Are you Danni or Kylie?

You might not have heard of Michael Winslow, but you’ll have heard of Jimi Hendrix.

In this 1984 clip Michael - otherwise known as ‘The Man of 10,000 Sound Effects’ - mimics helicopters, machinery and Jimi Hendrix complete with guitar solo. Every note, the wah-wah, the feedback, the scream of the strings, using only his mouth. It's uncanny (and so 80s).

I watched it last week and thought: if Hendrix had seen this, would he have been worried? Would some part of him have wondered what the point of him now was? Now that the thing he made could be done by a guy with a microphone?

Of course not. No one knows who Michael Winslow is. Everyone knows Hendrix is.

It isn't because of the notes - the notes can be replicated. But the Stratocaster on fire at Monterey can’t, nor the drugs, the headscarves, the death at 27. That’s the part that endures: the mess, the person.

Which brings me to Kylie Minogue. Sorry to cheapen this until now deeply cool cultural critique with the former Neighbours-star-turned-pop-princess, but there’s a comparison to be made.

In her documentary on Netflix, you see early clips of Kylie and her sister Danni performing together. On paper, Kylie and Danni are pretty much interchangeable. Australian, pint-sized, and both inspired by watching Olivia Newton John in Grease.

But you can see the difference in the clip of the two of them an Australian talent show: Danni is the polished, razzamatazz, stage school brat. Overly confident, robotically good, dead behind the eyes.

Kylie dances and sings just as well next to her, but there’s a hesitancy and self-consciousness.

You learn in the documentary that she worried her voice wasn’t good enough and was generally lacking in confidence. It’s that insecurity and the fact that she cares about it that becomes part of the performance. It’s why we’ve been watching her for nearly 40 years. Not because she's the better singer or the better dancer, but because there's something incomplete about her that she wants from us that we can then fill in. That’s the engagement bit – the enduring connection.

Michael Winslow can produce the sound of Hendrix. AI can produce the words of a writer, the images of a painter, the voice of a singer. But the magic is in the two-way relationship between creator and audience.

An engaged audience senses desire, doubt, curiosity, expertise, aka personality.

This isn’t another defensive AI-can’t-do-what-we-can-do post. AI is effing incredible, but if you want to differentiate, sound a bit ‘extra’ then ask: have you just slipped into reproducing the sound without the personality? Have you done a Michael instead of a Jimi, or (infinitely worse) have you been Danni when you could have been Kylie?