The music industry is caught between a promise and a threat. On one hand, artificial intelligence offers unprecedented tools for creation and discovery. On the other, listeners are already facing fatigue, as AI-generated content floods streaming platforms, devaluing human artistry and threatening the livelihoods of creators. As this new technology rewires the economics of music, the most powerful check on its overreach may not come from corporations or regulators, but from the listeners themselves.
We spoke with Martin Gutierrez, the Creative Director of Sync at SoStereo. With over a decade of experience fighting for artists, from co-founding a music festival to his current role connecting independent musicians with global brands. Gutierrez has a clear and passionate perspective on the industry’s latest existential challenge.
- The listener's veto: As the industry grapples with transparency, some platforms like Deezer have announced plans to label AI-generated tracks. But for Gutierrez, simple labeling falls short. He proposes a solution that moves beyond simple labels and puts the power directly into the hands of subscribers. "Once you are paying a platform a premium account, they should actually ask the user, 'Are you okay with us recommending AI-generated music to you?' Press 'yes' or 'no.' We should have the power for that." His reasoning is not just practical; it’s philosophical. "I don't think it has any soul. It doesn't have any love put into it," he added. "It's just things that are stolen from real people, from real creative minds."
- Artists first: "My end goal in doing what I do is always to help the people who make the music," Gutierrez says. "It's always hard for musicians. It's hard for them to get paid, and it's hard for them when a new technology comes up. They're the ones who always feel the negative effects most."
The line blurs when artists use AI as a tool rather than a replacement. Gutierrez points to a long-standing industry practice as a potential model: sampling. For decades, artists have legally incorporated snippets of other songs into their work, but with a critical distinction. "If they are using a sample and creating something over it, that's great," he explains. But a clear framework of consent and compensation, he argues, is what’s missing from today’s AI ecosystem.
-
A disheartening reality: The lack of a fair system has a real human cost. For Gutierrez, watching the industry grapple with these issues is both frustrating and painful. "It is very disheartening to see these things are happening, that governments are just not even thinking about the effect on the people that are last in the cycle of payments, which are the artists," he says.
Musicians are now taking a step forward and making sure they are protecting their voice recordings and their likeness through a combination of legal, contractual, and technological strategies. They still can't copyright their voice, but they can protect themselves against the models that AI is trained on.Martin Gutierrez - Creative Director of Sync | SoStereoThis disregard for artists is most blatant in how some AI companies source their training data. Gutierrez describes a blunt, transactional process where large firms approach music libraries with brazen offers to buy access to their entire catalogs for AI training. "'Hey, I'll give you this amount of money for all your songs so we can put all of that data into our systems. And it happens without even asking the artist."
In the face of this unregulated environment, some artists are taking matters into their own hands, employing a novel strategy to protect their most personal asset.
- Protect your voice: "Musicians are now taking a step forward and making sure they are protecting their voice recordings and their likeness through a combination of legal, contractual, and technological strategies. They still can't copyright their voice, but they can protect themselves against the models that AI is trained on."
Ultimately, these individual efforts can only go so far without systemic support. "That's what people in the music and art industry need: regulations," he says. "It needs to be regulated. It can't just be thrown into the pile for everyone to figure it out for themselves."
Despite the challenges, Gutierrez isn't entirely pessimistic about technology's role in music's future. He sees immense potential in ethical AI tools that augment rather than replace human creativity. He points to a compelling example: using AI to translate an artist's song into a different language for a foreign market, perfectly preserving the original tone and melody.
"The artist is still keeping those rights. The AI company doesn't own that," he concludes. "For artists to be able to adapt their songs in a way that is profitable to them, then I say, 'Hands down, that's great.'"