ON AI, HONESTLY
Human-made music is, above all else, something to be celebrated and cherished. Live performers deserve our support. Local artists deserve our support. And every person – regardless of their background or means – deserves access to affordable music education, instruction, and the joy of participation.
I don't believe AI should replace the human experience: it should be used to enhance it. Used responsibly and honestly, AI becomes a tool that opens doors, sparks curiosity, and invites more people into the world of music, not fewer. This conviction doesn't just shape my perspective; it shapes my decision making. As a result, I work by my Human-First Code of Ethics for AI Music & Art Creation – principles designed to ensure that artificial intelligence always remains in service to humanity: to augment human creativity, enrich human culture, and promote human flourishing.
AI is an instrument. We are the music.
HUMAN-FIRST ETHICS
WHY I WROTE THIS
Over the years I have taught hundreds of piano students, and there is one thing I have tried to pass along to every one of them, whether they were seven or seventy: be honest in your music. Play what is on the page, of course, but also mean what you play. Listeners can tell the difference.
When I began creating music with artificial intelligence, I realized that principle needed to come with me. AI has changed how music can be made, and I believe anyone using these tools owes their listeners a clear account of how they are using them. This page is my attempt to give that account. I wrote it for listeners, for fellow musicians, for students and teachers, and, frankly, for myself, as a set of standards to hold myself to.
HOW I USE AI
I use AI tools to create music. I am not embarrassed about that, but I do think it calls for an explanation and for some clear standards. Here are mine.
Transparency. Whenever AI has been used in my work, I will say so. My albums are identified as AI-assisted, and I am glad to describe my process to anyone who asks. Listeners have a right to know what they are hearing and how it was made.
Intention. AI does not replace my musical thinking; it extends it. Every piece still begins with a musical idea, a purpose, or a feeling I want to communicate, and every piece is shaped by my decisions about form, sound, text, and when the work is finished. Those decisions are mine, and so is the responsibility for them.
Craft. Just because something is easy to make does not mean it is worth making. I hold AI-assisted work to the same standard as everything else I do: Is it well made? Is it honest? Is it worth a listener’s time? If the answer is no, it does not get released.
Respect for the artists behind the tools. AI music systems learn from music that human beings created, and many of those musicians never agreed to that. I take that seriously. In practice, I do not prompt these tools to imitate a specific living artist by name, I do not reproduce the voice of any real person, and I will credit every human collaborator on my work. I am also following the legal and licensing questions surrounding these platforms, and I will adjust how I work as those questions are settled.
Honesty about process. I will not present AI-assisted work as entirely human-made. I will not submit it to competitions, grants, or other settings that do not allow it, and I will not use it to misrepresent my abilities as a musician.
ON AI AND THE ARTISTS BEHIND IT
AI music systems were trained on an enormous body of human music, spanning centuries, cultures, and countless artists, both named and unnamed. In most cases, those artists were never asked, and they have not been paid. They deserve credit, and they deserve compensation.
I cannot undo how these systems were built. What I can do is create with that debt in mind: approach every tradition I draw from with genuine respect, support living musicians and live music, and speak up for a future in which consent and compensation are part of these systems from the beginning.
MY STANDARDS AS A MUSICIAN
Most of these standards are not new. They are the same ones I have tried to live by for more than twenty years as a pianist, teacher, and arts administrator.
Make music I believe in. I will not make music simply to follow a trend or satisfy outside pressure. If I do not believe in it, it is not worth making.
Respect the listener. Anyone who listens to my music is giving me their time and their trust. I do not want to waste either one, or to manipulate someone’s emotions for effect.
Respect other musicians. This is a demanding profession. The people who choose it deserve credit where credit is due, fair treatment in collaboration, and colleagues who do not tear others down to build themselves up.
Do the work properly. Not perfectly, since none of us is perfect, but properly: prepared, careful, and honest about when something is not ready yet.
LOOKING AHEAD
We are at an early moment. The standards for using AI in music are still being worked out, and in many places they have not been written at all. I do not think that uncertainty is an excuse to be careless; if anything, it is a reason to be more careful.
I do not have all the answers, and I expect some of what I have written here will change as I learn more. But I believe working musicians and educators should have a voice in how these tools are used, and this is my contribution to that conversation. My conviction is a simple one: human-made music is something to be celebrated and cherished, and AI should serve that music, never the other way around.
Jon Michael Iverson, Ed.D.
Minneapolis, Minnesota
August 2026