I think that any form of auto accompaniment has an important role for the solo musician…

Not to be included in the final mix, but as an inspiring starting place for you to be able to play without that dreaded ‘blank paper’ moment early in production. Usually, in studio work, the rhythm section is tracked as a whole, and then sweetening is added afterwards. But the solo musician, if he doesn’t use accompaniment tools, has to lay down each part (especially the first couple of rhythm) without the benefit of anything else to play WITH, and it’s that interaction that leads to a more cohesive performance.

So I’ve no problem with their place in the studio or backing track preparation. But…

The magic that is humans playing real music is generally (hopefully!) far superior to machines playing little chunks that are stitched together using one system or another. The subtle variations that humans impart is something that may sometimes be difficult to hear but is obvious in its absence.

Now yes, we’ve had 20 years of dance music that WAS originally created using repetitive loops, and if that’s what you’re trying to do the machine deserves its spot in the final mix. But if you’re trying to make music based on an older aesthetic, it deserves to be through played, from beginning to end, like the original.

Generally, I love auto accompaniment to get the ball rolling, but gradually each part gets replaced by a played part, whether by me or a studio musician. I think it’s worth the time…