My perception is that a DJ is someone who mainly plays and mixes songs produced by other folks, while a live act is someone who presents his own music 'live' to an audience.
How much the live artist actually does it totally up to him, as long as the result fucking blows me away.
I'm always happy to see a lot of live playing going on but if the person in charge is not able to play a halfway accurate chord progression in front of an audience, I would sincerely expect him to use his prerecorded riff and not to torture me with his brave efforts.
However, the main thing for me is, that the artist is not faking something he isn't actually doing. If he's playing a prearranged set and he's just twiddling with the filters and he is really into it and it rocks and everything, then this is fine with me.
If he pretends to lay down the whole set turning one knob that's just awkward. And while the music might still be great I will surely lose some of my respect for him and with that will also go the enjoyment of his music.
thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
-
attackmode
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Sat Sep 16, 2006 10:51 am
- Location: Frankfurt / Germany
Not really. My original comment wasn't aimed at you and I was mainly agreeing with what you were saying. I was supprised how many people said "so what as long as it sounds good".Angstrom wrote: I still think you are missing my point.
One often forgets that one should say one when refering to someone other than the one who one is quoting. ie. If one were advertised to play live, then pressed play on one's computer and prended to doing something, then one would be cheating one's public. And no one deserves that.
Your expectations != audience's != employers
1. As a musician (which probably everyone reading this forum is), you might agonize over how much blood sweat and tears you put into your compositions and performance. As a real artist, these are crucial issues to your psyche, and that's as it should be
2. 99% of audience members DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU'RE DOING OR HOW YOU'RE DOING IT. They want an ENTERTAINING EXPERIENCE. If you're performing to impress a handful of people in the audience who know what you're doing, that's up to you.
It's a SHOW. That's why the Daft Punk show looks like it does. Yeah, musically they have done some interesting stuff, but their live show is about the VISUALS.
Believe me, a female DJ playing a DAT tape or CD-R, jumping around the DJ booth with her lumps jiggling will make INFINITELY more money than most of us EVER will -- no matter how brilliant your music is.
3. The person paying the bills cares about how many tickets/how much liquor is sold. That's why live music has disappeared from 90% of the bars in the world to be replaced by DJs, karaoke, or worse.
You have to decide for yourself what you goal is: to make a living, to make music without compromise for your own enjoyment, or wherever in between.
If you can do both, that's phenomenal.
2. 99% of audience members DO NOT CARE WHAT YOU'RE DOING OR HOW YOU'RE DOING IT. They want an ENTERTAINING EXPERIENCE. If you're performing to impress a handful of people in the audience who know what you're doing, that's up to you.
It's a SHOW. That's why the Daft Punk show looks like it does. Yeah, musically they have done some interesting stuff, but their live show is about the VISUALS.
Believe me, a female DJ playing a DAT tape or CD-R, jumping around the DJ booth with her lumps jiggling will make INFINITELY more money than most of us EVER will -- no matter how brilliant your music is.
3. The person paying the bills cares about how many tickets/how much liquor is sold. That's why live music has disappeared from 90% of the bars in the world to be replaced by DJs, karaoke, or worse.
You have to decide for yourself what you goal is: to make a living, to make music without compromise for your own enjoyment, or wherever in between.
If you can do both, that's phenomenal.
well, ok, hmm...
I've spent a lot of time playing guitar. I've become fairly good at it: I am a good guitar player, in a particular style of playing. People can watch and listen to me me play and say, 'he plays well, in that style that he plays...'.
However, if they don't like the style I'm playing and tack on "...but I don't like that style.", it matters not in that instance how well I render that style, nor how 'real' it is.
On the flip side, this is why people will align themselves with an artist, because they like the style they play, and will always not align themselves with people who play other styles (the 70's "rock vs. disco", or country vs. 'urban' are archetypical).
Bands practice. Good bands practice and rehearse until most of what they do is, basically, programmed into them. What seems spontaneous in a live performance is, of course, often scripted and practiced.
In addition, the *quality* of sound that you get from a computer is much, much better with far less effort than you can get from a band, 20-30 minute renditions are not physically exerting, and musical/rhythmic errors are far more avoidable.
So I can jam along with my Live set using guitar or my guitar-like MIDI controller, and while that is not as 'real' as jamming with a band, it is bang for the buck "better" because of the above. It sounds better than any band I've ever played with, with much less effort and more creativity and a fair amount of spontaneity, and a far wider range of 'styles' can be incorporated.
I've spent a lot of time playing guitar. I've become fairly good at it: I am a good guitar player, in a particular style of playing. People can watch and listen to me me play and say, 'he plays well, in that style that he plays...'.
However, if they don't like the style I'm playing and tack on "...but I don't like that style.", it matters not in that instance how well I render that style, nor how 'real' it is.
On the flip side, this is why people will align themselves with an artist, because they like the style they play, and will always not align themselves with people who play other styles (the 70's "rock vs. disco", or country vs. 'urban' are archetypical).
Bands practice. Good bands practice and rehearse until most of what they do is, basically, programmed into them. What seems spontaneous in a live performance is, of course, often scripted and practiced.
In addition, the *quality* of sound that you get from a computer is much, much better with far less effort than you can get from a band, 20-30 minute renditions are not physically exerting, and musical/rhythmic errors are far more avoidable.
So I can jam along with my Live set using guitar or my guitar-like MIDI controller, and while that is not as 'real' as jamming with a band, it is bang for the buck "better" because of the above. It sounds better than any band I've ever played with, with much less effort and more creativity and a fair amount of spontaneity, and a far wider range of 'styles' can be incorporated.
UTENZIL a tool... of the muse.
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
Cudos to Angstrom for starting this thread!
I have been struggling with this myself. I think what is missing in this argument is "fun."
Standing in front of an audience with a blank canvass is not my idea of fun, or adrenaline, to me it sounds like the kind of thing I have nightmares about. Imagining myself hunched over my laptop, sweating bullets, and way too self absorbed to to even notice what the audience is doing.
I'll never forget a Live PA artist who had a sticker on his gear that read :
"Look ma, no Computer!"
This guy prides himself on using drum machines instead of computers.
I'm sure that will score him respect points in some areas, but my angle is this:
This dude brings so much gear and crap to a gig, that there is no possible way he could just throw everything into a backpack and setup. And speaking of setup, how long does it take to wire all this gear together? What about all the other performers on the bill who need to use the same table all his crap is set up on? Those same performers that have to wait for him to get all his crap off the table so they can set their own stuff up! =NOT cool
This whole argument depends on what YOU think is "cool".
Is it "cool" that a DJ can do a 2 hour set with turntables and a Boss DD-2 guitar pedal?
Is it "cool" that I use Digital Performer to handle automation activity of background tracks while I perform, or that I was one of the first artists to actually attempt to do this?
Yes, AND no.
Yes it's cool for me that I had no peers back in 1998. It's also UNcool that I had no one to go to for help either because everyone said to me:
"You're bringing your desktop G3 onto a stage!?! Are you nuts?!"
If you are a singer, people come to hear you sing.
As a singer, it's important and revealing to me to hear and see HOW the singer handles certain passages.
Lip synching is not cool, and never has been, but guess what? It's a REALITY.
Madonna, Britney Spears, are examples of singers who dance at the same time. Every tried to do that?
As much as I am not a Britney fan, I can certainly respect that at certain points in her show she is likely lip synching, and is doing so for the benefit of the audience. Its practically undetectable, and the show benefits from it.
This idea of who is cooler, or braver, or cutting edge because they make things more difficult for themselves is just silly. It doesn;t matter whether you play turntables or guitar, there are always certain audience members who think you are cheating. As a guitar player in my teens, I remember older guitar players criticizing me because I had Cape Canaveral in the form of guitar pedals at my feet. This was before Tom Morello showed up and made it "cool" to have the NASA space station for a guitar rig. Rage Against the Machine is against using samples, but having the guitar sound like a synth is all good. The Edge from U2 has by far THE most complex guitar rig I have ever seen. He also REINVENTED how the guitar can sound, and paved the road for others to follow.
Steve Vai used to get a lot of criticism because of his use of the Eventide H3000 Harmonizer. Never mind the fact that even without all the FX, he is STILL a better guitar player than you, or I!
Before she had a band, Tori Amos used a DAT machine for her drum tracks.
KISS used a cassette recorder for the piano in "Beth".
Nine Inch Nails used 2 Fostex reel-to-reels synced with time code in the early days. (Look on youtube)
So lets get back to "fun":
There is ALWAYS an easier way to do things, but it might not be as fun.
Pressing play on the sequencer and simply singing along might float your boat.
If you enjoy experimenting and keeping your fingers crossed in front of an audience, by all means, rock n roll! It doesn;t mean you're a better performer, it doesn't mean your cool, it doesn't mean your music or your performance is better, its simply a stylistic difference, and unless you're standing there plain faced with your arms crossed, only the musicians in your audience will notice and care.
We all must be careful not to criticise other performers based on this point.
We as audio engineers geek out over stupid stuff that really only WE care about, and write songs with cool little "how I did it" stories to go with them. But really, for the non musicians, and music lovers out there, isn;t the music the whole point?
No one cares if you use Ableton, Cubase, real synths, turntables or a rack of drum machines. Only your peers care about that, and whether you like it or not, judgement from your peers is inevitable no matter what you do.
Remember SpoonMan? Two spoons and a mic, rocking the house.
Remember Pink Floyd and Rush? I saw the MIDI schematic for a Rush tour and there are printed circuit boards that look similar.
For everyone else, its about the music.
"it's not what is actually happening, it is what appears to be happening which counts to an audience "
Coming from a music performance and theatre background I could not have said it better myself. For some crappier theatres, there IS no stage hand to wire the CD player up, or the technical guy shows up 5 min before the show.
Can you imagine using a piece of crap mic placed in front of an even crappier gedo blaster speaker so that the audience can hear the music? I don;t have to imagine that, because I've done it, and the audience is never the wiser. Sure the sound isn't perfect, (and is in Mono) but the audience came to see a performance. NOT worry about whether there is unwanted comb filtering in the music!
As creatives, we tend to get so close to the bark that seeing the actual tree is impossible. I propose attempting to turn that around. What is your music saying? Does it work? Are the people into it? Does the club owner want you back?
If you press play on your iTunes and stand back, my bet is that you are not a lot of fun to watch, and faking it is your own conscience to battle.
I have been struggling with this myself. I think what is missing in this argument is "fun."
Standing in front of an audience with a blank canvass is not my idea of fun, or adrenaline, to me it sounds like the kind of thing I have nightmares about. Imagining myself hunched over my laptop, sweating bullets, and way too self absorbed to to even notice what the audience is doing.
I'll never forget a Live PA artist who had a sticker on his gear that read :
"Look ma, no Computer!"
This guy prides himself on using drum machines instead of computers.
I'm sure that will score him respect points in some areas, but my angle is this:
This dude brings so much gear and crap to a gig, that there is no possible way he could just throw everything into a backpack and setup. And speaking of setup, how long does it take to wire all this gear together? What about all the other performers on the bill who need to use the same table all his crap is set up on? Those same performers that have to wait for him to get all his crap off the table so they can set their own stuff up! =NOT cool
This whole argument depends on what YOU think is "cool".
Is it "cool" that a DJ can do a 2 hour set with turntables and a Boss DD-2 guitar pedal?
Is it "cool" that I use Digital Performer to handle automation activity of background tracks while I perform, or that I was one of the first artists to actually attempt to do this?
Yes, AND no.
Yes it's cool for me that I had no peers back in 1998. It's also UNcool that I had no one to go to for help either because everyone said to me:
"You're bringing your desktop G3 onto a stage!?! Are you nuts?!"
If you are a singer, people come to hear you sing.
As a singer, it's important and revealing to me to hear and see HOW the singer handles certain passages.
Lip synching is not cool, and never has been, but guess what? It's a REALITY.
Madonna, Britney Spears, are examples of singers who dance at the same time. Every tried to do that?
As much as I am not a Britney fan, I can certainly respect that at certain points in her show she is likely lip synching, and is doing so for the benefit of the audience. Its practically undetectable, and the show benefits from it.
This idea of who is cooler, or braver, or cutting edge because they make things more difficult for themselves is just silly. It doesn;t matter whether you play turntables or guitar, there are always certain audience members who think you are cheating. As a guitar player in my teens, I remember older guitar players criticizing me because I had Cape Canaveral in the form of guitar pedals at my feet. This was before Tom Morello showed up and made it "cool" to have the NASA space station for a guitar rig. Rage Against the Machine is against using samples, but having the guitar sound like a synth is all good. The Edge from U2 has by far THE most complex guitar rig I have ever seen. He also REINVENTED how the guitar can sound, and paved the road for others to follow.
Steve Vai used to get a lot of criticism because of his use of the Eventide H3000 Harmonizer. Never mind the fact that even without all the FX, he is STILL a better guitar player than you, or I!
Before she had a band, Tori Amos used a DAT machine for her drum tracks.
KISS used a cassette recorder for the piano in "Beth".
Nine Inch Nails used 2 Fostex reel-to-reels synced with time code in the early days. (Look on youtube)
So lets get back to "fun":
There is ALWAYS an easier way to do things, but it might not be as fun.
Pressing play on the sequencer and simply singing along might float your boat.
If you enjoy experimenting and keeping your fingers crossed in front of an audience, by all means, rock n roll! It doesn;t mean you're a better performer, it doesn't mean your cool, it doesn't mean your music or your performance is better, its simply a stylistic difference, and unless you're standing there plain faced with your arms crossed, only the musicians in your audience will notice and care.
We all must be careful not to criticise other performers based on this point.
We as audio engineers geek out over stupid stuff that really only WE care about, and write songs with cool little "how I did it" stories to go with them. But really, for the non musicians, and music lovers out there, isn;t the music the whole point?
No one cares if you use Ableton, Cubase, real synths, turntables or a rack of drum machines. Only your peers care about that, and whether you like it or not, judgement from your peers is inevitable no matter what you do.
Remember SpoonMan? Two spoons and a mic, rocking the house.
Remember Pink Floyd and Rush? I saw the MIDI schematic for a Rush tour and there are printed circuit boards that look similar.
For everyone else, its about the music.
"it's not what is actually happening, it is what appears to be happening which counts to an audience "
Coming from a music performance and theatre background I could not have said it better myself. For some crappier theatres, there IS no stage hand to wire the CD player up, or the technical guy shows up 5 min before the show.
Can you imagine using a piece of crap mic placed in front of an even crappier gedo blaster speaker so that the audience can hear the music? I don;t have to imagine that, because I've done it, and the audience is never the wiser. Sure the sound isn't perfect, (and is in Mono) but the audience came to see a performance. NOT worry about whether there is unwanted comb filtering in the music!
As creatives, we tend to get so close to the bark that seeing the actual tree is impossible. I propose attempting to turn that around. What is your music saying? Does it work? Are the people into it? Does the club owner want you back?
If you press play on your iTunes and stand back, my bet is that you are not a lot of fun to watch, and faking it is your own conscience to battle.
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
...even when I trigger clips the whole gig in ableton (in a live show) I feel I am faking it
it's like guitar hero but easier
.
it's like guitar hero but easier
.
Re:
It took me hundred of words to say what you just said.knotkranky wrote:It's all relative, so it's all the same imo. The only difference is "believability" But, if one gets busted, then all bets are off and they'll go down in flames. You don't have to worry about that too much if yer the realish deal.
Faking it? hmm. Is an overdub faking it? Is 48 tracks cheating? A drum "machine"? An orchestra stab on middle C? The trance button? Computers? I really don't know what's real anymore. Just entertain me.
Oh well...
Re:
I am coming to GJM's defense here:b0unce wrote:what audacious bullshit.gjm wrote: It dosen't matter that you don't live up to what someone elses version of what 'live' or 'authentic' is. If YOU are getting YOUR desired results as a performer and artist (clearly two different things), then guess what, there will ALWAYS be some smart mouthed hack who will call you down. They usually don't understand the big picture.
you ladies can gloss this up all day and night with the most existential drivel your vocab can facilitate.
'they usually don't understand the big picture' ....LOL
You been to art school ? Hands up who's been to art school
This is the only place they teach you to espouse this kind of turgid muck
"You ladies?"
Speaking of audaciousness!
Who is your next target? Minorities? Homos?
How is any part of what GJM said relate to existentialism?!
And then... art school?
Where does all this judgment come from, and why the anger?
Re:
The hole in your argument, is that you have told us where YOU (as a musician) draw the line, at DAT machines. But where does the audience draw the line?dj superflat wrote: and if you want a definitive answer, yes, playing a DAT and bouncing around is pathetic.
I think you make a good point discerning what is acceptible in the ROCK world compared to electronic world, they are different, but then what yoou as a musician think is acceptible is not likely to be in line with what your non-musician/music lover audience thinks. Or, maybe it is, but how on earth could you possibly know until their throwing bottles at you, or chanting your name?
If you and I went to a Slayer concert together, and Terry King was dressed as Homie the Clown, we would BOTH be fairly rattled by that, because we have EXPECTATIONS.
When it comes to electronic music, what kind of expectations to you estimate the audience has?
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
sad but truth.. a good fake will do the job... thats the reason so many fakes are out there doing good business.. actually most electronic live acts are faking it..if you would kidnap them during the set the show would just continue...maybe a bit less fillrer ups and downs...
but usually the tracks just run along..
most dj´s dont know which track will run one hour later... many "live"acts do know..and not even have to press an extra button to make it happen just at the sceduled time.. a bit lame...
And usually this kind of sets only works because the first 45 minutes was boring tools and the last 20 minutes are some hits..what creates a big relife and positive moodswing on the audience... so doing some galuzzie rolls and tripple let them wait hawtins over a fake set defently will satisfy the audience... they are used to be satisfied by dj´s anyway.. so no stunts necessary...
i once had a situation where i was about to play a second set... i went on stage and started writing some new 303 lines and beats while the dj was playing... suddenly the police busted the place..stoped the music/party... people came ...oh wow..your second set was so much better than the first one :-/.. i wasnt even on the system.. however... beeing synced to the soundsystem and doing all the necessary moves to quickly write some new tracks looked probably more live than the first set where preprogrammed patterns was in action...
You dont look anymore busy with electronic music as in the moment you are actually writing it,,,
So if you want to do a good fake... just run the playback..and write some lines on top of it... you might even be able to mix them in at one point...
but that would be risky..and fake acts dont take risks...
but usually the tracks just run along..
most dj´s dont know which track will run one hour later... many "live"acts do know..and not even have to press an extra button to make it happen just at the sceduled time.. a bit lame...
And usually this kind of sets only works because the first 45 minutes was boring tools and the last 20 minutes are some hits..what creates a big relife and positive moodswing on the audience... so doing some galuzzie rolls and tripple let them wait hawtins over a fake set defently will satisfy the audience... they are used to be satisfied by dj´s anyway.. so no stunts necessary...
i once had a situation where i was about to play a second set... i went on stage and started writing some new 303 lines and beats while the dj was playing... suddenly the police busted the place..stoped the music/party... people came ...oh wow..your second set was so much better than the first one :-/.. i wasnt even on the system.. however... beeing synced to the soundsystem and doing all the necessary moves to quickly write some new tracks looked probably more live than the first set where preprogrammed patterns was in action...
You dont look anymore busy with electronic music as in the moment you are actually writing it,,,
So if you want to do a good fake... just run the playback..and write some lines on top of it... you might even be able to mix them in at one point...
but that would be risky..and fake acts dont take risks...
Last edited by 3phase on Thu Mar 25, 2010 6:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
mac book 2,16 ghz 4(3)gb ram, Os 10.62, fireface 400,
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
After reading ALL of these posts, I had another thought to what was stated above:
What does being a musician have to do with being an entertainer?
Granted, everyone here is a musician.
But are you an entertainer?
There is distinction! Can you be both?
Henry Rollins for example is an entertainer. If you call him a singer OR a musician he himself will laugh in your face. (as he laughed in mine during our chat.)
Whether he sings sharp or flat is irrelevant. People come to see him and his band destroy.
Tori Amos, is BOTH.
If you are standing in front of an audience, you are performing for the purpose of entertaining.
What kind of musical integrity can be found when a band like Slipknot gets the entire audience to sit on the ground, refuses to play until they do, and then commands the audience to jump upon command?
Answer: NONE.
But you know what? It's funny as hell, its cheesy as hell, but when I jumped up on command, my energy went to a whole new level.
Feeling a solid double kick drum pounding from the subs and into my chest, seeing how Slipknot manipulates the audience with tension and release....THAT my friend, is entertainment!
What does being a musician have to do with being an entertainer?
Granted, everyone here is a musician.
But are you an entertainer?
There is distinction! Can you be both?
Henry Rollins for example is an entertainer. If you call him a singer OR a musician he himself will laugh in your face. (as he laughed in mine during our chat.)
Whether he sings sharp or flat is irrelevant. People come to see him and his band destroy.
Tori Amos, is BOTH.
If you are standing in front of an audience, you are performing for the purpose of entertaining.
What kind of musical integrity can be found when a band like Slipknot gets the entire audience to sit on the ground, refuses to play until they do, and then commands the audience to jump upon command?
Answer: NONE.
But you know what? It's funny as hell, its cheesy as hell, but when I jumped up on command, my energy went to a whole new level.
Feeling a solid double kick drum pounding from the subs and into my chest, seeing how Slipknot manipulates the audience with tension and release....THAT my friend, is entertainment!
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
"So I can jam along with my Live set using guitar or my guitar-like MIDI controller, and while that is not as 'real' as jamming with a band, it is bang for the buck "better" because of the above. It sounds better than any band I've ever played with, with much less effort and more creativity and a fair amount of spontaneity, and a far wider range of 'styles' can be incorporated."
Although I believe everything you say to be true, one eventual hurdle that a person can find themselves bored to tears of your own, typical kinds of things that you do. When you do stuff with other people, you get the benefit of their ideas as well, and you fall in love with those ideas the same way you do with your favorite music
http://forum.ableton.com/posting.php?mo ... fe7d51e620#
Although I believe everything you say to be true, one eventual hurdle that a person can find themselves bored to tears of your own, typical kinds of things that you do. When you do stuff with other people, you get the benefit of their ideas as well, and you fall in love with those ideas the same way you do with your favorite music
http://forum.ableton.com/posting.php?mo ... fe7d51e620#
-
HeadrickProductions
- Posts: 612
- Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2009 7:41 pm
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
I'd skipped over this thread and when I read it I realized that it brings up a great point!
I was so excited on time to see an artist (who's name I leave out) one time and when it came his turn he came out on stage, pressed play and left. People in the crowd commented, my brother and I (who grew up playing instruments not computers) where hatin on him in a second. That is no different than the kids who went to see one of 666 early shows growing up and they did a song and put on a CD.
I feel that the better computer, controllers, latency issues get the less crowds will stand for someone just standing there twisting a few knobs. Well actually the less excuse performers will have for just tweaking a few effects, loops, etc. Alot has changed with technology that allows us to truly perform good stuff on the fly with ableton.
Now in major clubs and huge festivals I do agree that most folks will not even know what is going on and could care less cause there gettin down. I remember the first time I saw the thievery corp dj I watched what they were doing the entire time.....but that might just be me. Now if we compare that experience to seeing the entire band, there is no comparsion. It is much more entertaining for me to see a live band, even if it is still electronic.
I feel that the line between dj/production/musician are becoming blurred along with all genres of music and ableton is a huge reason for that
. I guess that unless I'm so f@!@ed up that I don't know where I am I will always want to see and hear something that I now is real.
If you show up to your shows with your sets already created.....I feel that the crowd deserves more.
Just an opinion from a guy who plays instruments and just uses ableton to host the real and virtual instruments
I do agree that so much in the live music scene can be based on perception and entertainment.
I was so excited on time to see an artist (who's name I leave out) one time and when it came his turn he came out on stage, pressed play and left. People in the crowd commented, my brother and I (who grew up playing instruments not computers) where hatin on him in a second. That is no different than the kids who went to see one of 666 early shows growing up and they did a song and put on a CD.
I feel that the better computer, controllers, latency issues get the less crowds will stand for someone just standing there twisting a few knobs. Well actually the less excuse performers will have for just tweaking a few effects, loops, etc. Alot has changed with technology that allows us to truly perform good stuff on the fly with ableton.
Now in major clubs and huge festivals I do agree that most folks will not even know what is going on and could care less cause there gettin down. I remember the first time I saw the thievery corp dj I watched what they were doing the entire time.....but that might just be me. Now if we compare that experience to seeing the entire band, there is no comparsion. It is much more entertaining for me to see a live band, even if it is still electronic.
I feel that the line between dj/production/musician are becoming blurred along with all genres of music and ableton is a huge reason for that
. I guess that unless I'm so f@!@ed up that I don't know where I am I will always want to see and hear something that I now is real. If you show up to your shows with your sets already created.....I feel that the crowd deserves more.
Just an opinion from a guy who plays instruments and just uses ableton to host the real and virtual instruments
I do agree that so much in the live music scene can be based on perception and entertainment.
In a K induced Haze (the old K kind not the special K kind ), but an Asian spizz can sometimes bring me out! If ya don't get it, ya never will.
Swing like your life depends on it
Swing like your life depends on it
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
While I understand the general premise of the topic, and it's definatley an interesting one, I find the way you've framed your question a little odd! --
"If a person could not possibly tell the difference between A and B, do you think they would they be able to tell the difference between A and B?"
good topic, none the less.
I've seen 'live' sets that are very underwhelming if you actually look at the screen. What's worse is when someone has a bunch of controllers that they hardly even touch. Most punters, say in a club environment, will not really notice much. Interestingly alot of acts seem to get a prime slot for being "live", which often just constitutes using Ableton, and is arguably even less live than DJ'ing.
I've not long moved towards live performance myself from CDs. DJ'ing always felt a bit odd to me. Been having chats with a few people while compiling/programing my live show to pick up ideas, and a thing that has come up a number of times is that sometimes being more live has little effect on the crowds perception - and that it's sometimes not worth the effort.
Probably depends on what you're doing I guess. If you're just launching clip loops by pressing buttons, the audience could probably not be able to even tell how you are interacting - may as well be checking email. Knobs and sliders for parameters are probably a step up, slightly more visual/visceral. If you mashing out live drums and keys, that's getting closer to having audience understand your interactions.
Perhaps it's a good idea to take a page out of rock's book? You'll notice alot of bands will do their live tunes differently from studio versions - often more dynamic, more hot and cold, exaggerated intros/outros, breakdowns. There might be something in that for electronic musicians, too - Play with the dynamics a bit more.
Certain events have different flavors too I notice, some are blatantly just parties, some are 'gigs'.
another point! I think being really live gives you more control, allowing you to taylor things to the moment and crowd bettern than you would if you just had entire songs at your disposal; while audience may not be acutely aware of specifically what it is you are doing to the sound at any moment, you're ability to have comprehensive control still contributes to their overall enjoyment of the music.
Audience participation could be cool haha. Imagine throwing out a bunch o Wii-remotes to the crowd and 'conducting' your automations like an orchestra. You could probably gauge who would make a good candidate for your midi orchestra by watching how they respond on the dancefloor, hehe. "she's got no rhythm....... he's way too drunk....... this guys definatley in the zone though!" I digress!
"If a person could not possibly tell the difference between A and B, do you think they would they be able to tell the difference between A and B?"
good topic, none the less.
I've seen 'live' sets that are very underwhelming if you actually look at the screen. What's worse is when someone has a bunch of controllers that they hardly even touch. Most punters, say in a club environment, will not really notice much. Interestingly alot of acts seem to get a prime slot for being "live", which often just constitutes using Ableton, and is arguably even less live than DJ'ing.
I've not long moved towards live performance myself from CDs. DJ'ing always felt a bit odd to me. Been having chats with a few people while compiling/programing my live show to pick up ideas, and a thing that has come up a number of times is that sometimes being more live has little effect on the crowds perception - and that it's sometimes not worth the effort.
Probably depends on what you're doing I guess. If you're just launching clip loops by pressing buttons, the audience could probably not be able to even tell how you are interacting - may as well be checking email. Knobs and sliders for parameters are probably a step up, slightly more visual/visceral. If you mashing out live drums and keys, that's getting closer to having audience understand your interactions.
Perhaps it's a good idea to take a page out of rock's book? You'll notice alot of bands will do their live tunes differently from studio versions - often more dynamic, more hot and cold, exaggerated intros/outros, breakdowns. There might be something in that for electronic musicians, too - Play with the dynamics a bit more.
Certain events have different flavors too I notice, some are blatantly just parties, some are 'gigs'.
another point! I think being really live gives you more control, allowing you to taylor things to the moment and crowd bettern than you would if you just had entire songs at your disposal; while audience may not be acutely aware of specifically what it is you are doing to the sound at any moment, you're ability to have comprehensive control still contributes to their overall enjoyment of the music.
Audience participation could be cool haha. Imagine throwing out a bunch o Wii-remotes to the crowd and 'conducting' your automations like an orchestra. You could probably gauge who would make a good candidate for your midi orchestra by watching how they respond on the dancefloor, hehe. "she's got no rhythm....... he's way too drunk....... this guys definatley in the zone though!" I digress!
Last edited by flippo on Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:22 am, edited 2 times in total.
Re: thinks : is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?
also, anyone ever noticed that it's only midi geeks that like monome music?
Show a monome video to someone who isn't a computer music fiend and they just get too confused to enjoy/notice the music.
Show a monome video to someone who isn't a computer music fiend and they just get too confused to enjoy/notice the music.