The Edge [of all] Journeys

I’m Open to Having Conversations

If you have a podcast and need guests to interview on these topics, I’m articulate and love having these conversations – get in touch!

My Creative Philosophy

My current creative process includes using AI tools – not as a replacement for my own creativity, but as a way to steward it, the quality of its productions, and ultimately time itself, which is the most valuable resource any of us have in life. My approach to production (which is all over the place) is built on decades of experimental experience in music composition, production, and sonic exploration long before AI was on the scene. 

For example, every track on my Artifactual album was 100% home-grown human-produced in my spare time (over years). But even it was only possible using a host of technology tools that transformed my imagination and ideas into final songs. As a case-in-point, every sound in “Crafty” originated as recordings of random tools and things my kids and I banged on in our shop plus a vocal sample of my daughter from when she was tiny. The bridge between the random noises and final music was the creative employment of technology.

I see AI as another amazing technology tool in that suite of options that can help bridge the gap between human creativity and tangible Artifacts. I used Suno to help me produce a pseudo-sequel album to Artifactual called Hyperealaizations including new versions of some tracks and finally finishing other tracks that I had never shared before. 

This might sound like I’m trying to provide the human “credentials” behind my explorations, but that’s not really the case. I mostly just want to maintain creative transparency as a core value and add my voice to the raging debate around AI-assisted creativity. Some of that debate is fascinatingly critical to have while a LOT of it is absurdly (and ironically) dehumanizing. Like every other social-media-fueled debate space (alongside entertainment, politics, religion, etc.), this has become another arena dominated by echo chambers and emotionally driven confirmation bias rage-fests replete with insult-slinging and ad hominem attacks. Some (hopefully many) of us are capable of a more respectful* and nuanced discourse. 

It might help if we remember there is nothing new under the sun. AI hasn’t introduced any new debates, it has simply amplified existing debates in incredibly interesting ways. And it’s painful to watch both “sides”  often arguing right past each other about it when they might actually have more common ground than they realize or admit.

It is also worth noting that I express my values to engage with complex and fascinating topics – not out of any moral disclosure obligation. Never before has there been any expectation or demand on this level of artistic transparency. Have musicians previously been expected to disclose usage of arpeggiators or auto-tune or modular sequencing synths or any number of other technology shortcuts / enhancements / automations that they didn’t create or even completely control the output of? And yet historically many musicians have generously, voluntarily shared some their processes and tricks which have helped others learn and grow and pioneer new territory and that’s the spirit I wish was more prevalent in the debates about AI versus the turf wars, scapegoating, and straw man logic I typically come across. 

My Primary Creative Values in the AI era

As an inadequate oversimplification (within the confines of this format) here are my top, personal principles and values guiding how I view and use AI-assistance in my creative processes:

1. I respect others who operate under different guiding principles than these (except where primary direct motives include greed, deception, or other harmful intentions). *For clarity: respect and maintaining respectful behavior are different things to me.
2. I see (true) AI-Slop as a problem, but I believe that Pop-Slop has always been a problem too. And the vast majority of both might have a common denominator in the “harmful intentions” department. The main difference is that now AI can help individuals perpetuate “slop” on more equal footing to what the studios have always had. 
3. Even so, ultimately, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and unfortunately the appetites of beholders are often culturally engineered. Authenticity is a huge question, but not only in terms of production – also in terms of consumption. Do we consume what we truly love or do we consume what we’ve been programmed to believe we love because we think everybody else loves it too?
4. I write my lyrics. It’s fun (and can be hilarious) to see what happens when AI writes. AI can seem “creative” in ways that humans might not be. That fascinates me. It can even be inspiring in ways. But I want my thoughts and emotions to be expressed in my own words. 
5. I compose intentionally. I don’t see AI as a insta-magic-easy-button where outputs are instant, final products.
6. I create and input my own vocals, performances, instruments, ideas, thoughts, sounds, and more as raw materials and ingredients. Technologies (including AI) help me put those materials and new takes together into final Artifacts. Every track has its own unique production story from inspiration to realization. 
7. I am interested in discovering and sharing something unique and constantly experimenting with ways to do that. From creating custom models filled with only my original non-AI influenced music to exploring what happens when AI is pushed into hallucination territory and everything in between. 
8. Fraud, theft, and plagiarism will always be wrong. LLM training and machine learning are not inherently fraud, theft, or plagiarism. It’s easy for people to fear and hate what they don’t fully understand. There are legitimate conversations to have around the legal system constantly trying to catch up with technology, copyright issues, and artists’ rights, but hating on the way AI’s are trained from publicly available sources – including scraping – requires the moral consistency of not using any AI tool for anything – they are all trained the same way – on human creativity and thought analogous to the way any of us learn (albeit much faster). 
9. Although I use AI assistance for many things (exploring creative production, architecting / coding other technologies, completing home repair projects, etc.) I remain very skeptical that its ultimate trajectory will be beneficial for humanity. Right now there are benefits. And naturally, risks too. A hammer is superior to a rock for pounding nails and an air-nailer even more so. Tools can be misused too. And the most powerful tools hold the most potential for both good and bad. I do NOT consider my perspectives or conclusions or employment of AI to be on autopilot. It’s an area we should all be thinking about deeply in ways I know I never would have thought necessary in my lifetime just 5 years ago. 
10. I will likely refine and/or expand and/or revise these values and principles over time with more experience and more data to inform them.

I hope to write and/or record more in-depth treatments on all of these and related topics in other formats in the future! There are so many branching side quests to explore, and this is just a cursory scratch on the vast surface of so much to explore in all of this.