Check out this 1983 talk with Peter Gabriel and Ray Hammond about synthesizers mirrors today’s AI in music debates.

Similar fears: tech replacing musicians, job loss, killing craft, lowering the barrier.

Hammond worried about machines doing repetitive work better than humans, just like AI now threatens session players and composition shortcuts.

Gabriel saw synths as dream machines, tools to unlock instinct, intuition, and creativity. He believed tech forces us to find what makes us human.

Same applies now. We try to apply new tech to today’s industry instead of imagining the industry of tomorrow. Moore’s Law is still climbing. From 1983 that curve gave us DAWs, VSTs, and whole new genres. AI feels like the next step on that path.

The gear keeps changing. Soul, message, and feel still decide what lives on, and the current creators adapt to the new musical landscape with the tools they are given.

 

I just don't buy that it's the "next logical step"

Synthesizers in the 80s, while I understand must have been intimidating, still required the user to a) save hundreds/thousands of dollars to buy and then b) learn, figure out how to incorporate into a song, use creatively, etc..

There were still barriers.

There are no barriers with AI. Anyone can use it and spit something out with extreme ease in a matter of seconds. Using it creatively? Come on, if you consider typing various prompts to be creative work then the bar is pathetically low.

These are just my opinions, I'm not trying to offend...

At this point I don't even care about AI anymore. Anyone can use it and make a song now. But it's looking like the general public still highly favors the human aspect of art, fortunately. As in - almost every non-musician I know, at least, still has their favorite bands/musicians and keeps up with them not caring about what AI can do. And I hope it stays this way