Let me save a bit of time and just say that I think AI is a terrible songwriter, and even worse lyricist. The stuff it generates really is slop, it writes very generic, vanilla, odd and unfeeling songs. But... what it does do well, it does really well.
Production: AI comes up with some nice production elements, stops, instrument changes etc. My experience with Suno really drove the point home that over the years, what I was really missing, and really needed was a producer.
Engineering: While the AI renders on the whole do have a bit of an AI characteristic sound, they get a much better tone out of the instruments than I ever did and do a much better job of mixing.
Genre changes: This for me was the nicest surprise. I had a few songs that I never thought were right for just drums, bass and guitar. I asked Suno to change genres while still keeping the music and lyrics the same. This is probably AI’s strongest asset.
Singers!: I am not a great singer. In fact, I’m rather terrible. Not only can the AI sing better than me, I can access singers of many styles and genres, and more importantly… I can change gender. A few of my songs were originally written for a female voice, but I sang them just to record the demo. It was nice to be able to experiment with different voices.
What AI does and doesn't do well
My take on all this
I wouldn't want AI writing a song for me any more than I would want it eating my dinner for me. Ultimately, I would still be hungry and very unsatisfied. But using AI as a tool, in my opinion, does add some value. In my case, it was a great producer and gave me access to endless variations in vocal styles and sounds. In an ever increasing world of haves and have nots, (me being a have not) it just doesn't make sense to spend 45K recording some demos when I can do it for 120 bucks.
I also rendered the album covers with AI (exception HWL is not AI, it is the original cover) and then tweaked them in Photoshop. But remember, I did not have AI just randomly throw suggestions at me. These were album cover concepts that I have had in mind for years. AI didn't invent the concept, it just delivered the result...after several attempts and prompt tweaks, I eventually got what I was looking for.
I believe this is going to be the next contested area in copyright law. Right now, you can't copyright anything created with AI. But I would argue that there is a big difference between the prompts "make me a punk album cover" and "create an album cover with a woman in a pink bikini and heels skydiving and make sure you can see the Hollywood sign in the background. Slightly distort her face with wind distortion and make her long blond hair whip in the wind." And here is the kicker. If I gave a photographer that information and he or she shot it, my work would be covered by copyright. But, as it stands now, if I give AI that same info and have the AI "shoot it" it's not. Really? It's still my idea, it was just executed differently. That doesn't make any sense.
The way I see it, AI is a tool. People panicked when drum machines came out... There are still drummers. People freaked when Auto-tune came out... There are still singers. People overreacted at the dawn of digital recording. Yet, here were are, were all living our lives and doing just fine.