Double sorry but Brian Eno’s Music for Airports or Aphex Twin’s Selected Ambient Works II is not interchangable with AI drivel

They are not even interchangeable with each other!

You'd consider those generic?

He wasn't the one calling ambient music generic unnoticed music.

Parent comment said generic, he offered these as counters, so he called them generic.

"I like ambient music"

"Elevator generic background music is trash. Good riddance. "

"No, X and Y in the genre are good bands"

"So you agree it is generic elevator music?"

I wouldn't summarize it that way, but I can buy the interpretation.

But how I read it, the second comment is saying that AI slop competes with machine-replicable human slop. Of which a lot of ambient music is, but not necessarily all.

Most ambient music boils down to generic muzak that was machine generated in the first place in a DAW.

Fair. Your characterization of AI music is a bit ambitious. AI still can't write a breathtaking short story or poem: it can write a mediocre one of standard themes indistinguishable from a student, but that's it. I would argue that AI images is a special case: a photograph is after all not truly "art".

In my opinion, Aphex Twin is way overrated. Only a few tracks on SAW2 are listenable. I agree with the sentiment though and on calling out Brian Eno.

It's ok if you don't like it. Good even. It being weird and not of mass appeal is part of the charm.

I don't know them but if they're designed to be offensive airport noise fillers then yes, they are.

They're not. Is your search engine broken?

I have absolutely zero interest in listening to any music that is defined by the words "ambient" or "generic" or that is in any way at risk of being outcompeted by AI. I prefer interesting music.

yikes

I think your categorical dismissal of a genre that defies categorization (including one of the undisputed most influential eletronic artists ever!) disqualifies you from being able to identify "interesting" music. You sound like a boring person.

Triple sorry but if these aren't generic, then by definition they weren't what the parent comment was talking about, since it did say generic.

I wasn’t replying to generic, I was nailing “designed to go unnoticed”

As music historians note the profundity of their work with that explicit aim in mind

Then you invented your own thing which they never said, and complained that it's wrong.

I’m quoting them verbatim

You just said you cherry picked a subset of what they said to respond to.