Spotify’s New Favourite Band Might Not Be Real, And That Should Worry Us
If you keep up with entertainment news, you’re probably already familiar with The Velvet Sundown, the almost certainly AI-generated music project that has been the subject of very many articles and in-depth analyses in the past few weeks. The story of the mysterious “band”, which released its first two full-length albums in less than a month’s time and has been able to attract nearly a million monthly listeners on Spotify, is fascinating and at times absurd. However, it’s also arguably the first case of an AI artist completely taking over music media and amassing a sizeable following. What does it mean for the music industry? What does it mean for independent artists? Here are a few important takeaways.
1. Large streaming services have no problem hosting AI-generated music
In a matter of weeks, The Velvet Sundown has been discussed by journalists, music fans, musicians and even mainstream media outlets. The conversations usually focus on the ethics surrounding AI-generated music. Is it okay to charge people money to listen to songs created by a computer program? Do listeners have the right to know if the artists they’re being recommended are real or not? Whatever the answers to those questions may be, large streaming companies like Spotify and Apple don’t seem to be interested, even when the music is available on their platforms. As of today, there have been no official statements or reactions.
This one probably shouldn’t come as a surprise. In 2024, Spotify’s co-president Gustav Söderström said that, as long as artists are using generative AI “in a legal way”, the company had no problem with its implementation. That is a very problematic statement considering that the companies behind music creation programs like Suno AI (which was likely used to create The Velvet Sundown’s catalogue) have been recently sued for copyright infringement. And even leaving issues of legality aside, Spotify has repeatedly been criticized by users for allowing AI-generated material to make its way into popular playlists, potentially taking revenue away from flesh-and-blood artists.
Bottom line is, if companies like Spotify and Apple Music have qualms about their music libraries being full of songs not made by human musicians, they’re certainly not making an effort to convince the public that that is the case.
2. AI artists can create drama just as well as their human counterparts
There are many reasons to believe AI-generated art will continue growing in popularity as time passes (it’s cheap and easy to produce, after all) and many ways to argue it probably won’t. One of them is pointing out that a big part of the music business is drama, something advanced algorithms presumably can’t replicate. The success of superstars like Kanye West and Justin Bieber is inseparably linked to gossip and controversy, which results in media attention and unforgettable album cycles. In less than a month, The Velvet Sundown has completely disproven that theory.
Even when its whole image consists of a handful of clearly fake photographs, The Velvet Sundown has become one of the most controversial bands on the planet. They have haters on social media. They have influencers posting reactions to their official statements online. They were even victims of an impersonator! And all of it seems to have done wonders for their Spotify numbers. On June 26th, they had 325,388 monthly listeners on the platform. As of July 5th, the number is 937,686.
3. AI artists are still incredibly limited
Despite its relative success, as a project, The Velvet Sundown has mostly been a showcase of all the ways in which AI artists still can’t compete with human musicians in many key ways.
For one, it’s incredibly hard for whoever is behind the “band” to maintain ownership of the project. If you look at their official artist page in Spotify you’ll find a statement regarding “false representation”. They’re referring to Andrew Frelon, the man who spoke to Rolling Stone Magazine claiming to have created The Velvet Sundown and later admitted to being an imposter. Aside from making music journalists look horribly unprofessional, the incident made clear that it’s very easy to impersonate artists that exist almost exclusively through AI-generated materials.
The Velvet Sundown saga has also shown how difficult it is to promote AI-generated art. These “bands” can’t tour or use their faces to put themselves out there. They can’t rely on their personalities or their personal histories to connect with fans unless they spend actual time and money coming up with fictional backstories for the band members, which surely defeats the purpose of making a cheap fake rock band with widely available AI tools.
It also should be mentioned that, if you read one of the many, many articles that explore The Velvet Sundown, you probably won’t find a lot being said about their actual music. That’s because the songs are all incredibly derivative and forgettable. Without the controversy, it’s hard to imagine listeners paying attention to a retro folk-rock band with vague lyrics about war.
The activity of AI-generated bands and singers still seems limited to infiltrating popular playlists on quietly complicit streaming platforms. What The Velvet Sundown ultimately highlights isn’t just the potential of AI in music, but its current ceiling. Content can be generated in seconds, but building connection is another story. Without a genuine voice or lived experience behind the music, there’s only so far it can go. And if listeners are tuning in more for the mystery than the music, the question becomes: how long can it last?
For now, bands like The Velvet Sundown might win the algorithm, but they can’t replace the nuance, presence, or perspective that real artists bring. Because hype might be automated, but humanity isn’t.
Written by Carlos José Jijón