Artificial Intelligence

Fender’s CEO seems to think your bandmates are just analog AI

Published byAIDaily Editorial Team
4 min read
Original source author: Terrence O’Brien

Fender CEO Edward "Bud" Cole gave an interview to T3 in May celebrating the 75th anniversary of the Telecaster with comments on AI and music that initially flew under the radar. But it has started making the rounds recently, pouring more fuel on an already raging fire of bad PR following the company pissing off […]

Share:

Bud Cole also compared learning cover songs to AI training data in a controversial interview.

Fender CEO Edward “Bud” Cole gave an interview to T3 in May celebrating the 75th anniversary of the Telecaster with comments on AI and music that initially flew under the radar. But it has started making the rounds recently , pouring more fuel on an already raging fire of bad PR following the company pissing off basically the entire guitar-playing community by sending cease-and-desist letters to builders, claiming copyright of the Stratocaster body shape.

Some influential guitar YouTubers have even said they’re done buying Fender gear in the wake of the controversy. And Cole’s resurfaced comments comparing cover songs and bandmates to a sort of “analog AI have only sunk the company’s standing further among the loudest of its fans online.

T3 editor-in-chief Mat Gallagher’s feature mostly paraphrases Cole’s statements, and Fender did not immediately respond to a request for comment or clarification. But here are the relevant bits from the interview:

Cole’s philosophy is that AI in music is nothing new. “I think AI has existed in music as long as there’s been recorded music,” he says. While the biggest barrier to playing guitar is the time it takes to learn the instrument, it’s the second barrier, writing songs, where he believes AI plays a part.

“I actually believe cover music has been sort of analog AI for a long time,” says Cole. Those that don’t yet have the skills to write their own songs can play the songs written by their favourite artists instead. “I listened a lot to REM, U2, The Smiths and The Cure, and at some point I got sick of just listening to them. I wanted to play it, so I learned to play guitar.”

Those taking their first steps into writing, according to Cole, can also lean on a second analogue form of AI: their band mates. You might just have a chorus or a riff to start with but then the drummer or bassist can add to it, and a song is born. AI can also play this role. “I actually think that we are in the brink of freeing up people to move beyond the same old covers and to really get into working like they do with their bands,” says Cole.

Cole is trying to draw a comparison between a human “training” on a handful of cover songs and an AI ingesting enormous datasets of copyrighted music. He appears to be suggesting that, by learning to play other people’s songs, internalizing those influences, and then synthesizing them into something new, you are essentially doing the same thing as an AI. This is a woefully misguided take that says to me that Cole either doesn’t understand AI or doesn’t respect artists.

For starters, scale matters. No person could possibly learn all of the songs used to train your average generative AI model, which, in the case of Suno , is suspected to be in the millions . Additionally, it dismisses the inherent humanity of the millions of tiny decisions, conscious or otherwise, that an artist makes during the songwriting process. Whether they’re driven by emotional response, reacting to a happy accident, or compensating for limitations, the artistic decisions made by a human are unique to them.

This is fundamentally different from a model spitting out something based on a prompt and a network of data points. As Steve Onotera, better known as Samurai Guitarist , points out, a player’s physicality, or the tiny errors that every human is prone to, prevent them from replicating someone else’s work perfectly. That kind of serendipity can’t be replicated by an LLM.

The same is true of bandmates. Humans who pull from their own unique sets of “training data,” life experiences, and physical skills or limitations are not the same as a chatbot. An AI doesn’t have taste or instincts in the way that your picky bassist who studied jazz composition in college does. If you told your drummer they were no different from an AI model, they’d rightfully be insulted.

Later in the interview, Cole says: “I believe that AI is actually going to help create a whole new world of guitar players that use it. To help connect with other musicians, to be more productive. And across the chasm into becoming a student of songwriting to a master of songwriting.”

Cole’s assertion that AI will somehow help people “across the chasm” to becoming master songwriters is also, frankly, ridiculous. Evidence is mounting that relying on AI tools is actually leading to deskilling . Using an AI to suggest rhymes or metaphors for pain isn’t the same as practicing songwriting and developing skills. The AI has never been left at the altar or sweated over the perfect pre-chorus transition. Repetition is the key. The adage is that you need to write 100 ( or 1,000 ) (or 10,000 ) bad songs before you write one good one. That’s how you grow beyond tired tropes and learn to recognize when you’ve stumbled into something good.

You could be taking way better photos on your phone

Pixel 11 specs and price leak with no surprises

Foldables are sort of boring now — and that’s great news for Apple

Xbox prices are increasing by up to €200 or £170

Key takeaways

  • Cole's comparison between musical learning and AI could democratize musical creation, but it also generates controversies.
  • The dissatisfaction of the guitar community with Fender highlights the importance of authenticity and emotional connection in the music industry.
  • The interaction of Brazilian musicians with technology could shape the future of music in the country, offering new creative opportunities.

Editorial analysis

Edward Cole's statements, CEO of Fender, regarding the relationship between music, artificial intelligence (AI), and the practice of playing instruments raise significant questions about the evolution of musical creativity and the role of technology in this process. By comparing the learning of songs from other artists to AI training, Cole suggests that imitation and adaptation are fundamental parts of musical development, which can be seen as a form of democratization of musical creation. However, this perspective may be controversial, especially at a time when many musicians feel threatened by AI, fearing that technology could replace human creativity.

In the Brazilian context, where music is a vital part of culture and national identity, this discussion is particularly relevant. Brazil has a rich musical tradition, and how local musicians interact with technology can shape the future of the music industry. Cole's comparison may be seen as an opportunity for Brazilian musicians to explore new forms of creativity, using AI as a tool to expand their compositions rather than viewing it as a threat.

However, the negative response from the guitar community to Fender, especially following the copyright controversy, indicates that the brand needs to reconsider its approach. Consumer dissatisfaction can have a significant impact on sales and brand loyalty, especially in a market where authenticity and emotional connection are paramount. Fender must find a balance between technological innovation and respect for the musical traditions that its customers value.

Finally, the discussion of AI in music should not be viewed merely as a technological issue, but as a reflection of the ongoing cultural and social changes. As AI becomes more integrated into the creative process, it will be crucial to observe how musical communities, both in Brazil and globally, adapt to these changes and how this affects the production and consumption of music in the future.

What this coverage includes

  • Clear source attribution and link to the original publication.
  • Editorial framing about relevance, impact, and likely next developments.
  • Review for readability, context, and duplication before publication.

Original source:

The Verge AI

About this article

This article was curated and published by AIDaily as part of our editorial coverage of artificial intelligence developments. The content is based on the original source cited below, enriched with editorial context and analysis. Automated tools may assist with translation and initial structuring, but publication decisions, factual review, and contextual framing remain editorial responsibilities.

Learn more about our editorial process