The Hologram of Tupac: Where does this leave the future of live music?

I have spent the the day thinking about the Snoop Dogg gig this week with the hologram of Tupac – who died in 1996. Where does this leave the future of live music? In a few years time, will we be going to see the Beatles at Yankee Stadium, or the Michael Jackson Dangerous tour? Will it be possible for holograms of bands to play 100 gigs in one night – a world tour in 2-3 hours? More important – how does the use of technology like this make you feel? Is it any different from going to see a tribute band or buying an album like Crash Landing by Hendrix – which features Hendrix ‘performing’ with musicians via studio technology? In short – is it morally correct? Watch this link asap – as You Tube seem to be  taking it down at breakneck speed.

 

About Paul Carr

Academic working at the University of Glamorgan
This entry was posted in Live Music, Music Industry and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to The Hologram of Tupac: Where does this leave the future of live music?

  1. Simon Parton says:

    It’s pretty amazing! I didn’t know what was going on when I first watched it! I hope it doesn’t become a running trend… It’s cool to use every once in a while (I heard that they did it in the CIA for War Of the Worlds with a hologram of Liam Neeson), but hopefully not all the time… It’d be like… paying money to go to a stadium just to watch a youtube video surely? But then again it is cool… guess I couldnt say until I’ve ‘experienced’ it!

    Like

  2. propellerkuh says:

    Imho: does it hurt someone? If no, then it’s ok in my book.
    Is it entertaining? No like hell, lest the musik is entertaining.
    So why bother?! It’s nothing else but 1) youtube on steroids. 2) Posing
    Have fun and take care

    Like

  3. Emily Evans says:

    Personally i think that video is brilliant and very cleverly done. I think its a great way to celebrate and appreciate the life and musical works of late music legends. Although, saying this, I agree with Simon by saying that i hope it doesnt become a running trend and every late artist/band do the same as it would ruin the whole concept of a live performance. I personally wouldn’t be a fan of going to a concert knowing that I’ve paid money just to watch a big screen with computerised people singing all night. It’s a good idea to use once in a while in memorial or rememberance of someone and their music, but not on a regular basis by replacing the experience of actual live performances.

    Like

  4. Anonymous says:

    bands like the gorillas were never ‘alive’ considering their concerts and videos were nearly all animated:

    Even after death, its amazing what we can do to keep someone alive, but something about attempting to bring back a dead performer doesn’t sit right with me. I could see recreating historic speeches or something, as long as it sticks strictly to what actually happened and was said.

    The question is whether people would buy tickets to go as see a hologram.
    In japan this technology has already been implemented to create a pop star ‘Hatsune Miku’. This hologram is not a representation of anyone, it IS the artist
    and thousands of people regularly go to these events:

    On the plus side, Its giving the experience to people who have never otherwise seen an artist perform live. But inventing somebody is too ‘manufactured’ for my liking. I wouldn’t be surprised if people re already working on holograms for MJ, Whitney…

    Like

  5. Phil Johncock says:

    bands like the gorillas were never ‘alive’ considering their concerts and videos were nearly all animated:

    Even after death, its amazing what we can do to keep someone alive, but something about attempting to bring back a dead performer doesn’t sit right with me. I could see recreating historic speeches or something, as long as it sticks strictly to what actually happened and was said.

    The question is whether people would buy tickets to go as see a hologram,

    In japan this technology has already been implemented to create a pop star ‘Hatsune Miku’. This hologram is not a representation of anyone, it IS the artist
    and thousands of people regularly go to these events:

    On the plus side, Its giving the experience to people who have never otherwise seen an artist perform live. But inventing somebody is too ‘manufactured’ for my liking. I wouldn’t be surprised if people re already working on holograms for MJ, Whitney…

    Like

  6. Mike Despres says:

    I couldn’t see the link you posted but I think that the whole part of the exerience of going to see a band live is the individual performance that interacts with the crowd. I find it hard to see a way in which eventually, holograms will be doing more than one gig a night. For me it just takes that special experience away, it’s sort of a statement “I’ve been to see …”. Whereas if holograms were used it wouldn’t be so special

    Like

  7. Ben Roach says:

    From my point of view, watching the video of the Tupac hologram blew my mind; the technology and implementation I felt were fantastic, it seemed as if he was actually ‘there’. Although after pondering it further I believe I feel like this because I have no emotional attachment to this particular performer as I’ve never been a fan of his work. With this in mind I’ve been thinking about how I would react if there were to be a similar performance by a hologram of, say, Jim Morrison or Kurt Cobain – artists I am a fan of – and I don’t think I’d agree. The whole experience would be artificial and, although it would give younger generations the opportunity to experience (to an extent) a live performance by such an artist, it would essentially be a reproduction and therefore, not a real experience at all. And then how long would it take before their ‘one off performance’ would turn into a ‘new album’ using some sort of voice simulation technology? I don’t believe deceased artists would approve of themselves being exploited in such a way that borders on necrophilia.

    Like

  8. I’m not a fan of this – because it makes a rock performance – where anything might happen – into a theatrical show. It’s rock n roll I love – not theatre. For pop acts where it is all choreographed I guess it might work, but that’s not what I’m into…

    Like

  9. Steffan Hughes says:

    I believe the use of authenticity comes into issue here. I am also not surprized this has come about as I’m sure the people who are in charge of this would have made a lot of money from doing this. If there is a demand to see performers such as Tupac play live, than why not supply the product? The fact that you could play an infinite amount of gigs in one night will surely light up the record companies eyes. I would not be opposed to this idea though, as it would become a very cheap way of seeing artists live, and in my experience of sell out, big live gigs, I usually watch the big screen anyway, so a holographic image would not be much of a downgrade.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s