Play Audio
Pause
Sorry, no results.
Please try another keyword
- "AI Music Creation- Friend or Foe?".
Why I’m qualified to ask this question.
I wrote my first song when I was five years old, not in a “cute kid” way, but in the way where melody, rhythm, and repetition already made sense to me.
By thirteen, I had turned my bedroom into a recording studio. That room didn’t just make music, it helped pay rent for my parents and the artists who were repeat clients there. I Engineered dozens of albums, handled production and videography, and eventually built full creative pipelines that blended sound and visuals. Music was never just art for me. It was survival, structure, and strategy.
What makes this moment feel full circle is where that path eventually led.
After years of creating, producing, and building within creative systems, I found myself on the other side of the table, building creative technology. I went on to found an image and video startup, raising capital and building A.I.-powered tools used by creators and businesses alike. That first real check in my creative tech journey came backed by Amazon Web Services. In a very real way, my first venture into A.I. was backed by Bezos.
But none of that erased the core truth.
Before the pitch decks, before the models, before the infrastructure, I was and still am a lifelong creator. Every product decision I’ve ever made, every system I’ve built, comes from lived creative experience. From knowing what it feels like to sit with an idea, shape it, revise it, and put your name on it.
That’s the lens I bring when I talk about A.I. in music today.
What Tools Like Suno & Udio Really Are.
Let’s get something clear early.
A.I. music tools are not artists. They are instruments.
Tools like Suno and Udio can generate songs, arrangements, and textures at speeds that were unthinkable even a few years ago. That alone makes people uncomfortable, especially those who equate struggle with legitimacy.
But speed does not equal authorship.
These platforms don’t wake up with something to say. They don’t carry lived experience. They don’t know why a chord progression hurts or why a lyric hits different when it’s sung instead of spoken.
They respond to input. Direction. Taste.
That distinction matters more than most debates acknowledge.
The Real Upside: What A.I. Unlocks for Artists.
Used correctly, A.I. tools can:
Lower the cost of experimentation.
Let artists prototype ideas without studio pressure.
Help non-technical creatives translate ideas into sound.
Speed up workflows that used to block momentum.
For independent artists, especially, this is powerful. In the same way digital audio workstations democratized recording, A.I. isdemocratizing iteration.
You can sketch ten versions of an idea in an afternoon instead of burning weeks chasing a “perfect” take. That doesn’t cheapen creativity. It frees it.
The danger isn’t that artists will stop creating. It’s that they won’t claim ownership over what they shape.
The Real Risk: When the Tool Becomes the Driver.
Here’s where things get uncomfortable.
If you let A.I. become the creative engine instead of the creative assistant, you’re outsourcing authorship. Not legally, but philosophically.
When the prompt becomes the art, and not the expression behind it, you’re building on borrowed intent.
That’s where artists lose the plot.
Not because the tool exists, but because they never assert what they bring to the table. Melody decisions. Structural choices.
Emotional framing. Editing. Selection. Rejection.
Those are human acts.
And they’re the difference between “A.I. made this” and “I made this with A.I.”
Authorship Isn’t New. We’ve Been Here Before.
This debate isn’t unique to music.
Photography went through the same reckoning.
A camera is a machine. It captures light based on technical parameters. But no one seriously argues that a photographer isn’t an author. Why? Because authorship lives in choices: framing, timing, subject, perspective, and intention.
Two photographers can stand in the same place, point the same model camera, and walk away with entirely different images.
The machine executes. The human decides.
A.I. works the same way.
The author is the one who sets the direction, curates the output, edits the result, and determines what the work ultimately says. The viewpoint imparted on the system matters. The intent matters. The final selection matters.
Authorship has always been about decision-making, not raw mechanics.
Why Fear Helps the Wrong People.
If creatives hesitate, others won’t. Non-creatives, platforms, and intermediaries are already figuring out how to monetize these tools at scale. If artists sit back out of fear, they won’t stop A.I. from advancing. They’ll just remove themselves from the equation.
Every major creative shift works this way.
Those who adapt, shape the rules and those who don’t, get shaped by them.
So… Friend or Foe?
A.I. in music is neither.
It’s leverage.
Used blindly, it flattens expression. Used deliberately, it amplifies it.
The artists who win in this era won’t be the ones who pretend these tools don’t exist. They’ll be the ones who understand them deeply enough to stay in control.
Creativity has always been about translation. From thought to sound. From feeling to form.
A.I. doesn’t change that.
What it does change is how intentional artists must be about protecting their authorship.
This is a conversation I plan to continue, especially for music creators navigating publishing rights, performing rights, and copyright in an A.I.-assisted world. There are practical ways artists can use these tools while still asserting ownership, documenting authorship, and ensuring the work they release remains theirs in every meaningful sense.
That work isn’t optional anymore. It’s the next phase of being a creator.
What Comes Next, and Why Pedestal Matters.
This conversation doesn’t end with theory. It turns into practice.
As I continue to explore A.I. in music, my focus is on helping artists stay empowered as these tools become more common, not by avoiding them, but by understanding how to use them without giving up authorship. That means being intentional about how work is created, documented, and distributed. It means knowing where your rights live, how your intent is preserved, and who ultimately benefits from the systems you participate in.
That’s where Pedestal fits naturally into this moment.
Pedestal was built around the idea that artists should own their work, understand the economics behind it, and have access to tools and education. With this, artists can extract value from their creativity and not just be used for it. In an era where A.I. can accelerate output but also blur ownership lines, those principles matter more than ever. Moving forward, I’ll be sharing more specifically for Pedestal artists: practical ways to use A.I. tools responsibly, how to maintainclear authorship when working with generative systems, and how to protect publishing rights, performing rights, and copyright while still benefiting from modern workflows. The goal isn’t to slow innovation. It’s to make sure artists remain at the center of it.
If you’re creating music and thinking seriously about how to navigate A.I. without losing control of your work, Pedestal is where that conversation belongs.
