This of course all comes down to a philosophy of creativity and art. In my philosophy of creativity and art, fine-grained details is where the art gets made. Yo

This of course all comes down to a philosophy of creativity and art. In my philosophy of creativity and art, fine-grained details is where the art gets made. You can disagree with that, but I'd point to as evidence the design of the software and other tools that creators use are designed to facilitate fine-grained edits. So if you think that fine-grained edits aren't where the creativity and art comes from, then I'd ask why do you think all the tools are designed to offer that level of control? (E.g., DAWs, NLEs, 3D modeling/rendering, photo editing, vector editing, etc...). There are also "coarse" tools, and a market for them, e.g., iMovie and Canva, and I'd put AI tools in that same category of course. There's nothing new about coarse tools, but those are general for a different audience, and for a different production level. I.e., another way of saying this is that important thing is not "high-level of execution", Steve Albini didn't become a sought after producer by being technically great. In high-level creation, technical excellence is usually table stakes. He became sought after by having a particular vision for his music production, and that vision was executed by having fine-grained control over every single audio element of what he was working on. You can believe AI will negate the need for all this, but my point is simply that would be a mighty large coup to how high-level creation works today, ergo extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.