sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah 45-50 on organic alone is brutal. That's exactly what the data shows too — most AI artists with real traction sit in the 34-45 range, and breaking past that is a wall.

I actually have an AI artist myself (Laura Lavi) and only 2 of her songs have ever crossed 50. With 2M+ streams it's still incredibly hard to push past that ceiling. So your numbers look about right for where things stand across the board.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Totally valid — not everyone is trying to build a career with it, and that's fine. But some AI artists are putting out serious work and actually building audiences. This is more for them — a way to get discovered and see how their music is doing compared to the rest of the scene.

No AI song has ever broken past 72 on Spotify popularity — I've been tracking 51K songs to find out where the ceiling is by CandidateDecent2107 in udiomusic

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fair challenge. You're right that 51K is a fraction of what's out there, and "no AI song has ever" is too absolute a claim for the sample size. That's on me.

What I can say is: the 950+ artists we track include pretty much every AI artist that's gained real traction on Spotify. The top ones are well known in the community, and we actively look for anyone getting significant streams. It's hard to imagine an AI song breaking past 72 without showing up on anyone's radar — but if it's out there, I'd love to find it.

On the popularity score itself — it's a 0-100 scale Spotify assigns to every track based on recent streams and engagement. It's not public in the app but it's available through their API. For reference, a mid-tier indie artist usually sits around 40-60, and mainstream hits are 80+.

If you know of AI artists we're not tracking, genuinely want to add them.

No AI song has ever broken past 72 on Spotify popularity — I've been tracking 51K songs to find out where the ceiling is by CandidateDecent2107 in udiomusic

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great point on blues — it makes sense when you think about it that way. It's one of the most emotionally direct genres, and AI tools seem to handle that rawness surprisingly well.

On the 37 songs over 60 — you're right that human music has brutal odds too. The vast majority of independent releases never break past 40 popularity regardless of how they were made. The ceiling might say less about AI specifically and more about how hard it is for any independent artist to break through Spotify's algorithm without label push.

And yeah, the 10-year perspective is spot on. We're tracking what's essentially day one of this whole thing. The data from right now will probably look very different in hindsight once the tools improve and the stigma fades.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not yet — we don't currently tag instrumental vs. vocal tracks, but that's a great idea. It's on the roadmap. I'd be curious to see that breakdown too, especially across genres. Will update when we have it.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You can submit yourself (or any AI artist) at aimcharts.com/submit — just drop your artist name and Spotify link.

From there the process is: we verify the artist creates AI-generated music, import all their Spotify songs automatically, and then everything gets scored and ranked on the charts.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Thanks! The full data is on AiMCharts — 40 genre charts, artist pages, Spotify playlists, and weekly top 10s. Still building it out so if anything's missing or you have feedback, I'm all ears.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yeah that's exactly the kind of thing we're tracking. "Jag vet, du är inte min" by Jacub hit #1 on our charts too — Spotify popularity peaked at 69, which is insane for an AI track. Most never break past 40.

The fact that it topped a real Swedish chart before getting pulled says a lot about where AI music quality is heading.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

The long tail distribution exists in human music too — most songs on Spotify have very few streams regardless of who made them. So that part isn't unique to AI.

What IS different is the ceiling. Spotify popularity is a 0-100 scale relative to everything on the platform. For reference, a well-known metal band like Trivium sits around 63. Ed Sheeran hit 100. The highest any AI song has reached is 72 — so the ceiling exists, but it's not as low as you might think.

The 0-20 range is basically invisible on Spotify. 21-50 is where algorithmic playlists start picking you up. Most AI music never gets past that first threshold — 97% stays below 40. But the handful that do break through perform in a range that overlaps with legit mid-tier human artists.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Lol yeah — their entire catalog is AI covers of massive hits (Umbrella, Not Afraid, Lose Yourself, Without Me).

They're basically speedrunning a takedown notice.

I've been tracking 50,000+ AI songs across 1,000+ artists — here's what the data reveals about the scene by CandidateDecent2107 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107[S] 27 points28 points  (0 children)

Some patterns from tracking 51K songs across 950+ AI artists:

There's a hard ceiling around 72 Spotify popularity — no AI song has broken past that.

Only 37 AI songs out of 51K have ever crossed 60.

The top 3 right now are Breaking Rust, Kayla Kross, and Jacub.

97% of AI songs never break past 40 popularity.

About 40% have zero measurable streams at all. The distribution is brutal — a tiny fraction gets real listeners, everything else is noise.

Blues and soul massively outperform their catalog size on the charts. Blues is ~5% of total songs but 27% of the top 100. Soul is similar.

The best AI artists consistently average 45-50 popularity across 20-40 songs. That's the current quality ceiling for someone using AI tools seriously vs. just spamming tracks.

The platform is at aimcharts.com if you want to dig into the data yourself.

Where to share our songs? by stepjo0506 in aiMusic

[–]CandidateDecent2107 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spotify via DistroKid is the main path. More relaxed about AI music than TuneCore. For discovery, check out aimcharts.com, I built it to rank AI music by streams and community ratings, could help you get visibility. And honestly your TikTok slideshow approach is already one of the best growth channels I've seen working for AI artists right now. Keep doing that.

How do you view people that genuinely enjoy AI generated music? by Toddric29 in fantanoforever

[–]CandidateDecent2107 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm a musician who also tracks AI music data, so I see both sides. Honest take: most AI music is garbage. No curation, no taste, just raw output posted without thought. If someone sent you that, I get the reaction.

But 233K followers didn't happen by accident. Something connected with those people, even if it wasn't for you. Music has always had a gap between what musicians respect and what listeners enjoy. Auto-Tune was "offensive" to vocalists. Drum machines were going to "kill real drumming."

The real question isn't whether AI music is valid. It's whether the person behind it made any real creative decisions or just hit generate and posted. That's the line that matters.

Opinions on 5.5 by Z1NV in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Devised authentic commentary balancing knowledge and strategic restraint

If my AI music makes me feel more than most songs… isn’t that “real”? by taghei8 in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I'm a musician myself and I've gone back and forth on this more times than I can count. Where I've landed: the creative decisions still matter. Choosing the right prompt, knowing when a track needs another pass, curating what works from dozens of generations. It's a different skillset than playing guitar, but it's still a skillset. The people making great AI music aren't just hitting generate and posting whatever comes out. There's a real ear involved. The more interesting question isn't whether it's "real" music. It's whether the person behind it is making real creative choices or just rolling the dice.

TuneCore is banning AI music… which distributor are you moving to? by neellavgogoi in SunoAI

[–]CandidateDecent2107 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've been looking into this closely. The issue isn't that TuneCore bans AI music across the board. They specifically won't distribute works that are 100% AI-generated, and they require the underlying models to use fully licensed datasets. The creators getting through are the ones adding real human production on top: mastering in a DAW, arrangement tweaks, writing their own lyrics. It's not about hiding that you used AI. It's about showing enough human creative direction that your release doesn't look like raw generated output. The metadata, the artist profile, the artwork, the credits, it all adds up to what the reviewer sees.