In a world where AI is seemingly slipping into every crack of our lives, it is starting to appear in the music industry in a dangerously fast pace.
We have been seeing more and more AI generated songs topping the music charts or AI generated bands having viral TikTok sounds. With this happening, a feeling arises that creating art has recently shifted even more from a personal to a more fast-paced environment that focuses on revenue rather than the creation itself. So why do we let something non-human take up space which is shaped by emotional vulnerability and personal feelings?
We need to break down AI music first, to understand what it is and how it affects the music industry. The AI-driven composition uses machine learning algorithms to generate melodies, choruses, and rhythms without human intervention. During this process, the generative models analyse millions of musical patterns and offers the prompt writer a „new“ instrumental arrangement 1.Praised by users, its main positive aspect is that in the beginning stages of a song it cuts time down from days to minutes and offers the opportunity to then personalise your instrumental pieces in whatever way you like2.
While all of this sounds like a resourceful way to reduce time and just make the beginning stages a little easier, it leaves a bitter taste.
When people sit in their flats, their studios or wherever they record, they do not just offer their time for the creation of music, art and even covers, but their feelings to the listeners without expecting anything in return – They bare their souls to strangers.
If you compare human musical creation to AI music, it feels like a cop out to type in a prompt that skips these steps for you. It strips music of its essence - the personal pull, the emotional tether between artist and listener. What remains is technically sound, but lifeless and forgettable. And what happens to us if we do not accept what other people feel, if we lose the connection and the feeling of community that music so vigorously offers to all of us? It seems like there is nothing left if we take thepersonal influences away and try to comfort ourselves with a lifeless skeleton that was once filled with emotions and passion. While looking for opinions on this topic, I stumbled over someone saying, that the creation of a prompt is art in itself and helps beginners to find their standing – But is that what actually happens? It seems like a sign that people are trying to skip ahead. There is beauty in finding your niche, to explore what music has to offer and to learn new things. No one is simply perfect at something, so we should not look down on the idea to offer time to learn a craft and get better at it. And where does it leave artists that did the training, the belting under the shower, the tireless lessons they put themselves through to become better.
This sentiment sticks with artists and music enjoyers alike, when asked about this one of our readers told us that even ignoring the horrible environmental impact, they do not see the point of music if real people do not make it.
Steve, from the band Dog Bless, even goes a step further: “I think people using AI music is like someone trying to pass off a bowl of plastic fruit as the real thing. As soon as you look closer, it loses its appeal. At least for now, I think the idea of an AI artist just does not have the same worthwhile investment from a fans point of view.” While many people assume AI is thinking by itself, it ends up being a calculation of probabilities and it takes the emotional ammunition from somewhere else – All of this without giving the credit where credit is due. It feels like we are so tired of real emotions that we decided we do not care about the people. There is no conscious nor any lived experience. It is a prompt that calculates, and it uses other people’s art for doing so. Some might argue that some song structures are recognizable enough that you can tell if it is inspired by a well-known song or artist, so credit is given by mental recognition. But that doesn’t include up and coming artists, who put their ideas into their songs, but have not found their audiences yet. They lived through their experience and after deciding to share something intimate with the world, not knowing where and who might connect with it, they end up being discredited by AI.
All of this happens at the same time, as major artists are publicly fighting for their rights to own their own catalogues. Simultaneously, AI music stays in a limbo, an unmarked territory that tries but has no real idea to protect intellectual property3. Without the ability to differentiate between AI generated music and human-made music platforms like iHeartRadio have already banned AI generated songs. Platforms like Universal Music Group called out for a ban as early as 2023 and even called it a fraud to label it music. They want to protect the rights of their artists and even asked other platforms to do the same. As of 2025, they announced a collaboration with Udio, an AI Music Generator, where musicians can opt in and be paid for the usage of their art for an AI music generator. At the same time, the platform is designed to exclude the possibility to download the generated songs, so a distribution is not encouraged. But even with the idea to let people decide there are still uncertainties about copyright and ownership and no clear solution has been offered4.
If there is an increased usage of AI artists that get more advanced with every prompt, what becomes of the unique experience and the stories behind a song. It all seems like we are losing the opportunities of real understanding and emotional connections that music offers to us, while it gets more difficult to differentiate between an algorithm and a real person.
And if we go a step further; What does that mean for music, the industry, and listeners alike?
M. Ernst, 2025.
Add comment
Comments