The "Synthetic" Artist Live Experience: Interesting, Yes. Memorable & Lasting, No.
London's ABBA Voyage Experience & The Black Eyed Peas New AI "Synth" Vocalist "Vida" May Be Impressive. But Do They Really Create Lasting Memories?
Ready for your Monday morning weekly brAIn dump? Here it is. I just returned from generative AI/media meetings across “the Pond” in the UK. So, sip your Earl Grey tea and savor your favorite breakfast scone as you read this week’s ABBA-inspired “mAIn event” feature story that comes straight outta London. Then, it’s onto the “AI legal case tracker” (updates on other key AI infringement cases). LET’S GO!
I. The mAIn event - Synthetic Artist Live Experiences: Interesting, Yes. Lasting, No.
“Is it live, or is it Memorex?” Some of you will remember that famous ad campaign for the audio tapes we used to make our vinyl records portable (for those of you who don’t, all you need to know was that it was everywhere “back in the day”).
I was reminded of that famous advertising line as my wife and I attended the highly-touted “ABBA Voyage” show in London last week. The show features virtual avatars ("ABBA-tars") of the four band members — created using motion capture of their real selves, together with a dash of generative AI — performing “live” on stage as their younger selves. The result of this state-of-the-art holographic tech wizardry is intended to time travel you back to the band’s heyday in the dance and disco-driven 1970’s. The show has been endlessly hyped, so I went to experience it and judge its impact for myself because, you know, I’m a media-tech guy who always looks for “the next big thing.” My interest had absolutely nothing to do with the fact that ABBA’s music rocks. But of course it did!
The theme of this week’s newsletter then came to me the next day as I read the separate — but related — news that the music group Black Eyed Peas’ announced a 2025 Las Vegas residency that will feature a new band member named “Vida” who, according to band leader Will.i.am, is not human. Nor is Vida an ABBA-like hologram apparently. Vida is, instead, fully AI generated. Fully “synth” in other words.
So I jettisoned the feature story I had already written for this week to bring you these two intertwined stories, because both ultimately beg the question: how “real” (as in, meaningful, impactful and lasting) can a “synthetic” artist experience be in a live setting? Is it truly game-changing and a sign of significantly more to come (and perhaps even a threat to actual human artists)? Will we go Vida-loco for these ABBA-tars? Or is it simply techno gimickry in action? Tech for tech sake?
The simple answer is that “synthetic” artist-powered live concerts and experiences fall somewhere in between those two ends of the spectrum. ABBA Voyage was certainly a lot of fun and fascinating as a testament to human ingenuity. But that fascination was fleeting. Kind of like a sugar rush. After the show’s first 15 minutes, my wife and I got slightly bored, even as we joined the rest of the audience in singing with ABBA’s real voices (emanating from their synth personas) to sing their most classic dance anthem “Dancing Queen.” We turned to each other several times during the evening and both said, unprompted, “it’s kind of cheesy.”
Here’s the thing. While the show’s technology is impressive without question, never for one moment did we believe that we were seeing and experiencing “the real thing.” Yes, we were immersed in an ABBA world. But we never got lost in it (which is an experience that frequently happens at live human artist shows).
And that’s where it all falls apart. The whole point of going to see your favorite artists perform live on stage — is to see your favorite artists LIVE (and alive in front of you)! No two shows are ever the same in the real world. But with ABBA Voyage, it’s all the same. And you can feel that “sameness” permeating everything, despite how dazzling and impressive the technology is. Because it is — and it will get even more dazzling and impressive — but the result ultimately is likely to be the same.
There’s simply something that tech can’t reach when it comes to the human artist-audience connection that defines “live” experiences. That humanity is precisely what elevates those shared live concert and event experiences and makes them lasting. Makes them memorable. I’ve written this previously in my article titled, “Keanu Reeves & BottleRock Show Us a Way Out of the Matrix.”
“Synths,” on the other hand, ultimately become “gimmicks” to an extent. Cool to watch and experience. Impressive for sure. But once you’ve experienced a live synth artist experience, the excitement will likely wear off fast for you too. My bet is that you’ll soon return to scouring Ticketmaster for your next live show powered by your favorite human artists or band.
And for the Black Eyed Peas, candidly, methinks that Will.i.am is simply trying too hard in his endless promotion of generative AI and the Arts. When we see the Peas, we want to see the real Fergie sing with the band. We’re not there to see an AI generated Vida take her place to sing duets! (Yes, that’s apparently the plan).
Listen, I love great technology infusing live events and experiences — especially when it’s used to enhance the overall human generated performance, rather to make the tech itself the headline event. I’ve previously commented on — and rejected — Will.i.am’s belief that the music industry, in his words, “is technology.” The human artist and songs always come first. Tech can later join the stage to enhance and amplify.
At the end of the day, my bet is that the vast majority of us (not just Boomers, by the way) will always gravitate to real human artists performing live on stage, no matter how impressive or “invisible” the synthetic artist tech becomes. We’ll fondly remember those shared live experiences with our friends and loved ones. They frequently become memories of a life-time. They certainly have for me and my family.
I don’t see that happening with live AI-generated “synth” artist experiences. Yes, they’re impressive wonders of technology. But in a spin on the immortal words of Memorex’s famous ad campaign, they may be “live,” but they’re ultimately memory-less.
[What do you think? Send me your feedback to peter@creativemedia.biz].
II. The AI Legal Case Tracker - Updates on Key AI Litigation
I lay out the facts - and latest critical developments - via this link to the “AI case tracker”. You’ll get everything you need (including my detailed analysis) for each of the cases listed below. Lots of recent legal AI-ctivity (including this recent ruling against Stability AI and others, about which I wrote, by a federal judge in California that helped the cause of copyright owners). So much to know. So little time. I do the work so you don’t need to.
Bottom line: generative AI companies should get access to the content they need only when they seek consent from — and pay compensation to — the relevant content/copyright owners whose content they scrape. And when they don’t, they will increasingly find themselves in court.
(1) The New York Times v. Microsoft & OpenAI
(2) UMG Recordings v. Suno
(3) UMG Recordings v. Uncharted Labs (d/b/a Udio)
(4) Universal Music Group, et al. v. Anthropic
(5) Sarah Silverman, et al. v. Meta (class action)
(6) Sarah Silverman v. OpenAI (class action)
(7) Getty Images v. Stability AI and Midjourney
NOTE: Go to the “AI case tracker” tab at the top of the page at “the brAIn” website.
