← Risk register SOC 27-4011 · reviewed 2026-08-11

Audio and Video Technicians

70,230 US workers · median $58,100/yr · Media

EXPOSED

The core of this job — hanging speakers, running cable, rigging mics on bodies, aiming projectors, chasing a buzzing ground loop twenty minutes before doors — is hands-on work in rooms that are never twice the same, and robotics is nowhere near it. What is eroding is the console-side and post-side work: auto-mixing, auto-tracking PTZ cameras, AI noise removal and dialogue isolation, automated captioning, and templated livestream switching are absorbing tasks that used to justify a second or third tech in the room. Score reflects the modal worker in corporate AV, houses of worship, schools, and venue crews rather than the elite touring or broadcast engineer tier.

10-year outlook: Headcount per event shrinks as auto-mixing and auto-tracking cover the routine seats, but skilled load-in, rigging, and live-fix techs stay in demand and the pay gap between them and button-pushers widens.

US employment, 2019–2025-5.0%
73,96070,230 workers

Nearly all of this fall was the 2020 shock. It has been climbing back since.

Median pay $45,910 → $58,100 +1.2% in real terms (nominal +26.6%, less ~25% US inflation over the period)

The job count is not the verdict

This line is counted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics — the one figure on this page that isn't a judgement of ours. Headcount moves on demand, offshoring, demographics and the business cycle, and automation is one term among several, often not the loudest.

So a falling line is not evidence that AI did it, and a rising one is not evidence that it won't. Both happen in this register: some occupations resist automation and shrink anyway, others are highly automatable and keep growing. The marked year is 2020.

BLS projection, 2024–2034

+3.3%

Percentage only. The projection counts a different population from the 70,230 above — it includes self-employed workers, which for this occupation is most of them, so the two headcounts are not comparable.

Growing, and only partly exposed

The BLS expects +3.3% more of these jobs by 2034, and at 48/100 the work is only partly exposed — some tasks are automatable, the core of the job is not. Nothing here is in tension.

Different clocks. The score is what current AI could do to this work today. The projection is how many of these jobs will exist in 2034. Everything between the two — how fast employers actually adopt, whether demand grows in the meantime — is why they can point opposite ways without either being wrong.

~7,300 openings a year on average, including replacing people who leave.

One email if this score changes. Watch as many occupations as you like from the same address — no account, and nothing is sent on a schedule, only when a verdict actually moves.

Also known as — 24 job titles this covers

Titles reported by people doing this work, from the US Department of Labor's O*NET survey. If your job title is here, this page is about your work even though the name doesn't match.

StagehandVideo OperatorAudio InstallerVideo InstallerAudio TechnicianEvent TechnicianMedia TechnicianSound ControllerStage TechnicianVideo TechnicianProjector OperatorTheater TechnicianEvent Crew TechnicianOperations TechnicianAudio Video TechnicianVideo Control OperatorSight Effects SpecialistVideo Equipment TechnicianVideo Production AssistantVideo Production SpecialistVideo Projection TechnicianAV Tech (Audiovisual Technician)AV Tech (Audio Visual Technician)Service Technician (Service Tech)

Score — 48/100 resistance

Holding it up: embodiment (17/20). Weakest point: liability shield (2/20).

Five dimensions, 0–20 each, summed. Higher means more protected. The arithmetic is shown so you can check it: 13 + 17 + 2 + 8 + 8 = 48. · Scored 2026-08-11, and re-examined when evidence accumulates rather than on a schedule.

Task resistance 13/20

Mixed — a routine tier and a judgment tier 13 rather than 17 because load-in, rigging, cable runs and lav placement on bodies stay stubbornly manual, but the tasks that filled the rest of the shift — riding gain on a Q-SYS or DiGiCo auto-mixer, following a presenter with a PTZ camera, cleaning HVAC rumble out of a recording, cutting captions for the Zoom archive — are now defaults in the firmware or a one-click plugin, so the head count the room justifies is shrinking even though the work in the room is not.

Embodiment 17/20

Hands-on in uncontrolled environments 17 reflects that a normal week involves ladders and Genie lifts, truss and motor points overhead, pulling XLR and Cat6 through conduit and ceiling tile, and doing it in ballrooms, gyms, sanctuaries and outdoor tents whose ceiling height, power quality and RF environment you discover on arrival — the 3 points held back are the hours spent seated at a console or an editing timeline.

Liability shield 2/20

No licence, no signature requirement 2 because nothing in the job requires a licence you can lose: OSHA fall-protection and ETCP rigging certification are employer or venue preferences, FCC coordination for wireless mics rides on the frequency holder not the tech, and when a truss point fails the general contractor and the venue absorb it, so no statute names you.

Trust premium 8/20

Some relationship component 8 sits above anonymous work because the pastor, the meeting planner and the touring FOH engineer request the tech who already knows where the dimmer noise comes from and which input on the wall plate is dead, but the client bought the room and the gear — you are named on the crew sheet, not on the contract, and a replacement tech can be sent next Tuesday.

Judgment & accountability 8/20

Meaningful discretion 8 covers the calls that are genuinely yours and genuinely unscripted — reassigning wireless frequencies when the hotel next door fires up, deciding to run a redundant stream or reboot the encoder five minutes to air, cutting a channel that is feeding back with 400 people watching — but the consequence is a bad show or a lost recording, and the show file, plot and signal flow you are executing were mostly designed by someone else.

Confidence: high · reviewed 2026-08-11 · how scoring works

What this job involves — and which parts are yours

The verdict above describes this occupation as a whole. Almost nobody does the typical version of a job — tick what's actually in your week and see how your own mix sits.

AI already does these at usable quality

These still need a person

Active moats on the surviving side: embodiment, physical-presence, judgment

How to future-proof this job

Where to go deeper on what this job runs on: edX — performance measurement and evaluation free to audit · Khan Academy — reading and vocabulary, all levels, free free · Coursera — critical thinking and logic, audit free free to audit · edX — operations management and process monitoring courses free to audit · MIT OpenCourseWare — problem-solving and analytical method courses free · Coursera — active listening and communication skills free to audit

All 35 skills ranked by how many jobs they open →

Where this experience transfers — nothing clears the bar

No occupation passed every test: close enough to audio and video technicians on skills and subject matter, at least 10 points more resistant, no big jump in training, no new licence, no pay cut, and not shrinking on its own. That happens for 223 of the 654 occupations here that aren't SAFE, and it is worth stating plainly rather than leaving the section off.

The usual reason is that exposure travels with the skill profile. The jobs most similar to yours tend to be exposed for the same reasons yours is, so the near neighbours don't clear the gap — and the ones that do are a different kind of work, not a transfer of what you already know. Read that as a limit of this method, not a verdict that you're stuck: it only compares whole occupations, and it cannot see specialisation, industry, or anything you'd bring that isn't in a federal skill survey.

Here is that claim on your own job rather than in the abstract. These are the three occupations closest to this one by skill and subject matter — the places the work would most naturally transfer — with what the register scores them:

Sound Engineering Technicians EXPOSED 38/100 (-10) · 69% overlap
Telecommunications Equipment Installers and Repairers, Except Line Installers EXPOSED 55/100 (+7) · 69% overlap
Broadcast Technicians EXPOSED 35/100 (-13) · 69% overlap

That is the whole problem in three lines. The nearest work is not meaningfully safer, so there is no move here that trades a similar skill set for a better verdict. This is not us running out of ideas — it is what the neighbourhood looks like.

What would move this occupation up is the other direction, and on this page it's the more useful one.

What would move this back up — beyond any one person

The moves above are yours to make. This is the other half: what would have to change in the world for the occupation itself to score higher. None of it is in any one person's gift, but it is where the floor actually comes from. Scores here are not a one-way ratchet. Only two of the five dimensions — task resistance and embodiment — track what machines can do. The other three track law, what buyers will pay for, and who is answerable, and those move in both directions, often in response to the same pressure AI creates. If every lever below landed, this occupation would score around 72/100 — SAFE.

6 specific changes that would raise this score
  • already happening task resistance +4

    Genuine two-tier structure: if auto-mixing, PTZ auto-tracking, templated switching and AI dialogue cleanup absorb the routine tier fully, what remains is fault diagnosis in unrepeatable rooms, RF coordination in congested spectrum after the FCC's further 600/800 MHz reallocations, system tuning, and integrating equipment the vendor never intended to talk to each other. The residual job is denser in judgment even as headcount per room falls — score per remaining worker rises while worker count drops.

  • already happening judgment accountability +3

    Show-caller / A1 designated in contract as the person who stops the show (pyro, weather holds at outdoor festivals, crowd-crush calls). Post-Astroworld, promoter contracts and municipal event permits increasingly name an individual with stop-show authority; if that authority lands on the technical lead rather than a separate safety officer, accountability rises.

  • plausible liability shield +6

    State or municipal entertainment-rigging licensure of the kind Nevada and New York City already impose (NYC DOB rigging permits, Nevada's stagehand/rigging rules), plus insurer requirements that overhead points be signed off by an ETCP Certified Rigger or Entertainment Electrician before a venue's policy responds to a load. If ETCP certification moves from 'preferred' to a named condition in venue liability policies and public-assembly permits, a named human is legally on the hook for every flown speaker array and dimmer tie-in.

  • plausible judgment accountability +4

    Life-safety duties formally assigned to the audio operator in venue emergency plans — NFPA 72 mass-notification integration means the A1's console is the evacuation PA. If fire-code inspections and insurer walkthroughs start requiring a named, trained operator at the position whenever an assembly occupancy is full, the role owns a consequential call under ambiguity rather than just mixing.

  • plausible trust premium +4

    IATSE and AFM contract language setting minimum crew counts and prohibiting automated substitution for named positions — the 2024 IATSE Basic Agreement fight over AI produced clauses on notification and consent; if local venue agreements add per-position crew floors tied to house size (as some Broadway and arena locals already have), buyers pay for humans by contract rather than by preference.

  • plausible liability shield +3

    Temporary power distribution over a threshold (feeder tie-ins, generator drops for outdoor shows) being ruled electrician's-license work under state electrical codes rather than falling under entertainment exemptions — an interpretation fight already live in several state licensing boards.

The limit. Embodiment is already near ceiling at 17 and has nowhere to go. The trust premium here is thin and mostly invisible: corporate AV, school and house-of-worship buyers do not pay for a human tech as such, they pay for the show not failing, and will accept an automated box that mostly works. Union crew floors are the only real route and they cover a minority of these 70,230 workers. Nothing plausible lifts the ceiling for the single in-house tech at a megachurch or community college.

These are conditions, not forecasts — what would have to happen, not what will. Specific rules, cases and bills are named so you can go and check whether they exist and where they stand; verify before relying on any of them. Nothing here is legal or financial advice.

Where this work is, and what it pays there

BLS metro figures for 186 areas. The verdict above does not change by city — the rubric judges what the work involves, not where it happens — but pay and headcount do, and the national median hides a very wide range.

Most of these jobs

New York-Newark-Jersey City, NY-NJ 7,800 $72,300 +24%
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA 4,710 $64,900 +12%
Chicago-Naperville-Elgin, IL-IN 2,490 $63,780 +10%
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 2,210 $74,380 +28%
Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach, FL 1,820 $54,410 -6%
Orlando-Kissimmee-Sanford, FL 1,800 $56,660 -2%
Salt Lake City-Murray, UT 1,570 $48,730 -16%
San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,370 $75,540 +30%

Best paid

Auburn-Opelika, AL 40 $79,810 +37%
Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ 560 $79,610 +37%
Springfield, MA 60 $79,470 +37%

Percentages are against this occupation's national median of $58,100. Counts are jobs in that metro, not vacancies. Metros where the BLS suppressed the cell are absent rather than shown as zero.

Who is actually doing this — nobody, on the record

We have no reported case of a named organisation automating this occupation. Not one deployment, not one announcement.

That is worth saying out loud next to a score of 48. The verdict above is about what the work exposes — what current AI could do to these tasks. It is not a claim that anyone has done it. For this occupation those two things have come apart completely: the capability argument is on this page, and the evidence column is empty.

Read that as a gap in the reporting we can see, not proof of absence — the dispatch runs on English-language feeds and misses plenty. If you know of a case, tell us, or add a field report from inside the job.

Quick take — do you do this job?

Has AI actually changed your work? One tap, anonymous, and the running tally is public. Nothing else is asked of you.

Self-reported and unverified — a sentiment signal, not a survey. One response per person per occupation; you can change your answer.

Field reports — what people say has changed

No field reports yet. A written account takes a paragraph rather than a tap, goes to an editor before it appears, and is the one thing on this page the rubric cannot produce on its own.

File a field report

Concrete beats general: a tool that arrived, a task that moved, a headcount decision you watched happen. Don't include anything that identifies you or your employer if that would put you at risk.

Watch this verdict
Kept current

Rather than check back: get the digest and we'll tell you what changed — or watch a single occupation from its own page.