Blog Music Industry

Why the music industry needs to learn to live with AI

Cover image for Why the music industry needs to learn to live with AI

Photo: Image made with Canva Pro

Photo of Mark Mulligan
by Mark Mulligan

If life is a party, AI gate crashed it in 2025. With financial losses rising even more quickly than critical voices, AI will not find things quite so easy in 2026. You don’t have to look very far to find alarm bells being rung. Deutsche bank said of OpenAI’s $143 billion cumulative negative cash flow, “No startup in history has operated with losses on anything approaching this scale” (per Adweek).

Meanwhile, at the World Economic Forum, Microsoft’s Satya Nadella said that we must “do something useful” or lose “social permission” for the vast quantities of electricity it requires. So much of the financial system is vested in AI’s success that a bubble burst akin to the dot-com era is possible. However, with an MIT report claiming 95% of businesses are getting “zero return” from AI investments, something is going to have to change.

This is the state of AI at the start of 2026 – but it is not the state of music AI. Music is emerging as a case study of where AI is actually delivering (and getting better by the day). This means that everyone in the music industry needs to start thinking about how to co-exist with AI, whether they like it or not.

The impact of generative AI on music creation

The music creator economy may be the canary in the coal mine for AI’s impact on music. Leading company Native Instruments just announced that it is entering preliminary insolvency (per Music Radar). Native Instruments make beautiful software, hardware, and sounds that appeal most to established, successful music creators – creators that have spent years honing their craft. What it doesn’t do so well is cater for the emerging generation of younger creators that want to go to 0-100 in a millisecond.

This new breed of creators want making good music to be as easy as taking good photos and videos on their phones. A growing number see making music as personal entertainment rather than chasing dreams of multi-platinum success. It is a dynamic we explore in our brand new report: Music creator survey | Creation: Rise of the new breed.

AI did not create this dynamic but it did supercharge it. If music software democratised the means of production, AI has set it free. Thom York sang “anyone can play guitar” but anyone who has tried  (as I have done since I was five) will tell you that you have to spend a lot of time being bad before you are good. This is the case with all instruments. Gen AI, however, takes away being-bad-to-be-good. Anyone can write a text prompt.

The result is a whole new wave of people making music – and the number paying do so is rising rapidly. In 2025, gen AI music users were already 10% of all music creators, and the number paying to create with AI doubled. Meanwhile the number of people buying traditional music software fell in both 2024 and 2025, as did revenues. This indicates that not only are new creators flowing in, established creators are shifting activity and spend to AI too.

One of the reasons is that gen AI music is improving. While licensing disputes roll on, gen AI has learned from the best chord progressions, vocal performances, arrangements, etc., that music has to offer and – crucially – what consumers do with that. The constraint on quality was always going to be computation technique, not innate capability.

Industry stakeholders can make the AI slop argument, and music critics can claim that they can identify even the best AI songs as not being made by humans. But that misses the point. AI is for the masses, both on the creation side and the consumption side.

Tracks on Suno can sound convincing enough to the average listener. AI artists like Sienna Rose command millions of Spotify listeners, while earlier this month ‘Jag vet, du är inte min’ hit the top of the Swedish charts only to be banned for being AI (per the BBC). AI is not going to replace human content, but it will increasingly displace it.

AI is here to stay in music

The music industry needs to learn not just where AI fits in it, but where it fits in AI. This requires work from the industry, such as creating ‘lanes’ for AI as we argued in our Future of music streaming report. However, it also requires artists to put in work too.

Last year, YouTube-first music creator Mary Spender laid bare the challenge:

First it was about gigs and selling CDs, then it was streams, then it was about content, now it is something else entirely.

Her solution? To use her YouTube channel as her ‘proof of work’, the thing that communicates the humanness of her music. As this piece from It’s Nice That lays out, this is an approach being pursued throughout the creative industries.

Gen AI music enters 2026 of the back of two years of hockey stick growth. The coming 12 months will likely be more of the same. None of this is to suggest that creators and rightsholders should simply sit back and let unlicensed activity continue unabated – those battles still need to be fought. But, just as happened with music piracy, consumer behaviour is accelerating regardless.

Some rightsholders are already leaning into AI’s capabilities – as explained by UMG’s Jon Dworkin at MusicAlly’s great Connect conference. Others are resisting with every effort they can muster. Neither approach is more right or wrong than the other. Part of carving out a role is deciding whether you want to be part of or apart from. Whatever your choice, music AI is not going away – at least not anytime soon.

There is a comment on this post, add your opinion.

Newsletter

Trending

Add your comment

Comments

Joe
TLDR: There are other choices for our industry, don't let the VC hype merchants make you believe otherwise. For the sake of our kids, don’t support this narrative that one of the most rewarding things in life (learning, and yes, struggling with, an instrument) is equivalent to surrendering to an autocomplete machine. The longer version: I've always found Midia to be pretty nuanced and informative, but this take...ain't. 1. You rightly point out that the ROI of generative AI in the office world hasn't delivered. The economy rests on faith in hallucinating bots "curing cancer" when all they've created is increasingly undifferentiated slop. If you can understand that this tech is a fool's errand in the enterprise productivity world, why would it be any different for the uniquely human pursuit of music? What has generative "music" delivered other than our generation's greatest theft in the guise of innovation? 2. "This means that everyone in the music industry needs to start thinking about how to co-exist with AI, whether they like it or not." No, there are far more paths than this false dichotomy. Another option? Supporting the Bandcamps, Pinterests, etc whose users demand freedom from slop. You'll see the value of catalogues pre 2020s grow over time as listeners will know this was definitively created by a person, not a thieving engine. AI has a place in music, but let it be a connector of humans to humans, not a supplanter. 3. "If music software democratised the means of production, AI has set it free. Thom York sang “anyone can play guitar” but anyone who has tried (as I have done since I was five) will tell you that you have to spend a lot of time being bad before you are good. This is the case with all instruments. Gen AI, however, takes away being-bad-to-be-good. Anyone can write a text prompt." This is the same drivel spouted by Suno's CEO...the words we choose here are very important. You really believe typing into a text box and surrendering your voice to a copy/paste machine is “good” creation? And no, this isn't like the drum machine or past innovations. This line of thinking renders the artist as a replaceable cog who's simply a vehicle for a prompt. Do you really think D'Angelo's arduous toils over decades to come up with some of the world's best 3 albums are the equivalent of typing "soul joint, 96 bpm?” The difference deserves respect, and real fans know the difference.
Mark Mulligan
Here's the interesting thing: I agree with all of your points: 1 - ROI of AI hasn't delivered and wider AI applications are falling very, very short in many instances 2 - Human music has a place in humans' hearts and it should be a connector for humans to humans, not a supplanter 3 - A simple text prompt isn't creation And you'll note that my post actually stated both your first two points. My post was not about accepting whether AI is right or wrong, but accepting that it is here and will get bigger before litigation or legislation catch up. So, we need to learn how to co-exist, even if some choose combating as co-existing. On item #3 this is where things get REALLY subjective. Here's a thought exercise: - A young kid learning clarinet at school, simply learning how to place fingers and purse lips, but not learning how to express or compose, and not wanting to because they hate learning the instrument mum and dad forced her to. Is this creation? - A teenager uses Splice's CoSo, taking every recommendation the app makes to build a track entirely out of samples. Is this creation? - A late 80s hardcore producer takes the amen break, speeds it up, throws on a pre-installed bass loop from a synth and adds a vocal loop from a record (without copyright clearance). Is this creation? Each of those examples, you could make a strong argument for and against them being creation. It is like arguing whether an installation of an unmade bed in an art gallery is art or not. Some would violently argue yes, some equally as violently no. Do I personally believe writing a single text prompt is creation. No. But that doesn't stop those who do it believing it is creation, particularly for those for whom this is the first time they have ever 'created' music. But just as with that kid learning to play clarinet, a single line text prompt is the rudimentary entry point. As gen AI 'creators' get more sophisticated, so do their prompts, becoming multilayered, defining arrangement, lyrical content, feel, instrumentation etc. And they start using other AI tools to do different parts of their new workflow. Humming a melody into a vocal app and entering lyrics to create vocals etc. And this is where AI gets really interesting. For all of the mass consumerisation of music making, it widens the funnel for creation as a whole. More people start to learn to produce, to write, to play, to perform. in fact, I'd argue there will be a much higher conversion rate to happy musicians from gen AI than from school clarinet lessons!