When the Beatles broke up over 50 years ago, the legendary group left their fans hungry. But with artificial intelligence, their appetite is finally partially satisfied.
• Read also: Sting predicts a ‘battle’ between artists and artificial intelligence
• Read also: Fake AI-generated Drake and The Weeknd song sparks debate
By “bringing together” the four artists again, or by revisiting the latest works of Paul McCartney with his youthful voice, these creations highlight recent technological advances, while raising a host of ethical and legal questions.
“I am in tears! This is so beautiful!!!,” a listener wrote on YouTube, below the video for Paul McCartney’s single “New” (2013), which was fan-modified using artificial intelligence (AI). His voice is rejuvenated, and the track features a part sung by his late friend and partner John Lennon.
Equally impressive: A version of “Grow Old With Me,” one of the last songs written by John Lennon, released after his assassination and recreated by an artificial intelligence enthusiast calling himself “Dae Lims.”
With improved audio quality, and backing vocals that evoke the band’s heyday from Liverpool, the song’s most emotional moment comes when Paul McCartney sings along to the melody.
“When I hear that, I go crazy. I’m starting to cry,” said one-million-subscriber Youtuber Steve Onotera, or “SamuraiGuitarist” online, in a video.
After the band broke up, fans were robbed of a “happy ending,” he says. “So when you see them brought together artificially, but convincingly, thanks to artificial intelligence, it’s very moving.”
The song “Heart on a Sleeve”, bringing together artists Drake and The Weeknd, had garnered millions of clicks on TikTok and other platforms.
The technology used analyzes and captures the nuances of a voice. The creators probably sing the lyrics themselves, before applying a “clone” of the desired voice, like applying a filter to a photograph.
Getting there is not easy and requires humans who know how to handle AI, with a real knowledge of music software, according to Zohaib Ahmed, CEO of Resemble AI, a Toronto company specializing in this field.
“I think there is still only a very small part of the population that can access these tools,” he says. You have to “read on it, have the right computer, and put it all together.”
His company is one of those offering a platform that can be released more widely to the entertainment industry – including a Netflix documentary supposedly ‘commented’ by the voice of the late Andy Warhol.
For Patricia Alessandrini, a composer and teacher at Stanford, the growing number of AI-generated tracks represents the coming of age of a technology that has grown exponentially – while remaining quite remote from mainstream audiences over the past decade.
“It’s a good example of what AI does really well, which is anything to do with look-alikes,” she told AFP. But “there is really no risk that it will replace the rich history of art and culture created by humans.”
For the music industry, the implications are enormous. Technology allowing people to easily transform their voice into that of their favorite singer probably won’t be long in coming.
If the artists “are paid for a license of their voice, then everyone is happy”, estimates Steve Onotera. “But what about those who are long dead?”
The issue of copyright is central.
In the case of “Heart on a Sleeve”, the Universal group had the piece removed from streaming platforms – without this preventing it from reappearing online here and there.
According to Marc Ostrow, a lawyer specializing in these issues, AI-generated music is a “grey area”.
Rights can be claimed by both artists and music labels. But content creators using AI can claim the legal concept of “fair use” (“reasonable use”), a kind of exception clause.
The US Supreme Court ruled in the opposite direction last month, ruling that a photographer, whose photo of the musician Prince was used by the painter Andy Warhol, should have received copyright.
Ultimately, “I think the standards will be set by the industry deliberately (…) or it will end up in court,” Marc Ostrow told AFP.
The labels will indeed have to deal with the bad publicity caused by a lawsuit against the work of a fan, seen as a tribute and not a source of money.