A rising soul singer, amassing nearly three million monthly listeners, was challenging established stars. But the story behind Sienna Rose wasn’t one of dedication and talent – it was a carefully constructed illusion.
The music world is facing a startling revelation: the increasing presence of AI-generated artists. Sienna Rose, the sensation captivating audiences, isn’t a person at all, but a digital creation, part of a growing wave of “fake musicians” entering the industry.
While AI has long been a tool in music production, its current capabilities are sparking fear and debate. Many worry this technology doesn’t just assist creativity, but threatens to extinguish it, potentially blocking genuine artists from ever finding their audience.
Sienna Rose released a six-track EP last September, followed by further projects culminating in a ‘debut album’ just last month. Her rapid ascent to 2.7 million Spotify listeners was impressive, yet built on a foundation of code, not creativity. Her artist profile offered no hint of her artificial origins.
Streaming platforms are grappling with how to handle these AI artists. While permitted, policies exist to prevent malicious use, as demonstrated by the removal of a song mimicking another artist’s vocal style. The focus remains on listener choice, but the line between genuine and generated is becoming increasingly blurred.
Spotify views AI as a natural progression, akin to the introduction of synthesizers or GarageBand. They emphasize a commitment to removing harmful AI applications – spam, impersonation, and undisclosed AI usage – but maintain neutrality regarding AI-created music itself, paying all artists equally.
However, one streaming service, Deezer, is taking a different approach. They’ve developed tools to detect and tag AI music, removing it from algorithmic recommendations and editorial playlists. A study revealed a staggering 97% of listeners can’t distinguish between human and AI-generated music.
Deezer’s research showed a massive influx of AI-generated tracks – 50,000 daily, representing 34% of their submissions. They believe transparency is key, with 80% of users wanting clear labeling of AI music, allowing informed listening choices.
Interestingly, Deezer found limited organic consumption of AI content when not actively promoted. They also discovered a disproportionate amount of fraudulent streaming activity linked to AI-generated tracks, suggesting a motive beyond artistic expression.
The core concern isn’t the technology itself, but its potential for exploitation. The issue, according to Deezer’s head of research, is individuals attempting to profit unfairly, diverting revenue from genuine artists.
Veteran music industry professional Kev Nixon, with a 50-year career including work with music legends, sees AI as a disruptive force. While acknowledging the quality of AI-generated music, he’s deeply concerned about its impact on emerging talent.
Nixon argues that AI is clogging the system, making it nearly impossible for new artists to gain traction and earn a living. Funds earned by AI artists, like Sienna Rose, should be going to those just starting out, potentially changing their lives.
He believes the current landscape discourages aspiring musicians, removing the incentive to pursue a career in music. While AI as a tool is acceptable, the complete displacement of human artists is unacceptable and demands consequences.
The debate isn’t about technology versus artistry, but about fairness and the future of the music industry. The question remains: can AI and human creativity coexist, or will the pursuit of profit silence the voices of genuine artists forever?
