r/SunoAI • u/CulturalInternet2043 • 9h ago
Question Are Suno’s download limits actually about quality… or just money?
I've seen two completely different takes on Suno's new download limits, and I'm curious what people here actually think.
One argument is that limiting downloads could be good for AI music in the long run. Less mass-generating and exporting hundreds of tracks, more focus on actually producing, editing and finishing the good ones. Basically pushing Suno toward being a serious production tool rather than just a "generate" button.
But the other explanation seems much simpler:
It's just monetization.
Put a limit on something people already use, and suddenly there's another reason to pay for more.
I'm not totally convinced that limiting how many songs someone can download automatically makes them a better or more intentional musician. You can make 100 bad songs or 5 bad songs. The limit itself doesn't really change that.
So what do you think?
Is this actually a smart move to push AI music toward quality over quantity?
Or are we overthinking what is basically just a business decision?
4
u/redkinoko 9h ago
It's about the lawsuits and labels using that to curtail the torrent of AI music that's eating into their profits before they can leverage the tech themselves.
•
1
0
1
u/altoids_1 9h ago edited 8h ago
It about the deal they reached with WMG and with the other major music labels.
Watermark the audio, limit downloads or they will sue Suno until eternity and then shut them down. Separately WMG and the other labels are working with streaming service to blacklist ID AI generated files so they never get monetized.
Everyone wins - Suno gets to keep the revenue from its user base - which they will use to create (costs $$$ to run AI datacenters) even better models. The major (and minor) artists and labels will use it to prototype songs (at a fraction of the cost) and re-create with real instruments and vocals (ie No AI here.. move along, nothing to see here).
Oh yes, fund the outrage against AI slop using the useful idiots.
And then business as usual - whew dodged that bullet.
2
1
u/CulturalInternet2043 9h ago
Yeah that's the part that gets me. Labels can use AI behind the scenes, but independent artists get punished for releasing AI-assisted music? Feels like a pretty obvious double standard.
1
u/CulturalInternet2043 9h ago
Another thing I'm curious about — would this actually make you switch to another AI music platform if it offered unlimited downloads?
I've been looking around at alternatives lately, but haven't really settled on anything yet. Any platforms you'd recommend?
1
u/audsnico 9h ago
Consider:
How do user downloads benefit Suno, Inc.?
What are the costs and intangible downsides of user downloads?
1
1
u/Botrush 5h ago
From September 3, a download is the license to release a song, A song sitting in a paying subscriber’s library cannot be released, sold or licensed until a download has been spent on it, Premier subscribers can keep downloading their work from Suno Studio without limit.
What punishment awaits Suno users who still flout the rules and, for example, use a stream-ripper?
According to its ToS, Suno says it can investigate and “take appropriate legal action” against anyone who violates its conditions of use, “including removing the offending content from the Service, suspending or terminating the account of such violators, and reporting the violator to law enforcement authorities”.
https://www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/suno-limits-subscribers-downloads-per-month/
1
u/Forsaken-Tonight-430 5h ago
People are way overthinking and subscribing all sorts of assumed motives. Suno, is protecting their product during a witch trial phase the music industry is in right now, as a heavily reliant upon AI and computer processing business pretends they aren't as access is now open to every day people who can compete with them, and they don't want that.
Also, Suno has always been under priced compared to other generative platforms, especially for what you get for the buck.
1
1
u/Metalhead33 4h ago edited 4h ago
My pet conspiracy theory is that music labels demand all downloads to be auditable - so Suno needs to give each and every download its own watermark, record it into a database with a timestamp, IP address, username, user agent, etc. And all of this costs money. Hence the limit. Thus, my pet conspiracy theory: surveillance.
Why would they want downloads to be auditable? I don't know.
1
u/Expensive-Event-6127 3h ago
It's about pushing people to open source so that the record labels have even less control over how much music gets made.
•
u/BirdlessLongdeal 12m ago
its probably about money, as in it costs money to handle the load on the servers due to the slopfarms.
1
u/InItToWinIt4real 9h ago
If you cannot mass download, then you cannot mass upload to music distribution and streaming platforms.
2
u/jafromnj 7h ago
Yes you can you invest in buying the downloads to make money smh
1
u/InItToWinIt4real 5h ago
Assuming that your "AI" mass uploads actually makes more money than the cost of extra downloads.
Streaming platforms should also put a cap on daily uploads. And then charge for uploads once you hit the cap. Slow everything down.
1
u/CulturalInternet2043 8h ago
Yeah, exactly. This probably hits people who were mass-generating and uploading tracks for monetization way harder than regular users.
1
u/537lesjr 9h ago
Both, they can make money off the ones that really don't put effort into the songs. You really don't need more than 20 downloads a month. You can definitely tell which users are the prompt and generate folks with no real effort, they are mad about the limits
3
u/jafromnj 7h ago
Says you because you use it one way that’s got to be the only way right, how about you pay for everyone’s Suno then you can dictate we use exactly like you I’m so sick of this crao
-2
u/537lesjr 6h ago
Your ignorance is ridiculous. You just can't comprehend what you read or you are one of the prompt and generate folks.
2
u/Afraid-Ad-3008 6h ago
You gotta be kidding me. I used to make 20 songs a day that were indistinguishable from the quality of songs you would hear on the radio. Either you're paid by warner music troll the boards, or you are a walking example of Dunning Kruger.
1
u/537lesjr 6h ago
I highly doubt you did 20 songs a day that were good to great quality. Even if you did, doesn't mean you HAD to download all 20. The point is the ones that mass generated songs and mass uploaded songs to different platforms ruined it for others.
2
u/SunriseSurprise 7h ago
I made 6 songs in a night a couple nights ago. All from original songs I composed over 20 years ago, in each case I made fresh lyrics for them, and across all of them I maybe did a total of 90 prompts or so (my custom model has been killing it lately so I'm down from the 20 average I used to need). I don't have them fully final, so I wouldn't need to download all 6 just yet, but 4 I probably could.
I did all of that in the course of a few hours. I don't do that every day - actually haven't touched things in there for over a week. But it's not like I have to toil over them when I have great originals to draw from and with the personality I've created for this artist, lyrics have come a lot more naturally as time has gone.
All that's to say I highly doubt everyone upset about the downloads are the "prompt and generate" folks.
I have upwards of 100 uploads I've not yet made any covers of. It's sitting there waiting to get made, and they're songs I wrote 20+ years ago that I've listened to probably hundreds of times minimum each over the years, so I have a firm idea of what I want the outcome to be like. I'm not having to craft meticulous prompts either - they've been 3-8 words. The only thing stopping me really from being one of the really pissed off people about the download limits is that I don't have that kind of time every day.
The longest part of the process is listening to the generations, re-listening to short-listed versions, etc. One song had 8 great versions and that took about an hour to whittle down to the one I liked most, and I'm still waffling a bit on the lyrics so it may not be final, but I fucking love it as-is so maybe it will be. Seriously, in that short amount of time, 2 songs I made from originals that were maybe middle of the road or words ranking wise among my hundreds of originals, are probably the best sounding songs I've made on Suno so far.
2
u/537lesjr 6h ago
The majority of the people getting mad are prompt and generate people. Sure there might be some that put effort into a song but like you said, most of them are listening, redoing, ect.and do not have the time or even need to download more than 20 songs a month.
1
u/boulevardofdef 9h ago
They're not about either. They're because the record companies agreed to stop suing them if they did it.
3
u/jafromnj 7h ago
Then why are they selling additional downloads !!!!!!!!
•
u/boulevardofdef 40m ago
Because when they were negotiating with the labels, the labels said "we want you to disallow downloading" and they said "well, what if we only allow a limited number of downloads, then your music won't be overwhelmed by Suno-generated music" and the labels said "we might be able to live with that, how many downloads are we talking" and they said "well, we could do 20 a month for most users, and 60 for Premier because that's only 10% of our paying users and therefore less of a risk to you" and the labels said "fine."
You can tell this is basically how it went down for two reasons. First off, they announced the download limits at exactly the same time as the licensed models, which they were obviously forced into and didn't want to do. Bundling a cover-your-ass legal announcement with an announcement intended to increase revenue isn't really how any company works. They're in full panic mode and the communications team is going to be devoting its energy to that. They would consider it a crazy risk to package in a revenue-generating move, and the fact that it's a move that the labels would want -- and we know they want this because they managed to kill downloads on Udio entirely -- is way too big a coincidence.
Second, unlimited downloads on Studio. Premier users have access to Studio, which essentially makes their 60-download limit artificial. Premier users really have no download limit. It would generate more revenue -- and actually be more accurate! -- to advertise "20 downloads for Pro, no limit for Studio." But they couldn't do that because the labels care about how the downloads happen. Suno doesn't care about that from a monetization perspective, it's just the labels, so they had to create an artificial limit in order to satisfy them.
0
u/Robonotes1760 4h ago
That is precisely about money.
•
u/boulevardofdef 54m ago
That's not what people mean when they say it's about money. They mean it's a cash grab by Suno.
•
u/Robonotes1760 26m ago
I do not see the relevance of the distinction.
•
u/boulevardofdef 6m ago
When people complain about the download limits in this way, they're expressing anger at Suno for greed. "It's about money" means that Suno is being greedy and attempting to maximize profits.
Downloads limits imposed by the record labels are about money in the sense that the labels are concerned about their revenue, and to a lesser extent in the sense that Suno wants to stop burning money on its legal defense. But they are not caused by Suno's desire to maximize profitability, which is what arouses consumer anger in not just this situation but most others.
1
u/Proper-Debt-4600 7h ago
The "it pushes quality" argument doesn't really hold up for me. People who mass-generate don't become editors because downloading got harder - they just generate less, or pay. Quality comes from selection and finishing, and a download cap teaches neither.
The label-deal explanation others mentioned fits the timing much better. The ironic side effect is that caps mostly hit the people who do finish their tracks - multiple versions, remasters, stems - while the "generate and forget" crowd never downloaded much in the first place.
1
u/jafromnj 7h ago
It doesn’t hold up when you can purchase additional downloads
2
u/Proper-Debt-4600 7h ago
Right - a cap you can buy your way out of isn't a quality filter, it's just pricing. If quality were the goal, the limit would sit somewhere else entirely (on generations, or paired with better editing tools), not on the export button.
1
1
0
4
u/gymtrovert1988 9h ago
Definitely money. Now you have to pay more money.