AI In Music – A Personal View From Sarah Bardwell, Managing Director At The RPO

The industry debate on AI in music is gathering momentum but we felt it was vital to plug the audience view into the industry discussion. For any performing ensemble, we are nothing without our audience and supporters, so hearing their views on AI was very important to us. The RPO research results revealed mixed views between the positive and potentially negative impacts of AI in music; a clear sense of the value and importance of supporting human creativity – and there were contrasting views towards live and recorded music. It has been valuable to have a chance to digest and reflect on these views from the people that support concerts, buy or stream music and that advocate for orchestral music generally.

If one steps back from the polarised industry debate for a moment, the simple truth is that AI is here, it’s been with us for a while. I don't think that a day goes by when we don't use AI in some shape for form in our daily lives and at work. We sometimes don't even realize we're using it. AI can help you with music playlists and it helps you get to places. It could help you with security, it gives you information from Google searches and it shapes your everyday online shopping experience. AI is a genie that can’t be put back in a bottle.

So, the discussion for us, as creatives, is; how we use it, how we use it responsibly and how we tackle practical issues – such as AI copying music – that, together, we need to overcome. It’s all part of evolving into a new age. A hundred years ago in 1926, some may have found the invention of the microphone and recorded music to be a threat. The recorded music age in fact sign-posted people to the concert hall as live and studio recorded music learned how to happily co-exist. And today, the same is true of AI and its relationship with music. What we all have to work on is the how, not the if; how we engage AI responsibly, thoughtfully – and to the benefit of all our stakeholders.

A practical example here would be how we use AI to enhance our box office operation – here there's all sorts of ways that AI could help us. Through AI, we can find out what the best time is to put tickets on sale and when to advertise events. It’s probably fair to say that for most of the tickets people buy nowadays, AI has in some way impacted decisions and it has potential to assist our team in helping to personalise the experience for our audiences. And we need to do this because the audience is already engaging with the outputs of AI in the concerts they see, the tickets they book, the travel plans they make for concerts and the music streaming suggestions that are recommended to them. So, in terms of operational efficiency, AI can help us in so many ways and I’m encouraging our staff team to explore what is possible with AI. Ultimately, if people are using AI as part of their daily lives, it makes sense for us to apply the best practice in the world of work.

Touring is another example where AI can help us. As ambassadors for British culture on the world stage, the RPO tours extensively from the USA to China - and many places in between. The tour planning and logistics are hugely complex and time-intensive operations and we are currently exploring how AI can help us with the booking of flights, accommodation and various forms of personalised AI assistance for our musicians. AI can’t do everything though – for example, during our recent tour of the US, the extreme weather conditions threw up countless logistical challenges and it needed the human skills of our brilliant tour manager, Rose, to step in and make the experienced calls on urgent issues, to ensure the tour went smoothly. And this is similar to many people’s experiences of customer services in general: AI can provide quick responses on the straightforward matters, and that frees up the human experts to step-in to handle complex cases or situations. Again, there is a sense of balance and of co-existence that mutually benefits the organisation and the end-user. This feels like a positive and sustainable way forward.

The need for consideration and balance

I have reflected on some of the positives we can enjoy from AI, but we also have to engage with it knowingly. We can’t just sleepwalk into it, or think one day it will work itself out; we need to be purposeful and much more considerate about the boundaries we set and how we use AI as a base upon which we overlay human thought, interpretation and judgement.

I do think we have to manage AI carefully, and that's why I think we have to have our eyes wide open. And the way to positively influence outcomes is to engage. Within our organisation, we doing an audit of how we think we're using AI at the moment, assessing how we're knowingly using it, where it adds value and the terms of engagement for using it going forward. Ultimately confidence and a sense of parameters come from having a considered plan in place.

The creative discussion

Most of my comments so far relate to mechanics and the logistics of our world, rather than the creative imperative, which I think, is quite a separate conversation. For us, that's a different bit of AI; we have to separate those things out and use it when it's useful. Let’s use it well; let's use it knowingly - and let's use it so AI is learning good things from us. But there's a risk as well.

I've heard about a composer who plans to write an opera using AI prompts. They want to create an AI opera and I think that will happen more and more particularly in a TV and film context. I suspect at the moment, you have to prompt AI really, really well to get anywhere close to music fitting film or moving image perfectly, but AI will get there. We need to be mindful to protect composers and song writers from having their music borrowed or stolen. We need to establish the best way to achieve that, whether it is through copyright laws, closed AI spaces or some other tool.

In terms of recorded music and streaming, we absolutely have to keep an eye on the copyright and royalties issues. I know artists can opt out, and decide not to be part of the AI infrastructure, to not have your recordings, your work, your creative output, in there. I think we need to think about ways of making sure that artists and composers are paid fairly for their copyright and there are grounds for concern here. Historically, we've certainly not done a great job in the sector around streaming rights. So, it worries me that we might get to the same place with AI in that you can opt in, but you're paid ridiculously tiny amount. I think there are things that need to be bottomed out around this for sure, it's a very live issue in the sector. I regularly meet with other creative leaders, not just in the music sector but also from the worlds of theatre and dance, and it's a constant recurring subject. This is not something we're going to be able to just ignore. I will be sharing the research findings from our AI in Music study with industry contacts, allies and policy makers, in the hope that our insights can help inform positive change going forwards.

However, we should remain confident in the enduring power of live concerts, the magic that only comes from people – musicians and audiences interacting. And as our Music Director, Vasily Petrenko, commented to me the other day; the imperfections of human creativity are precisely the things that create art. Perfected emulation is what it is; for some it has a place but it will never replace the artistic talents of human creation. On a personal level, I was pleased our market research backed this up.

It was so pleasing to see from the research that a high proportion of people still want the spontaneous, very human magic of live concerts in the AI age - and I think that's something we absolutely have to hold on to, cherish and continue to build on. Whilst many people said live music and theatre could not be overtaken by AI, the public’s view was different when it came to studio-based creation, such as music recording and also photography.

I also noticed some subtle suggestions from the research that there may be understandable generation differences in the public’s attitudes to AI in music. Older people were generally more fearful of AI and saw it as more of a threat. Conversely many – though not all - younger people were more likely to see AI in music as more of a non-issue, probably because many have grown up with it. , But we must always be careful not to over-generalise. Whilst many young people do embrace AI and new technology, some of them have strong opinions on the environmental impact of AI. These are valid views that should form part of the broader conversation about the thoughtful, considered and respectful use of any new technology.

Whilst our recent study focused on the music audience, the views of musicians are also crucially important to the AI debate. At the RPO, I encourage the musicians and staff to understand how useful AI can be, as a supportive tool - and to appreciate that we're not trying to use it to in any way disadvantage them or their livelihoods. We want to embrace it in a way that works for everyone, in a way that adds something to our creative lives.

And that’s maybe a meaningful final thought to reflect on. AI is for everyone, it affects everyone and the pathway we forge has to be inclusive to everyone’s thoughts and preferences. We would be mad not to embrace AI but, to make things work, AI has to include everyone and at the RPO we are working hard to make sure that the everyone comes with us on the journey.