Fender's CEO Said Cover Songs Are 'Analog AI'. Guitar Players Are Not Happy.
Edward 'Bud' Cole compared learning cover songs and jamming with bandmates to how AI trains on data. The backlash was swift, and the timing could not be worse for the guitar brand.
Key points
- Fender CEO Edward "Bud" Cole told T3 magazine in May 2025 that cover songs and bandmates are a form of "analog AI."
- The comments resurfaced weeks later, adding to an existing wave of anger after Fender sent legal letters to guitar builders over the Stratocaster body shape.
- Critics argue Cole's comparison ignores the enormous scale at which AI trains, which can involve millions of copyrighted songs.
- Some popular guitar YouTubers have said publicly they will stop buying Fender products.
- Research suggests relying on AI tools for creative work can erode the skills it takes to produce that work independently.
Fender's chief executive has given guitar players yet another reason to be unhappy with the brand.
In a May interview with the tech and lifestyle magazine T3, celebrating the 75th anniversary of the Telecaster guitar, CEO Edward "Bud" Cole shared his view on AI and music. The comments passed largely unnoticed at first. Then they started circulating online, first reported by The Verge AI, and landed on a crowd already primed for outrage.
What did Cole actually say?
Cole told T3 that AI in music is nothing new. His argument: when a beginner learns cover songs, they are doing something similar to what an AI does when it trains on existing music. Bandmates, he added, fill a comparable role by contributing ideas to a half-formed song.
"I actually believe cover music has been sort of analog AI for a long time," Cole said. He also said he believes AI will help people move "across the chasm" from learning covers to becoming skilled songwriters.
The logic sounds tidy. It does not hold up under scrutiny.
Why does the comparison fall apart?
Scale is the first problem. A person learns dozens, maybe hundreds, of songs over a lifetime. AI music generators, including tools like Suno, are suspected to have trained on millions of copyrighted tracks, meaning the amount of material absorbed is simply incomparable.
The second problem is what happens inside the process. A human learning a song makes thousands of tiny decisions shaped by emotion, physical quirks and personal history. A guitar player cannot perfectly replicate another musician's work because their fingers, their mood and their past all get in the way. That imperfection is where originality comes from.
An AI system generates output by spotting patterns across enormous amounts of data and predicting what should come next. It has no bad memories to channel, no muscle limitations to work around, no instinct built from years of listening.
As guitarist and YouTube creator Steve Onotera pointed out in response to the story, those small human errors and physical constraints are precisely what stop any player from being a copy machine. A chatbot does not have that problem.
Cole's claim that AI will help beginners become master songwriters also runs counter to growing evidence that leaning on AI for creative tasks can actually make people worse at those tasks over time, not better. Songwriting improves through repetition and failure, not shortcuts.
Why does the timing make this worse?
Fender was already fighting a PR fire. The company recently sent cease-and-desist letters (legal notices demanding someone stop an activity) to independent guitar builders, claiming exclusive rights to the body shape of the Stratocaster. The move angered craftspeople and players across the industry.
Cole's resurfaced comments landed directly into that controversy. Several influential guitar YouTubers have said they will no longer purchase Fender products. Fender did not respond to requests for comment or clarification before publication.
Common questions
Does this affect ordinary guitar players?
Not directly right now. No products are changing, and no new rules apply to anyone buying or playing a guitar. The controversy is about trust and how the company talks about musicians and creativity.
Is comparing human learning to AI training ever a fair comparison?
At a very loose level, both involve absorbing existing work to produce something new. The meaningful difference is scale, intent and the messy, irreplaceable human element that shapes what any individual creates.
