From Spanish to Japanese, and everything in between
The first instrument was created tens of thousands of years ago, when Neanderthals produced a flute out of bone.
We’re a long way out from that time. In fact, producing music has never been easier. Within the last 50 years, music production has achieved fast-paced advances.
In the age of generative AI, the process is even more streamlined. With this, a certain degree of tension has emerged within the music industry, especially among creative professionals.
While AI is certainly helping people rise up to stardom, generating music out of what seems like thin air, musicians are worried.
While it’s too soon to say if the music industry is experiencing a major glow-up or if we’re watching its downfall, there is no doubt that generative AI is changing music production forever.
Musicians, producers, and the many professionals involved in the process of making many of your favorite albums are anxious about their automated replacements.
Record labels, which hold the key to success for many artists, are exploiting this technology to up their profits and cut out anyone they can.
Audio engineers are using the technology to amp the mixing and mastering processes. But there’s a big difference between using the technology to streamline and using it to replace human creatives.
Generative AI tools like Suno and Udio can generate a song from the input of a bit of text. This is very different from assisted mastering.
Like AI used across other fields, the technology picks up on patterns via data sets (licensed songs or those publicly available, as well as metadata).
Taking a small audio sample or just based on text input, the AI model comes up with a musical output best aligned with the predictive patterns it identifies.
So the AI model depends on existing music, the tools that have been used to produce music, and the huge datasets that power knowledge to actually facilitate an output.
Like all AI models, its machine-learning capacity determines the quality of its output. The more data it is exposed to, the more likely it is to be accurate in its output.
Often, these generative AI platforms produce songs that are standard in the genre or style that the platform is being prompted to produce. Few would argue that innovative or particularly interesting outputs come out of AI.
But stereotypical sounds sell. Musicians have noticed and have joined other creatives in filing lawsuits against different AI tools.
In some cases, the issue of licensed material makes copyright arguments more clear. In others, fair use of publicly accessible material draws a big gray zone.
Either way, legal systems across the world are still scrambling to figure out how to make sense of these lawsuits and where compensation falls.
Ed Newton-Rex, who was VP of audio at Stability AI when the company launched its audio generative AI initiative, Stable Audio, points out that the issue is that people spend a limited time listening to music in their daily lives.
Therefore, the amount of money that those in the industry can make is also limited, as consumption is a key aspect to the product that the industry produces.
For Newton-Rex, this limited pool is now in danger of becoming even smaller with generative AI audio initiatives joining profit fishing, meaning less and less will actually go to humans making music.
The Artist Rights Alliance statement against the use of AI to generate profitable music was issued in early 2024 by over 200 musicians. This was one of the first of many protests to come in the demand for regulation.
The issue of consent is central for artists as the lines continue to be blurred between illicit regurgitation and innovation in the creative industry.
Newton-Rex also organized a ‘silent’ album with the collaboration of 1,000 musicians, backed by iconic stars such as Sir Elton John and Paul McCartney, across the UK.
The album, titled ‘Is This What We Want?’ comprises ambient empty studio and performance sites, foreshadowing what the industry faces if overcome by AI.
It’s not just about the output. For some artists, just the act of using their data without their consent to then produce a creative output is a key issue to the generative AI process.
It’s not just the middle men or independent artists who are facing the heat of AI. Mega superstars like pop icon Celine Dion and Bad Bunny have also issued statements on AI-generated music.
An AI-generated cover of a gospel song was circulated across various platforms with over one million views, crediting Dion. The tune was produced via software that reproduces voices without the singer’s permission or knowledge.
There is another side to the story. Randy Travis, a performer who suffered a stroke which rendered him unable to speak or sing, has grasped onto the technology to continue to produce music despite his condition.
Dion, who has also faced challenges to perform following her diagnosis with Stiff Person Syndrome, might, too, be tempted to use the technology in the future, depending on the evolution of her illness.
Sources: (Rolling Stone) (Forbes) (Vox)
Another creative profession has taken center stage in the conversation around AI. This time, it's music creators speaking out. AI-generated music is being published across platforms under the names of artists who have no involvement with its production.
Legal battles over copyright law infringement are popping up among creative professionals in all fields, and for musicians, it's no different. Even superstar Celine Dion has had to get on the mic to let her fans know that a song proclaiming to be hers is in fact AI.
The veil between fact and fiction is getting thicker as it becomes more difficult to distinguish between real and AI-generated music. Curious to know how musicians are responding? Click through.
AI is beginning to mimic our favorite musicians
Artists like Celine Dion set the record straight: That's not me!
MUSIC Technology
Another creative profession has taken center stage in the conversation around AI. This time, it's music creators speaking out. AI-generated music is being published across platforms under the names of artists who have no involvement with its production.
Legal battles over copyright law infringement are popping up among creative professionals in all fields, and for musicians, it's no different. Even superstar Celine Dion has had to get on the mic to let her fans know that a song proclaiming to be hers is in fact AI.
The veil between fact and fiction is getting thicker as it becomes more difficult to distinguish between real and AI-generated music. Curious to know how musicians are responding? Click through.