From clip to conversation: different roles of Synthesia and AvatarSpark
Whenever I talked about AvatarSpark, people instantly compared it to Synthesia. I understand the association: “there’s an avatar speaking on screen.” But that’s only the surface. Synthesia delivers avatar video clips. AvatarSpark is an end-to-end conversational pipeline: story design (Flow / AI Flow), in-house avatar generation, playback, interactions, analytics, and live runtime.
Why the confusion happens
At first glance a video is a video. In reality we compare a production fragment (Synthesia) with an engine that designs, generates, and runs conversations (AvatarSpark). They belong to different categories.
How I see Synthesia
Synthesia shines when you need quick clips: type the script and receive a presenter-style avatar video. Perfect for linear content such as:
- courses and onboarding materials,
- announcements and short presentations,
- content for LMS/CMS platforms and social media.
It’s a valuable part of the chain, yet still only one part.
What AvatarSpark is
I built AvatarSpark as a conversation engine for avatars that covers the full lifecycle:
- Conversation design: deterministic Flow plus optional AI Flow for controlled Q&A.
- Media: in-house avatar generation (voice/TTS, lip-sync, rendering), queues, and processing statuses.
- Player: node navigation, history, fullscreen.
- Interaction: buttons/voice, forms, QR codes, CTA scenarios.
- Analytics: sessions, events, KPIs, A/B testing.
- Live runtime: kiosk mode, watchdog, cache/offline support.
How we generate avatars
We don’t “plug in” Synthesia. We run our own pipeline to keep tone, control, and independence:
- content in conversation nodes (from Flow scenarios),
- tailored TTS delivery,
- lip-sync and micro gestures,
- render and post-processing (stabilization, color, optional upscaling),
- per-node clip packaging plus metadata for the player,
- rapid QA and regenerating only fragments that need it.
The outcome: consistent tone, no vendor lock-in, and readiness for smooth offline or online playback.
Video versus conversation
Synthesia produces linear footage — the viewer watches what you edited earlier. AvatarSpark drives a deterministic conversation: the user chooses the thread and the avatar continues. When open questions are required, you deliberately enable AI Flow on your own knowledge base with guardrails.
Why the distinction matters
Trust and effectiveness grow when the experience is predictable:
- you keep narrative control (no hallucinations),
- the brand voice stays consistent in every node,
- you measure which paths convert, where users drop, and what to refine.
The “intelligence” happens before publishing, so runtime stays lightweight and stable — even at events.
Data and business outcomes
I treat AvatarSpark as a sales and marketing instrument with clear metrics:
- KPIs: conversation starts, node transitions, session time, CTA performance.
- Leads: GDPR-compliant forms, QR handoffs for follow-up.
- Optimization: A/B testing for intros, story paths, and calls to action.
“So is it competition or not?”
It’s more of a complement than a rival. I often recommend a mix: Synthesia clips embedded inside nodes, AvatarSpark orchestrating the Avatar Story — paths, interactions, analytics, kiosk/web delivery.
When to choose what (no jargon)
- Need an avatar video quickly for a course or announcement? → Use Synthesia.
- Need users to converse, choose paths, leave leads, and let you iterate on data? → Choose AvatarSpark.
- Need both? → Combine them, knowing AvatarSpark generates avatars on its own — no dependency on external engines.
The key is matching the tool to the funnel stage. Synthesia accelerates content production. AvatarSpark transforms the experience into a conversation — with analytics, control, and readiness to act in real time.