The influx of AI-generated music onto streaming platforms like Spotify is becoming increasingly noticeable, prompting listeners to question the authenticity of the artists they’re discovering. While Spotify doesn’t disclose specific figures, the sheer volume of new releases – and the speed at which some artists are producing albums – is raising eyebrows. Deezer reported in September 2025 that 28% of its daily uploads were AI-generated, highlighting the scale of the issue.
Identifying AI-generated music isn’t always straightforward, but a combination of factors can point to its artificial origins. Here’s a breakdown of what to look for, based on observations from users and analysis of current trends.
1. Superhuman Output
A key indicator is the sheer volume of music an artist releases. Traditional musicians typically release albums over several years, interspersed with singles and EPs. AI-driven projects, however, often churn out multiple albums within months, or even weeks. For example, the artist “The Devil Inside” released 13 albums in 2025, while “The Velvet Sundown” released three albums in its first year. “Aventhis,” another AI artist, also released three albums in 2025, though some have since been removed from the platform.
This prolific output is possible because AI tools can generate music at a rate far exceeding human capabilities. It’s important to note that while some exceptionally prolific human artists exist – James Brown released five albums in 1968 – the consistency and speed of AI-generated releases are often a telltale sign. Crucially, AI-generated albums generally don’t predate 2024, as the necessary tools for large-scale production only became widely available in late 2023 and early 2024 with the launch of platforms like Suno AI and Udio.
2. A Lack of Live Shows, Media Interviews, or Social Media Posts
Another significant clue is the absence of real-world presence. Most artists, even those starting out, will eventually schedule live shows, conduct interviews, or maintain an active social media presence. AI-generated artists, lacking a physical embodiment, typically have none of these. None of the AI projects examined had scheduled live performances. “Breaking Rust,” an AI project with over 2.5 million monthly listeners, is a prime example.
While exceptions exist – one instance of “The Devil Inside” incorrectly listing a live show for a different band – the general rule holds true. A lack of media coverage and a limited or non-existent social media presence further reinforce the suspicion. Even artists with limited budgets often have some form of online engagement.
3. AI-Generated Imagery
The visual presentation of an artist can also be revealing. AI-generated artists often utilize AI-created imagery for their artist pages and social media profiles. These images often appear overly smooth or generic. However, Here’s becoming increasingly difficult to detect as AI image generation technology improves. Some artists, like Sienna Rose, have reportedly scrubbed older AI-generated imagery from their profiles after being flagged, replacing it with more ambiguous visuals.
Checking profiles on other platforms like Tidal and Deezer can sometimes reveal earlier iterations of an artist’s branding, potentially exposing the use of AI-generated imagery.
4. Credits with a Single Creator (or AI Acknowledgement in the Bio)
Examining the song credits is often the most direct method. Traditional songs typically involve multiple composers, performers and producers. AI-generated tracks, however, are frequently credited to a single individual, reflecting the fact that they are often produced by one person using AI tools. While solo artists do exist, they often have collaborations listed on other tracks.
Some artists are also proactively disclosing their use of AI in their biographies.
5. The Music is Flagged on Other Platforms
Spotify currently doesn’t label AI-generated music, but Deezer does. The platform flags albums it identifies as likely being created by AI. Checking an artist’s discography on Deezer can provide valuable insight. There are also community-driven resources like Soul Over AI, which compiles reports of suspected AI-generated artists, though these reports should be viewed with caution.
6. Generic, Repetitive Music and Lyrics
While subjective, the quality of the music itself can be a clue. Listeners often report that AI-generated music tends to be bland, repetitive, and lacking in originality. However, this is the least reliable indicator, as many commercially released songs also fall into this category.
identifying AI-generated music requires a holistic approach, considering multiple factors in conjunction.
The increasing prevalence of AI-generated music raises important questions about transparency and control for listeners. While some may not mind AI-created content, the ability to make informed choices is crucial. Currently, users largely rely on self-detection, but platforms should consider implementing features like AI labeling or opt-out options for AI-generated recommendations. Without such measures, some listeners may find themselves seeking alternatives to Spotify and other streaming services.
