Liontamer ⚖️ Posted Sunday at 07:32 PM Posted Sunday at 07:32 PM (edited) Artist Name: Craig Jackson Grooves meet banana-induced chaos in this jazz-funk adventure. Smooth rhythms and syncopated instrumentation reveal the emotional aftermath of barrel-laden escapades, mixing humor with a touch of melancholy. Games & Sources Donkey Kong Country - Title Edited 2 hours ago by pixelseph
Liontamer ⚖️ Posted Monday at 01:15 AM Author Posted Monday at 01:15 AM The track was 4:30-long, so I needed to hear the VGM used for at least 135 seconds to consider the source material dominant. :00-:50.5, 1:35-2:12, 2:56-3:03.5, 3:20.5-3:42, 4:17.5-4:28.5 = 110.5 seconds or 40.92% source usage The lack of direct source usage & substantive arrangement is an automatic dealbreaker for me. NO Easily the most interesting genre transformation and another rarer example where the music during part the verses at least sounded adjacent to the source music, with backing patterns from the original in play on bass even when lyrical melodies weren't related to the source. This one's actually also the only example where I heard the vocals partially arranging the source theme. Much more of the source usage was from the bass usage rather than melodic arrangement. No surprise the chorus was disconnected from VGM, given the precedent of the other music. Aside from the lyrics feeling tired (because it's the same meta-narrative concept every time), this was the most interesting result, so that's something. ----------------------------------- Checklist: - Minimal VGM arrangement, mostly unrelated composition - Any direct VGM arrangement is very straightforward and brief - Warbly vocals - Lyrics also feel AI-prompt generated, too on the nose with the rhyming, always extended character meta-narratives - Staid, limited drum writing - Dynamics possibly undercut by limiter on volume Sorry if my perception of this undersells how much actual human-generated content is there, Craig. If I had to bet on it though, this comes across like prompt-generated lyrics and the song structure isn't dynamic enough or connected enough to the original VGM to feel like it's mostly Craig's direct input on this. I definitely don't want a trend of people sending AI-generated content here, no matter how good it ends up being. The aim is to highlight skill, intention, and creativity with human-created, human-written, human-produced music. When you take human decision-making out of the equation, even if the end result sounds good, it wouldn't be people genuinely creating the music.
prophetik music ⚖️ Posted Tuesday at 12:16 PM Posted Tuesday at 12:16 PM there isn't enough source to pass the standards. the sax parts sound generated with how buzzy they are. this is so frustrating because they're fun songs to listen to, but the artist is trying to cover up just how much they didn't do. craig stated that he played many instruments and used tools to cover the other elements, and specifically stated he didn't use genai to make the track. i do not believe him and do not believe we should accept future submissions without clear proof that he's creating future stuff himself. NO
paradiddlesjosh ⚖️ Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago Larry already covered the major issues and the lack of source usage is more than enough to prevent this one from passing. Given this is in direct violation of our Submission Standards, namely 2.3, 7.1, and 7.2: And considering you weren't truthful or forthcoming about the usage of prompt-based generative AI tools in the creation of your submissions, I am no longer interested in being polite about them. Unless you plan on honing your craft as a composer, arranger, and mix engineer, shove this slop where the sun don't shine and never darken our digital doorstep again. NO
Chimpazilla ⚖️ Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago Cosigning with my fellow Js. Cool concept, and the composition and mix sound good enough to do very well on YouTube, Spotify and all the other socials, but for OCR we look for very specific things, including enough source use with thoughtful and creative interpretations, and real musicianship. While we allow limited use of AI tools to enhance a track, this submission (and the other tracks you submitted on the same day) is far too much AI for our standards. If we have misjudged this situation, I'd welcome some real, solid proof that these tracks were made with a lot more human involvement than we are hearing, but my feeling is that such proof cannot be provided. Best of luck to you with these, you've hopped on a shiny new lucrative bandwagon with these AI tracks, we just don't want to host music like this on OCR. NO
pixelseph ⚖️ Posted 3 hours ago Posted 3 hours ago As much as I'd like to see the human involvement in this piece or the other submissions by Craig, it is overshadowed by the audacity of submitting an entire album's worth of generative AI slop and lying about how large a role generative AI played in it. I have no pithy comments to make - my fellow judges summed up my feelings pretty well, and there's no need to belabor the point. NO. DO NOT resubmit anything using Suno or other such tools again and lie about it.
Recommended Posts