Using artificial intelligence to generate music is not a new phenomenon. As early as 1957, composer Leonard Isaacson and mathematician Lejaren Hiller programmed the early computer Illiac to produce original compositions, marking the dawn of algorithmic music. Machine learning has since been employed in various musical contexts, from automated accompaniment to generative melodies. However, the landscape shifted dramatically with the launch of Suno in late 2023 and Udio in early 2024. These platforms made it possible for anyone to generate complete songs in diverse genres purely through text-based input — akin to how generative AI now creates text, images, and video.

The new tools are so powerful that the music they produce is often indistinguishable from human creations. A survey conducted by Ipsos on behalf of Deezer in November 2025 revealed that only 3% of listeners can tell the difference between AI-generated and human-made music. At the same time, an overwhelming majority of respondents called for clear labeling of AI-generated content. The quality of these outputs and the ease of use have led to an explosion in the volume of AI-generated music. By April 2026, AI-generated tracks accounted for an astonishing 44% of all uploads on Deezer, and the figures are similar on Spotify. This surge poses existential questions for artists, record labels, and streaming services alike.

Millions of Tracks, Few Listeners

Despite the flood of AI-generated uploads, listener interest remains minimal. On Deezer, AI-generated music accounts for only 1% to 3% of total streams. Spotify reported last autumn that the figure was below 1%. Furthermore, 40% of listeners stated they would avoid AI-generated music entirely if given the choice. Daniel Johansson of the trade magazine Musikindustrin explains, "The reason people don't listen to entirely AI-generated music very much is that the majority of it is really bad. Yet this is changing as the music being released is a combination of human creativity and AI. The tools have improved to the point where we are moving away from simple prompting that generates 100% AI music — which is rather uninteresting to most, even if it's high quality — toward a fusion of human and machine." This shift suggests that the future may not be about pure AI generation but rather about collaborative creation where artists use AI as a sophisticated instrument.

Copyright Issues and Legal Battles

The legal landscape surrounding AI-generated music is as murky as that of other generative AI fields. Numerous lawsuits are underway, primarily between major record labels and AI companies. Much like the publishing industry’s aggressive stance against OpenAI and Anthropic, record labels seek compensation for the use of copyrighted material in training AI models. Not all companies are willing to pay. Daniel Johansson notes, "Suno is having the greatest impact on the industry because its actions are forcing the industry to spend an enormous amount of time on legal proceedings, as Suno refuses to obtain necessary licenses required by copyright law. However, the majority of platforms launched in the past year are licensed, and the trend is clear: Most AI companies realize they must have correct licenses in place." On the other side, amateur creators using services like Suno and Udio are confused about their own copyright status. In many countries — including Sweden and the United States, where most services are based — human involvement is required for copyright protection. A song generated entirely by AI from a text prompt currently holds no copyright. Yet many questions remain: How much human involvement is sufficient? Does using a service trained on copyrighted material without a license constitute infringement by the user? Suno’s terms of service place all legal liability on the user, meaning if a generated track infringes on a copyright, the user must defend themselves. To monetize music created via Suno, a subscription is required, as the free version limits use to private listening. Udio amended its terms in early 2026, prohibiting any commercial use of generated music; users who upload such tracks to monetized platforms like YouTube risk being banned.

The Difference Between AI and AI

The term "AI" is used broadly, but distinctions matter. Anders Ekman, senior lecturer at Örebro University, says, "It is reasonable to assume that AI use in music is increasing. On one hand, tools are being refined; on the other, more instances of AI usage reach the general public. Two songs in this year’s Melodifestivalen were written partly with AI, and there are likely more we are unaware of." Daniel Johansson emphasizes a key distinction: "You have to differentiate between generative AI and functional or problem-solving AI. Professional songwriters have been using plugins and tools for functional AI for over ten years. That’s nothing new." The industry employs generative AI not only for music creation but also for marketing, cover art, and other elements. "Many think the music industry is lagging behind when it comes to AI, but it’s exactly the opposite; they’re just careful to protect their rights."

Clearer Labeling on the Way

Currently, identifying AI-generated music is a challenge, but the industry agrees that clear labeling is essential. Daniel Johansson explains, "All streaming services, distributors, copyright societies, record labels, music publishers, and also licensed AI companies that wish to collaborate are working hard to develop new metadata formats and update existing systems that already identify who played guitar or was the sound engineer, or wrote the melody or lyrics." He expects an AI metadata system to be operational by 2027. So far, only a handful of companies, including Suno, have opted out of this collaboration. Once implemented, users will be able to filter out AI-generated content on platforms like Spotify if they prefer human-made music.

How to Tell If a Song Is Made With AI

Until metadata systems are in place, listeners must rely on detective work. Here are warning signs that may indicate AI generation:
An artist churning out new music
Few humans can produce multiple albums in just a few months. While exceptions exist, a rapid release schedule is a clue.
Lack of information
Check the artist's page: Is there any biography, photos, lyrics, or details about musicians, producers? For a band, you should be able to find individual members and their past work. Wikipedia is a useful resource.
AI-generated covers and other elements
If the album cover, music video, or graphics appear AI-generated, the music may be too. Fewer human collaborators suggest AI involvement.
No live performances
Many human artists never tour, but live shows are a strong indicator of real people. Established artists who use AI are still human.
No social media presence
Absence of a natural social media presence, or posts that feel overly glossy and contrived, can be a red flag. Additionally, if an artist with millions of streams has never been interviewed, skepticism is warranted. None of these signs are foolproof, but they form a practical toolkit for discerning human-made music from AI-generated imitations.

Source: PCWorld News