In the 19th century, during the industrial revolution, the Luddites were a movement of English textile workers who took their name from the legendary Ned Ludd who may or may not have existed. These Luddites opposed certain automated machinery that they believed was taking their jobs and putting laborers out of work. The Luddites were against the technological advances that were being made and protested by breaking into the factories and destroying the machines. The factory owners, as one might imagine, did not take well to the Luddites and the state response was swift. By 1812, only a year after the movement’s formation, the destruction of these machines became a capital offence. Since the government did not look kindly on disrupting the balance of power (money) many of these dissidents were shot, hanged, or deported to Australia.
Some New Questions
In our current day and age, being identified as a Luddite has become synonymous with being someone who opposes technological advances or someone who either cannot or will not keep up with technology. Surprisingly, the original Luddites were neither lacking in skills nor diametrically opposed to technology. Many Luddites were skilled laborers who were fine with the machinery but upset over the labor practices of many factory owners. Since the formation of unions in the United Kingdom did not come about until 1824, one might consider the Luddites as a precursor to union organizers, bearing in mind that their main concern was to have quality machines and to preserve their jobs at a fair rate of pay.
Losing one’s livelihood to technology has always been a worry for the worker and laborer. Over the years, many jobs have been lost through the advent of technology. Other than farm work, warehouse and factory work, there have been jobs such as elevator operator, switchboard operator, bank teller, postal mail sorter and grocery cashier, to name a few. While not all are obsolete, they have been drastically cut down in size due to technological advances. Of course, new technology has opened the door to new jobs such as the many IT jobs, data science, robotics, support specialists and social media managers, but most of these jobs require higher education, and for those who do not have the means or a technical inclination, the job market can be intimidating, to say the least.
In the1990’s a new, albeit informal, movement of Neo-Luddism was born. The roster included writers, Amish, Quakers, students and environmentalists to name a few and, despite their desire to live in a less technological, world these neo-Luddites have not been able to slow the advance of technology. Unlike their older and initial Luddite counterparts, their main concern was the danger of technology rather than the concern of job loss to the technology itself. Just to be clear; I did not see any mention of musicians or audio engineers in any list of Luddites. Not that they do not exist, but our field generally embraces newer technology, and in many cases the technology has opened new jobs in the world of live audio.
AI is the newest technology to come under the scrutiny of any self-respecting Luddite. While I do not consider myself a Luddite, I do have concerns about artificial intelligence and the jobs that might be lost to it when it becomes totally ensconced in the production of live concert audio. Since my expertise in AI and concert audio is limited, I thought that I would ask an expert how AI would be used in concert audio. So, I posed the question to ChatGPT, and this is what AI said about itself — and I quote, because if I don’t, I might be sued for plagiarism by AI: Yes?
ChatGPT’s Answers
“One of the most significant applications of AI in live concert audio is automated mixing. Traditionally, sound engineers manually adjust equalization (EQ), compression, and levels in real-time to ensure optimal sound quality. AI-driven audio mixing software can analyze real-time sound inputs and automatically make adjustments based on pre-set parameters or learned data from past performances. AI algorithms can monitor sound levels across different instruments, identify imbalances, and correct issues instantly. This capability reduces the need for extensive human intervention and allows engineers to focus on creative enhancements rather than technical troubleshooting. Moreover, AI can learn an artist’s preferred sound settings and adapt them dynamically based on the acoustics of different venues. This ensures consistency in sound quality regardless of whether a concert is held in an intimate club, an open stadium, or a large arena. In conclusion, AI is revolutionizing live concert audio by automating sound engineering, enhancing acoustics, personalizing audience experiences, and assisting musicians in real-time. While challenges remain, the potential benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. As AI technology continues to evolve, it will redefine how live music is experienced, making concerts more immersive, precise, and accessible to audiences worldwide.”
Although AI speaks highly of itself, I have highlighted a few sentences that are, what I consider, cause for concern regarding job security in an AI driven world of engineering. The first highlight and following explanation basically says that there will be no need for a live engineer. The second highlight reiterates that there will be no need for an engineer, followed by the third highlight which, once again, lets us know that the engineer will be obsolete. AI couches its statement by saying that it will take care of the technical and leave the engineer in charge of the creative. This might sound great, but calling adjusting the mix “technical trouble shooting” seems to overlook the fact that adjusting the mix is the “creative enhancement” part of an engineer’s job and this is what AI says it is going to take away from the engineer. The last highlight is AI patting itself on the back to let us all know that AI is better than a live engineer. Therefore, as I see it, with these answers from ChatGPT, AI is presenting a case for itself.
As I mentioned before, I am not a Luddite, but I already see how AI has taken away jobs and earnings in the field of recorded music. Take for example the singing voice generators that can sing your songs, in a professional voice, in any style and it can write the song based on a lyric or melody-even if said lyric and melody are incomplete. The voiceover app will read one’s content in a professional voice and AI will mix and master one’s recordings. When I asked AI what the benefits of using AI might be the response is: “Reduced dependence on session musicians and studios; faster background music production; lower licensing costs; quick idea development; unique sound combinations; support for non-musicians.” As a live engineer it seems that AI will leave no room to “focus on creative enhancements rather than technical troubleshooting,” since AI will do the creative and the engineer will be there to technically troubleshoot AI… if needed. This certainly does not sound like AI will benefit the working professional musician or recording engineer. What it does sound like is that AI is already high on itself and quite possibly coming for my job which, quite frankly, makes me a paranoid Luddite.
Reach Baker Lee at [email protected]
