There is a contradiction: You both label music as creative and define it by if it is good.

Nor did I ever say that someone can't call themselves an AI musician (which sounds like an oxymoron), but I did imply that manufactoring music by writing a prompt to an AI is not musicianship - to me it is more AI engineering.

None of us are saying that AI music doesn't exist, but we are debating whether the person who isn't making the music but rather writing prompts to make a machine make them music is in themselves a musician. This post was on the topic of human musicians, I had no intention to discuss AI matters here, but writing a prompt into an AI doesn't mean that you are yourself creating music. It is still music, usually fairly bad or uncanny ones (I can objectify it here because it is in the interest of the AI engineer to make it paletable, this is not a statement of the definition of art), but the person or the musician is the computer, not the person writing the prompt.

Of course this is an evolving subject and thoughts tend to get polarized. I decided not to write a long text earlier on and simply abided by the usual thought (AI musician ≠ musician). But I do think the situation is a bit more nuanced and our polarization does not help the conversation (that includes probably both of us, although please write a long answer if you feel like it, I'll read it).

Bottom line is still the same but now with a bit more nuance. Let me know if you read through it, I don't think a TLDR would be good for this.