Log in to subscribe to heads-up notifications for this feed or its category via email, Slack, or Discord.
Ask the AI anything about content, patterns, and edits for Tornevalls Blog. The AI will receive full version history including all edited articles. Open question history.
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616bEvery now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […]
Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate.
Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close.
The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now.
This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works.
Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!
A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment.
It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do.
AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s.
But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough.
That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”.
The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode).
It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research.
“But VSTs Use AI!”
Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!
This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me:
“Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?”
First: No, they don’t.
Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct.
Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics.
Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either.
The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools
This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who:
have never mixed a track manually,
never aligned vocals without an AI tool,
never programmed automation by hand,
never learned gain staging,
never rendered or layered anything intentionally,
and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline.
Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”.
And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like:
“you refuse to be educated”
“you’re a luddite”
“DAWs used AI for decades!”
“it’s the same thing!”
No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation.
Why This Matters
The problem isn’t people using AI.
The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology.
AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding.
If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood.
You’re just wrong. And loudly so.
If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music:
Learn what your tools are.
Learn what your tools are not.
Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI.
Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they...
Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate.
Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close.
The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now.
This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works.
Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!
A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment.
It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do.
AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s.
But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough.
That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”.
The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode).
It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research.
“But VSTs Use AI!”
Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!
This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me:
“Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?”
First: No, they don’t.
Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct.
Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics.
Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either.
The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools
This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who:
have never mixed a track manually,
never aligned vocals without an AI tool,
never programmed automation by hand,
never learned gain staging,
never rendered or layered anything intentionally,
and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline.
Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”.
And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like:
“you refuse to be educated”
“you’re a luddite”
“DAWs used AI for decades!”
“it’s the same thing!”
No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation.
Why This Matters
The problem isn’t people using AI.
The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology.
AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding.
If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood.
You’re just wrong. And loudly so.
If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music:
Learn what your tools are.
Learn what your tools are not.
Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI.
Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbbEvery now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they...
Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate.
Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close.
The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now.
This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works.
Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!
A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment.
It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do.
AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s.
But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough.
That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”.
The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode).
It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research.
“But VSTs Use AI!”
Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!
This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me:
“Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?”
First: No, they don’t.
Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct.
Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics.
Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either.
The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools
This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who:
have never mixed a track manually,
never aligned vocals without an AI tool,
never programmed automation by hand,
never learned gain staging,
never rendered or layered anything intentionally,
and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline.
Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”.
And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like:
“you refuse to be educated”
“you’re a luddite”
“DAWs used AI for decades!”
“it’s the same thing!”
No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation.
Why This Matters
The problem isn’t people using AI.
The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology.
AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding.
If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood.
You’re just wrong. And loudly so.
If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music:
Learn what your tools are.
Learn what your tools are not.
Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI.
Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared […] CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
TITLE: Things “Prompt Pushers” Thought They Understood About DAWs – But Are Completely, Utterly Wrong About DESCRIPTION: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they... CONTENT: Every now and then, especially in groups where “AI-generated music” is the hot topic, I encounter a parade of self-declared “AI creators” who seem absolutely convinced they understand how AI, DAWs, plugins, audio engines and production workflows operate. Spoiler: they don’t. Not even close. The latest example – my personal favorite – came from an exchange with a couple of AI-wannabe musicians who tried to argue that a DAW is a type of AI. Yes. A Digital Audio Workstation. According to them, pressing Record apparently counts as machine intelligence now. This is the level we’re dealing with – usually among Suno-wannabes and so-called Udio-idiots when we try to explain how DAWs works. Table of Contents Toggle A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI!“But VSTs Use AI!”Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI!The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music ToolsWhy This Matters A DAW IS NOT AI – IT WILL NEVER BE AI! A DAW is a workstation – software used to record, edit and produce audio, not a “thinking” system (see any basic DAW definition). A timeline. A mixer. A routing environment. It doesn’t think. It doesn’t predict. It doesn’t learn. It doesn’t hallucinate answers because you ask stupid questions. It doesn’t care what you want. It does exactly what you tell it to do. AI, meanwhile, is defined by its capacity to generate, classify, predict or reason based on trained data – a machine based system that infers from input to generate outputs like predictions, content or decisions (see the OECD and EU definitions of AI systems). That is machine learning, which is something completely different from a sequencer that has existed since the 1980s. But apparently, for some people on the internet, everything becomes AI if you squint hard enough. That ALSO includes the Google screenshot that was used to prove me wrong saying “Yes, DAWs use AI in a variety of ways to enhance music production”. The text used is not a technical definition, it is an AI generated summary from Google’s experimental AI Overviews and AI Mode in Search feature, which stitches together a generic answer to the vague prompt “does a DAW use AI in some way”... That “AI researcher” is by the way extremely unreliable as it very much works as ChatGPT in “quick response mode” and guessing (since users tend to hate wait for a correct answer) what it cannot cover by itself (unless you use Thinking mode). It talks about using AI powered plugins and features inside a DAW, not about the DAW itself magically becoming an AI system. Google itself describes these AI Overviews as AI generated “snapshots” that simply bundle key information with links to real sources, not as authoritative definitions of anything (see their own description). Treating that blurb as proof that “a DAW is AI” is like treating an ad banner as peer reviewed research. “But VSTs Use AI!” Yes, some do – and that still doesn’t make your DAW AI! This was the next brilliant argument thrown at me: “Most of the components in a DAW use AI. Are you slow?” First: No, they don’t. Second: Calling people slow and other random words doesn’t magically make your argument correct. Most plugins run on traditional DSP – decades-old mathematics based on manipulating digital samples, not on “learning” from data (audio DSP is literally just signal processing code, not AI). Compression, EQ, filtering, reverb, synthesis, modulation – none of that is AI. If you think a compressor is artificial intelligence, you need to revisit the basics. Some plugins do use machine learning for tasks like noise reduction or stem separation – for example real time denoisers trained on speech like VoiceGate or deep learning based noise reduction projects like DeepFilterNet. Fine. But your environment does not become AI just because a plugin inside it happens to use it. Your microwave doesn’t become AI if you heat a smart thermometer inside it either. The Real Issue: AI Musicians Who Don’t Understand Music Tools This whole conversation acutally exposed something deeper, which makes this topic interesting, and that is why I choose to highlight the idiocrazy: Many AI-first creators cannot explain – or even identify – the tools they’re supposedly replacing. There’s a growing crowd of prompt-pushers who: have never mixed a track manually, never aligned vocals without an AI tool, never programmed automation by hand, never learned gain staging, never rendered or layered anything intentionally, and absolutely never used a DAW beyond dragging stems into the timeline. Yet they lecture others on “how audio production really works”. And when someone challenges their nonsense, they fire off buzzwords like: “you refuse to be educated” “you’re a luddite” “DAWs used AI for decades!” “it’s the same thing!” No. It’s not. And calling someone a luddite doesn’t turn confusion into expertise. It just telegraphs desperation. Why This Matters The problem isn’t people using AI. The problem is people pretending that AI makes them instant audio engineers – and then attacking anyone who points out the difference between a tool and a technology. AI is powerful. It’s useful – but it doesn’t replace understanding. If you think a DAW is artificial intelligence, you’re not an innovator. You’re not “ahead of the curve”.You’re not misunderstood. You’re just wrong. And loudly so. If you want to be taken seriously as a creator in this hybrid world of AI-assisted music: Learn what your tools are. Learn what your tools are not. Stop claiming everything with buttons and soundwaves is AI. Because right now, the biggest challenge for AI-powered music isn’t the tech. It’s the users who don’t understand it.
bdde7b7698eb2daba3719ec4a81f56d716d5674a
d376ec321e6bb84aed112ef4528c71b7545d616b
c700d9cdac72c1b650d96e4c5992db0e4d20c2a1
3e81c80ea7c802eb7b125427806c792985432bbb
e026e96be8275bee62b0691f051978350362153eThe musical side of FWSC was probably never planned, structured or even meant to become a “project”. It was very much about learning applications. The name grew naturally out of the same world as FreeWare Data and FreeWare Data/2 (FidoNet...
The musical side of FWSC was probably never planned, structured or even meant to become a “project”. It was very much about learning applications.
The name grew naturally out of the same world as FreeWare Data and FreeWare Data/2 (FidoNet 2:200/213) – late nights at the computer, curiosity, and the feeling that anything you made was worth saving just because it existed. The BBS era was chaotic, experimental and completely unpretentious, and the music followed that logic perfectly.
Table of Contents Toggle How it started 🎧Working With Miazma 🤝The Sound of That Time 🔊What It Means Now ✨Later Musical Identity 🎶 How it started 🎧
00:00
var srp_player_params_69eb0b962654b = {"title":"","store_title_text":"","albums":"37614","hide_artwork":"","sticky_player":"","show_album_market":"1","show_track_market":"1","hide_timeline":"","titletag_soundwave":"div","titletag_playlist":"h3","show_playlist":"1","wave_color":"","wave_progress_color":"","shuffle":"","reverse_tracklist":"","searchbar":"false","track_desc_lenght":"55","strip_html_track_desc":"true","player_layout":"skin_boxed_tracklist","hide_progressbar":"false","use_play_label":"false","use_play_label_with_icon":"false","orderby":"date","order":"DESC","main_settings":"||"} var srp_player_params_args_69eb0b962654b = {"before_widget":"","after_widget":"","before_title":"","after_title":"","widget_id":"arbitrary-instance-69eb0b962654b"} if(typeof setIronAudioplayers !== "undefined"){ setIronAudioplayers("arbitrary-instance-69eb0b962654b"); }
I didn’t approach music as a musician. I approached it the same way I approached BASIC: try something, see what happens, break it, try again. The results weren’t tone-deaf, but they weren’t exactly polished either. FastTracker became the tool of choice simply because it worked, and because it made it possible to test ideas quickly – even when those ideas tried (and often failed) to imitate techno or rave. Kristian (Miazma) pointed out more than once that I had a habit of hammering snares way too hard, which was probably fair. Still, rhythm was already “a thing” for me back then, and that might be why genres like DnB, jungle and house eventually became so interesting.
The FWSC prefix appeared for the same reason the name appeared in my software – it was the identity of everything I created at that time. If I wrote a program, it went under FWSC. If I made a module file, it ended up with FW- in the filename. It wasn’t branding. It was just me putting a small signature on whatever I played around with.
Working With Miazma 🤝
One part that stands out is the collaboration with Kristian Olofsson (Later also Miazma). We weren’t trying to make releases. We weren’t thinking about demos or charts or reputations. We were just two people creating and trading modules.
Tracks like Tranceflash (there is no official release on this one) exist because we thought it was funny – and because the tools made it possible. Whether it became a “Hardcore Edit”, a “Hypermix” or a random experimental version didn’t matter. What mattered was the process: that feeling of the screen glowing at 2 AM, the modem humming in the background, and FastTracker patterns scrolling by faster than the music itself.
The Sound of That Time 🔊
FWSC music wasn’t polished. It wasn’t refined. It didn’t try to be anything. It was:
short experiments
trance and ambient ideas
half-finished riffs
a few working loops
sometimes chaotic, sometimes surprisingly good
Files like FW-PIANO.XM, FW-GUITA.XM, FW-AMBI.XM – these were snapshots. Little fragments from a time where every small test felt like its own project. None of them were meant for an audience, which is probably why they still feel honest today.
What It Means Now ✨
Looking back, the FWSC music represents the same thing as the rest of the era: a phase where creativity was effortless because there were no expectations. No plans. No goals. Just the pure joy of making something, storing it on a disk, and letting it sit there.
Most of the tracks survived only by accident – backups, old folders, forgotten archives. But together they form a tiny musical footprint of FreeWare Data. Not a career. Not even a catalog. Just a timeline of experiments from someone who wanted to create, and who found a way to do it with the tools that existed at that exact moment in time.
That’s what FWSC music was. And, honestly, that’s enough.
Later Musical Identity 🎶
In the years that followed, I continued making music under several names beyond FWSC:
Tomas Tornevall (my own name, used for more personal or experimental work)
TMM (an early alias during the transition from tracker-based music to more refined styles)
DJ TT (used for electronic, trance and dance-oriented productions)
These identities represent the evolution from small FWSC experiments into a more defined creative path, even if the early tracker era remains the foundation of it all.
c8baa9d10cf5a89be984a5b0d332c91c2979385fThe year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn...
Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023
March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight.
Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving.
Tracklist
TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet
Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
f6e013dceb4a22c1717af1984f0dcde96a648f97
c8baa9d10cf5a89be984a5b0d332c91c2979385f
TITLE: DJ Set: The Experimental Minimix from 2022 that saved me from pain DESCRIPTION: The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn... CONTENT: Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight. Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving. Tracklist TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
TITLE: DJ Set: The Experimental Minimix from 2022 that saved me from pain DESCRIPTION: The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn... CONTENT: Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight. Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving. Tracklist TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
c8baa9d10cf5a89be984a5b0d332c91c2979385f
f6e013dceb4a22c1717af1984f0dcde96a648f97
f6e013dceb4a22c1717af1984f0dcde96a648f97The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn...
Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023
March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight.
Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving.
Tracklist
TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet
Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
f6e013dceb4a22c1717af1984f0dcde96a648f97
c8baa9d10cf5a89be984a5b0d332c91c2979385f
TITLE: DJ Set: The Experimental Minimix from 2022 that saved me from pain DESCRIPTION: The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn... CONTENT: Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight. Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving. Tracklist TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
TITLE: DJ Set: The Experimental Minimix from 2022 that saved me from pain DESCRIPTION: The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn... CONTENT: Table of Contents Toggle The year was 2023Tracklist The year was 2023 March 2023 became one of the hardest crashes of my online life. My main Facebook account was hijacked through a malware-infected Chrome extension, renamed to “Lily Collins” and permanently shut down. The attackers attempted to burn almost 50,000 SEK on ads, two-factor authentication did nothing, and every attempt to reach support led nowhere. Twenty years of posts, contacts and personal history disappeared overnight. Out of that mess came an unexpected reset. In the middle of the panic, someone told me: “Go for a walk, it will help”. That walk became a routine, then training, then running with Drum & Bass in my headphones. Somewhere along those frozen sidewalks, the Experimental Minimix 2022 stopped being just a DJ set and turned into a soundtrack for getting my head above water. Together with tracks like Running Inna Fi Storm, it became the musical snapshot of that period: a hacked account, a cold winter and a decision to keep moving. Tracklist TimeArtist(s)Title / Mix00:00Duck Sauce x Dirty Ducks, PradoBarbra Streisand (DJ Baur 2021 Reboot)01:10Allan Nunez, Fran Valdivieso, CucharaGuaira (Original Mix)02:41Block, Crown, Maickel TelussaWatch My DJ Spin (Original Mix) [Rawtone Black]04:14AdwerKolibri (Quivver Remix)05:3184BitIn My Arms06:18Richard Grey & LissatJump (Original Mix)07:35Smashing SebastianNo Cha Cha09:57Silvano Del GadoGo Go Tribal (Original Mix)11:05RawtoneHow Low Can U Go12:10Kreisler & Leo SagradoTheyyam14:17DJ Vartan & TechcrasherShake It (Club Mix)16:23Dean Mickoski, Simon FieldFever In My Feet Original post: https://www.tornevalls.se/experimental-minimix-20221127/
c8baa9d10cf5a89be984a5b0d332c91c2979385f
f6e013dceb4a22c1717af1984f0dcde96a648f97
fa16fcc59ca6f3c97aab46df25ebf052eebbce8aSoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025....
SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud)
Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes
Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee” for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee” (80% to artists). (SoundCloud)
On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud)
Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com)
Eligibility tightened and clarified.
You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification.
You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic” does not qualify).
Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud)
Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Plays”. (SoundCloud)
Termination and suspension mechanics.
By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined.
By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud)
Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud)
Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud)
Operational details that affect day-to-day
Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud)
Play definition. A “Play” counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud)
UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud)
Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud)
Context: what changed compared to older terms
Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud)
Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud)
Official sources
SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud)
Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com)
Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
08dfda23b409712b3171d4d94980fc2d074e53f2
fa16fcc59ca6f3c97aab46df25ebf052eebbce8a
TITLE: SoundCloud monetization terms update: what’s new and what matters DESCRIPTION: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025.... CONTENT: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud) Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee†for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee†(80% to artists). (SoundCloud) On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud) Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com) Eligibility tightened and clarified. You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification. You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic†does not qualify). Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud) Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Playsâ€. (SoundCloud) Termination and suspension mechanics. By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined. By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud) Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud) Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud) Operational details that affect day-to-day Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud) Play definition. A “Play†counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud) UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud) Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud) Context: what changed compared to older terms Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud) Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud) Official sources SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud) Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com) Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
TITLE: SoundCloud monetization terms update: what’s new and what matters DESCRIPTION: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025.... CONTENT: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud) Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee” for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee” (80% to artists). (SoundCloud) On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud) Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com) Eligibility tightened and clarified. You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification. You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic” does not qualify). Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud) Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Plays”. (SoundCloud) Termination and suspension mechanics. By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined. By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud) Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud) Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud) Operational details that affect day-to-day Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud) Play definition. A “Play” counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud) UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud) Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud) Context: what changed compared to older terms Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud) Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud) Official sources SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud) Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com) Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
fa16fcc59ca6f3c97aab46df25ebf052eebbce8a
08dfda23b409712b3171d4d94980fc2d074e53f2
08dfda23b409712b3171d4d94980fc2d074e53f2SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025....
SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud)
Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes
Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee†for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee†(80% to artists). (SoundCloud)
On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud)
Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com)
Eligibility tightened and clarified.
You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification.
You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic†does not qualify).
Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud)
Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Playsâ€. (SoundCloud)
Termination and suspension mechanics.
By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined.
By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud)
Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud)
Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud)
Operational details that affect day-to-day
Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud)
Play definition. A “Play†counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud)
UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud)
Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud)
Context: what changed compared to older terms
Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud)
Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud)
Official sources
SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud)
Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com)
Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
08dfda23b409712b3171d4d94980fc2d074e53f2
fa16fcc59ca6f3c97aab46df25ebf052eebbce8a
TITLE: SoundCloud monetization terms update: what’s new and what matters DESCRIPTION: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025.... CONTENT: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service†for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025â€. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud) Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee†for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee†(80% to artists). (SoundCloud) On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud) Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com) Eligibility tightened and clarified. You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification. You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic†does not qualify). Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud) Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Playsâ€. (SoundCloud) Termination and suspension mechanics. By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined. By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud) Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud) Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud) Operational details that affect day-to-day Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud) Play definition. A “Play†counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud) UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud) Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud) Context: what changed compared to older terms Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud) Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud) Official sources SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud) Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com) Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
TITLE: SoundCloud monetization terms update: what’s new and what matters DESCRIPTION: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025.... CONTENT: SoundCloud has posted a new “SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service” for both On-Platform Monetization and Off-Platform Distribution. The terms page shows “Last Updated: October 31, 2025”. SoundCloud’s notice to artists says the update will take effect on November 24, 2025. (SoundCloud) Table of Contents Toggle Headline changesOperational details that affect day-to-dayContext: what changed compared to older termsOfficial sources Headline changes Distribution service fee removed. Off-Platform Distribution now pays 100% of Net Revenues to the artist, and SoundCloud states it will not retain any “so-called distribution fee” for its own benefit. Earlier versions retained a 20% “Off-Platform Distribution Fee” (80% to artists). (SoundCloud) On-Platform Monetization stays at 100% of net income (Fan Powered Royalty). The terms confirm 100% of net income for on-platform under Fan Powered Royalty. (SoundCloud) Payout processing fee transparency. Separate from the removed distribution cut, SoundCloud’s Help Center clarifies a small payout processing fee per payment (as low as $0.50 or up to 2%). This sits alongside a $25 minimum for payouts and net 60 timing. 2FA is required to receive payouts or change payout method. (help.soundcloud.com) Eligibility tightened and clarified. You must be 18+ (or age of majority) and pass identity verification. You must have an active paid Artist Subscription (non-paid “Basic” does not qualify). Material eligibility excludes DJ sets, spoken-word, soundalikes, podcasts, and tracks that are exclusively 100% GenAI. WAV and FLAC are currently accepted. (SoundCloud) Artificial streaming and fraud enforcement. The terms explicitly forbid automated, artificial or fraudulent plays and paying for access. If SoundCloud reasonably believes plays are artificial, it may exclude those plays, forfeit related revenues, assess fees or fines, and pass through DSP fines to you. Plays under 30 seconds are not counted as “Plays”. (SoundCloud) Termination and suspension mechanics. By you: end On-Platform Monetization via support form; canceling your Artist Subscription is deemed notice to end participation. Off-Platform Distribution continues until the End Date as defined. By SoundCloud: termination for any reason on 30 days’ notice, or immediately for violations, canceled subscription, or non-payment. SoundCloud may remove materials or continue distribution during a suspension period. (SoundCloud) Third Party Opportunities fee. Brand or endorsement uses facilitated by SoundCloud can carry a 20% distribution fee on that specific revenue stream, negotiated case by case. This is separate from regular distribution royalties, which are now 100% to artists. (SoundCloud) Governing law and forum. The terms are governed by California law, with exclusive jurisdiction in Los Angeles County courts. (SoundCloud) Operational details that affect day-to-day Statements and thresholds. Monthly accounting; if monthly Revenues are under $25, they carry over to the next cycle. (SoundCloud) Play definition. A “Play” counts at 30 seconds or more; preview clips do not count. (SoundCloud) UGC platform distribution. Some selected destinations are UGC platforms (e.g., TikTok, YouTube Shorts); usage there follows those platforms’ standards and policies. (SoundCloud) Change notices. SoundCloud says it will provide 14 days’ notice for significant ToS changes before they take effect. (SoundCloud) Context: what changed compared to older terms Then (example 2022 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share was 80% to artists with a 20% distribution fee retained by SoundCloud/Repost. (SoundCloud) Now (2025 terms): Off-Platform Distribution Share is 100% of Net Revenues to artists and no distribution fee is retained by SoundCloud. (SoundCloud) Official sources SoundCloud Monetization Terms of Service (Last Updated: October 31, 2025): https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms (SoundCloud) Getting Paid by SoundCloud for Artists (processing fee, $25 threshold, net 60, 2FA): https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/360051802713-Getting-Paid-by-SoundCloud-for-Artists (help.soundcloud.com) Archived 2022 terms showing prior 20% distribution fee: https://soundcloud.com/pages/artist/distribution-terms/2022-10-12 (SoundCloud)
fa16fcc59ca6f3c97aab46df25ebf052eebbce8a
08dfda23b409712b3171d4d94980fc2d074e53f2
ae6ff4aae61b299fc97ffb597baf774966960a26On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents...
On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable.
There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice.
Planet B on SoundCloud
Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook
Last but not least!
This is also in the release pipe!
“Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel.
Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
fb66160c83c51856ede9f3138c71e7fd101e91f0
ae6ff4aae61b299fc97ffb597baf774966960a26
TITLE: “Planet B” – Several releases this friday! DESCRIPTION: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents... CONTENT: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable. There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice. Planet B on SoundCloud Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook Last but not least! This is also in the release pipe! “Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel. Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
TITLE: “Planet B” – Several releases this friday! DESCRIPTION: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents... CONTENT: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable. There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice. Planet B on SoundCloud Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook Last but not least! This is also in the release pipe! “Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel. Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
ae6ff4aae61b299fc97ffb597baf774966960a26
fb66160c83c51856ede9f3138c71e7fd101e91f0
fb66160c83c51856ede9f3138c71e7fd101e91f0On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents...
On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable.
There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice.
Planet B on SoundCloud
Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook
Last but not least!
This is also in the release pipe!
“Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel.
Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
fb66160c83c51856ede9f3138c71e7fd101e91f0
ae6ff4aae61b299fc97ffb597baf774966960a26
TITLE: “Planet B” – Several releases this friday! DESCRIPTION: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents... CONTENT: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable. There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice. Planet B on SoundCloud Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook Last but not least! This is also in the release pipe! “Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel. Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
TITLE: “Planet B” – Several releases this friday! DESCRIPTION: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents... CONTENT: On Friday, 7 November 2025, several new tracks drop – and “Planet B” takes the spotlight. This is a latin tech house journey. A tribute to the ones who dare to keep pushing when optimism feels fragile. Planet B represents those who hold the line and refuse to give up. The title nods to our shared reality – “There is no Planet B” – and the music honors the ones who fight to keep our world livable. There is also a flavour of Greta Thunbergs iconic tone here, inspired by how she spoke during her climate summit speeches in 2019, including the UN Climate Action Summit in New York on 23 September, without any direct sampling or use of her actual audio or voice. Planet B on SoundCloud Thomas “DJ” Tornevall on Facebook Last but not least! This is also in the release pipe! “Ola, Olle, Eva – Rhythm Shifter Remix” – a second generation tribute to our influencing mentors Ola Möller, Olle Thorell and Eva Lindh, in Drum and Bass style (Swedish lyrics). My fellow AI based artist Tornevalls Neural Ensemble made an original track, more pop stylee, and I found it interesting to remix it into solid Drum and Bass, after hearing some dubsteppy variants. The only AI generated elements here are the lyrics. Original track is attached below too!Original: Ola, Olle, Eva on SoundCloud.Additional context: Facebook Reel. Tornevalls Neural Ensemble – “Var Inte Rädd” – a release dedicated to those moments when fear pushes people to abandon each other. It addresses friendship under pressure and how fast trust can fracture when emotions take over. The piece is a reminder to breathe, to not surrender to panic and to not sacrifice real relationships because of stress and miscommunication.
ae6ff4aae61b299fc97ffb597baf774966960a26
fb66160c83c51856ede9f3138c71e7fd101e91f0