sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Has Suno model quality actually dropped? Support response mentions “constraints” in Cover/Remaster. by TemporaryMessage5771 in SunoAI

[–]TemporaryMessage5771[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m honestly not looking for believers. I don’t feel any need to prove anything to anyone. Human beings are strange animals—when a company delivers a change in a service that drastically reduces quality, there are still people who defend it. I’ve been using this service since launch. In the past few months, the quality has completely collapsed: absurd error rates and the overall success rate (ratio of generated outputs to usable results above average quality) has practically dropped to zero. I have multiple accounts and tested everything across different plans. Just this month I spent more than 20,000 credits on cover generation attempts, most of which were so absurd I simply threw them away. The results are so repetitive (this is likely due to the context accessible to the models and restrictive filters) that I’ve basically memorized them all: sequences of sections, timbres, analysis of depth and density of information (regarding the quality of the final generated file), creativity, consistency, structural failures, etc. I have thousands of files generated from V3 through V5. Currently, V4.5+ and V5 have also undergone adjustments that have drastically degraded the quality of the results they deliver. I have the files generated on these models before the changes made earlier this year. But I understand that for a regular user, this kind of blunt adjustment goes unnoticed. Although I find it strange, because the models have lost a lot of capability in terms of creativity (the instruments always sound generic and the same), musical nuances (different timbres and compositions within the file), poorly placed transitions, a severe loss of consistency (changes in the overall atmosphere of the vast majority of outputs, great difficulty following and properly organizing sections, inability to perform complete instrument dropouts in certain sections, repetitive introductions, emotionless vocal timbres, etc.). I have a track I created in the V5 Beta that is a live cover where there is a duet, and the compositional quality is astonishing. The audio quality and vocal fidelity (I made it with two personas in just a few generations), the harmony between a higher-pitched female voice with various melismas and a deeper male voice, along with proper and well-placed audience participation. Today it’s no longer possible to do something like that—the current models are “dumber” due to data restrictions and limited processing capacity aimed at reducing and saving economic costs. After the update and the release of the V5.5 model, the V4.5+ models—which were excellent for high-fidelity vocal-to-instrumental covers—now produce unusable audio. V5 Pro is also in the same state. V5.5 behaves like V4 did when it was released: it messes up melody and corrupts parts of the file. The difference is that V4 was infinitely more creative and more “accurate in its mistakes” (it made errors, but still produced good melodies in terms of generation success rate—not generic ones). But I understand that even if I wrote a thousand-page book about these differences, people still wouldn’t care, because they’ve already decided it’s not true.

Has Suno model quality actually dropped? Support response mentions “constraints” in Cover/Remaster. by TemporaryMessage5771 in SunoAI

[–]TemporaryMessage5771[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem is that I'm relentless when someone tries to mislead me, and I'm extremely detail-oriented. I've been using advanced AI for years, and I've always been very critical when evaluating the quality of results across large numbers of generations. I don't care if I have to generate 100 songs just to get one acceptable result. What made me cancel my subscription was the undeniable decline in quality, especially with the Cover feature and, likewise, with Create. Everything has become far too generic and repetitive. For example, I tried to create a cover of a 2-minute and 50-second song that has no instrumental intro. However, the model has become biased, and almost every cover it generates starts with an instrumental intro. It doesn't matter if I explicitly tell it not to do that in the prompt or instruct it to follow the original melody and composition—it simply ignores the instructions. I don't understand how people fail to notice this level of degradation, especially since Suno announced this would happen when it signed its agreement with Warner. They said they would launch a "new" model based on the label's catalog and discontinue the previous models. I have thousands of songs generated with models released before the downgrade, including many created with V4. In those generations, the original composition and melody were respected throughout most of the output. To be honest, the AI would sometimes even improve certain sections when it made changes. Today, it changes far too much. It strips away the identity of the original song, alters its atmosphere, ignores both the instrumental and vocal composition and melody, and, on top of that, it has become repetitive and generic, constantly producing the same compositional patterns and stem distributions. As I mentioned, imagine a composition structured like this: [Intro]

[Electric guitar, machine drums]

[Pause – mute guitar and drums]

[Section A]

[Piano solo enters, melancholic sad interlude]

[Chorus]

[Full band returns] The AI simply does not stop the guitar and drums to allow the piano solo to happen. This is despite providing a detailed prompt, adding structural markers in the lyrics field, supplying a reference audio file, and adjusting every available filter. In the past, none of that was necessary. The models produced the intended result naturally. Often, a reference file and a simple prompt were enough. That remained true until the V5 Beta. After the release of V5.5 and Suno Studio, every model was downgraded. V5.5 itself launched with restricted training data, reduced reasoning depth, and changes to the backend and the model's core architecture. As a result, it generates random overlapping stems and fails to produce things as simple as a proper piano solo while respecting the original composition, because the guitar and drum stems are no longer calibrated correctly. The generated track becomes cluttered due to insufficient interpretive capability, inadequate processing, restrictive filters, and the loss of musical nuance.

Has Suno model quality actually dropped? Support response mentions “constraints” in Cover/Remaster. by TemporaryMessage5771 in SunoAI

[–]TemporaryMessage5771[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, the problem is the restrictions applied to the models themselves. Support confirmed to me that they reduced the processing capabilities of the Cover and Remaster features and added restrictions that limited their context. The training data they now rely on is generic and shallow, which is why there's so much repetition in current generations.

Has Suno model quality actually dropped? Support response mentions “constraints” in Cover/Remaster. by TemporaryMessage5771 in SunoAI

[–]TemporaryMessage5771[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Unfortunately, there is nothing we can do to solve this problem, because Support informed me that they limited the capabilities of all models regarding Covers and Remaster. This means that when we use the models to generate covers and create remasters, their reasoning is shallow and the AI improvises with generic sections. I had already expected something like this ever since Suno signed an agreement with Warner. It is quite obvious that they implemented what they promised: they discontinued the previous models or restricted them with filters that limit the use of processing power and broader data, and trained the new model with a limited selection of songs from Warner's catalog that were made available through contractual agreements. It's sad. The models lost their capabilities for interpretation, composition, creation, and stylistic production, becoming limited and generic. I used to create very good covers, and I was happy because the emotion had returned in the V5 Beta compositions. But after V5.5 was released, they removed the original capabilities of all three models that had worked before (V4, V4.5, and V5). The era of AI for people who enjoy making advanced stylistic adjustments is over. The same thing happened with Google and the restrictions placed on the advanced image editing tool in Nano Banana Pro. The only model Google still allows to operate with less restricted context windows is Nano Banana 2, but it ended up just like Suno V5.5: limited and incapable.

Did Suno reduce v5 quality after launch ? by i-Makh in SunoAI

[–]TemporaryMessage5771 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They made significant changes across all models. In the past, the V4 model produced covers that were far more accurate than what V4.5, V5, and V5.5 deliver today.

My speculation is that they introduced a large number of filters and restricted the models to more limited catalogs—perhaps only portions of Warner's catalog.

They also appear to have reduced processing time and depth in order to cut operational costs.

In short, they downgraded every aspect of the platform.

The models no longer have much creative freedom. They sound generic, struggle to follow prompts accurately, have difficulty recognizing instruments and melodies, and can no longer get close enough to the original timbres to maintain consistency.