tech
Page: 31
NASHVILLE — Ahead of the 2024 Music Biz conference, Music Business Association president Portia Sabin predicted that artificial intelligence would be the most hotly-discussed topic.
“AI is the big one that everyone’s talking about,” she told Billboard.
That premonition proved true during the current conference (held in Nashville May 13-16), as dozens of speakers across the spectrum of music, tech, legal and more discussed AI’s uncertain future in the space, and its current impact on the industry.
One such panel was “How AI and Tech Are Shaping the Business of Music” on Monday (May 13). Moderated by Elizabeth Brooks, managing partner at Better Angels Venture, the panelists—head of artist marketing and digital strategy at Friends At Work, Jeremy Gruber; senior vp of product and technology at MAX, Jeff Rosenfeld; MADKAT founder Maddy Sundquist; and singer-songwriter Stephen Day — discussed the emergence of AI in music, some of the concerns surrounding its potential impact on artist creativity, and how artists can maintain an authentic connection to their fans.
Trending on Billboard
As the sole artist on the panel, Day kicked off the AI portion of the discussion and countered that, despite the recent uptick in the use of generative AI in popular music — most recently with Drake on “Taylor Made Freestyle,” the diss track in which he uses AI to recreate Snoop Dogg and the late Tupac Shakur’s voices, which has since been taken down after the Shakur estate threatened to take legal action — he’s not concerned about generative AI’s emergence. “Overall, I’m not really scared about it because technology has always advanced,” he said. “The human with the heart and the soul is what makes it important.”
Rosenfeld agreed, adding that “technology continually upends the business of music,” pointing to social media as an example of something that changed digital marketing strategies for artists and labels. One group that could be at risk though, he said, are artists that people don’t have a direct connection with, like film/TV composers. “It’s the personal connection [that fans are after]. It is the person and their story behind the music that people relate to,” he said. “And that’s why it’s important to have a relationship with your fans.”
Rosenfeld isn’t the first exec to note that risk for artists who make instrumental music. In a 2023 Billboard story, Oleg Stavitsky, co-founder/CEO of AI-driven functional sound company Endel, pointed to “functional music” (that is, a type of audio “not designed for conscious listening”) as an area of focus for their firm. While the company isn’t in the business of making hits, it’s focused on making music that promotes sleep or relaxation (lo-fi music, ambient electronics, etc.) with help from AI tools. Another company, LifeScore, which uses AI to “create unique, real-time soundtracks for every journey,” recruited James Blake to create an AI ambient soundtrack titled Wind Down.
While that’s a threat to that corner of the market, the panelists were largely optimistic, albeit cautiously, about AI’s future impact.
“AI is not our overlord today,” Brooks said. Added Rosenfeld, “It’s enabled small businesses to expand… It’s destabilizing, but at the same time empowering.”
At a separate panel on Wednesday (May 15) titled “How AI Is Changing the Way We Market, Promote & Sell Music,” the speakers also had a positive outlook on AI in the industry. Moderated by co-founder and CEO of 24/7 Artists, Yudu Gray, Jr., the panel featured chief product officer of SymphonyOS, Chuka Chase; head of communications & creator insights at BandLab Technologies, Dani Deahl; and Visionary Rising founder LaTecia Johnson.
Chase said that his company has used AI to streamline the process of finding and growing an audience for artists. One way has been to use AI to build a setlist for an emerging artist’s first tour. Chase explained that his team was able to harness AI by sending out emails and putting out polls in order to gain insight into what that artist should perform in each city. “We went into the CRM and blasted emails to put out polls, a microsite asking what songs [that artist] should perform. After a couple hours we got around 20,000 responses,” he said, adding that he could then plug that data into GPT and make a setlist based on the most-requested songs.
For Deahl, who’s also a DJ and music producer, AI has helped with delegating various administrative tasks. “One of the biggest hurdles that artists now have to overcome is they don’t have to just worry about the creative components… They have to worry about all these different facets of their business.” She argues that any tool that gives her the ability to “cut out the BS” and give her the time to focus on the creative process is the best way to help her amplify her work. “Not every artist is built to be an entrepreneur,” she said.
Several companies are beginning to launch similar “AI assistants” for these kinds of admin roles. Last month, for example, Venice Music launched a new tool called Co-Manager “to educate artists on the business and marketing of music, so artists can spend more time focused on their creative vision,” Suzy Ryoo, co-founder and president of the company, said in a statement at the time. The idea is to, as Deahl said, give artists more time to be artists.
To that end, as AI tools become more prominent, the humans on an artist’s team are now more crucial than ever. While AI tools perhaps shrink the size of an artist’s team due to their functionality, Deahl doesn’t envision a world in which human roles are fully replaced. “I don’t worry about replacement when it comes to the people I engage with,” she said. “It would be a really lonely road for me as an artist if the only things that I relied on were AI chatbots or tools that tell me what my strategy should be. I need human feedback.”
Sony Music warned tech companies not to mine its recordings, compositions, lyrics and more “for any purposes, including in relation to training, developing, or commercializing any [artificial intelligence] system,” in a declaration published on the company’s website on Thursday (May 16).
In addition, according to a letter obtained by Billboard, Sony Music is in the process of reaching out to hundreds of companies developing generative AI tech, as well as streaming services, to drive home this message directly.
The pointed letter notes that “unauthorized use of SMG Content in the training, development or commercialization of AI systems deprives SMG Companies and SMG Talent of control over and appropriate compensation for the uses of SMG Content, conflicts with the normal exploitation of those works, unreasonably prejudices our legitimate interests, and infringes our intellectual property and other rights.”
Trending on Billboard
GenAI models require “training” — “a computational process of deconstructing existing works for the purpose of modeling mathematically how [they] work,” as Google explained last year in comments to the U.S. Copyright Office in October. “By taking existing works apart, the algorithm develops a capacity to infer how new ones should be put together.” Through inference, these models eventually can generate credible-sounding hip-hop beats, for example.
Whether a company needs permission before undertaking the training process on copyrighted works is already the subject of a fierce debate, leading to lawsuits in several industries. In October, Universal Music Group (UMG) was among the music companies that sued AI startup Anthropic, alleging that “in the process of building and operating AI models, [the company] unlawfully copies and disseminates vast amounts of copyrighted works.”
Although these cases will likely set precedent for AI training practices in the U.S., the courts typically move at a glacial pace. In the meantime, some technology companies seem set on training their genAI tools on large troves of recordings without permission.
“Based on recent Copyright Office filings it is clear that the technology industry and speculative financial investors would like governments to believe in a very distorted view of copyright,” Dennis Kooker, Sony Music’s president of global digital business, said during the Artificial Intelligence Insight Forum in Washington, D.C. in November. “One in which music is considered fair use for training purposes and in which certain companies are permitted to appropriate the entire value produced by the creative sector without permission, and to build huge businesses based on it without paying anything to the creators concerned.”
While Kooker was adamant during his testimony that training for genAI music tools “cannot be without consent, credit and compensation to the artists and rightsholders,” he also pointed out that Sony has “roughly 200 active conversations taking place with start-ups and established players about building new products and developing new tools.”
“These discussions range from tools for creative or marketing assistance, to tools that potentially give us the ability to better protect artist content or find it when used in an unauthorized fashion, to brand new products that have never been launched before,” he continued.
Sony’s letter to genAI companies this week ended on a similar note: “We invite you to engage with us and the music industry stakeholders we represent to explore how your AI Act copyright policy may be developed in a manner that ensures our and SMG Talent’s rights are respected.”
HipHopWired Featured Video
CLOSE
Source: Jeff Fusco / Getty / Comcast
We didn’t ask for it, but another cable-like streaming bundle is coming.
Comcast chief Brian Roberts announced a new three-way bundle featuring Peacock, Netflix, and Apple TV+ is coming at a reduced price.
Speaking Tuesday at MoffettNathanson’s 2024 Media, Internet, and Communications Conference in New York, Roberts said the new package will be called the StreamSaver bundle and will be available to all Comcast broadband and TV customers.
Without revealing many details, Roberts said that Peacock, Netflix, and Apple TV+ will “come at a vastly reduced price to anything in the market today.”
According to Roberts, the goal of this new bundle is to “add value to consumers” and, at the same time, “take some of the dollars out of” the other streaming companies’ businesses.
“We’ve been bundling video successfully and creatively for 60 years, and so this is the latest iteration of that,” Roberts said. “I think this will be a pretty compelling package.”
Social Media Says The Bundle Is Basically Cable TV
The new bundle’s reception isn’t met with the excitement Roberts hoped for. Most users on X, formerly Twitter, are basically saying this is just cable television, which many have cut their cord for, replacing it with streaming platforms.
“let me just go ahead and get a landline too,” one person on X wrote in response to the announcment.
Another user wrote, “Cable is back baby! (Without the same residuals for actors though).
One user pointed out this move could be out of desperation because the streamers are not making as much money as they used to.
“They are all folding. Individually, each business model cannot sustain itself. When you see mergers like this happen, it’s because they are hemorrhaging money. They merge not to become a superpower but to save each other,” the post on X read.
Welp.
You can see more reactions in the gallery below.
1. Exactly
3. Too damn much
5. Basically
For the last two years, I’ve poured my angst, joy, wonder and grief into a musical project called Current Dissonance.
I read the news voraciously, and every few days, a story resonates with particular thunder. I sit with that story in mind, as inspiration and intention, and then record a piece of solo piano music, composed on the spot, in reaction. Most often, Current Dissonance subscribers receive the new track within minutes of its completion.
I love engaging with this project. It’s become a cathartic practice and wordless diary, connective tissue when so much around us seems to be fracturing, something full of guts and blood and soul that feels deeply personal and unapologetically human.
Given all that, I find it both thrilling and jarring that AI music creation has advanced to a point where well-crafted algorithms could largely take my place as the brain, heart and fingers behind this project.
At its core, the fusion of AI and music creation isn’t new, and its evolution from tweaky curiosity to full-on cultural juggernaut has been fascinating to watch. My first exposure came via Digital Audio Workstations (DAWs) — the complex software suites used to produce nearly all new music. Years ago, I experimented with an early AI feature that allowed virtual drummers to bang out rudimentary grooves tailored to my songs-in-progress; another utility let me stretch and distort audio samples in subtle or grotesque ways. Later, I wrote coverage of a startup that used machine learning to auto-generate soundtracks for video.
Trending on Billboard
Some of those legacy AI utilities felt promising but imperfect, others inelegant to the point of unusability. But they all showed the potential of what was to come. And it’s not hard to see that what was coming has now arrived — with the force of a freight train.
Welcome To The New A(I)ge
Examples of AI’s growth spurt permeate the music world. For cringe-worthy fun, check out There I Ruined It, where AI Simon & Garfunkel sing lyrics from “Baby Got Back” and “My Humps” to the melody of “Sound of Silence.” Then visit Suno, where single-sentence prompts yield remarkably realistic songs — fully-produced, with customized lyrics — in electronica, folk, metal and beyond. Open up Logic Pro and hear just how big and vivid its AI mastering utility can make a track sound in seconds. These developments are just the overture, and there’s no technical reason why a vast array of musical projects — including my own — couldn’t be AI-ified in the movements to come.
For example, I’ve created 154 short piano pieces for Current Dissonance, as of the writing of this article. Hours more of my piano work are publicly accessible. An AI model could be trained on those recordings to look for patterns in the notes I play, the chord voicings I choose, the ways I modulate volume and manipulate rhythms — all the subtle choices that make me sound like me, as opposed to anyone else sitting at a piano.
The algorithm would also need to learn the relationship between each Current Dissonance movement and the news article it reinterprets, building a map of correlations between facets of the written story and recorded music. Do Locrian-mode motifs in 7/8 permeate my playing when I’m reflecting on South Asian politics — and are C#s twice as likely to appear when I reimagine headlines that are less than four words long? I have no idea, but a well-trained AI model would parse those potential patterns and more.
In the end, my hypothetical AI Current Dissonance would function like Suno does for popular music formats. To hear a Michael Gallant-style piano reaction to anything, type in your prompt and see what erupts.
While this may sound like a daydream, the key technical bedrock exists right now, or will exist soon. Following a similar development pathway, I doubt it’ll be long before we can also hear how Tchaikovsky might have reacted symphonically to war in Ukraine, or how McCoy Tyner could have soloed over “Vampire,” “Believer,” or any other tune written after his death. Elvis Presley reimagining Elvis Costello, Billie Holiday reinterpreting Billie Eilish, John Philip Sousa composing marches to honor nations that didn’t exist when he did — the possibilities are stunning.
But where does all of this innovation leave today’s music professionals?
Old Theme, New Variations
Recent conversations with fellow music-makers have yielded gallows humor, dark jokes about obsolescence at the hands of the robots — but also a sense of resilience, the feeling that we’ve heard this tune before.
Take for example the advancement of synthesizer technology, which has certainly constricted market demand for musicians who make their living playing in recording sessions. And the ubiquitousness of affordable, powerful DAWs like Pro Tools, Ableton Live and GarageBand has snuffed out a generation of commercial studios and their engineers’ careers. Those losses are real and devastating, but they’re only part of the story.
Inventing, programming and performing with synthesizers has become a thriving musical specialty of its own, creating new professional opportunities amidst ashes of the old. The same can be said for the brilliant minds who make every new bit of music software even more amazing. And democratized music production due to GarageBand and its ilk has made possible the global ascent of DIY artists who could never have afforded to work in traditional studios.
As the duality of loss and regrowth takes hold in the AI era, everyone involved in music must amplify the latter, while keeping the former as muted as possible. There are key steps that communities and countries alike can take to ensure that AI music technology boosts existing creators and inspires new ones — that it enhances human creativity more than it cuts us down.
Shedding for the Future
The biggest error music-makers can commit is pretending that nothing will change. When it comes to AI, willful ignorance will lead to forced irrelevance. Let’s avoid that future.
Instead, I encourage all music-makers to learn as much about AI music technology as possible. These tools are not secret weapons, siloed away for the rich and privileged; with an internet connection and a few hours, any music-maker can gain at least a high-level look at what’s going on. It’s incumbent on all of us to learn the landscape, learn the tools and see how they can make our human music-making better.
Music-makers must also double down on human connections. For artists with followings large or small, this means rededicating ourselves to building meaningful relationships with audiences, strengthening the human connection that AI can only approximate. Taking time to greet listeners at each performance, making space to bond with superfans — just as in-person concerts will grow in meaning as fiction and reality become increasingly indistinguishable in the digital world, so will the importance of face-to-face conversations, handshakes and high-fives, hugs between artists and those who see beauty in their music.
For music-makers who spend their time in studio settings, reinforcing connections with clients and collaborators will also be key. While I currently rely on AI-fueled music tools in some contexts, I cherish every opportunity to team up with fellow humans, because I’m blessed to work with great people who elevate and inspire me. That’s another vital connection that AI cannot now — or hopefully ever — replace.
It Takes a Movement
Music-makers, those who support them in commerce and industry, and those who weave music into their lives as listeners — all of us must help build a movement that cherishes human creativity lifted through technology.
There’s already hard evidence that protecting artists’ digital integrity is an all-too-rare consensus issue within American politics; check out Tennessee’s bipartisan ELVIS Act for more. Music-makers in any community can push their local and national leaders to ride Tennessee’s momentum and reproduce its successes against AI abuse. As a voting member of the Recording Academy, I’m proud of the organization’s pro-human activism efforts when it comes to federal copyright law and other vital issues. Every music-related entity should make noise in favor of similar protections.
Granted, even the smartest laws will only go so far. AI music technology is so accessible that trolls and bad actors will likely be able to manipulate musicians’ voices, privately and anonymously, without suffering real consequences — a dynamic unlikely to change anytime soon. But the more our culture brands such exploitative recordings as tasteless and taboo, the better. We cultivate respect for human creators when we marginalize the consumption of non-consensual, AI-smelted musical plastic.
Consent is one key; control is another. While industry executives, music-makers of all shapes and flavors, influencers and lawmakers must collectively insist that musicians remain masters of their own voices, I recommend we go further by empowering artists themselves to take the lead.
It would be brilliant, and fair, for Madonna or Janelle Monáe, Juanes or Kendrick Lamar, to release interactive AI albums that they, the artists, control. Such properties could allow fans to create custom AI tracks from raw material exclusively recorded for that purpose. Under no circumstances should AI assets be leveraged for any use without the explicit permission — and compensation — of the humans responsible for the music on which those algorithms were trained.
…And I Feel Fine
In the face of AI’s explosion, we must remember to stay curious, hungry and optimistic. Investors, inventors and tech companies must look beyond novelty song creation as the technology’s highest musical goal; I can’t imagine how far AI will go when applied to creating new instruments, for example. Much of the music I make is improvisational, formed in my brain milliseconds before it’s realized by my fingers. How amazing would it be to jam with live band members — as well as an AI algorithm trained to create instant orchestrations, in real time as I play, using a never-before-heard chimera of Les Paul overdrive, volcanic glass vibraphone and a grizzly bear roaring?
AI presents massive challenges to human creators of any sort, but if we proceed with thoughtfulness and respect, new innovations will lift music-making communities everywhere. I for one will be thrilled to learn who the first Beethoven, Beyoncé and Robert Johnson of the AI era will be, and to hear the masterpieces they create.
Michael Gallant is a musician, composer, producer, and writer living in New York City.
A bipartisan group of four senators led by Majority Leader Chuck Schumer is recommending that Congress spend at least $32 billion over the next three years to develop artificial intelligence and place safeguards around it, writing in a new report released Wednesday that the U.S. needs to “harness the opportunities and address the risks” of the quickly developing technology.
The group of two Democrats and two Republicans said in an interview Tuesday that while they sometimes disagreed on the best paths forward, it was imperative to find consensus with the technology taking off and other countries like China investing heavily in its development. They settled on a raft of broad policy recommendations that were included in their 33-page report.
Trending on Billboard
While any legislation related to AI will be difficult to pass, especially in an election year and in a divided Congress, the senators said that regulation and incentives for innovation are urgently needed.
“It’s complicated, it’s difficult, but we can’t afford to put our head in the sand,” said Schumer, D-N.Y., who convened the group last year after AI chatbot ChatGPT entered the marketplace and showed that it could in many ways mimic human behavior.
The group recommends in the report that Congress draft “emergency” spending legislation to boost U.S. investments in artificial intelligence, including new research and development and new testing standards to try and understand the potential harms of the technology. The group also recommended new requirements for transparency as artificial intelligence products are rolled out and that studies be conducted into the potential impact of AI on jobs and the U.S. workforce.
Republican Sen. Mike Rounds, a member of the group, said the money would be well spent not only to compete with other countries who are racing into the AI space but also to improve Americans’ quality of life — supporting technology that could help cure some cancers or chronic illnesses, he said, or improvements in weapons systems could help the country avoid a war.
“This is a time in which the dollars we put into this particular investment will pay dividends for the taxpayers of this country long term,” he said.
The group came together a year ago after Schumer made the issue a priority — an unusual posture for a majority leader — and brought in Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, Republican Sen. Todd Young of Indiana and Rounds of South Dakota.
As the four senators began meeting with tech executives and experts, Schumer said in a speech over the summer that the rapid growth of artificial intelligence tools was a “moment of revolution” and that the government must act quickly to regulate companies that are developing it.
Young said the development of ChatGPT, along with other similar models, made them realize that “we’re going to have to figure out collectively as an institution” how to deal with the technology.
“In the same breath that people marveled at the possibilities of just that one generative AI platform, they began to hypothesize about future risks that might be associated with future developments of artificial intelligence,” Young said.
While passing legislation will be tough, the group’s recommendations lay out the first comprehensive road map on an issue that is complex and has little precedent for consideration in Congress. The group spent almost a year compiling the list of policy suggestions after talking privately and publicly to a range of technology companies and other stakeholders, including in eight forums to which the entire Senate was invited.
The first forum in September included Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and owner of X, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg, former Microsoft CEO Bill Gates and Google CEO Sundar Pichai.
Schumer said after the private meeting that he had asked everyone in the room — including almost two dozen tech executives, advocates and skeptics — whether government should have a role in the oversight of artificial intelligence, and “every single person raised their hand.”
The four senators are pitching their recommendations to Senate committees, which are then tasked with reviewing them and trying to figure out what is possible. The Senate Rules Committee is already moving forward with legislation, voting on Wednesday on three bills that would ban deceptive AI content used to influence federal elections, require AI disclaimers on political ads and create voluntary guidelines for state election offices that oversee candidates.
Schumer, who controls the Senate’s schedule, said those election bills were among the chamber’s “highest priorities” this year. He also said he planned to sit down with House Speaker Mike Johnson, who has expressed interest in looking at AI policy but has not said how he would do that.
Some experts warn that the U.S. is behind many other countries on the issue, including the EU which took the lead in March when they gave final approval to a sweeping new law governing artificial intelligence in the 27-nation bloc. Europe’s AI Act sets tighter rules for the AI products and services deemed to pose the highest risks, such as in medicine, critical infrastructure or policing. But it also includes provisions regulating a new class of generative AI systems like ChatGPT that have rapidly advanced in recent years.
“It’s time for Congress to act,” said Alexandra Reeve Givens, CEO of the Center for Democracy & Technology. “It’s not enough to focus on investment and innovation. We need guardrails to ensure the responsible development of AI.”
The senators emphasized balance between those two issues, and also the urgency of action.
“We have the lead at this moment in time on this issue, and it will define the relationship between the United States and our allies and other competing powers in the world for a long time to come,” Heinrich said.
When Drake dismissively told Metro Boomin to go and “make some drums” in one of his recent diss tracks during his beef with Kendrick Lamar, the superproducer went off and did just that — and the result marked a turning point for the use of AI in music production.
The beat, titled “BBL Drizzy,” pairs a vintage-sounding soul vocalist over some 808 drums. The producer released it to SoundCloud on May 5, encouraging his fans to record their own bars over it for the chance to win a free beat, and it swiftly went viral.
But soon after, it was revealed that the singer from the “BBL Drizzy” beat didn’t exist — the voice was AI-generated, as was the song itself. The vocals, melody and instrumental of the sample were generated by Udio, an AI music startup founded by former Google Deep Mind engineers. Though Metro was not aware of the source of the track when he used it, his tongue-in-cheek diss became the first notable use case of AI-generated sampling, proving the potential for AI to impact music production. (A representative for Metro Boomin did not respond to Billboard’s request for comment).
Trending on Billboard
As with all AI tracks, however, a human being prompted it. King Willonius, a comedian, musician and content creator, had put together the Udio-generated song on April 14, pulling inspiration from a recent Rick Ross tweet — in which the rapper joked that Drake looks like he got a Brazilian Butt Lift — to write the lyrics. “I think it’s a misconception that people think AI wrote ‘BBL Drizzy,’” Willonius told Billboard in an interview about the track. “There’s no way AI could write lyrics like ‘I’m thicker than a Snicker and I got the best BBL in history,’” he adds, laughing.
There are a lot of issues — legal, philosophical, cultural and technical — that are still to be sorted out before this kind of sampling hits the mainstream, but it’s not hard to imagine a future where producers turn to AI to create vintage-sounding samples to chop up and use in beats given that sample clearances are notoriously complicated and can drag on for months or years, even for big name producers like Metro Boomin.
“If people on the other side [of sample clearance negotiations] know they’re probably going to make money on the new song, like with a Metro Boomin-level artist, they will make it a priority to clear a sample quickly, but that’s not how it is for everyone,” says Todd Rubenstein, a music attorney and founder of Todd Rubenstein Law. Grammy-winning writer/producer Oak Felder says clearing a sample for even a high-profile track is still a challenge for him. “I’ll be honest, I’m dealing with a tough clearance right now, and I’ve dealt with it before,” he says. “I had trouble clearing an Annie Lennox sample for a Nicki Minaj record once… It’s hard.”
Many smaller producers are not able to sample established songs because they know that it could get them into legal trouble. Others go ahead without permission, causing massive legal headaches, like when bedroom producer Young Kio sampled an undisclosed Nine Inch Nails song in an instrumental he licensed out on BeatStars. The beat was used by then-unknown Lil Nas X and resulted in the Billboard Hot 100 No. 1 “Old Town Road.” When the sample was discovered, Nas was forced to give up a large portion of his publishing and master royalties to the band.
Udio’s co-founder, David Ding, tells Billboard that he believes AI samples “could simplify a lot of the rights management” issues inherent to sampling and explains that Udio’s model is particularly adept at making realistic songs in the vein of “Motown ‘70s soul,” perhaps the most common style of music sampled in hip-hop today, as well as classical, electronic and more. “It’s a wide-ranging model,” Ding says.
Willonius believes AI samples also offer a solution for musicians in today’s relentless online news cycle. While he has made plenty of songs from scratch before, Willonius says AI offered him the chance to respond in real-time to the breakneck pace of the feud between Drake and Kendrick. “I never could’ve done that without AI tools,” he says. Evan Bogart, a Grammy-winning songwriter and founder of Seeker Music, likens it to a form of digital crate digging. “I think it’s super cool to use AI in this way,” he says. “It’s good for when you dig and can’t find the right fit. Now, you can also try to just generate new ideas that sound like old soul samples.”
There’s a significant financial impact incurred from traditional sampling that could also be avoided with AI. To use the melody of “My Favorite Things” in her hit song “7 Rings,” for example, Ariana Grande famously had to cede 90% of her publishing income for the song to “My Favorite Things” writers Rodgers and Hammerstein — and that was just an interpolation rather than a full sample, which entails both the use of compositional elements, like melody, and a portion of the sound recording.
“It certainly could help you having to avoid paying other people and avoid the hassle,” says Rubenstein, who has often dealt with the complications of clearing songs that use samples and beats from marketplaces like BeatStars. But he adds that any user of these AI models must use caution, saying it won’t always make clearances easier: “You really need to know what the terms of service are whenever you use an AI model, and you should know how they train their AI.”
Often, music-making AI models train on copyrighted material without the consent or compensation of its rights holders, a practice that is largely condemned by the music business — even those who are excited about the future of AI tools. Though these AI companies argue this is “fair use,” the legality of this practice is still being determined in the United States. The New York Times has launched a lawsuit against OpenAI for training on its copyrighted archives without consent, credit or compensation, and UMG, Concord, ABKCO and other music publishers have also filed a lawsuit against Anthropic for using their lyrics to train the company’s large language model. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA) has also introduced a new bill called the Generative AI Copyright Disclosure Act to require transparency on this matter.
Udio’s terms of service puts the risk of sharing its AI songs on users, saying that users “shall defend, indemnify, and hold the company entities harmless from and against any and all claims, costs, damages, losses, liabilities and expenses” that come from using whatever works are generated on the platform. In an interview with Billboard, Udio co-founder Ding was unable to answer what works were specifically used in its training data. “We can’t reveal the exact source of our training data. We train our model on publicly available data that we obtained from the internet. It’s basically, like, we train the model on good music just like how human musicians would listen to music,” says Ding. When pressed about copyrights in particular, he replies, “We can’t really comment on that.”
“I think if it’s done right, AI could make things so much easier in this area. It’s extremely fun and exciting but only with the proper license,” says Diaa El All, CEO/founder of Soundful, another AI music company that generates instrumentals specifically. His company is certified by Fairly Trained, a non-profit that ensures certified companies do not use copyrighted materials in training data without consent. El All says that creating novel forms of AI sampling “is a huge focus” for his company, adding that Soundful is working with an artist right now to develop a fine-tuned model to create AI samples based on pre-existing works.
“I can’t tell you who it is, but it’s a big rapper,” he says. “His favorite producer passed away. The rapper wants to leverage a specific album from that producer to sample. So we got a clearance from the producer’s team to now build a private generative AI model for the rapper to use to come up with beats that are inspired by that producer’s specific album.”
While this will certainly have an impact on the way producers work in the future, Felder and Bogart say that AI sampling will never totally replace the original practice. “People love nostalgia; that’s what a sample can bring,” says Felder. With the success of sample-driven pop songs at the top of the Hot 100 and the number of movie sequels hitting box office highs, it’s clear that there is an appetite for familiarity, and AI originals cannot feed that same craving.
“BBL Drizzy” might’ve been made as a joke, but Felder believes the beat has serious consequences. “I think this is very important,” he says. “This is one of the first successful uses [AI sampling] on a commercial level, but in a year’s time, there’s going to be 1,000 of these. Well, I bet there’s already a thousand of these now.”
This story is included in Billboard‘s new music technology newsletter, Machine Learnings. To subscribe to this and other Billboard newsletters, click here.
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: LyfeShare / LyfeShare App
Planning after a loved one passes is never an easy situation to deal with, both mentally and especially physically. LyfeShare aims to give users peace of mind during the process.
LyfeShare is an “innovative platform with patent-pending technology, dedicated to preserving and sharing your legacy.”
It allows users to securely upload, store, and share important documents that will be useful later, such as when a loved one dies or when you need to refer to critical financial documents to close certain accounts.
That’s not all you can upload; you can also share other essential documents that may get lost over time, like family recipes, photos, birth certificates, and more, to ensure you never forget your family’s history.
The app is the brainchild of Michael Swift and its other founders, who wanted to make estate planning and dealing with the end-of-life process easier, especially for Black and Brown people.
Speaking with AriseTV, Swift talked about creating Lyfeshare, telling the website, “Witnessing the undue burden and added pain caused by disorganized and inaccessible documents during a time of loss ignited the idea for LyfeShare.”
He continued, “The necessity for a solution became clear to create a platform that simplifies document management, safeguards legacies, and ensures critical information is readily accessible when needed most. LyfeShare is not just about storage. It’s about providing support, guidance, and peace of mind to individuals and families navigating life’s most challenging moments.”
How Much Does The Service Cost?
By heading to the website or through the downloaded app, you can sign up for three different prescription tiers: Basic, which starts at $7.99 per month; Standard, which costs $9.99 per month; and Premium, which costs $16.99.
Once subscribed, users will have access to other features like the “Buddys,” giving friends and other family members access to the information.
LyfeShare Features A Unique “Time Release Function” Exclusive To The App
Source: LyfeShare / LyfeShare App
LyfeShare’s patented “Time Release Function” will also be available to subscribers. This function gives users more control over their documents and when they will be available following a loved one’s passing.
Swift spoke about the feature, telling the website it’s “exclusive to LyfeShare, is our intellectual property, setting us apart from other legacy management platforms. It allows users to schedule the release of their documents and information to specific individuals at predetermined times in the future. It offers a strategic approach to legacy management, enabling users to ensure that their important information is shared according to their wishes, even after they’re no longer able to manage it themselves.”
He continued, “Personally, the time release function has changed my life by providing peace of mind and reassurance that my legacy will be managed and shared in the way I intend. It allows me to plan for the future with confidence, knowing that my loved ones will have access to the information they need, when they need it most. Additionally, the ability to schedule the release of information on important dates or milestones allows me to continue to be present and make a meaningful impact in the lives of my family and friends, even after I’m gone.”
LyfeShare is available for download on iOS and the Google Play Store.
You can also sign up by visiting the website.
HipHopWired Featured Video
Source: NurPhoto / Getty / TikTok
Following President Biden keeping his promise and signing the bill that could ban TikTok in the United States, the social media platform is suing in hopes of keeping that from happening.
Spotted on the AP, TikTok and its China-based parent company ByteDance sued the US Government, challenging the law and calling for the potential banning of the popular video-sharing app and most young adults’ source of “news” if it fails to find a US-approved buyer.
ByteDance has nine months to find a buyer and gets a three-month grace period if it finds a US-approved buyer.
The lawsuit claims the US Government’s law is an attack on free speech that has never been done before and unfairly singles out TikTok.
Per The AP:
In its lawsuit, ByteDance says the new law vaguely paints its ownership of TikTok as a national security threat in order to circumvent the First Amendment, despite no evidence that the company poses a threat. It also says the law is so “obviously unconstitutional” that its sponsors are instead portraying it as a way to regulate TikTok’s ownership.
“For the first time in history, Congress has enacted a law that subjects a single, named speech platform to a permanent, nationwide ban, and bars every American from participating in a unique online community with more than 1 billion people worldwide,” ByteDance asserts in the lawsuit filed in a Washington appeals court.
President Biden signed the law as part of a larger foreign aid package. This law is the first time the US has imposed a potential ban on a single social media company.
Advocates of free speech argue that the law is similar to the behavior of oppressive regimes like China, which is ironic because the US is trying to keep US citizen’s private data out of the hands of the Chinese government.
More Details From TikTok’s Lawsuit
The lawsuit states that ByteDance has no intention of selling TikTok, which aligns with reports that the company prefers a ban over a sale. However, if it did, ByteDance would need Beijing’s blessing to make that happen.
Another sticking point is TikTok’s algorithm, which has been the “key to the success of TikTok in the United States,” which the Chinese government “made clear” in its lawsuit would be part of any sale.
According to both entities, the new law would force them to shut down in the US by Jan.19 because operating in the US would be technologically and legally impossible.
The lawsuit also claims that a US-only version of TikTok would be technologically impossible because there would be no “operational relationship” between the US TikTok app and the Chinese company.
While we don’t know what TikTok’s fate will be, one thing is for sure: This will be a long, drawn-out situation.
HipHopWired Featured Video
CLOSE
Source: picture alliance / Getty / Phil Spencer
The video game world is still reeling after word hit the e-streets that Xbox closed Arkane Austin, Tango Gameworks, and Alpha Dog game studios under the Bethesda Games umbrella. Now, gamers are focusing on Xbox chief Phil Spencer and his leadership, or lack thereof. Should Phil Spencer be fired? Is it time for him to go? That’s what many are calling for to happen after this recent round of studio closures and the absorption of one into ZeniMax Online Studios.
While many blame the practice of companies like Xbox and PlayStation acquiring game studios, some also feel that Spencer’s feet should be held to the fire.
Kotaku’s Zack Zwiezen proclaimed in an article that “It’s time to stop giving Phil Spencer a pass,” pointing out the many “bad decisions Spencer has made during his time as CEO and contradictory statements.
Per Kotaku:
In October 2020, shortly after Xbox announced its plans to consume Bethesda, Spencer told Kotaku: “This deal was not done to take games away from another player base” and added that Xbox wants “more people to be able to play games, not fewer people to be able to go play games.” Yet, in March 2023 Redfall director Harvey Smith said that Microsoft stepped in after buying Bethesda and canceled a PS5 port of the vampire hunting co-op game. Starfield shipped only on Xbox and PC. And despite a few Xbox games—like Grounded and Sea of Thieves—jumping ship to PlayStation and Switch, future big titles like Indiana Jones won’t be multiplatform.
Xbox’s boss has also talked a big game about giving developers the freedom to make what they want to make, explaining in a May 2023 interview with Kinda Funny: “When a team like Rare wants to do Sea of Thieves, when a team like Obsidian wants to do Grounded, and Tango wants to go do Hi-Fi [Rush] when everyone probably thought they were doing The Evil Within 3. I want to give the teams the creative platform to go an push their ability, push their aspirations.”
The article states that Spencer says the right things, but even when those studios get to make the games they want, and if they are critical successes, there is still a chance they will suffer the same fate as these latest studios.
Social Media Reactions
Social media hasn’t been kind to Spencer either, and that’s totally understandable because we are all tired of hearing about these layoffs while people in offices continue to line their pockets with cash while game developers have to figure out how to make ends meet.
Former PS I Love You XOXO co-host and head of Pen To Pixels Janet Garcia also called out Spencer for his comments that have now “aged like milk,” pointing out his penchant for trying to be transparent, something people appreciate about Spencer, leaves him open to these contradictory moments.
“Yeah so many of Xbox’s comments are aging like milk rn. This is the danger of selling the “good guy” narrative. It only works when you do “good” things. That said this is also why PlayStation and Nintendo don’t talk to anyone anymore. They’re like nah I’m not gonna play myself,” Garcia said on X, formerly Twitter.
Former Blizzard President Mike Ybarra Comes To Phil Spencer’s Defense
Former president of Blizzard Entertainment Mike Ybarra tried to empathize with Spencer, writing on X, “I know this hurts him [Spencer] as much as anyone else.”
Ybarra continued, “I’m not trying to defend the decisions. I think we all get ourselves into situations that are tough and unexpected (certainly I have). It’s part of the job, as is the accountability for the outcomes. But he’s a good human and he cares deeply for the creative process and developers. That’s my first hand experience in working closely with him for 8+ years and knowing him for 24+.”
Unfortunately, folks were not trying to hear it and didn’t hesitate to tell Ybarra he was wrong.
What a sad state of affairs.
Hopefully, we will hear from Spencer in his own words about this latest decision.
Until then, you can see more reactions in the gallery below.
1. Oh wow.
HipHopWired Featured Video
CLOSE
Source: Christian Petersen / Getty / Xbox
The video game industry is in turmoil, and you wouldn’t think that’s the case because of the quality of games we have been getting. While we, as gamers, are enjoying a spoil of riches, developers continue to lose their jobs at a ridiculous clip.
Xbox is navigating choppy waters as it shifts its business model, putting some of its biggest exclusive titles on competitive consoles.
One of those titles was the beloved Hi-Fi Rush from Tango Gameworks, one of the many studios Xbox acquired when it acquired Bethesda Game Studios.
In a stunning turn of events, Tango Gameworks is one of four studios, including Arkane Austin, the developer of the massive flop Redfall, Alpha Dog Studios, and Roundhouse Games, which have been closed by Xbox, IGN reports.
Xbox is one of the many video game companies that have been unable to avoid the massive layoffs in the industry. The Microsoft company started the year by laying off almost 2,000 employees, which led to then-Blizzard president Mike Ybarra leaving.
Now comes the news of a new round of layoffs due to significant studio closures under the Bethesda umbrella.
Per GameRant:
Xbox has decided to shut down Arkane Austin, Alpha Dog Studios, and Tango Gameworks, with Roundhouse Games also effectively shutting down by being “absorbed” by ZeniMax Online Studios. In an email from Matt Booty obtained by IGN, it was explained that these shutdowns are about “prioritizing high-impact titles and further investing in Bethesda’s portfolio of blockbuster games.” Arkane Austin worked on the 2017 Prey game and Redfall, Tango Gameworks was known for The Evil Within and the critically-acclaimed Hi-Fi Rush, Alpha Dog Studios was working on the Mighty Doom mobile game, and Roundhouse Games was primarily serving a support role at the time of its closure.
Arkane Austin’s demise could directly result from the disastrous launch of Redfall. Reviewers immediately deemed it a critical flop due to its broken state and abandoned it despite some quality-of-life improvements.
In a statement on X, formerly Twitter, Arkane Studios confirmed the Austin studio’s closure, telling gamers who bought the Hero Pass of the premium Bite Back edition or Bite Back upgrade will be eligible to receive the value of the upgrade.
Arkane says Redfall serves will remain online, but there will be no further updates.
Tango Gamework’s closure is the biggest surprise due to Hi-Fi Rush’s success following its surprise drop on the Xbox Game Pass and, most recently, its newfound popularity on the PlayStation 5 console.
What a spooky time to be a developer in the video game industry.
You can see reactions to the sad news in the gallery below.
1. No lies detected
2. This is also true
3. We’re old enough to remember the push for Xbox to gobble up more studios.
8. Cold world