Computer generation was first used in music composition by Alan Turing in 1951. Known for his work with World War II enigma code-breaking machines, Turing once predicted computers would “learn from experience.” His ideas and inventions eventually formed the basis for what we now know as artificial intelligence (AI). In recent years, AI has been creeping into the music and arts scene. This not only degrades creativity in the music industry — it also creates financial barriers for artists.
Many musicians are condemning AI use, and asking fans not to support AI-generated music. This April, more than 200 artists signed a letter against AI in music through the Artist Rights Alliance, including Stevie Wonder, Pearl Jam, Billie Eilish, Arkells, and Norah Jones. The letter states that AI is an “assault on human creativity,” and can “substantially dilute the royalty pools that are paid out to artists.” Although AI-generated music doesn’t get royalties, it still takes opportunities for royalties away from artists who don’t use AI.
Instead of sampling, which means incorporating portions of songs into new tracks — AI can generate “original” sounds using patterns from real songs. However, sampling usually involves consent. AI-generated music is essentially plagiarism of other artists’ sounds and styles. Some have used it to generate fake songs using someone else’s likeness, while others copy musicians’ styles and present them as their own. Despite the number of people condemning AI-generated music, a few artists — such as Canadian musician Grimes — are embracing it to supposedly support their music-making process. When it comes to music production, some professionals believe AI can be helpful in the sense of streamlining the process of finalizing audio engineering elements in the studio. They also argue AI can help with promotion and marketing. However, this still hinders originality and makes for an unfair industry.
Although AI-generated music doesn’t get royalties, it still takes opportunities for royalties away from artists who don’t use AI.
For new musicians who are trying to make a name for themselves in the industry, AI use gives them less of a chance to stand out and showcase their originality. Since AI can generate compositions faster than humans, it’s difficult for artists to compete and keep up with AI-generated songs. Artists who choose not to use AI during the promotion process are also at a financial disadvantage, as it physically takes longer to promote and market their work.
AI is already abundant in many technology sectors, but when it comes to art, it’s being taken too far. People create music because of their original ideas, the overall process, and the satisfaction of the final product. AI can’t replace the level of emotion expressed in an artist’s work. If it continues to take over the arts at this alarming rate, it will further degrade originality and put livelihoods at risk. To take a stance against AI, we should support musicians’ original works and boycott AI art in all forms — don’t buy into technological trends that plagiarize genuine creativity.
