Paper short abstract:

This presentation highlights the misalignment between industry visions about GenAI and creative work, and the everyday experiences of music technologists. By drawing on an ethnographic study in Melbourne, it reveals how these communities value accidents and glitches over LLM aim for precision.

Paper long abstract:

Generative AI is largely seen in industry narratives as a revolutionary force that will democratise, reshape and enhance human creativity, as well as potentially alleviating tasks for improved efficiency and productivity. However, people working at the intersection of music and technology may complicate this vision, with creative practices and expectations around AI and automation that are shaped by and evolve with everyday life.

This article shows the limitations and misalignment between dominant visions about the impact of GenAI on creativity, and the experiences of music technologists. Thus, it draws upon examples of an ethnographic study of these communities in Melbourne. These insights emerged from a collaborative and co-creative process alongside the research participants during one year and a half of fieldwork. The findings reveal that although there is a cautious enthusiasm towards generative AI and automation in their practice, most creative workers remain dubious about its potential to achieve human-like emotions, expressive qualities and tacit communication. Additionally, while LLM aims for full precision and perfection, music technologists value mistakes, ‘happy accidents’ and glitches as a way to counter depersonalisation and homogenisation, embracing creative uncertainty.