At this years Grammy event, those shaping sounds offered perspectives on AI that reflect both promise and prudent caution. Read on for a full recap.
“You can never fight technology. You’re always going to lose. I think when it comes to someone in the background, like production, say for instance, I can’t afford a choir. I can do and AI choir, I can do some AI. I’ve been a studio and you write some lyrics. You have them tailored by AI – utilize it, you know. But make sure you have control. And when it comes down to the branding, the person always matters. But all your tools are useful, so use all of them.”
Diplo (AP Interview at Grammys)
“I feel like there’s a smart way to use it. As as technology develops, I think it’s our job as humans to use it, to use it to our advantage. As long as there’s compensation for it and things are made fair and the laws are sorted out before it goes haywire. I’m good with it. I think there’s lots of tools that can make our lives easier. But, yeah, I’m not – I’m like, kind of in the middle. If we can get a grip on the legal parts. I think AI can be really strong.”
Victoria Monét (AP Interview at Grammys)
“Yeah, it’s fun, it’s fun. Of course. Of course. Any – I think technology and music evolution, they always go hand in hand. And, you know, it’s been like this with sampling. It’s been like this with electric guitar or even piano, you know, so this is just another evolution of music. But creative minds, they’re going to stay creative minds.”
David Guetta (AP Interview at Grammys)
“I don’t like competition. But I know it’s inevitable. Really – I don’t think it’s great for music. It hurts songwriters and hurts, you know, screenwriters. It hurts everybody, you know, except for the only thing I guess they can’t do yet is go out and sing like me, you know.”
Sammy Hagar
Artists acknowledged both opportunities and risks around AI’s expanding impact on the creative process. For many, embracing certain tools while retaining human oversight seems a reasonable compromise. However, others view direct musical competition from AI as problematic unless very carefully regulated.
Here’s the entire segment by AP on YouTube:
As the industry establishes norms around appropriate uses of emerging technologies, transparency and fairness will be important values to uphold. Musicians want innovation that enhances rather than hinders artistic expression or livelihoods. Diplo’s point about maintaining control of one’s brand highlights this desire for balanced progress.
Some see opportunities if AI can lighten certain workflows, as Victoria Monet discussed. Assistive technologies may free up time and resources musicians can then pour into other rewarding pursuits. However, compensation structures will need reforming if AI starts performing valuable creative labor at scale.
Addressing such regulatory questions proactively could help allay fears of the unforeseen impacts David Foster and Mergui raised. While most acknowledge transformation as inevitable, establishing safeguards to protect livelihoods may ease uneasy transitions and encourage embracing, rather than resisting, beneficial technological change.
As the Isley Brothers observed, more time is also needed to fully evaluate AI’s artistic merits and limitations. Copying established styles is one thing, but equaling or surpassing human abilities across music’s vast dimensions is an enormous challenge. Pursuing medical and other non-arts applications first, as Verdine White proposed, could help address concerns over premature displacement of human creative talent.
Overall, keeping dialogue open as the industry and technology continue evolving seems wise. With care and conscience, intelligent tools may indeed become valuable friends to musicians as Laufey hoped. But maintaining space for heartfelt human expression will remain pivotal as partnership models are built between artists and artificial intelligence.
