CONTROVERSY: ORCHESTRA USES AI CLIPS IN LIVE CONCERT

[mitchern]

Posted: 1/16/26 at 7:41am

It's giving me The Wiz vibes, anyone? 

https://slippedisc.com/2026/01/controversy-orchestra-uses-ai-clips-in-live-concert/

I do think the source of art, be it human or AI should be credited. 

[TarHeelAlan]

Posted: 1/16/26 at 12:21pm

mitchern said: "It's giving me The Wiz vibes, anyone?

https://slippedisc.com/2026/01/controversy-orchestra-uses-ai-clips-in-live-concert/

I do think the source of art, be it human or AI should be credited."

The article is behind a paywall, only available to subscribers. 

[SteveSanders]

Posted: 1/16/26 at 1:09pm

TarHeelAlan said: "he article is behind a paywall, only available to subscribers."

Hmm.  Opened fine for me, but this is all that was there:

"The visuals in last night’s performance of Stravinsky’s Firebird, Pacific Symphony of Orange County, California, used AI generated clips, we understand from members of the audience.

The originator of the visuals, Fowler Amusement, says: ‘For the look of the Firebird projected media, we drew inspiration from theater, dance, and classic illustrations of NC Wyeth, Arthur Rackham, and Howard Pyle from the early 20th century, among others. Our cinema influences include the greats of early cinema, as well as Zefferelli, Miyazaki et al.’

What has yet to be tested – in both artistic and legal terms – is whether is is appropriate to diminish a live, human performance of a work of music with a robotic automation.

One spectator tells us: ‘I think it’s absolutely despicable and contrary to their artistic integrity.’

Your views?"

 

[John Adams]

Posted: 1/16/26 at 2:35pm

The title of this thread is slightly misleading. When I read it, I got the impression that there was a controversy over using AI-generated musical clips. 

AI-generated visual clips of animation (as opposed to those that are meant to be photo-realistic) are really not so different from computer-generated animation; basically, they just remove the element of human interaction with mouse/keyboard. Also, there is no human input in terms of creating the algorithms that produce the automation for generating the illustration output in a computer-generated animation.

I do agree, however, that AI generated output should ALWAYS be  clearly and obviously labeled/credited as such.

Updated On: 1/16/26 at 02:35 PM

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/18/26 at 6:12pm

John Adams said: "AI-generatedvisualclips of animation (as opposed to those that are meant to be photo-realistic) are really not so different from computer-generated animation"

I beg to differ, both philosophically and aesthetically. 

But I don't know how much fight I have in me about it. The Wiz seemed to satisfy people with an obvious lie, and shows like Death Become Her use what looks exactly like generative AI imagery in several places, to the point where if it is not then it is for some reason trying to ape its most stylistically incoherent tics and tells, to no visible backlash at all. 

[John Adams]

Posted: 1/19/26 at 7:50am

Scarywarhol said: "John Adams said: "AI-generated visual clips of animation (as opposed to those that are meant to be photo-realistic) are really not so different from computer-generated animation"

I beg to differ, both philosophically and aesthetically."

I can agree about "philosophically", but as for aesthetically, both are computer-generated which puts both on the same aesthetic plane.

 

[FolliesCabaret]

Posted: 1/19/26 at 11:26am

John Adams said: "I can agree about "philosophically", but as for aesthetically, both are computer-generated which puts both on the same aesthetic plane."

I disagree, I've yet to see AI animation that doesn't look ghastly, especially when compared to non-AI animation. You can (hopefully) aesthetically tell when AI has been used for animation.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/20/26 at 1:11pm

John Adams said: "Scarywarhol said: "John Adams said: "AI-generatedvisualclips of animation (as opposed to those that are meant to be photo-realistic) are really not so different from computer-generated animation"

I beg to differ, both philosophically and aesthetically."

I can agree about "philosophically", but as for aesthetically, both are computer-generated which puts both on the same aesthetic plane.

"

Sondheim is not on the same plane as some guy plagiarizing "Pop Goes the Weasel" just because they were both written on staff paper. 

Updated On: 1/20/26 at 01:11 PM

[John Adams]

Posted: 1/20/26 at 3:12pm

Scarywarhol said: "Sondheim is not on the same plane as some guyplagiarizing "Pop Goes the Weasel" just because they were both written on staff paper."

Agreed re: who and how it's used, but the mediums are identical (which is what my post was about). Computer-generated output is computer-generated output (regardless of AI vs programmer) which puts the two on the same plane.

Updated On: 1/20/26 at 03:12 PM