Piston

I wrote this song with the idea of going to basic mechanic movements in music. The idea was a piston engine that creates momentum.

It works overall. Attached is the score I used along with the prompt. If you think it's that easy, you have to consider that this song went through a critical rasterization process before completion. Numerous renderings were created before this final version.

I used my website to create the pitch pallete then composed from there to create mechanical alliteration.

Piston.pdf

rescinded

Edited June 14Jun 14 by interlect

I absolutely created it. In my AI ethics course, any user that creates with AI is the sole author. I'm also liable and held accountable if anything goes wrong, you know?

But, if you must know, SunoAI had a hand in it, too. But then, that would be very confusing to give it to the robot. Think of it as a complement to the music I created.

Thank you, @interlect !

rescinded

Edited June 14Jun 14 by interlect

All that hurts logic, Interlect. If you overthink it too much, then yes the computer composed it. If I overthing too much, I'm left vulnerable to where people can steal my music and do whatever they want with it, because thus they've proven that I don't own it.

See where the problem is?

I'll go with the ethics class I attended, as it's more rational by that point to provide ownership to the artist. I also stand by my work.

On 3/30/2026 at 3:44 PM, Vonias said:

I absolutely created it. In my AI ethics course, any user that creates with AI is the sole author. I'm also liable and held accountable if anything goes wrong, you know?

Those are very different things.

If I buy a hydraulic press and use it to flatten a stainless steel pipe, obviously I'm morally responsible for flattening the pipe. If that pipe belonged to someone else, I can hardly evade responsibility by saying, "Hey, it wasn't me! It was the hydraulic press!"

On the other hand, it's equally obvious that I can't lay claim to flattening the pipe as a feat of strength. If I cry, "Behold my strength!" as I hold the flattened piece of steel aloft, I am quite rightly met with, "Uh... you didn't do that. The hydraulic press did."

On 4/21/2026 at 8:16 AM, Aiwendil said:

Those are very different things.

If I buy a hydraulic press and use it to flatten a stainless steel pipe, obviously I'm morally responsible for flattening the pipe. If that pipe belonged to someone else, I can hardly evade responsibility by saying, "Hey, it wasn't me! It was the hydraulic press!"

On the other hand, it's equally obvious that I can't lay claim to flattening the pipe as a feat of strength. If I cry, "Behold my strength!" as I hold the flattened piece of steel aloft, I am quite rightly met with, "Uh... you didn't do that. The hydraulic press did."

Yeah, but look at it like this. I copyright the music before entering it into AI. The AI creates a variation based on my music, therefore it is still mine. IDK, I try to make the AI music as identical to what I compose, too.

Not sure where you're based. In the US, courts require "meaningful human authorship" to claim copyright, not just human contribution. You did not author the final product, just the prompt. It is possible to claim copyright to your part, but not to the final recording. Suno may have granted you commercial license rights if you paid them extra, but that is not the same as being able to claim copyright.

Also, after listening to music created with Suno like this, I'm always less and less worried about AI music taking over. The use of kitsch and corny elements are through the roof, seem to have no relationship to the genre/style of the original concept, and have a redundant, non-developing form.

"In my AI ethics course, any user that creates with AI is the sole author." - I am quite curious as to what sort of unreliable AI ethics course would be promoting this, as it's standard knowledge that all writing, graphic, and musical LLMs are only possible because you are not the sole author.