Glad I found your Substack through a friend. I'm a producer and fellow nerd ( I work with some of your clients at MU! :)
On Spotify’s AI remixing: if they sneak this in, they’re in for a world of pain : labels, distributors, and especially artists won’t take it lightly. Sure, illegal remixing and sampling built entire genres (I spent years digging for samples breakbeats to chop into my MPC), but this feels different. This could be the final straw.
That said, I think we’re heading for a shift. AI tools like Suno and Udio are making music production accessible to everyone, but ironically, they’ll create a new “elite”- not based on money, but on skill, taste, and originality. Same as writing: AI can churn out novels, but real writers push their craft further to stand apart.
Maybe all this mass-produced fluff will make people crave real Artistry and Quality again. Funny how that works.
Personally, I think this remixability will lead to 'small music' that is more relevant and specific to people in certain contexts. We're leaving the age of 'mass media' behind, which is also the age in which the recording industry came up. I don't think we can expect music as a medium to remain the same, just like music as a medium was different before the age of mass media. In that sense, a historical anomaly is being corrected.
There's a lot of nuance and I respect that artists don't want to be a part of it, but I do think that there is a cultural expectation for people to 1. have personalized content and feeds, and 2. be able to edit and remix things (like memes, tiktoks, etc).
Great analysis. I work at Audiomack and we have a feature called “audiomod” which allows listeners to do simple manipulations, like speed up, slow + reverb, etc. It is opt in at the distributor level but we were trying to address the issue that all of these manipulated recordings were getting passed our content filters. The hope was that this would stop the uploads and allow us to pay out royalties to the relevant rights holders. Opt in at the artist level makes more sense
What I'm hearing on this: The first enhanced audio attribute Spotify is releasing is just a crossfade feature. They *want* to do more (stem separation, speed up/ slow down, pitch shifting, press a button and make it reggae) but that would require a new licensing structure with rights holders. Spotify *was* exploring as to whether they could get away with all these features if the editing was done directly in the Spotify client, but they abandoned that idea. The labels + publishers, for their part, have a load of artist relations issues to deal with if they make these licensing deals so they're hesitant (for now).
Interesting - thanks Drew. FWIW, certain quarters of the music industry creator community are kicking up quite a fuss about the likes of DistroKid apparently updating their T&Cs to now permit "derivative works" which those people feel is paving the way for this AI remixing function. Example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acDthZy86M4
The interesting thing for me is that the likes of DistroKid and the more DIY artists it represents are not - IMO anyway - ideologically aligned with the likes of Universal. The latter would rather see that long tail of small releases moved onto some other platform, as they feel it just floods the plain with low quality output.
If we accept that to be true, then it is interesting if DistroKid *are* planning to allow the works they represent to be remixed in this manner, as it would basically play into a scenario where Spotify are then rolling out this remix feature but only for these more DIY-led releases. That, in turn, *might* put pressure on the likes of Universal to follow suit.
I guess my point is just that it could get interesting if Spotify is pushing the lower-tier distributors etc to sign onto this kind of feature, as it then creates something of an "us and them" dynamic with the majors.
It seemed to me like a feature to help sell the hefty subscription increase that they want people to pay for hi-res audio (I'll believe it when I hear it!), and justify the fact that they'll be more expensive than all the other services already offering CD quality audio. If that is the case then I find it odd as the feature will mainly appeal to a younger demographic who most certainly won't be shelling out $15 per month for the remix feature & have no real desire for hi-res audio.
Glad I found your Substack through a friend. I'm a producer and fellow nerd ( I work with some of your clients at MU! :)
On Spotify’s AI remixing: if they sneak this in, they’re in for a world of pain : labels, distributors, and especially artists won’t take it lightly. Sure, illegal remixing and sampling built entire genres (I spent years digging for samples breakbeats to chop into my MPC), but this feels different. This could be the final straw.
That said, I think we’re heading for a shift. AI tools like Suno and Udio are making music production accessible to everyone, but ironically, they’ll create a new “elite”- not based on money, but on skill, taste, and originality. Same as writing: AI can churn out novels, but real writers push their craft further to stand apart.
Maybe all this mass-produced fluff will make people crave real Artistry and Quality again. Funny how that works.
Looking forward to reading more of your takes!
Agree with that Stefano - and thanks for the kind words!
Personally, I think this remixability will lead to 'small music' that is more relevant and specific to people in certain contexts. We're leaving the age of 'mass media' behind, which is also the age in which the recording industry came up. I don't think we can expect music as a medium to remain the same, just like music as a medium was different before the age of mass media. In that sense, a historical anomaly is being corrected.
There's a lot of nuance and I respect that artists don't want to be a part of it, but I do think that there is a cultural expectation for people to 1. have personalized content and feeds, and 2. be able to edit and remix things (like memes, tiktoks, etc).
I've written a long essay about it before here: https://musicx.substack.com/p/will-ai-correct-the-anomaly-of-the
Great analysis. I work at Audiomack and we have a feature called “audiomod” which allows listeners to do simple manipulations, like speed up, slow + reverb, etc. It is opt in at the distributor level but we were trying to address the issue that all of these manipulated recordings were getting passed our content filters. The hope was that this would stop the uploads and allow us to pay out royalties to the relevant rights holders. Opt in at the artist level makes more sense
What I'm hearing on this: The first enhanced audio attribute Spotify is releasing is just a crossfade feature. They *want* to do more (stem separation, speed up/ slow down, pitch shifting, press a button and make it reggae) but that would require a new licensing structure with rights holders. Spotify *was* exploring as to whether they could get away with all these features if the editing was done directly in the Spotify client, but they abandoned that idea. The labels + publishers, for their part, have a load of artist relations issues to deal with if they make these licensing deals so they're hesitant (for now).
Interesting - thanks Drew. FWIW, certain quarters of the music industry creator community are kicking up quite a fuss about the likes of DistroKid apparently updating their T&Cs to now permit "derivative works" which those people feel is paving the way for this AI remixing function. Example here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acDthZy86M4
The interesting thing for me is that the likes of DistroKid and the more DIY artists it represents are not - IMO anyway - ideologically aligned with the likes of Universal. The latter would rather see that long tail of small releases moved onto some other platform, as they feel it just floods the plain with low quality output.
If we accept that to be true, then it is interesting if DistroKid *are* planning to allow the works they represent to be remixed in this manner, as it would basically play into a scenario where Spotify are then rolling out this remix feature but only for these more DIY-led releases. That, in turn, *might* put pressure on the likes of Universal to follow suit.
I guess my point is just that it could get interesting if Spotify is pushing the lower-tier distributors etc to sign onto this kind of feature, as it then creates something of an "us and them" dynamic with the majors.
Great analysis, thanks Darren!
It seemed to me like a feature to help sell the hefty subscription increase that they want people to pay for hi-res audio (I'll believe it when I hear it!), and justify the fact that they'll be more expensive than all the other services already offering CD quality audio. If that is the case then I find it odd as the feature will mainly appeal to a younger demographic who most certainly won't be shelling out $15 per month for the remix feature & have no real desire for hi-res audio.
Fair point!