Suno AI vs. Udio
The AI music ecosystem is moving at such groundbreaking speed that reviewing the current features of any AI music maker tools is pointless: the next upgrade might revolutionize the platform to the point of making it unrecognizable even to long-time users!
However, what we can do is take a look at what the best AI music makers can do right now, and what they offer to anyone interested in entering the world of AI-assisted music production.
For this article, we’ll analyze two of the most popular tools: Suno AI and Udio. I had the opportunity to use both for a recent music project, and to pry into the infinite possibilities these platforms offer.
How I Tested Suno AI and Udio
For this test, I chose three macro genres: classical, rock, and electronic music. I tried to use prompts with clear guidelines and limitations to see how the platforms follow directions.
Aside from adherence to prompts, I paid attention to the songs’ consistency and variety. The sound quality and how natural instruments sound are other things I particularly care about.
Another important factor is speed. When working with these platforms, it's important for me to receive a quick response to my prompts so that I can make adjustments and refine the songs in real-time.
In the following sections, you’ll find the three genres I used for the tests, the prompts I used to generate music with both platforms, and my personal views on the results.
Classical
Prompt:
Create a high-energy orchestral piece with fast-paced strings, brass, woodwinds, and dynamic percussion for a thrilling and festive feel.
Results:
Opinion:
Both platforms struggled with the genre. Despite my best efforts to create a joyful piece, Suno’s orchestral compositions always tended towards cinematic tension. Maybe the platform is not into major chord progressions?
As for Udio, it kept adding vocals even when explicitly instructed not to. Adjusting its Prompt Strength helped, but it often created a piece that sounded unnatural. Plus, the transition from opera to standard is totally unrealistic.
However, I did enjoy the instrumental part created by Udio, and the crescendos felt surprisingly cohesive and articulated. Shame about the vocals though.
Rock
Prompt:
Create a hard-rock song with powerful drums, bluesy riffs and a raw voice. Lyrics should evoke the power of the sea and the unstoppable force of nature.
Results:
Opinion:
I got much better results with rock music than with classical. For the lyrics, I used Suno’s built-in lyric generator.
Suno created a full track, complete with verses, a chorus, multiple guitar solos, a solid buildup, and an interesting rhythm section. It still surprises me to see an AI platform create a 4-minute track like this in mere seconds.
However, after a couple of plays, Suno’s track starts feeling prosaic: the vocals are generic, and the structure, while solid, is predictable, if not outright boring.
Udio, on the other hand, was quite a surprise. I had Led Zeppelin in mind when creating the prompt, and Udio delivered a track with a groove that felt very Zeppelin-like, but with some interesting twists that make the piece stand on its own. Udio introduced more variation which made the song feel organic rather than AI-generated.
Electronic
Prompt:
Create an energetic phonk house with an energetic beat and melodic synth. 4/4 beats, 128 BPM, and with a dark atmosphere.
Results:
Opinion:
The results were somewhat similar to the rock prompt. Suno produced a high-energy track that checked all the right boxes but lacked variety. On the other hand, Udio’s take on the prompt was more atmospheric and layered, and the result feels more like an authentic song.
That is not to say that Suno's electronic piece is bad. The kick and bassline are punchy and galvanizing, and the variations keep the tune interesting. The problem is with the main melody, which never changes in the 4 minutes of the song. If you download the song and remove the last two minutes, you might have a banger in your hands.
Udio's electronic track is shorter (they usually are) and feels more like a journey. The drop creates a great separation between the main melody and the song's second half, which feels more meditative. However, the ending is a gradual fade that doesn't quite fit with the rest of the piece.
If I were to publish this tune, I’d download it and have the main melody start again after the drop, to give a sense of closure to a piece that otherwise feels unfinished.
Pros and Cons of Each Platform
Suno
Pros:
- Generates full tracks very quickly.
- Well-structured songs.
- Best for commercial and background music.
Cons:
- Formulaic and repetitive compositions.
- Struggles with classical and more "unpredictable" genres.
Udio
Pros:
- Dynamic and evolving compositions.
- Unique, sometimes unexpected creativity.
Cons:
- Less predictable and harder to control.
- Some endings feel abrupt.
- Slower response time than Suno.
Final Verdict
At this stage, Suno and Udio offer completely different experiences.
Suno delivers tracks at groundbreaking speed, but the music it offers often feels unimaginative. You have to really put in the effort to make something remarkable, but if you’re looking for commercial or background music, it’s probably the best option.
Udio creates music that surprises you more, with changes in tempo, syncopation and melodic variations. It often feels like you’re not really in control (with AI, it’s not that uncommon), but if you’re looking for something more unpredictable, this is the platform for you.
Personally, I value Suno’s predictability because it allows me to create simple tracks in seconds. Whenever I use AI to compose, I’m not expecting the platform to deliver a hit, but rather ideas that I can use and expand based on the project.
Udio is fun because it seems to have a "soul." More often than not, it created a piece that differed greatly from what I had in mind, and yet the song was enjoyable and quite unique.
Both tools are great at bringing ideas to life, so how about you give them both a try? If you do, let me know your experience in the comment section below.
Have fun!