I've been experimenting with AI music generation software lately and I have found it to be quite interesting. I've tried two programs, Mubert and Soundful, and I was pleasantly surprised with the results I got. Although the music generated wasn't very creative, it was good at replicating common background music styles. There was no noticeable distortion or excessively syllabic sounds in the audio, which I have seen in other services in the past.

The biggest issue with these AI music services is licensing. Most of the services I've tried claim copyright over the music generated using their tool and put many restrictions on how the music can be licensed back to the user. You can't use it in certain projects, or distribute the music on its own. Mubert has particularly restrictive licensing terms. To obtain full rights to the audio, the cost can be exorbitant, with Mubert charging upwards of $400, while Soundful, which has more reasonable terms, charges around $50. It almost seems like these services are trying to price their product just below what human artists would charge. This business model doesn't make much sense.

When it comes to the ethics of AI art, I don't think it will harm artists as much as some people fear. For example, these AI music services I talked about can only replicate the most basic and generic types of music. They are still far inferior to human artists, even for creating background music for YouTube videos. I plan to get into streaming and making YouTube videos, and for that, I will still probably go with conventional music. I believe AI art will simply become another tool for creating art, reshuffling the deck a bit and potentially putting some people out of business or into business, but it won't be a sea change in the industry.