have.”

I realize that often what people are talking about in these hypotheticals is Brian using AI for like an instrument sound or something. And sure, that would essentially equate to another method of creating samples for a synth.

What we’ve been largely talking about here are AI *voices*. A person faking Brian’s voice with software is far different from a theoretical scenario where Brian uses machine-learning to get a specific piano sound for a synth, where he or some other human would still be playing the instrument.

To believe that sensitive artists wouldn’t perhaps see a difference between tech made to enhance HUMANS making the music (e.g. synths, effects, etc.) and an *artificial* computer-generated voice, isn’t really thinking much of those artists.

But really, considering people *today* often don’t understand what or how these AI vocals (or AI generated art of any medium) are generated, it’s hard to even imagine how someone in the 60s would have wrapped their head around a PC, let alone AI software trained on other recorded examples.

But frankly, we have *some* insight into this now, because there are a number of artists from the 60s and 70s who are still making music today who also *can’t* sing like they did back then. How many of those artists have used AI to create fake versions of their own voice? They’d have *more* motive (and theoretically knowledge) to alter their voice now than they would have in their prime.

That all being said, I would also say an artist doing something with their OWN voice (or image, etc.) with AI would be somewhat different from a third party doing it. If Paul McCartney wants to sing into a program and guide AI software trained on *his own voice*, then at least this is all being done with the person’s approval and everything we’re hearing is based on that person’s voice. Not ideal by any means; I don’t need artists to do this. But I’ll take that over some random person doing it, especially if the artist had some specific and perhaps unique prompt in approaching doing it, as opposed to the fake AI vocals from fans which are essentially aural fanfic.

*That* all being said, I did take some time in the interest of renewed open-mindedness and continued good faith to go back and re-listen/listen to a good deal of the Beach Boys/Brian AI stuff, and I hope to post some thoughtful, non-cynical, yet honest comments on those shortly. 

It feels like you have conveniently bypassed one of the main points I wrote in my earlier opinions about Brian using AI in a hypothetical scenario where he had the option to use it if it existed 60-70 years ago.

Brian in his teens was already using what was then new and developing audio recording tech and techniques to replicate the vocal sound of his favorite group the Four Freshmen, and we can actually hear some of those original reel tapes as proof. Why is it such a stretch to open the possibility that the same guy who was already doing this would have done the same thing (for the same goals and results) if better technology existed and was available in 1960? That's different from using it on a commercial recording when he became a professional producer and creator, and I was clear in separating the two in the hypothetical scenario. But as someone who was already experimenting with manipulating voices using new technology in his teen years, I can't see why it's not a possibility to think he'd grab even better technology to do the same things and at least experiment with the new tech to achieve the same goals.

And I will for the sake of discussion add even another layer in creating music: Would Brian have used AI technology to create lyrics for his music? A plausible scenario could be applied to any one of his known collaborations in the 60's hit-making period. He wants to write a song about hot rods and a drag race...he inputs into the AI a scenario such as "two guys are racing their hot rods", and asks the AI to generate a set of lyrics on that topic. The AI creates something, Brian picks, chooses, and edits the better ideas from the AI generated results, and fits them in to his music creating a melody, rhythm, etc., adding anything else necessary to complete the song.

It's the same process he did with Usher, Christian, Asher, Love, etc...with the AI essentially running with the idea Brian had for lyrics to fit the concept he had in mind and the music he had created.

Is it really a stretch to think Brian or any songwriter wouldn't have at least tried it to see what lyrical ideas the AI would generate?

[rab2591]

Just speculating here, but I can totally see Brian Wilson using this tech in the 1960s to emulate the Ronettes for a demo of ‘Don’t Worry Baby’, or an attempt to convince the Beatles how good they would’ve sounded on ‘Girl Don’t Tell Me’ had Brian wanted to approach them about recording it.

This is a guy who double-tracked, sped up tape, used studio effects, used pop bottles, had Vosse record water sounds - he was all about using the bare minimum to the latest technology to create new sounds and experiences. Not to mention all the people he produced: The Honeys, Sharon Marie, The Survivors, Glen Campbell, his attempts with Redwood, etc. He wasn’t all about The Beach Boys, and from the get-go was looking for different sounds (whether vocals or instrumentals) to produce/create.

If Brian had the potential to do this all on his own I can totally see him taking advantage of that technology - if merely for experimental demos - or to show his artists exactly what he was hearing in his head. Or to add minor touches to recorded vocals by any of his artists. Etc etc.

[guitarfool2002]

Just speculating here, but I can totally see Brian Wilson using this tech in the 1960s to emulate the Ronettes for a demo of ‘Don’t Worry Baby’, or an attempt to convince the Beatles how good they would’ve sounded on ‘Girl Don’t Tell Me’ had Brian wanted to approach them about recording it.

This is a guy who double-tracked, sped up tape, used studio effects, used pop bottles, had Vosse record water sounds - he was all about using the bare minimum to the latest technology to create new sounds and experiences. Not to mention all the people he produced: The Honeys, Sharon Marie, The Survivors, Glen Campbell, his attempts with Redwood, etc. He wasn’t all about The Beach Boys, and from the get-go was looking for different sounds (whether vocals or instrumentals) to produce/create.

If Brian had the potential to do this all on his own I can totally see him taking advantage of that technology - if merely for experimental demos - or to show his artists exactly what he was hearing in his head. Or to add minor touches to recorded vocals by any of his artists. Etc etc.

That's a great point and element in the process which I totally missed: Add every songwriter and songwriting team to the discussion, and if those writers were contracted to write new material for any name artists, whether it be Elvis, Sinatra, or whoever...they could demo a song with an approximation of the target artist's voice on the demo and present that demo to the artist, managers, producer, A&R, etc and have it sound close to what the song would be as sung by that artist.

Yes in that case I can absolutely see AI voice replication technology being used and embraced in those scenarios. Sometimes (or many times) the voice and the sound of that voice literally makes a song and a record greater than the song itself.

[HeyJude]

Yeah, I mean, I think there's a difference between any recording tech used to alter/enhance a human being singing or playing an instrument, and technology in which music is artificially created by an algorithm/software. In one case, it's still a human doing it, in the other, it's not.

I *think* Brian Wilson was smart enough even in 1961 that he would have taken notice of this difference. Until one of us jumps in a time machine and offers it to him, that's my best guess.

All this other stuff where the bar is being lowered where the hypothetical is now Brian using AI to "experiment", to "create demos", to do like experimental lab work for his own personal use, yeah, I guess that's different? But I feel like people are trying to "prove" the efficacy of artificial computer-generated vocals, to imprint some kind of potential theoretical endorsement by Brian of this stuff, by suggesting this possibility, and I don't think it's really particularly analogous to what we're talking about.

People are consuming these AI vocals presently as enjoyable music to listen to. This is bringing it much closer to "released" music being consumed in a very similar fashion to actual real music.

The discussion of AI vocals here didn't begin with just the knowledge that people were using this tech behind the scenes for experimental/workshopping purposes. Now, I'm sure some will contend that is what the makers of the AI stuff are doing. But again, I don't think their work is then being consumed as such. In the analogy of Brian using AI as a behind-the-scenes aid in his creative/technical process, we'd never even hear that stuff, let alone listen to it as if it was the real thing.