Feature photo by Chris Scheurich
Story by Kailee Shores
One might think that Artificial Intelligence has no place in musical genres grounded in authenticity, but so-called progress has a way of influencing areas of creativity, even where many don’t welcome it. Conversations at AmericanaFest 2024 investigated the threats and opportunities of AI in the human act of creating music.
“In some ways, [AI is] a continuation of issues we’ve been dealing with in the music community for a long time,’” said Jen Jacobsen, executive director of the Artist Rights Alliance. “Illegal downloading was going to kill the industry. It actually kind of did for a while, but it came back. And then we have streaming, which sort of saved the industry… And then the newest iteration, in some ways, is artificial intelligence.”
Jacobsen joined “AI and the Music Creator,” one of three panels the Americana Music Association hosted on how AI is impacting music. It focused on the prospects and pitfalls of using AI in songwriting, while other conversations outlined legal issues surrounding intellectual property and copyright that arise when tapping AI in the creative process.
A key debate included the difference between using AI as a songwriting tool and using it as an artist. Using AI as a supplementary tool in the creative process is a valuable use of the technology, like in generating ideas for song harmonies, Jacobson said. Leyla McCalla, a panelist alongside Jacobsen and an Americana musician, disagreed.
Human artistry is not expressed only through lyrics and melodies, she said It extends to song mixing, in the texture of vocals and level of reverb, McCalla said. “All the things that you were saying are potential points of collaboration with AI, I was just thinking about all the people that I’ve worked with in my career who have this incredible gift and experience… all the musicians that I’ve worked with and their education and experience,” McCalla said. “All their teachers, all their mentors, their spiritual practices,” McCalla said.
Fears remain about AI contributions devaluing the work of humans. Ultimately, AI allows people to skip the hard work involved in creating music, which is what makes the product valuable, said artist Kim Townsend.
“It’s cheating,” Townsend said. “It’s programming exactly what you want. ‘Ooh, I want a waltz like Eleanor Rigby, I want it in A minor, but I want it to be about vanilla pudding,’ and it will do it. In seconds. Where’s the human ingenuity in that?”
In May 2024, AI helped bring the world a new song by Randy Travis — a feat rendered impossible after a stroke in 2013 left him unable to sing. The song, “Where That Came From,” allowed Travis to share his music with the world once more, using a voice engineered by AI. Is that art?
The question of the value of human connection is hard to answer on an industry level, but it must define AI legality, and quickly.
The Recording Academy outlined clear guidelines on what can and cannot earn an award in 2023 following its semi-annual board of trustees meeting.
“The Grammy Awards [are] to reward human creativity. And so right now, our rules are clear that we only award the Grammy to human creators,” said Todd Dupler, Chief Advocacy & Public Policy Officer for the Recording Academy. In an interview at Americanafest, he continued, “So for example, if you write something yourself, but you have AI perform it, you could get a songwriting Grammy, but you’re not going to get a performing Grammy.”
Nor are works generated by AI copyrightable, noted John Riley with the U.S. Copyright Office during an AmericanaFest panel on legal issues in the age of AI. “Our guidance says, effectively, you have to tell us what parts of the work are created by AI,” Riley said. “If it’s completely created by AI, then it’s not going to get any protection. But if it’s a component that has enough human creative output as an element, then it could get registration. You would just have to disclaim the pieces that were created by AI.”
But the line between human creation and machine output remains hazy.
AI’s intersection with copyright law is proving tedious to litigate, but one of the clearest issues is borrowing artists’ voices to train generative AI to create sound-alike songs. Tennessee took a leadership position in July 2024 with the ELVIS Act, adding voices to existing protections of name, image and likeness. All such uses must now be authorized.
Artists’ likeness and voice can also be used to train generative AI, with authorization.
But authorization rights sometimes reside with a record label or other parties besides the artists themselves, depending on the contracts they’ve signed in the past.
“It’s certainly in the abstract, an opportunity for major labels and major publishers to create models with the works that they have in their… massive catalogs and to generate works based on those existing works,” said John Strohm, a music industry lawyer. “And certainly, major music companies are looking for opportunities in generative AI. They’re looking for ways to monetize these technologies in ways that are legal and that are acceptable.”
Of course what’s acceptable as an ethical issue will vary for everyone, no matter what the law allows. And people are afraid of AI not only replacing musicians, but in some cases rendering artists obsolete. Yet Dupler pointed out that Americana music exists for its authenticity.
“That’s what attracts people to listen to that music, right?” Dupler said. “It’s that there is a realness and an authenticity, and the ability to use AI to replicate that, to misuse it, to appropriate it without permission, really kind of undercuts the heart of what makes that music special.”
This story appears as part of a collaborative reporting project between MTSU’s Sidelines and WMOT.
Kailee Shores is the Editor in Chief of MTSU Sidelines.
To contact the Lifestyles Editor, email lifestyles@mtsusidelines.com.
For more news, visit www.mtsusidelines.com, and follow us on Facebook at MTSU Sidelines and on X and Instagram at @mtsusidelines. Also, sign up for our weekly newsletter here.
