Interview: Louis Rogers, Senior Director of Partnerships & Sales, APAC at Leap Event Technology

Louis Rogers is the Senior Director of Partnerships & Sales, APAC at Leap Event Technology, and NxtNow Music connected with him for an in-depth interview to discuss the recent AI music ban by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA), and its wider impact on the music industry.

You were the marketing manager at the Triple J radio station before generative AI existed. How did that experience shape your perspective on authenticity in music, and how has the rise of AI changed what “authenticity” means today for both artists and audiences?

I believe that triple j’s audience has an appreciation of the challenges involved in being a musician/artist. Being a media that prioritised new music (particularly via the Unearthed program) meant that listeners often got to see new artists grow from grassroots beginnings to major forces in the Australian music industry. Silverchair is an obvious example of this. Missy Higgins, Grinspoon, the list goes on.

I got to see the human side of music, the people that are the creators of so much that we enjoy. It’s somewhat easy to take this creativity and humanity for granted. Obviously this isn’t important to everyone. And I think it’s something that is just a background expectation, the fundamental belief that a human being had some kind of involvement in the creative process.

Even manufactured bands like the Spice Girls still involved real people.

AI casts a shadow of doubt over the creative process. Many known artists are now acknowledging that they are using AI in the creative process. So does that reduce the value of their output? Does it mean that their fans will think less of them? At the end of the day, it’s the quality of the finished product that they’ll be judged by. And as AI is increasingly present in our everyday lives, it will almost be assumed that it has been involved in some way in the creative process. But perhaps we’ll also see a defiance from artists, stating clearly that they refuse to use AI in their work. For some audiences that will be important. For others, not at all.

ARIA’s new rules draw a line between music that is “substantially human made” and tracks that are wholly or primarily AI-generated. From your perspective in live events and audience engagement, how workable do you think that distinction will be in practice?

With live events, AI involvement is somewhat more obvious, at least while there are humans performing the work. If AI was involved in the creation of music, but people are still performing it, then AI is secondary in the audience experience.

There are some “bands” that you could describe as artificial. Fake members and backgrounds, AI generated music, all designed to deceive the consumers. While they portray themselves as authentic, the live performance will always be a challenge. Will audiences care if a “performance” is a hologram or projection of some kind? Would they pay for it?

You mentioned that audiences aren’t just buying a product—they’re buying into an artist, a community and a shared experience. How might the growing presence of AI-generated music affect that trust and connection at live events, festivals, or artist appearances?

I think different genres of music will be judged differently for their use of AI in the creative process. Electronic music has always had an element of assisted creativity, via new sounds and effects that technology makes possible. The Fairlight sampler was revolutionary and caused a creative explosion. Sampling was considered anti-creative and a form of plagiarism for years before it was accepted as a creative artform in itself.

Perhaps AI will make it easier for artists to bring their ideas to life more easily and explore and experiment in ways that had previously required greater skill and experience. So we could see more people becoming musicians because it’s easier. Will audiences think less of them because they’re using AI creatively? If they can bring this to the live performance, they will be judged on the performance rather than how the music was made in the first place.

I think there will be some genuine curiosity in audiences about how an AI “artist” can translate into a live experience. There have been digital entities for some years now that have a persona and a form that fans are engaged by. Technology makes it possible for these entities to be reactive to audiences, even if they’re still on a screen, not physically present.

Regarding transparency, what specific forms of disclosure or labelling do you believe audiences, platforms and event organisers should reasonably expect when AI has played a material role in a song or performance?

This is a real challenge. Do you set percentages as guides? Like, this album contains more/less than 50% AI generated content?

To me, the big question is how much originality the artist is claiming in the creation of the material? Some use of AI is extremely obvious, while some is more subtle or discreet. So it can come down to the honesty of the artist to disclose the origins of the work.

Organisations like ARIA will draw lines and boundaries, but how is it enforced? In ARIA’s case, they are trying to protect the rights of artists who produce original work.

Should other platforms have their own set of standards, like for live performance? We’re at the very beginning of these considerations.

You’ve noted that AI already has strong potential behind the scenes, such as helping with audience insights, personalisation and demand prediction. Where do you see the most promising applications of AI for the live music and events industry in the next few years?

From a marketing perspective, AI has the potential to ingest huge amounts of historical data and provide true insights about how consumers might behave given certain circumstances. Trends in audience tastes, what different demographics are responding to, what are audiences prepared to pay more for? These kinds of insights can potentially de-risk events to some extent. But human creativity will always be an essential ingredient to deliver innovation and excitement. If we rely on AI to have all the answers, we run the risk of AI generated repetition and that would be very boring.