Record company executives gathered in the back corner of an exclusive private club, drinking from crystal glasses, each containing a large square ice cube. On the table stood a 40-year-old bottle of Macallan, already two-thirds empty.
“Artists are so difficult,” the Briton complained. “They're finicky, unreliable, and refuse to believe that creativity should be turned on like a switch. I mean, how hard can that be?
Next up was a petite woman from Seoul who is responsible for much of the East Asian music market. “It's true,” she said, “and they're always whining about being treated poorly. “Streaming doesn’t pay” and “I need more money.” I never want to hear someone from my label complain about having to post something on social media every day. I mean, how hard is it to make every post go viral?”
The Sao Paulo resident pinched the bridge of his nose. “And the fans! They're so unpredictable and ungrateful when it comes to the music we give them. Can't they just eat it and shut up?”
There were several moments of silence before the American stood up. “Ladies and gentlemen, those were the bad old days. Thanks to artificial intelligence, we now have complete control over ALL music.” He raised his glass and everyone stood up.
“Congratulations everyone! We finally managed to get the artist out of the art!”
They clinked glasses so hard that two of them cracked.
A far-fetched dystopian vision of the music of the future? Or the shape of future events? I'd vote for the latter.
If you follow the music charts, you may have noticed the debut of someone named Xania Monet on the US Billboard radio airplay chart. She doesn't exist. She – it – became the first creation of artificial intelligence to hit the charts. I quote the press release:
“This announcement follows a string of impressive achievements for the virtual singer, who has quickly become one of the most talked-about names in the emerging AI music space. The historic milestone marks a defining moment for the intersection of technology and creativity, proving that digital art can achieve mainstream success alongside traditional talent.
“On social media, Ksenia continues to gain momentum with a rapidly growing following and active engagement across multiple platforms. Her visuals, storytelling, and evolving personality have sparked widespread discussion about the role of AI in music—not just as an instrument, but as a creative collaborator. Earlier this year, Ksenia inked a $3 million deal with Hallwood Media, further establishing her as one of the most valuable and visible AI artists today.
“Beyond her musical success, Xania's rise represents a shift in the way audiences connect with creators. Her presence on the Billboard Airplay Chart challenges long-held assumptions about music authenticity, while her massive online following highlights a new type of fan relationship built on curiosity, creativity and cultural dialogue.”
Receive daily national news
Get the day's top news, political, economic and current affairs headlines delivered to your inbox once a day.
Again, Xenia only exists as a soulless binary. She doesn't need food, water or sleep. She will never complain, get sick or die from a drug overdose. She will do whatever she is told without any resistance. And it makes money for its creators by taking attention away from the real artists.
Expect more from things like this. Last week, the world's largest major label, Universal Music, announced a landmark deal with Udio, an artificial intelligence company with software that creates full songs from text prompts. Universal filed a lawsuit against Udio, alleging that the company collected copyrighted materials to train its AI models by asking permission or paying someone for the privilege. Now they're on the same page, announcing a joint venture where they'll launch a “music creation, consumption and streaming” service sometime in 2026.
The announcement goes on to say: “In addition to the compensatory legal settlement, new recorded music licensing and publishing agreements will provide additional income opportunities for UMG artists and songwriters.” Are these allegations of copyright infringement? Fallen. Left. Poof.
And here it is: The world's largest record label will soon offer its artist to an artificial intelligence company so it can attract more defunct singers like Xania Monét. They claim that the artists involved in this training will be compensated, but in reality they are transferring human-created art to a robot, which could ultimately put human artists at risk of extinction, if not extinction.
Udio is not alone. What does this mean for Suno and other generative AI music platforms that have also been sued by labels including Universal? Will other labels follow the template created by Universal and Udio? What does this “licensing” look like? Which artists will agree and who will refuse?
Will publishers be able to opt out? If so, will they need the consent of their artists? Performing rights organizations, including Canada's SOCAN, announced last week they are all for one and one for all when it comes to recording music partially created by artificial intelligence.
In other words, they are preparing for an onslaught of creators who will use AI as a tool for making music. Hey, Ksenia may be a fake, but she—she—needs to pay. Or at least the people she is do.
What about music lovers? The vast majority of reviews and studies I have seen reflect This one where fans say human creativity is essential in the time of artificial intelligence. Here's a study of the Canadian music industry two years ago we discovered something similar.
But other studies (like this one) compare the emotional impact of music created by artificial intelligence and music composed by a human, and learn something very different. Researchers in Argentina asked 88 subjects to watch music videos from both humans (“human-created music,” or HCM) and artificially intelligent music generated from cues of varying complexity.
Using biometric data such as pupil dilation, they found that there was little difference in responses to HCM and AI. I quote: “Participants found the AI-generated music to be more arousing than HCM, while HCM was perceived as more familiar than both AI conditions.”
This is music (so to speak) to the ears of those who want to go down the path of AI-powered music creation.
And make no mistake. Attitudes towards music created by artificial intelligence are already changing. Fan engagement is driven by artificial intelligence. And don't be surprised if you hear more about ELIZA effect. This is a psychological situation where those who coexist with AI entities—chatbots, AI assistants, AI agents—become emotionally attached to these unreal “personalities.” This will only increase as more people turn to AI for casual communication, self-help therapy, romantic relationships and sex chats. It will be easy to become emotionally involved in the musical essence of artificial intelligence.
Musicians are already having a hard time and they feel very, very betrayed. Let me paraphrase what a musician I saw the other day on Threads said about the rise in popularity of AI-generated music: “I've spent years learning to play an instrument and honing my craft on stage and in the studio. You typed a few words into your phone. We're not the same.”
AI is already on its way to destroying musicians and the music business. Think about the implications for musical instrument sales, the existence of recording studios, and the people who teach music for a living at all levels. An entire class of creative people could be destroyed when something as human as music is taken over by machines.
My favorite view of AI and music is: “I want AI to wash my clothes so I can have more time to be creative.” We're already there. Why not go in this direction instead?
