Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Youtube AI Music

Fake Bands and Artificial Songs are Taking Over YouTube and Spotify (elpais.com) 102

Posted by EditorDavid from the stop-children-what's-that-sound dept.
Spain's newspaper El Pais found an entire fake album on YouTube titled Rumba Congo (1973). And they cite a study from France's International Confederation of Societies of Authors and Composers that estimated revenue from AI-generated music will rise to $4 billion in 2028, generating 20% of all streaming platforms' revenue: One of the major problems with this trend is the lack of transparency. María Teresa Llano, an associate professor at the University of Sussex who studies the intersection of creativity, art and AI, emphasizes this aspect: "There's no way for people to know if something is AI or not...." On Spotify Community — a forum for the service's users — a petition is circulating that calls for clear labeling of AI-generated music, as well as an option for users to block these types of songs from appearing on their feeds. In some of these forums, the rejection of AI-generated music is palpable.

Llano mentions the feelings of deception or betrayal that listeners may experience, but asserts that this is a personal matter. There will be those who feel this way, as well as those who admire what the technology is capable of... One of the keys to tackling the problem is to include a warning on AI-generated songs. YouTube states that content creators must "disclose to viewers when realistic content [...] is made with altered or synthetic media, including generative AI." Users will see this if they glance at the description. But this is only when using the app, because on a computer, they will have to scroll down to the very end of the description to get the warning....

The professor from the University of Sussex explains one of the intangibles that justifies the labeling of content: "In the arts, we can establish a connection with the artist; we can learn about their life and what influenced them to better understand their career. With artificial intelligence, that connection no longer exists."
YouTube says they may label AI-generated content if they become aware of it, and may also remove it altogether, according to the article. But Spotify "hasn't shared any policy for labeling AI-powered content..." In an interview with Gustav Söderström, Spotify's co-president and chief product & technology officer, he emphasized that AI "increases people's creativity" because more people can be creative, thanks to the fact that "you don't need to have fine motor skills on the piano." He also made a distinction between music generated entirely with AI and music in which the technology is only partially used. But the only limit he mentioned for moderating artificial music was copyright infringement... something that has been a red line for any streaming service for many years now. And such a violation is very difficult to legally prove when artificial intelligence is involved.

Fake Bands and Artificial Songs are Taking Over YouTube and Spotify More | Reply

Fake Bands and Artificial Songs are Taking Over YouTube and Spotify

Comments Filter:

  • I wish there was an option in Spotify to filter out any AI generated trash in Discover Weekly. No, I don't want to discover extremely bland lyrics with an autotune-sounding voiceover.

    • I just listened to known musicians and not random ones. Eliminates most of the issues.

      • Yup. I just listen to the same old shit all the time. "Classic rock" is fine. Don't need to listen to the new shit.

        I have not changed the six DVDs in my disc changer since I put them in 18 years ago.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by quall ( 1441799 )

      Same with human generated crap. Bunch of auto-tuned garbage that I wish I can filter out. Very difficult.

      • Yeah, this is such out of touch elitist bullshit: "In the arts, we can establish a connection with the artist; we can learn about their life and what influenced them to better understand their career. With artificial intelligence, that connection no longer exists."

        A lot of popular music is just about making money, not about 'art'. A lot of people don't give a fuck about the life of the artist. They just want to listen to songs that sound good enough, which generative AI is perfectly capable of producing.

        • Same as it ever was - but who gets all the money? At least some kids were earning a living instead of some fukin Tech Bro accumulating all the rewards from their "intellectual property". At least what was being produced was music and not IP.

  • Problem solved! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheMiddleRoad ( 1153113 ) on Monday June 16, 2025 @01:43AM (#65452063)

    Don't use YouTube or Spotify for discovering or listening to music. Read reviews in the media. Get recs from friends. I've found awesome music that way.

    • That sounds like "solved" problem. But that's where I came from. The reality is the music recommended through reviews and friends is highly specific and comes in at a trickle. Opening a standard review page and you're lucky to get one music in even the genre let alone a sub genre that interests you. Likewise for friends, you run two risks: one: you have a friend like one of mine who listens to death metal - yes all his recommendations are worthless to me, and two: you have a friend like another of mine that

      • It sounds like you want the algorithms but you don't want the algorithms. For the few bucks a month for Spotify, you're not going to get curation. You're going to get exploitable algorithms. I suppose an alternative service could be created, where people pay $100 a month for algorithm driven music with actual humans making sure that no AI tracks get through, but such a service would fail in weeks, since few would sign up, the algorithms would never have time to develop to the level you want, and AI track

    • The chance of these scammers paying to have a run of CDs or records pressed with their crap on is zero.

    • also sites like https://radio4000.com/ [radio4000.com] and https://app.radiooooo.com/ [radiooooo.com]

  • A bot may be able to guess that something is AI, but banning people based on guesses is going to generate tension.

    • A bot may be able to guess that something is AI, but banning people based on guesses is going to generate tension.

      I think Youtube has learned its lesson from the Cheryl Sandberg era. They still have keywords that will get a person demonetized, but a person Gould even get their account terminated for comments with non-glowing reports mentioning #metoo, or #believe women.

      Sandberg was pretty big on misandry and man shaming. Which YouTube has a lot of male users. And yeah, it generated some friction under her iron womanist fist.

      There is so much AI content there now for all categories, some of the vids note they are A

  • Tidal is completely overrun by AI (Score:5, Informative)

    by mastazi ( 10280392 ) on Monday June 16, 2025 @01:51AM (#65452075)

    I used to be on Tidal. During that time I was playing in a funk band so while preparing for a concert I went to a lot of funk artist pages on Tidal. Some of those like CHIC, Rufus, Prince were completely overrun with AI. I sent emails to customer support, they said they would look into it, never did anything. This was about a year ago and the situation is not much improved:

    Rufus - look under "Albums" and under "Singles" - this account is so overrun with AI slop that it's hard to find the actual content https://listen.tidal.com/artis... [tidal.com]

    CHIC - a year later, the singles and EPs section still has fake stuff in it; they have cleaned up the albums though https://listen.tidal.com/artis... [tidal.com]

    Prince - this one looks fine now. It was still filled with AI slop just a month ago though https://listen.tidal.com/artis... [tidal.com]

    Since then I've jumped ship and went to Apple Music, it's not perfect by any means but at least I don't see this problem as much.

    • Not new.
      Fraud/impersonating another artist for money on you tube was happening before the pandemic ... my Ladyfriend likes mainstream pop like Buble and Adele .. I'd put it on a song or playlist for her, then after a few tunes, the music sounded off. The voice wasn't quite right ... I no longer recall exact details, because we stopped listening to YT... they were feeding us knockoffs, presumably to collect advertising revenue.

      After that I just torrented a few albums from the actual artists, I know, shame o

  • If people are legitimately happy with what they're getting, it ought to tell you something about the oversampled, autotune-ridden crap being pushed these days. If a fake album allegedly released in 1973 (it wasn't) is such a hit that it's getting revenue, imagine what ACTUAL performers could do in 2025 if they learned from that lesson.

  • Duke Ellington (Score:3, Insightful)

    by innocent_white_lamb ( 151825 ) on Monday June 16, 2025 @02:08AM (#65452089)

    "If it sounds good it is good." - Duke Ellington

    • "If it sounds good it is good." - Duke Ellington

      Exactly. Artists have used technology as it evolved to make music; AI is just one more technology to adapt to using. What AI is doing is giving people who can't sing or play an instrument a way to make music and sell it; treating the money stream of major labels and artists. Services like Spotify also make it easier to make money while bypassing the traditional gatekeepers; which helped small indie artists but now is adding to the competition.

    • "If it sounds good it is good." - Oliver Cromwell (as reported by AI)

    • The irony is anyone can go to something like Suno and make their own music. I have a nice playlist on my phone with AI created songs that I prompted.
      I'm not sure why, but some of these songs are really, really well made and very compelling to listen to.

      It's a paradigm shift and the world is not ready.

  • There's quite a few signs that AI made a piece of music, there's a general grittiness to it, the voices are very similar no matter the band.

  • Not a problem (Score:2, Insightful)

    by bloodhawk ( 813939 )
    It is not a problem at all. I dont give a shit who or what created the music, as long as i enjoy it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by quall ( 1441799 )

      I agree. If people enjoy the song then what does it matter?

    • You don't seem to understand the problem then. Think of a band you like. Now imagine Spotify just told you they released a new album and you excitedly go and play that album only to find out it's some fraudster in India who uploaded the album under the name of a famous band, full of AI trash to farm accidental clicks and algorithmic recommendations.

      The question of who or what created the music doesn't matter as long as the "who" is the person they claim they are. In this case they aren't. This AI slop is po

    • Too true... however, it makes finding good music infinitely harder as AI is incapable of doing things that make the song special and unique while maintaining artistic integrity.

      Take Creep by Radiohead. If they didn't have that guitar string scratching thing in it at one point, would the song have been as good? Once you hear that, you can almost toss out the rest of the song.

      Wait, am I arguing against common music here?

  • So, after decades of claiming “music“ is dumbed-down repetitive noise accompanied by autotuned whining, this “creative“ industry faces annihilation by bots. Completely unexpected.

    • So, after decades of claiming “music“ is dumbed-down repetitive noise accompanied by autotuned whining, this “creative“ industry faces annihilation by bots. Completely unexpected.

      You aren't kidding. Most present pop music it written in Sweden, using all manner computational work, The tune is generated, some insipid words, then the divas pick which tune they want - there have been embarrassments where two have picked the same tune.

      So it is AI - and was before the AI buzzword came to mean anything or nothing.

      Pop music isn't much about music any more anyhow. It's hotties twerking and not even actually singing much of the time. Although it can get a literal weird some times. As r

  • "There's no way for people to know if something is AI or not...."

    So where is the problem? If Spotify puts a nice song in one of my playlists and I like it, does it get worse the moment I become aware that it was AI generated?

    I think sooner or later the streaming services will start to provide interactive radios that generate music on demand. Faster than realtime music generation is already here and there will be the point when it is viable to offer live generation of music according to the taste of the user

    • People often want to go see the bands that play music they enjoy. Imagine looking to find out where your favorite band is playing and realize they don't exist.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by SpzToid ( 869795 )

      Amazon Music has an option to, "play similar music" with every playlist. Given all my options and tests at various services, this works best for me.

      You can achieve similar results with Apple Music by creating a playlist, selecting the last song in the list and I can't remember exactly the option to select, I think it is infinity music, it works but with a serious messed up UI/UX.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by allo ( 1728082 )

        Spotify has the same feature, but you end up in a loop. They seem to count music they put in your playlists the same way as music you select yourself, creating a reinforcement loop.

        I've seen a prototype for an infinite radio using music AI and while the currently available AIs are limited, I think the concept may become common in the future.

        To me it looks like AI won't be replacing images/videos/music/books, but adding a new art form to each medium, with more interactivity. Who reads AI books? I don't know

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by SpzToid ( 869795 )

          I tried Spotify a while ago and I prefer Amazon Music's 'play similar music' radio-like feature.

          FWIW, it's easy to switch between music services with all your playlists using https://freeyourmusic.com/ [freeyourmusic.com]

  • if something is AI or not.... Why does it make a difference then? "a connection with the artist; we can learn about their life and what influenced them to better understand their career"- all fine and dandy, but if that story that fabricates a connection is also fabricated by AI, does it make the music better? And, if an artist wants to stay anonymous, or pretends, he/she is a fictional character, does it make the music worse? Sure, for people who prefer or need a little make-pretend - but they are usually
  • I want to listen to my favorite songs done by the original bands and too many times when the songs don't sound right, I look and see it's by some AI ? knock-off band I never heard of !

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by quall ( 1441799 )

      Same with real bands. Spotify keeps playing knockoff covers, or songs that sample like 50% of the original song. From actual bands and not AI. Such garbage.

  • If I like the song, what difference does it make if it is AI generated or not?

    • Bad on your tasteless empathy. JapChat generated artforms of any variety are obvious to even  pedestrian viewers. Kinda like the difference between mass-produced and free-range chicken. Or the difference between electrostatic and Marantz/Advent hi-fi speakers. There's a race-2-the-bottom surrounding  machine and AI-generated content ...   some peons may embrace it. 

  • Most music is talentless schlock with poor production quality and provides nothing novel. This barely moves the needle on that. The vast majority of music ever produced was total fucking garbage made only because some producer thought there was a chance that some crowd would latch on and make it profitable, and not for reasons which have anything to do with quality. Far more musical artists have been rightly forgotten than have ever been successful or noted.

    This doesn't change that significantly. You're sti

  • Before drum n bass was a thing, dance halls were enamored of speed garage, eurolounge was all over, and raves were, well, raving, I had already made a couple of analog synthesizers, one intended for a guitar pedal chain, which got used by a vibraphone artist who scared the heck out of me.

    I stumbled into electronica, not the disco-in-a-box crap, and started experimenting with all that. Splurging for a TB-303, my first 'purchased' instrument, I started sequencing and stuff. Adding in some filters and whatnot,

    • What certifies what music is? Was it pounded on a buffalo drum? Plucked on a string? Chanted in gothic cathedrals? Played in royal opera houses (or not)? Is it printed and sold in a store? Music label contracts? Radio playtime? MTV airtime? Napster availability? Youtube/Spotify/Amazon has it?

      Now it's "Did humans make it?"

      In the end, the same rule has always applied: "I play, therefore I'm music."

  • So the copyright violators can be sued when legislation wakes up.
  • Once the girl and boy band formulas were perfected, I don't see much difference in the 'real' popular music anyway. I won't mourn for the Taylor Swifts of the world and the millennial - whoop - inspired stuff on repeat everywhere. Real music seems to have stopped about 15-20 years ago. There are a very few outliers, but you need to buy their album and T-shirts, not listen on Spotify.

  • I suspect that most of this "music" is not made by creative people who "don't need to have fine motor skills on the piano". I suspect that most is made by scammers and mercenaries who want to harvest money by putting in minimal effort

    That said, there is very little art in mercenary pop music created by teams of producers, arrangers, trendmongers, choeographers, stylists and others. It's artless industrial product, carefully crafted to be almost identical to what's popular, with just enough difference to avo

  • Because they'd probably be better than most of what humans generate.

    Most of the visual art I see today is AI generated, and I imagine that's the case for most people. That's because people can easily create an image that's imaginative. Sure, a lot of people create crap, but there's more than enough enjoyable stuff in there, much more than if people didn't have AI as a tool. I imagine this is true for music too.

  • Well, it's like the Turing test. Passed by machines because humans got less intelligent. Same thing with music.

  • The professor from the University of Sussex explains one of the intangibles that justifies the labeling of content: "In the arts, we can establish a connection with the artist; we can learn about their life and what influenced them to better understand their career. With artificial intelligence, that connection no longer exists."

    This is why the Arts have a serious problem. Art should be judged on the merits of the work, not on who created it. Why do you need to understand the artist's career, frame of mind, or anything else about them to appreciate their work? If an AI can create something as stunning as the Sistine Chapel roof or compose something like Einer Kleiner Nachtmusik why would we care that it was made by a machine? It may be that AI will find it extremely hard to produce such works of art but, if it succeeds in doing s

Slashdot Top Deals

The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.

Close