Poll concerning AI sub-forum

[PeterthePapercomPoser]

Let us and the other members of the forum know how you feel about including an AI sub-forum on Young Composers Forum!  Reply to this thread if you don't see an answer in the poll that you'd like to see (click "Other").  The staff will take into account the opinions of the members at large but reserve the right to make the final decisions regarding the future of AI on Young Composer's Forum.

During the recent 2025 Christmas Music Event the Young Composer's Forum has experienced an unprecedented influx of AI generated music into the forum.  This has caused quite a bit of contention and adversity not only for the members but also for the staff.  We have argued about all the different reasons why AI should and shouldn't be included in the forum and have given many different rationales for each point of view.  Here are some of our thoughts:

@chopin: I'm ok with it, as long as submissions are handled in a dedicated subforum, AND the following:

1. You must explain your process.
   1. Did you write a series of prompts?
   2. Did you mix tracks? If so, are these tracks AI or human created?
2. If this is a song with lyrics,the lyrics must be original.

@Thatguy v2.0:  I think AI generated music should be banned on our forum. 

I'm not talking about it's use in sound samples, like AI generation in voice samples for a vocal piece, or making string instruments sound as lifelike as possible. Sound samples are just really good now. This is a composing forum, dedicated to the art of composition. Typing words as a prompt for machines to output sounds is offensive to me as an artist, especially when calling it your own composition. 

The issue I have with an AI subforum is that it will always be tied to the site as a whole. The original intent of a place where young people could learn from more experienced composers and also share compositions of all styles and skill levels is gone. I'm sure it's neat to see what AI comes up with with whatever creative words one could share with it, and I'm also sure that we could all learn some interesting things from it's output. But do we need YC to have that? Or should that knowledge be gained somewhere more appropriate?  Analyzing it from a studious viewpoint isn't something I'm guessing would be the reason people are sharing their AI music. It will mostly be just promotion, but maybe I'm wrong on that (I guess a lot of people already use YC for that lol).

@Henry Ng Tsz Kiu: I am against AI music, since I think it's sacrilegious to those who really work hard on their own to write their music. Using AI to compose for me is just an act of theft without really assimilating those great music in the past. To involve AI to their creative process to compose and call the outcome "their" "music" and call themselves "composers" is just a shameful act. YC to me is a place where both the composer and the reviewers can learn by giving and receiving feedbacks, and both sides should have give and take. In the case of AI "composers", they can only take and wouldn't be able to provide useful feedback except luring other members to use AI like them (just like drugs), and when they receive any feedback they wouldn't be able to change the details of their very "own" "music", apart from clicking another button to create another music track. This will literally ruin the crucial function of YC as a forum.

Nonetheless I still welcome an AI subforum, definitely not for the reason of liking AI music, but to me it's like the legalisation of alcohol and smoking. There's no way to prohibit people using AI to "compose" at all, and given the trend the number of AI "composers" will only increase. Having an AI subforum may attract those newcomers who don't know how to write to our forum, check out other members' works and start to really write with their brain, instead of outsourcing their brain to AI. Also, AI may develop in a way that knowing its trend would be important, and having an AI subforum would be beneficial to knowing the trend.

Prohibiting AI music to enter any events/competitions is my bottom line.

@Omicronrg9:  (he is sick and will express his opinion in due time)

@UncleRed99:  (see his reply below)

@PeterthePapercomPoser:  My rationale for why AI music should be included is that I, as a composer, value good music and good musical ideas regardless of where they come from and am always willing to learn from whatever piece of music gets created either by human or machine or a combination of both.  My rationale for not including AI is that it might open the forum up to people who inspire dissent on both sides of the aisle.  Composers who don't use AI may inspire dissent because they don't want to be classed among others who just wrote a prompt for an AI and want to call themselves "composers" for that reason.  People who support AI and use AI to make music may inspire dissent because they think they belong to our community without the knowledge and effort that such membership usually requires.  Those "composers" then feel on an even playing field and feel free to critique or evaluate other composers music without really knowing nor caring how much know-how it takes to create your own piece of music from scratch.

[UncleRed99]

My answer of "Other" on Question 1; 

I don't downright "hate" the idea of generated music, as we've adapted as a society from traditionally only ever using real live instruments for music, into the use of MIDI, VST2/3, and other realistically generated playback sound. So I believe it has its uses. I've even from time to time, as a sort of "test" to AI like GPT for example, submitted a PDF and .mp3 copy of something insignificant that I wrote to the AI to see if it is truly able to determine the tonality, mood, and atmosphere of the music, while also experimenting with how well it was able to provide fast and productive feedback on the score itself. I can't say it did as good a job as people here who share my level of expertise and well beyond it, but in a pinch, It was able to identify the mistakes that I made, intentionally, on the score, as a test for what it was truly capable of and what level of knowledge in Music theory was available to it. It was dead wrong about a couple of things, as I tend to notice regularly when you ask an AI a direct question without any leading context. So the advice received should be taken with a grain of salt. Also why I believe that Bot generated music can N E V E R be a genuine form of music simply due to the fact that it's incapable of understanding the true purpose of music, it's intended affect on the human mind and emotional center, and will never be able to live up to the true original's standards of creativity. All it will do is utilize what it can find online and on streaming platforms to mimic impactful sounding music. Which to some may be enough, but to me that undermines the entire community of people who spend hours, days, weeks, months or even years to compose something intricate of the same length / duration of music that could be created with AI in seconds, and is created without any true "thought" or "feeling" put into it. 

Regarding my Other answer of the last Question;

Potentially, we could add a form to fill out with required fields in the sub-forums for music submission posts... Such as; 

Work Title (untitled if not yet established): _________________________________________
Composer/Username: _____________________________
Key Signature (Maj./Min.): _______________________________________
Starting time signature: ______________
Instrumentation or Ensemble Type: ___________________________
Additional Details: ___________________________
Description of Piece: _______________________________________...
*required
Please attach a plain (or) watermarked PDF copy of your score (for Notation Software Users), including either a YouTube Link or attached .MP3 file for playback. If using DAW software, please attach both a MIDI file, .MP3/YT Link, as well as a description of MIDI, VST2/3 Instruments used and a few of the FX Editor plugins that were used, in order help maintain the orchestral compositional authenticity of our community 🙂- Sorry, must've had a brain fart right here. fixed it.

Obviously this is simply a suggested set of questions that would be up for consideration, editing/alteration, omission etc... but I feel that this would curb most if not all low-effort "hey guys look, I just wrote this today" **(Attaches a fully mastered, 5 minute long EDM track, fresh out of the shower wearing Day clothes after trying to pass it off like they created a fully completed track with full mastering and editing by working on it tirelessly all day long just for it to have been an AI the whole time after they simply asked it like 3 prompts to alter results...)**

Edited December 30, 2025 by UncleRed99

[muchen_]

Quoting what I wrote in a thread earlier:

Quote

 

I am in support of the idea of completely banning these AI-generated music on this forum. The story may well be different if, for example, someone had written the score for a piano sonata, and they managed to get AI to perform it (though I'm not sure it is even possible at the moment for AI to do this). But, I am of the opinion that wholly-generated AI music has no place on this forum. It matters not that someone fed into the prompt a specific chord progression, or melody references, or texts for a song. That person has done no composing of their own. The subreddit r/composer for example requires all submissions to be accompanied by a score, and it may be interesting to consider enforcing a rule similar to this.

Personally, I post music here for two reasons: to allow others give feedback to my work, and to give others music that they might enjoy. From a feedback point of view: what is there to discuss about AI music? What even is the point of giving any feedback? It's no different to me than trying to reason with a chat bot - hopeless and pointless. I'm also sure nobody here who composes seriously would want to dissect, breakdown, and review AI music, and those who generated the AI music in all likelihood have very little to give in return. Then the second point: I personally don't want to listen to AI music, especially not on this forum out of all places, and I'm positively sure the majority of users here don't either.

And so, to me, this isn't about ethics, skill, or even the amount of time it takes for a regular composer vs AI to write music. Allowing AI to permeate this forum would ultimately defeat my interpretation of the point of this forum's existence.

 

Furthermore, unless a sub-forum for AI music can be quarantined, I strong believe that all AI music should be banned. Quarantining in this context means nothing posted in this sub-forum will be presented to users by default, unless they specifically looked for it (new posts/replies in this sub-forum will not show up on the sidebar on the main page etc). Without quarantining, just making an AI sub-forum is the equivalent of allowing AI to exist on this website in its current form.

[Aiwendil]

My feeling is that, regardless of your opinion on AI music, this is a composition forum.  Prompting an LLM to generate music is not composition.  Therefore, it has no place on this forum.  It's as simple as that for me.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

Just saw this and voted. 

Those results so far

[AngelCityOutlaw]

I will also add that I think video should be encouraged as the primary detection means.

Almost every computer today has built-in screen capture software that will allow you to record daw/notation playback effortlessly.

[TristanTheTristan]

Ai should only be used for learning composition, not doing composition.

Also composition practice. Eg. Let ai make a theme and you improvise upon it as practice, but not actual composition that should be submitted in events and stuff. I would say, make a special forum, really for composition practice and have them submit both their theme and also the improvisation they wrote themselves. This is my limit I would give to AI composition.

Best of all, just ban it, though.

15 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

I will also add that I think video should be encouraged as the primary detection means.

Almost every computer today has built-in screen capture software that will allow you to record daw/notation playback effortlessly.

 

But what about the people without that type of computers?

On 12/26/2025 at 5:18 PM, UncleRed99 said:

Regarding my Other answer of the last Question;

Potentially, we could add a form to fill out with required fields in the sub-forums for music submission posts... Such as; 

Work Title (untitled if not yet established): _________________________________________
Composer/Username: _____________________________
Key Signature (Maj./Min.): _______________________________________
Starting time signature: ______________
Instrumentation or Ensemble Type: ___________________________
Additional Details: ___________________________
Description of Piece: _______________________________________...
*required
Please attach a plain (or) watermarked PDF copy of your score (for Notation Software Users), including either a YouTube Link or attached .MP3 file for playback. If using DAW software, please attach both a MIDI file, .MP3/YT Link, as well as a description of MIDI, VST2/3 Instruments used and a few of the FX Editor plugins that were used, in order help maintain the orchestral compositional authenticity of our community 🙂- Sorry, must've had a brain fart right here. fixed it.

Obviously this is simply a suggested set of questions that would be up for consideration, editing/alteration, omission etc... but I feel that this would curb most if not all low-effort "hey guys look, I just wrote this today" **(Attaches a fully mastered, 5 minute long EDM track, fresh out of the shower wearing Day clothes after trying to pass it off like they created a fully completed track with full mastering and editing by working on it tirelessly all day long just for it to have been an AI the whole time after they simply asked it like 3 prompts to alter results...)**

Yes, that would work for most of us, but what about the poor fellows that don't know music theory but still compose authentically?

15 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Just saw this and voted. 

Those results so far

 

Same. Agreed!

[AngelCityOutlaw]

5 minutes ago, TristanTheTristan said:

But what about the people without that type of computers?

 

Do they even exist at this point?

[TristanTheTristan]

Just now, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Do they even exist at this point?

 

I remember one of my friends' computers doesn't...

[Henry Ng Tsz Kiu]

5 minutes ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Do they even exist at this point?

They do, you can play Microsoft Minesweeper on it!

[TristanTheTristan]

11 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Do they even exist at this point?

 

Also, Windows 95 and 98. Yes. They are staring at you right now.

10 hours ago, Henry Ng Tsz Kiu said:

They do, you can play Microsoft Minesweeper on it!

 

11 hours ago, TristanTheTristan said:

I remember one of my friends' computers doesn't...

 

11 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

Do they even exist at this point?

 

11 hours ago, TristanTheTristan said:

Yes, that would work for most of us, but what about the poor fellows that don't know music theory but still compose authentically?

 

11 hours ago, TristanTheTristan said:

But what about the people without that type of computers?

 

15 hours ago, AngelCityOutlaw said:

I will also add that I think video should be encouraged as the primary detection means.

Almost every computer today has built-in screen capture software that will allow you to record daw/notation playback effortlessly.

 

So back to the question: What do we do with them?

(The people with questionable computers)

Edited 19 hours ago by TristanTheTristan
I can't bear wrong spelling.

[PCC]

1. I'm not sure if the anti-AI detection algorithm would work
2. if we accept AI in compositions, submissions must thoroughly declare any AI involvement in composition (explain which exact ideas/parts/transformations/revisions/etc. were driven by AI and how exactly was AI used in those parts like, total LLM prompt? vague idea? proofreading? etc. generative vs analytic?)
3. I think a complete ban on AI might look close-minded (even though I am actually not against this entirely at all at this point in time), but the world is still at its infancy of dealing with AI/LLM (which itself is also at infancy), and right now at most I would be open to a severely restricted use of AI. As time goes by I might eventually be more open.
4. the problem with enforcing these rules is we might "overcorrect" and label genuine works as "AI"esque. this goes back to my first point, we don't want to mirror YouTube's AI-takeover in doing copyright claims and reports which mostly just benefits big companies.

[Alex Weidmann]

Does GarageBand Drummer count as AI?

I've used this once or twice in the past. Though I made lots of manual tweaks to create alternating rhythms and percussion techniques in different sections of the piece. So it wasn't purely AI driven.

I've also used AI to create cover art for my scores.

[Wieland Handke]

1. How do you feel about including AI generated music on YCF?

In my opinion, AI generated music is misplaced in the general submission threads and competitions/events on this forum, since the purpose of the forum is to exchange about the composition process, results, difficulties etc. (and not about which music one likes or not).

However, to ban it completely would mean to neglect a tendency which is now existing and will further increase in the future.

Thus, a special, separated sub-forum could be a compromise, but I have to admit that @muchen_ 's objection and demand for quarantine cannot be dismissed out of hand.

3. If we decide to regulate AI music, how should we detect it?

I am (strongly) opposed to the use of online AI detection tools, as they can lead to “false positives” and, in my opinion, their use contradicts the goal of publishing and reviewing only high-quality, human created compositions in this forum. Therefore, the judgement can only be done in the same way as requested for the submissions. With this background, the distinction between genuine compositions and compositions generated (wholly or partly) by AI can only be achieved by making the composition process used by individual members more transparent.

One idea could be to create a special section in the forum where each member can post their own topic explaining in detail how they normally work, including the notation software they use, the type of recording (either live recording or with which DAW software), etc. I think anyone who intends to regularly publish works in the forum would appreciate it if others could take a look behind the scenes, so that we could learn a lot from each other.

A regular submission of a piece could then include a link to this explanatory post and should, of course, include a PDF score, an MP3 audio, possibly an intermediary MIDI file, a brief description of the musical form, key, time signature, instrumentation, etc., as well as a little background information about the inspiration and idea behind the piece.

I think, that if we could encourage members to post their contributions in this way, the overall quality of the forum would improve and, more importantly for the submitters, it would be easier for reviewers to familiarize themselves with the pieces, which would certainly lead to more and profound reviews. (I say that also with the background that some members tend to „flood“ the forum with a dozen of uncommented posts at once – which might be fine but not necessarily leads to many or instant reviews. Sometimes, less is more.)

I don't know if such a procedure could be introduced as a “rule,” perhaps more as a “recommendation.” However, if the “experienced” members were to post in this way, they could serve as example for the others.

[AngelCityOutlaw]

6 hours ago, Alex Weidmann said:

Does GarageBand Drummer count as AI?

Probably, but it's not actually doing anything that isn't already a standard feature really in drum kits for years. Premade beats.

6 hours ago, Alex Weidmann said:

I've also used AI to create cover art for my scores.

I would point out that on marketplaces like gamedev market, they forbid AI art assets, but allow composers to use AI cover art.

[expert21]

My view on the matter is that while any pieces of "music" that are generated using tools like Suno should be completely banned, the use of AI tools like Cantai to generate mock-ups from midi or notation should be allowed as they are not really any different from generating a mock-up using sound samples (as others have already said). With regards to the issue of how we should go about detecting AI "music", I like @UncleRed99's idea, though I recognise @TristanTheTristan's concern that asking for technical music theory things like starting keys/time signatures may unfairly exclude composers who do not work in theory/notation heavy genres. I propose that we require users to write a short description of their piece naming some musical elements/techniques that were used (e.g. chord progressions, instrumentation etc.) alongside any additional details they might want to mention, like maybe what inspired them? 

[Kvothe]

1. When it comes to platforms like Suno, that should be regulated: it should not be used in competitions, detection should be used, and if there is abused it should be banned.     When it comes mock ups in the Daw or in notation (Note perfomer, vst, etc):  For the composer plays the notes into the program, and such.  Sometimes, we do get lucky and have live performance.  I think it would be cool, if there was sub forum to share our live performances. 

2. A pianist and composer, I'd prefer if someone who did not use AI. 🙂 

3. I agree with @UncleRed99 Idea. In traditional music, you can generally see the key, meter, and etc, but with lyrical songs we can't see that.