What would you do if you found out your favorite band was AI? Some may scoff and shrug their shoulders, while others may opt for man-made creations crafted by human, talented artists. No matter how you stand on the topic, one thing is clearer than anything else– AI is making its way into the music industry at an alarmingly fast rate. Bordering on the edge of fiction and reality, you’d think AI musicians would be something only found in a Black Mirror episode. However, programs like ChatGPT, Suno AI, and Udio make it possible to generate an entire song with a click of a button. At first glance, this may seem revolutionary, allowing people without musical experience or knowledge to create something beautiful. Yet, on a deeper level, this “technological advancement” targets hardworking artists, musicians, and even listeners. AI presents a significant threat to the music industry and could potentially have detrimental effects on musicians, label executives, and audiences.
The spark that ignited the surge of AI-generated music occurred in June 2025, when a mysterious band began appearing on sponsored Spotify playlists. The Velvet Sundown circulated across popular 60’s rock playlists, featured among rock and roll legends like Led Zeppelin and Fleetwood Mac. Despite releasing two albums on the same day and having little to no monthly listeners, the band strangely skyrocketed in popularity, earning over four million listens on their song, “Dust on the Wind.” Because of the band’s sudden boost in popularity, speculation arose among listeners. Was The Velvet Sundown an industry plant? Did Spotify sponsor the band to profit at the musicians’ expense? The band confirmed the worst. According to the band’s Spotify bio, they describe themselves as “a synthetic music project guided by human creative direction, and composed, voiced, and visualized with the support of artificial intelligence.” However, the damage had already been done. The Velvet Sundown began a domino effect of AI-generated music all across the internet.
More often than not, these AI-generated personalities serve as a vessel for their creators’ own desires. In September 2025, poet Tanisha Jones crafted her AI personality, Xania Monet, in an attempt to transform her poetry into song. Her song, “How Was I Supposed To Know?” reached number 30 on Billboard’s adult R&B Airplay chart. In an even more alarming turn of events, Monet was “signed” to a three-million-dollar deal by former Interscope Records executive Neil Jacobson. Jacobson has outwardly endorsed the usage of AI in music, signing music engineer Imoliver, solely for his use of AI. Jacobson spoke out in Ethan Millman of The Hollywood Reporter’s article, “Hallwood Inks First of Its Kind Record Deal With an ‘AI Music Designer’”, stating that, “Imoliver represents the future of our medium. He’s a music designer who stands at the intersection of craftwork and taste.” Signing AI personalities to record deals is incredibly harmful to the industry. By offering massive opportunities to unimaginative and mindless creators, you leave hardworking musicians in the dust.
AI musicians have exceeded the point at which streaming services enable this behavior. Spotify, infamous for its unfair practices toward artists and its AI integration in its app, has been very adamant about allowing AI artists to remain on its platform. According to the post “Spotify Strengthens AI Protections for Artists, Songwriters, and Producers” on newsroom.spotify.com, Spotify claims, “At its best, AI is unlocking incredible new ways for artists to create music and for listeners to discover it. At its worst, AI can be used by bad actors and content farms to confuse or deceive listeners, push ‘slop’ into the ecosystem, and interfere with authentic artists working to build their careers.” What the company refuses to understand is that the ‘best of it’ is, in reality, the worst. AI offers nothing of importance in creative spaces. Spotify’s AI tools, like the playlist generator and the DJ, do nothing but waste resources. According to the Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI), data centers consume 50,000 million gallons of water per day. On average, five prompts equate to a bottle of water. For Spotify to be pushing these AI-powered appliances into the faces of listeners and enabling AI to exist on its platform is a complete mockery of the artists who brought the company to its multi-billion dollar status.
For years, music has been my lifeline. There are so many extraordinary creatives in the world who can create life with only a melody. It pains me to see people trying to grasp the strength one needs to make something extraordinary. Can AI generate a melody, lyrics, and a title in a few seconds? Sure. Can AI replicate the hardships one has to go through to create? Will it be able to replace the lyrical genius of hip-hop, the catchiness of pop music, or the integrity of punk? Just because AI is fast and efficient does not mean that it’s ethical. It is a complete disgrace to art to see AI placed in these spaces. In the next few years, we may see AI music becoming much more frequent on streaming services, movies, and TV- even AI concerts could emerge from this. However, there is a silver lining to all of this. Thousands of musicians have spoken out against AI amidst growing concerns about its involvement in creative industries. Hundreds of talented artists and passionate listeners have signed a petition created by the Artists Rights Alliance, which opposes AI companies being trained using their music. While streaming services may shove AI down our throats from now on, it’s important to unite against our common enemy. Music is beautiful. Music is human.