John Lennon, the legendary pop singer who was murdered in 1980, has appeared in a new Beatles song released in 2023.
According to CNBC, the song was made possible by AI software developed by Peter Jackson, the director of “The Lord of the Rings,” and his team during the production of the documentary series “The Beatles: Get Back.”
The song, called “Now And Then,” took over five decades to complete due to “impossible technological challenges” in isolating Lennon’s vocals from a demo, according to The Beatles’ YouTube. However, AI technology enabled the team to clean up his vocals and finally complete the song.
“We were able to take John’s voice and get it pure through this AI, so that then we could mix the record as you would normally do. It gives you some sort of leeway,” Paul McCartney said on BBC’s “Today” program, per CNBC.
The Beatles are not the only ones using AI to create music. Here’s how AI is shaping the future of music — not always for the better.
AI’s impact on the music industry
In 2023, a song called “NostalgIA,” featuring replicated voices of Bad Bunny and Justin Bieber, started making rounds online. However, neither artist worked on the song. Their voices were replicated using AI, according to BBC.
Additionally, an artist known as Ghostwriter submitted a song for the Grammys in 2023, using AI to replicate Drake and The Weeknd’s voices in a track called “Heart on My Sleeve,” per Variety. It first appeared on YouTube but was taken down by Universal Music.
The song was deemed ineligible for the Grammys because it was not legally cleared for “general distribution.”
Despite this, Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr. spoke positively about Ghostwriter’s intentions. “I got the chance to speak to ‘Ghostwriter’ and hear his perspective, and it’s very interesting,” Mason told Variety. “He’s very forward looking, he’s very creative.”
“From my perspective, this has been an exercise for him to try and establish a dialogue and create some awareness around the possibilities and what are going to be some of the potholes,” he continued.
He emphasized that the Grammys would accept works that include AI elements, but human creativity must remain integral.
“We’re not going to be giving a nomination or an award to an AI computer or someone who just prompted AI,” he said. “That’s the distinction that we’re trying to make. It’s the human award highlighting excellence, driven by human creativity.”
Pop singer Grimes is enthusiastic about AI in music and has invited people to use her voice in their music freely.
In a post on X, she said, “I’ll split 50% royalties on any successful AI generated song that uses my voice. Same deal as I would with any artist i collab with.
“Feel free to use my voice without penalty,” she added. “I have no label and no legal bindings.”
Challenges ahead
Last month, Tennessee became the first state to pass legislation protecting artists from AI imitating their voices, according to The Associated Press. The law holds individuals liable if they use an artist’s voice without permission.
“We employ more people in Tennessee in the music industry than any other state,” Gov. Bill Lee said, per The Associated Press. “Artists have intellectual property. They have gifts. They have a uniqueness that is theirs and theirs alone, certainly not artificial intelligence.”
Another concern is that AI could mean studios no longer need to pay artists; instead, they could input a prompt and AI would generate a song imitating a particular artist’s style, according to Time.
Edward Newton-Rex, vice president of audio at Stability AI, resigned from his position, stating he believed he was helping companies steal artists’ work.
“Companies worth billions of dollars are, without permission, training generative AI models on creators’ works, which are then being used to create new content that in many cases can compete with the original works,” he wrote in a statement on Music Business Worldwide.
Other artists also fear AI’s impact on the future of music.
Dolly Parton told The Hollywood Reporter that AI music was “the mark of the beast.”
She added, “I think all this stuff can be great, used in the right way. But not to replace voices and writings and not to replace a human being that belongs to God.”