ArtistDirect News
Berklees AI Music Summit Sparks Debate Over AIs Role in the Music Industry
Beneath the vaulted ceilings of Boston’s Richard Ortner Studio Building, a chorus of engineers, educators, executives, lawyers, researchers, producers and musicians gathered for the inaugural AI Music Summit (AIMS). From June 3‑5, the Berklee College of Music’s new Emerging Artistic Technology Lab (BEATL) turned the historic space into a hub of debate about how artificial intelligence is reshaping every layer of music—from creation and production to performance and learning.
BEATL executive director Mark Ethier framed the summit as artist‑centered. He said the goal was to give musicians and educators a platform to shape AI tools “grounded in real musical practice rather than hype or fear.” The event opened with music lawyer Elizabeth Moody, who delivered a keynote titled “The Future of Music & AI: Deals, Data, and Creator Value.” Moody warned that the public often conflates music‑production plugins, generative songwriting software and voice‑cloning technology, urging a clearer taxonomy.
The agenda reflected the breadth of AI applications. Panels tackled stem separation, sampling, and effects processing, with CEOs from Audioshake, AutoTune, Image‑Line, LANDR and Universal Audio arguing that AI should solve specific production problems rather than be used for its own sake. Generative‑AI companies also took the stage. Suno, a platform that can produce full songs from text prompts, was discussed alongside Udio’s “Starstruck” app and Spotify’s AI remix tool. The discussion highlighted that Suno trains its models on unlicensed music, whereas ElevenLabs claims to use only recordings with permission. Suno’s “open studio” model lets users download and distribute AI‑generated tracks, while Udio and Spotify propose walled‑garden approaches.
Student protest was a visible element of the summit. A rotating group of Berklee students stood outside the venue, playing music, handing out brochures and engaging attendees in conversation. Contemporary‑writing major Theo Wheeler said the protests were a response to the college’s broader approach to AI. He noted that students want to learn how to navigate AI’s impact on careers rather than how to use AI tools. The protests followed earlier student pushback in April against an AI songwriting class and a growing national discomfort with AI‑generated music, as reported by Luminate.
Musicians also took center stage. Holly Herndon presented her AI‑related projects, including an AI choral soundscape and a voice‑clone called Holly+. She emphasized consensual data collection and ownership. Jordan Rudess demonstrated how he uses Moises for vocal isolation and Suno to flesh out improvisations, and later performed call‑and‑response duets with jam_bot, an AI system trained on his playing by the MIT Media Lab. L’Rain’s Taja Cheek highlighted an “anti‑algorithmic” approach, layering loops and effects in a live show that critics said could not be replicated by a fully generative platform.
The summit also addressed economic and legal questions. Speakers discussed how AI companies handle training data, opt‑in consent for name, image and likeness rights, and royalty distribution. Despite these efforts, many participants noted that the bulk of the money generated by generative AI currently flows to companies rather than to musicians. Suno recently raised $400 million, valuing the company at $5.4 billion, while ElevenLabs raised $500 million for a $11 billion valuation. Sponsors included Adobe, Spotify and other tech firms.
AIMS concluded with a statement that the college would host another summit next year and that BEATL would establish a student advisory board. The event highlighted the tension between rapid technological advancement and the need for clear legal, ethical and economic frameworks. While the summit showcased AI’s creative potential, it also underscored that the industry still grapples with questions about who benefits, how artists can protect their livelihoods, and how education can keep pace.
The debate that unfolded at AIMS reflects a broader industry conversation about the place of AI in music. As the technology evolves, stakeholders will need to balance innovation with protections for creators, audiences and the cultural fabric of the music business.
BEATL executive director Mark Ethier framed the summit as artist‑centered. He said the goal was to give musicians and educators a platform to shape AI tools “grounded in real musical practice rather than hype or fear.” The event opened with music lawyer Elizabeth Moody, who delivered a keynote titled “The Future of Music & AI: Deals, Data, and Creator Value.” Moody warned that the public often conflates music‑production plugins, generative songwriting software and voice‑cloning technology, urging a clearer taxonomy.
The agenda reflected the breadth of AI applications. Panels tackled stem separation, sampling, and effects processing, with CEOs from Audioshake, AutoTune, Image‑Line, LANDR and Universal Audio arguing that AI should solve specific production problems rather than be used for its own sake. Generative‑AI companies also took the stage. Suno, a platform that can produce full songs from text prompts, was discussed alongside Udio’s “Starstruck” app and Spotify’s AI remix tool. The discussion highlighted that Suno trains its models on unlicensed music, whereas ElevenLabs claims to use only recordings with permission. Suno’s “open studio” model lets users download and distribute AI‑generated tracks, while Udio and Spotify propose walled‑garden approaches.
Student protest was a visible element of the summit. A rotating group of Berklee students stood outside the venue, playing music, handing out brochures and engaging attendees in conversation. Contemporary‑writing major Theo Wheeler said the protests were a response to the college’s broader approach to AI. He noted that students want to learn how to navigate AI’s impact on careers rather than how to use AI tools. The protests followed earlier student pushback in April against an AI songwriting class and a growing national discomfort with AI‑generated music, as reported by Luminate.
Musicians also took center stage. Holly Herndon presented her AI‑related projects, including an AI choral soundscape and a voice‑clone called Holly+. She emphasized consensual data collection and ownership. Jordan Rudess demonstrated how he uses Moises for vocal isolation and Suno to flesh out improvisations, and later performed call‑and‑response duets with jam_bot, an AI system trained on his playing by the MIT Media Lab. L’Rain’s Taja Cheek highlighted an “anti‑algorithmic” approach, layering loops and effects in a live show that critics said could not be replicated by a fully generative platform.
The summit also addressed economic and legal questions. Speakers discussed how AI companies handle training data, opt‑in consent for name, image and likeness rights, and royalty distribution. Despite these efforts, many participants noted that the bulk of the money generated by generative AI currently flows to companies rather than to musicians. Suno recently raised $400 million, valuing the company at $5.4 billion, while ElevenLabs raised $500 million for a $11 billion valuation. Sponsors included Adobe, Spotify and other tech firms.
AIMS concluded with a statement that the college would host another summit next year and that BEATL would establish a student advisory board. The event highlighted the tension between rapid technological advancement and the need for clear legal, ethical and economic frameworks. While the summit showcased AI’s creative potential, it also underscored that the industry still grapples with questions about who benefits, how artists can protect their livelihoods, and how education can keep pace.
The debate that unfolded at AIMS reflects a broader industry conversation about the place of AI in music. As the technology evolves, stakeholders will need to balance innovation with protections for creators, audiences and the cultural fabric of the music business.