Editor’s Note
The integration of artificial intelligence into music creation is accelerating, promising both immense opportunity and complex challenges for the industry. As this report highlights, the economic impact will be significant, but it also prompts crucial questions about creativity, copyright, and the future role of human artists. This transformation demands our close attention.
The music landscape is undergoing an unprecedented transformation as artificial intelligence (AI) becomes increasingly integrated into music creation and production. A recent report commissioned by the collective management societies GEMA and SACEM reveals that the market for AI-based music tools is expected to grow more than tenfold over the next five years, generating a staggering $3 billion in revenue by 2028.
This rapid development of generative AI, according to GEMA CEO Tobias Holzmüller, “offers enormous economic potential.” However, the revolution is not without its challenges, as 27% of music creators are at risk of losing income due to the growing presence of generative AI by 2028. This revelation highlights the urgent need to implement protection and regulation measures at the intersection of human creativity and technological innovation.
The paradox becomes apparent when we observe that it is the artists and composers themselves who are adopting these AI tools in their creative process. According to a survey of 15,000 members of GEMA and SESAC, 35% of composers and publishers have used AI technology at some stage of their creative work. Among all respondents, 19% were “AI rejecters,” while another 26% “would prefer not to” use AI.
Adoption of these tools varies by age and genre, with creators under 35 and creators of electronic music leading in their use, at 51% and 54% respectively. This is followed by hip-hop (53%), advertising music (52%), background and stock music (47%), and the audiovisual industry (46%). It is relatively less common in pop music (40%), rock and metal (38%), symphonic/contemporary and electroacoustic music (36%), jazz/blues/improvisation (33%), and traditional and world music (30%).
Despite this growing acceptance, most music creators express a palpable fear in the face of advancing generative AI, with 71% admitting that “they fear that the use of AI for music could make creators no longer able to make a living from their work.” This fear underscores the need to balance technological innovation with safeguards that protect artists’ rights and livelihoods.
The report identifies specific areas of music creation that could be most affected by generative AI. It highlights that companies seeking generic music for soundtracks or advertisements could meet their needs with AI-generated music in the future. Similarly, within the music industry, artists and labels are expected to increasingly rely on AI tools for producing backing tracks and mastering, which could reduce opportunities for session musicians and studio producers.
Cécile Rap-Veber, CEO of SACEM, highlights concerns about the potential impact on creators, stating the above. She urges collaboration between the technology sector and the music industry to establish a transparent and fair relationship, pointing to relevant provisions in the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act. She also calls on the governments of France and Germany not to oppose the implementation of effective transparency requirements for generative AI companies.