Playing live as an instrument (Rant)

[hambone1]

More and more performers are using visuals to enhance their stage presence and creativity. At least there's something to see other than someone hunched over a laptop or MIDI controller, or head-bobbing while doing alternate knee-raises.

There's never been a better or cheaper time to get into visuals. Any of the popular VJ apps and/or DMX lighting controlled by Live makes an inexpensive and easy-to-use powerful combination.

[suie_paparude]

i saw recently apollo 440 live.what a nightmare.to replace the good sounding programmed drums with awful drum sounding live kit is a common mistake a lot of electronic bands do.
they simply cannot create that vibe with the drummer.the same goes with trentemoller except that he's doing also programmed stuff under the drummer and it sounds a little better.
this is fashion.i say:are you an electronic music act ? stay electronic
no hybrid bullshit weak sounding drums and weak sounding bass.

of course there is one big exception .... massive attack.great sounding band.but their music is suitable for remixing in a more acoustic and band-ish way.

[Johnisfaster]

i saw recently apollo 440 live.what a nightmare.to replace the good sounding programmed drums with awful drum sounding live kit is a common mistake a lot of electronic bands do.
they simply cannot create that vibe with the drummer.the same goes with trentemoller except that he's doing also programmed stuff under the drummer and it sounds a little better.
this is fashion.i say:are you an electronic music act ? stay electronic
no hybrid bullshit weak sounding drums and weak sounding bass.

of course there is one big exception .... massive attack.great sounding band.but their music is suitable for remixing in a more acoustic and band-ish way.

with the quality and sensativity of electronic drum triggers these days I'm f*ing shocked that more groups don't use them. I mean you can get a cheap setup to trigger drum samples off your computer for cheap these days, yet the people you'd expect to be doing just that don't.

ladytron does it though, props to them, even though they suck live.

[Angstrom]

.what a nightmare.to replace the good sounding programmed drums with awful drum sounding live kit is a common mistake a lot of electronic bands do.

yep, and there's more to that thought.

In converting my own studio music to play live I did the opposite to the trend . I have a lot of songs which I programmed to sound like 'real' drums , but it would be weird to have the sound of jazzy tom fills and a 'real kit' coming from one bald guy and some foot pedals - to me electronic drums make more sense when there is only one guy there. So I altered all my drums to be much more 'electronic' and got rid of anything that seemed too much like a 'real drummer', for any 'drumkit' that was essential I made my programming sound like loops (!)

I know it seems weird - but in the context of a live gig it worked a lot better than using all the tricky stuff which is in the recordings. It's also easier for people to get into, because they don't have to try and 'understand it' first.

[landrvr1]

Man-O-Man.

I guess I just come from a different era or something, because a live show for me is always about the Music. First and last and always. If there's no visuals and the music is fantastic, a Great Night. If there's the most awesome visuals imaginable but the music is horrid, a Shit Night. If the music is fantastic AND there's great visuals, well, bonus.

Now-a-days it's all about sensory overload, so some dude sitting there doing nothing - even if he's creating GOD LIKE sounds - is usually written off. A classic example would be Robert Fripp. Sits on a stool. No lasers. No smoke. No projections. Does nothing. Well, unless 'nothing' means generate just about the most creative guitar playing of all time, I suppose.

The joke of course, especially with more ambient performances, is that visuals are needed to offset the god-awful boring music. There's a measure of truth in that, but it's certainly not limited to ambient or soundscape stuff. All too often those visuals are just a crutch; hauled out to distract the audience from a sub-par performance.

I love laptop performers who incorporate real instruments, but at the end of the day even that is secondary to The Music. I can be a musical snob about it, but if the music is interesting - taking me on a journey to someplace interesting - than I could give a shit if the performer can't whistle Dixie in tune.

Push those funky buttons, White Boy.

...

[landrvr1]

i saw recently apollo 440 live.what a nightmare.to replace the good sounding programmed drums with awful drum sounding live kit is a common mistake a lot of electronic bands do.
they simply cannot create that vibe with the drummer.the same goes with trentemoller except that he's doing also programmed stuff under the drummer and it sounds a little better.
this is fashion.i say:are you an electronic music act ? stay electronic
no hybrid bullshit weak sounding drums and weak sounding bass.

of course there is one big exception .... massive attack.great sounding band.but their music is suitable for remixing in a more acoustic and band-ish way.

Wow, I just couldn't disagree more. I applaud any artist who's prepared to work outside of their comfort zones. Whether or not they do it successfully is subjective, but just because someone is in one genre or style certainly doesn't mean they've got to stay there.


...

[suie_paparude]

no landrvr1 i also totally agree with you.i like to see genre crossing and all that stuff.
as you say it's about the music.

but it's this trend...a laptop performer is not so good as a live band. why ? even
his/her music it's massive and godsend.
i cannot understand.do you really need live drums to ruin your music ?
do you really need live bass guitar to ruin your sub-bass ?
just because it looks good ? how about the music ? the vibe ? the sound ? sometimes it seems many electronic bands don't care about the music, they care about the looks.it seems that even their music doesn't sound so good with band, they MUST do it that way.just because this is the fashion

it's not about comfort zone.does your music sound better only with one laptop ? stick with that.you can experiment with live band,live orchestra whatever...buit if it's worse,please stick with the laptop,sampler,keyboard.

if it's good do it like massive attack or nouvelle vague
if it's not stick with laptops like modeselektor(wow godspeed)i saw them live in bucharest...hats off guys.you rule

i'm so dissapointed about some electronic acts that ruined their tracks with live bands.it's like restaurant electronic music with performers hired for the wedding

others do well with live bands
it's only about music and vibe at the end of the day

[mikemc]

but it's this trend...a laptop performer is not so good as a live band. why ?

well, 'trends' are where it is *not* at all about the music, but about 'style' and perception, and what tradition would have as the cause of the band to "sell out". Selling out is where you change your methodology in a way you normally wouldn't based on what someone makes you believe more of the people will like.

It is somehow supremely ironic that an electronic group would "sell out" by firing their computers and hiring a band

[landrvr1]

but it's this trend...a laptop performer is not so good as a live band. why ?

well, 'trends' are where it is *not* at all about the music, but about 'style' and perception, and what tradition would have as the cause of the band to "sell out". Selling out is where you change your methodology in a way you normally wouldn't based on what someone makes you believe more of the people will like.

It is somehow supremely ironic that an electronic group would "sell out" by firing their computers and hiring a band

UTENZIL!!!!!!

[friend_kami]

I see everyone demanding control, control and more control. We want midi controllers with clip triggering matrix's and complete seperation running midi to outboard synths and return effects on every channel.

.....
" to "how can I setup my live set so that I have the maximum amount of control of timbre, rhythm, energy, tempo and progression whilst still maintaining tangible crowd communication so that the crowd feels like they are part of the evolution of the sound"

um yeah, i think you kinda answered your own rant there mate.
i want more control because i DONT want to be stuck in a predefined djstyle fashion. i spend hours creating racks, finetuning my setup so i can have as much control as possible, while still beeing able to perform rather then engineer on stage.

its quite boring to watch a guy at his laptop, slowly turning his one knob through a 2 minute filter sweep. its another thing to see someone smashing every buttonson his controllers, pulling every fader, twisting and turning his knobs, dancing his heart out while doing it and you can actually both see and hear what hes doing with the music.

but yeah. im not a rockband, so unfortunately i cant stand infront of a micophone with a guitar making cool rockband poses and singing cool rockbandy cheesy lyrics.
id rather mash the fuck out of my contorller anyways.

but i wouldnt mind having a completely 100% freely assignable UI nonetheless.

[Lazos]

people on this forum have such little regard for learning a real instrument. shame.

Sadly, I agree.

I think 99% of the questions on basic (or even intermediate) music theory wouldn't need to be asked on this forum if more people have some background on a "traditional" instrument.

As far as the performance aspects, I agree with Pitch Black. The computer is still not viewed as an instrument because it is not one. At least not like a drum or a horn or guitar is one. The computer is just a sound module like a rack-mounted synth. EXCEPT Live does change and blur this distinction. IMHO, Live+computer is more like a sophisticated play-back machine (virtual instruments loaded and played realtime within Live withstanding). Live comes closest to being an instrument when used for live (previously unrecorded) looping (audio or midi) as this is a primary characteristic of a "real" instrument (not the looping part, just the creating in the moment part). But to follow Pitch Black's logic and to further throw a wrench in the works, is Live the instrument when I'm looping realtime or is the instrument my midi foot pedal that I'm stomping on?
Right. Well, it doesn't really matter does it?
When I write music, I could care less what anyone thinks. When I perform, I'm presenting to an audience my original work, and (gasp!) I do kinda care what others think. I care, at least, that they were entertained and would like to hear more of my music. So do visuals, get your friends to enact part of a play, build a crazy playable sound sculpture with midi triggers all over it. Do what it takes, I say! Otherwise, if you're just going to stare at a screen, give each audience member a copy of your CD and show them the door.

[jimmynitcher]

For all its 'sophisticated' and elaborate desire to be a 'performance', for me, the Pitch Black stuff was very dull musically; tempo sync'd delays, 808 sounds, dub drops, breakbeats, pink hair, I mean come on - where's the IMAGINATION!

"We are not DJ's!" Me thinketh he doth protesteth too much Falstaff! (excuse me I seem to have developed a lisp).

I don't see why, DJ's have as much skill, no?

What are you then? I'd say a sort of performance engineer, like in the old days before digital and all the faders had to be ridden to capture a performance. (Would people pay to see that - yes! I hear you cry - OK, I know when I'm licked as FZ would say).

But I'm sorry, not musicians - and I don't care how many fancy quotes you've got.
I agree with that other person who thought the typewriter analogy was wrong.
Don't get me wrong I LOVE collage - I'd just like to see it done with a bit more originality.

I don't think Live should be called Live - it does itself a disservice, its a brilliant song-writing tool,(maybe the name has put a lot of imaginative people off - bad marketing IMHO.

[Johnisfaster]

[ I have a lot of songs which I programmed to sound like 'real' drums , but it would be weird to have the sound of jazzy tom fills and a 'real kit' coming from one bald guy and some foot pedals

I think squarepusher would give you the thumbs down on that statement

[oblique strategies]

I don't think Live should be called Live - it does itself a disservice, its a brilliant song-writing tool,(maybe the name has put a lot of imaginative people off - bad marketing IMHO.

I think it is a highly accurate name. Performance really was the focus of Live when it was introduced.

When Live first appeared, I was hunting for software that would mimic my hardware setup because I was finally buying a laptop & traveling. I wanted to bring my performance rig with me, but it was way too much gear. Live had the Session view, which in fact did mimic a traditional setup perfectly: sound sources, mixer, & signal processors.

The Session view was unique, most of the other software was all DAW/sequenced timeline oriented. Definitely not what I was looking for. I also didn't really want to re-build Live in Max/MSP, so Live it was.

I have used Live to perform, DJ, compose, & produce. Also, a lot of what I do has nothing to do with song-writing per se. So, for as many people who use Live to write songs & music, there are others who use it for such things as live theatrical sound design, soundscape work, DJing, etc. It's capabilities extend far beyond song writing. And this is exactly what makes Live stand out from the other DAWs.

[friend_kami]

[ I have a lot of songs which I programmed to sound like 'real' drums , but it would be weird to have the sound of jazzy tom fills and a 'real kit' coming from one bald guy and some foot pedals

I think squarepusher would give you the thumbs down on that statement

everybody knows that squarepusher isnt a real musician. i mean, he is using samples.
we all know that samples is cheating, its been discussed time and time again.
















wait, what?