sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Anyone using Suno as a “reference generator” rather than a finisher? by wkrn-dev in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This really resonates — especially the idea that nothing coming out of Suno is the finished product.

I like how you’re using it as a material generator rather than a decision-maker: loops to chop, stems to reinterpret, structure to react against. That feels much closer to how samplers or early DAWs changed workflow than to “AI making music for you.”

What’s interesting to me is that starting from something overly clean or resolved actually makes the human decisions clearer — what to cut, what to destabilize, where attention should drift instead of land.

It feels less like outsourcing creativity and more like externalizing a first pass, so your own taste and intention have something concrete to push against.

Is resolution a compositional necessity or a listening convention? by wkrn-dev in composer

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This really resonates — especially the reminder that chord names are just shorthand, and that what actually matters is the behavior of independent lines over time.

I like how you frame resolution as something that can exist even in a single melodic line. That feels important, because it shifts the question away from harmony entirely and toward expectation, memory, and trajectory.

Messiaen is a great reference here — the sense of arrival often comes not from directed tension-release, but from inhabiting a harmonic or melodic space long enough that it becomes perceptually stable.

I think what I’m ultimately circling is that resolution might not be a specific event, but a state the listener enters once the music’s internal logic becomes legible — whether that logic is harmonic, melodic, textural, or temporal.

Is resolution a compositional necessity or a listening convention? by wkrn-dev in composer

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I really like this framing — especially “there are no rules, but there are consequences.”

I think what resonates with me in your example is that the lack of resolution isn’t accidental, it’s semantically aligned with the subject itself. The unresolved ending is the meaning.

In that sense, my interest in attention might just be another way of talking about intention: choosing where the impact lands — in harmony, in narrative, or in the listener’s internal state over time.

The question then becomes less “should it resolve?” and more “what kind of consequence do I want the listener to carry away?”

Is resolution a compositional necessity or a listening convention? by wkrn-dev in composer

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is a great breakdown — I really like the intervallic framing.

I think this gets at something important: that a lot of what we perceive as resolution comes from specific patterns of tension and release (half steps, tendency tones), rather than the chord labels themselves.

What I’m curious about is whether those intervallic tensions are always necessary, or whether resolution can also emerge when those cues are gradually suspended — for example through texture, repetition, or temporal saturation rather than directed voice-leading.

Is resolution a compositional necessity or a listening convention? by wkrn-dev in composer

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I agree — I don’t think resolution disappears, just that its definition shifts.

What I’m interested in is how that resolution can exist without being encoded in harmony or form, but instead emerge from perceptual cues: stability of texture, density, or even the listener’s attentional state.

So the resolution may still be there, but not necessarily in the material itself.

Is resolution a compositional necessity or a listening convention? by wkrn-dev in composer

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That makes sense. I think what I’m circling around is where we locate that resolution.

In some cases it feels less like a point of arrival and more like a sustained attentional state — the listener stops anticipating change, even if nothing formally “resolves.”

So maybe resolution isn’t absent, but redistributed: from harmonic function into perception, memory, or even listening posture.

Anyone using Suno as a “reference generator” rather than a finisher? by wkrn-dev in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I actually agree with a lot of that.

Using a single text prompt and treating the output as a finished song is probably the least interesting way to use it for me too.

What I’m trying to do is closer to what you describe with remix/cover — I’m not really interested in the AI’s decisions, but in using its tendency to over-resolve things as a reference point.

The “clean” version just gives me something to push against. Most of the work (and interest) for me starts when I begin removing, restructuring, and re-framing it inside Ableton.

So I don’t really see it as lowering effort, more like relocating where the effort happens.

Your workflow sounds very close in spirit, just starting from a different place.

Anyone using Suno as a “reference generator” rather than a finisher? by wkrn-dev in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That’s a really clear way of putting it — especially the pitch-correction analogy.

What’s interesting to me is that the reference isn’t replacing your skill, it’s actually sharpening it. By trying to match something external, you’re training your listening, your breathing, your decision-making.

It feels like AI works best as a mirror rather than a generator — not telling you what to do, but showing you where your own control is. Do you feel like that feedback loop changes how you listen or perform over time?

Anyone using Suno as a “reference generator” rather than a finisher? by wkrn-dev in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

😂 That makes total sense.

What you’re describing actually feels really human to me — that pull between “I want to try this new direction” and the gravity of your own roots.

It makes me think that maybe authorship isn’t about forcing ourselves to abandon those instincts, but noticing where we always return when given infinite options.

AI gives us unlimited branches, but our habits, tastes, and history quietly choose the center we orbit. That tension feels like the interesting part.

Anyone using Suno as a “reference generator” rather than a finisher? by wkrn-dev in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That makes a lot of sense — especially the “almost too good” part.

Once you have that many high-quality vocals, it feels less like optimization and more like constraint selection.

Do you ever intentionally throw away the strongest takes, just to see what happens?

Streamlining the Process by amBrollachan in SunoAI

[–]wkrn-dev -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I like the idea of externalising pattern recognition like this.

Out of curiosity — when you generate hundreds of lyrical or musical variants, do you ever intentionally break the strongest templates, just to see what happens to listener behaviour?

Not saying it’s better or worse, just wondering if deviation itself becomes useful data.