Tom, thanks for a thought-provoking post. Your historical examples make a strong case for AI’s place in music. Betting against it probably would likely make me the guy in 1906 shorting the phonograph.
But what happens when polished songs and manufactured artists become limitless yet our attention doesn’t?
Verified human authorship could become more valuable. Helping a musician create is different from generating the song, singer, and backstory. I can enjoy a breakup song and still wonder whether anyone actually got dumped.
Vinyl’s renewed appeal offers a useful parallel. Convenience didn’t erase our appetite for a tangible connection to music. AI’s abundance could deepen our desire for a human one.
That means credible verification: who wrote it, who performed it, and where AI contributed. “Human-made” should be something listeners can trust, not just a sticker on the album cover.
The transition could be rough. Musicians may face greater competition for streams and pressure on publishing income. But those who sustain their craft and audience connection may eventually command a premium.
I’ve been digging deep on a business idea around this with a longtime music-industry friend. Once we have it dialed, I’d love to run our rough mix past your ears.
When AI can make endless music, will knowing a human made it become the thing worth paying for?
Tom! Loved the piece! Brevity is the soul of wit, and perhaps something uniquely human, or so I believe. AI is a wonderful tool that can help us get there faster, but the end result, much like a game of chess, is unique to each individual, even though we all begin with the same 64 squares and 32 pieces.
Here's a playful thought experiment: What if we applied the Ship of Theseus paradox to music? If an artist gradually replaced every element of a song with AI-generated components, one piece at a time, at what point would it stop being the artist's music and become AI's? Or does the artist's intent make it theirs regardless of how much AI contributed?
You raise an excellent point. I think we're not far from a time when Suno or other music AI will appear as a songwriter in the credits for a song- the ones we see on Spotify when you click on 'Song Credits' for your favorite track. Keeping the books and tracking what music industry people call 'splits' to measure who-did-what has always been tricky; it becomes harder and even more important in the age of AI.
At Boombox, a music collaboration company I co-founded, we've built this capability into musicians' essential workflow when they're creating a track together. Our ledger doesn't care if it's a human or an AI, as long as humans agree. :-)
And I certainly agree: musicians who sustain 'craft and connection' will successfully cross over.
But, what of the next generation? What about people *learning* to make music with AI, and not with instruments? How will they even know if they sound “like themselves”?
It’s easy to decry AI slop, but I feel like this post misses the point that as AI gets better, there will be less and less “slop.” Eventually, we will be to the point where we can tell AI “write a love song that will appeal to the masses,” and it will write a number 1 radio hit. And the people listening to it won’t care, so do artists really want to cede their jobs to AI like that?
Because every piece of technology has- in some way- increased the with ease which something is done. And that either makes something more widely accessible, or makes some workers redundant, or both. I’m not saying AI can’t be used for good aims, I’m saying it’s potential for harm likely outweighs the good. And people caving and going along with it because everyone else is doing it isn’t answering that question at all.
I agree that AI will get better and better, but as John Litz points out, craft and connection are the enduring difference-makers for musicians who successfully navigate the transition.
I have techie friends who like AI-generated music and listen to it while they code. They also drink Soylent for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. ;) As in all things, I guess we have to let people choose.
Tom, thanks for a thought-provoking post. Your historical examples make a strong case for AI’s place in music. Betting against it probably would likely make me the guy in 1906 shorting the phonograph.
But what happens when polished songs and manufactured artists become limitless yet our attention doesn’t?
Verified human authorship could become more valuable. Helping a musician create is different from generating the song, singer, and backstory. I can enjoy a breakup song and still wonder whether anyone actually got dumped.
Vinyl’s renewed appeal offers a useful parallel. Convenience didn’t erase our appetite for a tangible connection to music. AI’s abundance could deepen our desire for a human one.
That means credible verification: who wrote it, who performed it, and where AI contributed. “Human-made” should be something listeners can trust, not just a sticker on the album cover.
The transition could be rough. Musicians may face greater competition for streams and pressure on publishing income. But those who sustain their craft and audience connection may eventually command a premium.
I’ve been digging deep on a business idea around this with a longtime music-industry friend. Once we have it dialed, I’d love to run our rough mix past your ears.
When AI can make endless music, will knowing a human made it become the thing worth paying for?
What is abundant becomes cheap (AI-generated music). What is scarce, becomes more treasured (authentically human sound and experience).
Tom! Loved the piece! Brevity is the soul of wit, and perhaps something uniquely human, or so I believe. AI is a wonderful tool that can help us get there faster, but the end result, much like a game of chess, is unique to each individual, even though we all begin with the same 64 squares and 32 pieces.
Here's a playful thought experiment: What if we applied the Ship of Theseus paradox to music? If an artist gradually replaced every element of a song with AI-generated components, one piece at a time, at what point would it stop being the artist's music and become AI's? Or does the artist's intent make it theirs regardless of how much AI contributed?
You raise an excellent point. I think we're not far from a time when Suno or other music AI will appear as a songwriter in the credits for a song- the ones we see on Spotify when you click on 'Song Credits' for your favorite track. Keeping the books and tracking what music industry people call 'splits' to measure who-did-what has always been tricky; it becomes harder and even more important in the age of AI.
At Boombox, a music collaboration company I co-founded, we've built this capability into musicians' essential workflow when they're creating a track together. Our ledger doesn't care if it's a human or an AI, as long as humans agree. :-)
And I certainly agree: musicians who sustain 'craft and connection' will successfully cross over.
But, what of the next generation? What about people *learning* to make music with AI, and not with instruments? How will they even know if they sound “like themselves”?
It’s easy to decry AI slop, but I feel like this post misses the point that as AI gets better, there will be less and less “slop.” Eventually, we will be to the point where we can tell AI “write a love song that will appeal to the masses,” and it will write a number 1 radio hit. And the people listening to it won’t care, so do artists really want to cede their jobs to AI like that?
Because every piece of technology has- in some way- increased the with ease which something is done. And that either makes something more widely accessible, or makes some workers redundant, or both. I’m not saying AI can’t be used for good aims, I’m saying it’s potential for harm likely outweighs the good. And people caving and going along with it because everyone else is doing it isn’t answering that question at all.
I agree that AI will get better and better, but as John Litz points out, craft and connection are the enduring difference-makers for musicians who successfully navigate the transition.
I have techie friends who like AI-generated music and listen to it while they code. They also drink Soylent for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. ;) As in all things, I guess we have to let people choose.