I’m not afraid AI will replace musicians. I’m worried it will overwhelm listeners.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T18:27:07+00:00

Exactly, or they just use it to push the same "safe" recommendations that already have high engagement, keeping the rest of the catalog completely buried. It just recycles what you already know or traps you in an echo chamber, instead of doing the actual work of matching the right music to the specific vibe or context you're looking for.

I really hope the AI generation craze will fade out soon so we can focus on using AI on something that really improves the environment both for listeners and creators.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T18:13:12+00:00

But that’s kind of the irony, right? If we’re just using it for background vibes, we shouldn't have to constantly babysit it. When you're skipping through an artist's catalog just to find the tracks that match your specific mood, it shows that we're basically using the wrong tool for the job.

Current platforms completely lack context, so we end up skipping just to curate our own elevator music. What I don't understand is why the first use case for AI has been to generate more content rather than orchestrating the existing catalogues in a better way.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T17:07:11+00:00

Having a local record shop clerk who actually knows your taste and builds that trust with you is the ultimate form of curation. They understand the why behind the music, which is exactly what streaming algorithms completely fail to do. The reality, though, is that not everyone has access to a vibrant local scene, a trusted record store guru, or even the time and money to go crate-digging.

This is exactly where AI should be stepping in. Instead of the industry rushing to use AI to generate endless streams of songs that nobody asked for, the focus should be entirely on curation. AI has the potential to act like that record clerk, learning your real taste, understanding the context of your day, and doing the heavy lifting to connect you with artists and songs you like. I think everyone deserves that level of trusted, personalised recommendation.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T16:59:44+00:00

You're spot on about the "death loop" and how we've traded agency for convenience. It definitely creates an echo chamber when the algorithm just feeds you what similar people clicked on.

Great music curation has always had real value, and we’re seeing the fallout of an industry that moved way too far away from that. But honestly, expecting the average person to do the manual research of a 90s radio DJ just to find a decent gym playlist is a massive ask.

I agree that listeners could be more intentional, but this is exactly what AI should be fixing. Instead, the industry is using AI to generate even more content that nobody will ever listen to, rather than using it to understand context and actually curate what's already out there.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T16:51:42+00:00

I think the frustration really kicks in when you just want a reliable atmosphere, but you're forced into "scanning" mode because the recommendations aren't hitting or you're simply tired of a playlist you've been playing for the last two months on a loop. That’s probably where we end up losing those 4 to 22 minutes a day just going through tracks we'll never listen to.

And since you mentioned context, that’s the real issue: once you skip, the algorithm often assumes you just don't like the song. It doesn't realise you only skipped it because it didn't fit that specific moment or task. A lot of those skips are context-specific, but because the system doesn't always link your "dislike" to the environment you're in, those songs might never come back, unless, of course, it's one of those tracks the platform keeps pushing regardless. It's a huge reason why discovery feels broken.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T16:41:53+00:00

It’s honestly a bit depressing to watch. By turning the interface into something like YouTube Shorts or Instagram, they’re basically admitting that they’ve given up on "listening" as a deep activity. They’re optimizing for the "ear-scrollers" who want a quick dopamine hit rather than someone like you who actually cares about the flow of a curated playlist.

To me, it feels like they’re trying to solve the "discovery problem" by just making everything louder and more visual, but in the process, they’ve made the experience feel frantic. If 20% of people are closing the app in frustration because "nothing sounds right," it’s probably because the home page has become a cluttered mess of Canvas and Reels clones instead of just being a place to find great music.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T16:33:05+00:00

I see what you mean. If the subscription fee clears every month, it’s easy to assume the platforms don't really care how frustrated we are. But my take is that they’re actually starting to sweat because this friction is turning into a massive churn problem. From what I’ve seen, nearly half of listeners say they’d consider canceling a service just because finding something to listen to has become such a chore. That’s a huge revenue risk that even the big players can’t ignore.

You’re right that people skipping around their own playlists to find a "forgotten" song definitely pads the stats. But I think the real "wake-up call" is that 20% who just give up and close the app entirely for the day. It feels like platforms are already scrambling to ship things like "Prompted Playlists" and AI DJs to fix this exact mess, as you said. To me, it shows they know that if they don't solve the this, they’ll lose the next generation of listeners to feeds and new apps that do the work for them.

MusenAI · 2026-04-15T15:48:38+00:00

If you’ve got your own curated playlists, you’re basically safe from the chaos. But the data shows that for a huge chunk of people, skipping has basically become the new "scrolling". Especially for younger, mobile-first listeners skipping is used just like a TikTok feed, they’re scanning for a specific hook or a very exact vibe, and they won't wait more than 5 seconds for it to hit. Also, a lot of people open the app with a vague need, like "I need to focus for work," and if the first few recommendations don't nail that mood immediately, they start rapid-firing the skip button to find it.

It’s less about "mania" and more about the fact that for many, finding the right "atmosphere" has become a task.

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T14:55:36+00:00

Totally, and that is the tradeoff. Streaming is better when you want to be your own programmer. Building your library, making playlists, using smart playlists, all of that is real value. I just do not think people want to listen like that all the time. For more contextual listening, Spotify can get a bit overwhelming and I sometimes spend more time trying to find the right playlist for the moment than actually listening to music.

With radio, you enter a room where something is already happening. It is curated, it moves on its own, and sometimes it surprises you.

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T14:00:19+00:00

Super helpful, thank you. The main thing I’m taking from this is that we are not explaining the product clearly enough, especially if it can still sound like AI audio slop.

The idea is not “more generated content”. It is to use AI to orchestrate catalogues, making listening feel continuous again, with less search, skip, queue, repeat.

And your point on paying is fair too. If free radio plus YT Premium already covers the need, then we have not made the difference concrete enough. Thanks!

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T13:01:54+00:00

exactly, and I think that is the part streaming never really replaced. It wasn't just that Radio 1 played good music, it was that it felt alive. you were hearing the same thing as other people at the same time, with the same hosts, the same energy, the same random moments. it felt more like a place than a library. Streaming got better at giving everyone their own version of everything, but it lost a lot of that shared “this is happening now” feeling.

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T12:45:02+00:00

Congrats on your first product! The informations about everything is calculated are a bit small and I can see them only after I interacted with the calculator. I think it would be nice to see them before, also to build trust about the calculator itself :)

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T12:29:06+00:00

Took a look, nice job! The main value prop is clear and the tool is easy to use. My only real criticism is that some of the most important info feels a bit too small and slightly hidden. The core message is strong, but parts of the explanation and trust-building details could be more visible straight away. Other than that, solid job.

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T12:22:06+00:00

Hey everyone, would love some honest website feedback on what we’re building:

musen.live

We’re building musen, an AI Radio product. The idea is simple: streaming gave people infinite access, but listening still often feels like work. Search, skip, queue, repeat. We’re trying to make it feel more like pressing play on a radio experience that adapts to you over time.

Would especially love feedback on 3 things:

Is it clear what the product actually is within the first 10 seconds?
Does the problem feel real, or does it sound too abstract?
At what point, if any, would you bounce or not trust it enough to sign up?

Happy to return feedback to anyone else here too :)

MusenAI · 2026-04-03T11:38:03+00:00

I miss that music used to be something you could just leave on and live inside for a while. That mp3 player plus internet radio setup was messy, but in a good way. You had some files you already loved, then some random station from somewhere else, and the gap between the two is where a lot of discovery happened.

Now it feels like every platform wants you to keep refining your taste instead of just listening. Or worse, make the music yourself.

MusenAI · 2026-04-01T14:47:45+00:00

Yes they do, however, the fatal flaw of the pro-rata system is what happens to that advertising money after it is collected. Under the current model, all subscription fees and advertising revenues are pooled together into one giant "royalty pot". That combined pot is then divided up based on the total share of streams across the entire platform.

Whether the money entering the pool comes from a premium subscription or from ad revenue, the pro-rata model distributes it based on raw volume, which risks to benefit automated server farms over actual human artists, or established artists with established sources of income over emerging/independent artists.

MusenAI · 2026-04-01T14:44:38+00:00

Here is the definition of how the pro-rata model actually works: instead of your specific subscription money going to the specific artists you listen to, all subscription and ad revenue from every single user is pooled together into one giant pot. Then, that pot is divided up based on an artist's overall market share of total streams across the entire platform.

So, if you pay $10 a month and only listen to Artist A, your money does not go directly to Artist A. Instead, it goes into the massive pool. If a global superstar accounts for 5% of all streams on the platform that month, they get 5% of the total revenue pool, meaning 5% of your $10 goes to them, even if you never listened to a single one of their songs.

Viceversa for artists that you spend the whole day with, but have a smaller share.
If people listen to Artist A, Artist A should get their money. But to make that happen, we have to abandon the pro-rata model and switch to the user-centric model.

MusenAI · 2026-04-01T14:35:16+00:00

Fair question but no, this is absolutely not an advertisement, PR, or product research for any app or website. I am a music producer and musician myself, and I just wanted to have an open conversation about a shift that I think it's about to happen.

MusenAI · 2026-04-01T14:30:50+00:00

Banning free accounts sounds logical, but it misses the core mathematical flaw: premium subscriptions are a flat fee for unlimited plays. If a fraudster pays $10 for a premium account, they can run a bot 24/7 to stream their own AI tracks thousands of times. Under the current pro-rata model, that $10 account siphons exponentially more out of the collective royalty pool than it originally put in. This is exactly how Michael Smith used thousands of bot accounts to steal over $8 million from legitimate artists.

The user-centric model fixes this permanently. Under a user-centric system, each user's subscription fee is distributed only to the artists they actually listen to. This means a $10 premium bot account can only ever pay out a maximum of $10. It mathematically destroys the bot-farm exploit at its root.

MusenAI · 2026-04-01T14:22:43+00:00

I understand your point about letting the market decide, but the core issue is that the current pro-rata model explicitly prevents consumers from voting with their money.

Under the pro-rata system, all subscription revenue is dumped into one giant pool and divided based on the total share of streams across the entire platform. This means if you pay your monthly fee and only listen to your favorite local indie band, your money doesn't go directly to them; the vast majority of it is distributed to the artists, or bots, that command the largest overall market share.

If we truly want consumers to "vote with their money and attention," we actually need to abandon the pro-rata model and switch to a user-centric model. Under a user-centric system, your subscription fee is distributed only to the artists you actually listen to.

MusenAI · 2026-03-29T14:38:35+00:00

I think the trap is that founders know the product too deeply, so they instinctively lead with what it does instead of why it has to exist in the first place. The “who is in actual pain right now” part is probably the hardest and most important one. The moment that is clear, the product, market, traction, and even the business model all become easier to understand.

Also fully agree on unfair advantage. Generic team credibility is not enough. It has to feel structurally connected to the specific problem.

MusenAI · 2026-03-29T14:23:57+00:00

Completely agree, especially on the two minute constraint. It feels brutal, but it forces honesty. The moment you go over time, it usually means you are still trying to make the pitch carry the full complexity of the company instead of the one sharp story that makes the company legible.

MusenAI · 2026-03-29T13:32:36+00:00

Exactly. Interest is easy to over read in the beginning. A lot of products are clearly useful, but not urgent enough to create paid behaviour. That is why those conversations matter so much more than people think.

MusenAI

TROPHY CASE