Ableton Forum

well - part of it I see it that I cant afford a PA or venue to hear the music in that environment - so in that sense it's kind of worth it regardless of how the music is played - in the same way as it will always be worth going to the cinema no matter how easy it gets to download off torrents

I have honestly never got this thing of looking at 'superstar DJs' to see what they're doing, but yeah this thread isnt just about DJs

I've actually always preferred a pristine recording at home where I can hear every nuance and only wanted to go out if I want to get off my head, dance and have a good night - and in that situation I usually forget there was anyone at all making the music unless I have a drunken moment of enthusiasm to go and annoy the DJ/dude to ask what that track was - but to be honest I havent done that in a long time

even when I've gone to clubs and seen they had Live going, usually the furthest I'll get is briefly trying to see over their shoulder to see if I can see anything familiar then going back to my corner somewhere

but I'm one of those moody people who finds somewhere to sit in a corner with my eyes shut listening, unless I'm talking to people in which case the music becomes virtually irrelevant

having said all that, pitch black were impressive - but really the main thing that made the visual experience distinctive was their video - they could have been tweaking imaginary knobs for all I knew - they gave a good performance but I defintiely wouldnt know from the front if it was real if I didnt already know

but their support act Tjupurru was this Aboriginal Digeri-bone (digeridoo that slides to change pitch) live looper dude who made this awesome techno entirely with loop and FX pedals totally live - that was very impressive

so I guess the point there is, unless they are specifically making an impressive show of 'look at this clever trick I'm doing' of which live loopers are probably the best example, then otherwise it's not important what they are doing

just because people will eat shit, gives us know reason to feed it to them,


in the end pride is all you have

Angstrom wrote: Just to prove how hard it is to tell:
A friend of mine was touring with a large well known act, I saw people on this forum salivating over their upcoming tour, and after the gigs they raved about the performance - how they connected, how live it was, etc, etc. But the thing is - it was all on DAT. Every night the Promoter would say to my friend "so how long is the set, roughly" and he would reply - " exactly fifty eight minutes, twenty seven and a half seconds".

it doesn't matter how you pull it off, it all comes down to integrity and being honest..

as b0unce said; advertise it as a DAT set, not a live act..

if that friend was announced as a live performance, you're screwing people..

doc holiday wrote:just because people will eat shit, gives us know reason to feed it to them,


in the end pride is all you have

yeah but it doesnt have to be shit

what about DJing your own tunes and just doing filter sweeps etc live? you're not creating the music, just DJing, but it's still authentic

Poster wrote:

Angstrom wrote: Just to prove how hard it is to tell:
A friend of mine was touring with a large well known act, I saw people on this forum salivating over their upcoming tour, and after the gigs they raved about the performance - how they connected, how live it was, etc, etc. But the thing is - it was all on DAT. Every night the Promoter would say to my friend "so how long is the set, roughly" and he would reply - " exactly fifty eight minutes, twenty seven and a half seconds".

it doesn't matter how you pull it off, it all comes down to integrity and being honest..

as b0unce said; advertise it as a DAT set, not a live act..

if that friend was announced as a live performance, you're screwing people..

but what makes you assume they did advertise it as that? in my experience having "live" after the artists name is the exception, not the rule

so if it just says the artists name (which most flyers do) then are they screwing the punters?

forge...

I don't know anyone who goes to a gig to hear a DAT, which is what angstrom was talking about. Christ, no matter how low the punter's expectations are.... they're not expecting that. The artist knows that, it's still deceitful.

the least a punter is probably expecting from a gig is some live dj or pa work. playing a DAT with the whole set on it is blatantly taking the piss no matter what side of this discussion your on...imo

forge wrote:

doc holiday wrote:just because people will eat shit, gives us know reason to feed it to them,


in the end pride is all you have

yeah but it doesnt have to be shit

what about DJing your own tunes and just doing filter sweeps etc live? you're not creating the music, just DJing, but it's still authentic

OT was a comparison of someone who cares and someone who does not care.

now forge you and i know who really wins in the end.

forge wrote:

Poster wrote:

Angstrom wrote: Just to prove how hard it is to tell:
A friend of mine was touring with a large well known act, I saw people on this forum salivating over their upcoming tour, and after the gigs they raved about the performance - how they connected, how live it was, etc, etc. But the thing is - it was all on DAT. Every night the Promoter would say to my friend "so how long is the set, roughly" and he would reply - " exactly fifty eight minutes, twenty seven and a half seconds".

it doesn't matter how you pull it off, it all comes down to integrity and being honest..

as b0unce said; advertise it as a DAT set, not a live act..

if that friend was announced as a live performance, you're screwing people..

but what makes you assume they did advertise it as that?

that why I said *if*..

forge wrote: in my experience having "live" after the artists name is the exception, not the rule

so if it just says the artists name (which most flyers do) then are they screwing the punters?

well.. here in NL it's quite a common thing to add 'live' or 'DJ' to names on flyers..

as I said before; I don't care how you do it as long as I'm having a good time..

but if lying and screwing people is going to be an accepted thing you do..
I mean if I cannot trust people or have to doubt their integrity why should I pay to get that extra live performers give?

Poster wrote:

Angstrom wrote: Just to prove how hard it is to tell:
A friend of mine was touring with a large well known act, I saw people on this forum salivating over their upcoming tour, and after the gigs they raved about the performance - how they connected, how live it was, etc, etc. But the thing is - it was all on DAT. Every night the Promoter would say to my friend "so how long is the set, roughly" and he would reply - " exactly fifty eight minutes, twenty seven and a half seconds".

it doesn't matter how you pull it off, it all comes down to integrity and being honest..
as b0unce said; advertise it as a DAT set, not a live act..
if that friend was announced as a live performance, you're screwing people..

I think the audience certainly expected that the performance would be in some way live ... they were / are an electronic act with winking black boxes and stuff. So it's hard to tell.
My friend certainly didn't think it was particularly good, but he was an employee, not a decision maker. He left shortly after, probably partly because the experience didn't make him feel "valid". But again - the audience enjoyed it massively - it was him that didn't.

But the thing to consider is - what is a 'live' performance here. Which of these actions are "Live", and therefore meritorious.

• pressing some mysterious buttons on a black box (8 presses per minute) Is that live?
• Clicking some icons on a laptop screen (8 clicks per minute) Is that live?
• pressing the spacebar, once per song and sometimes using some effects? is that live?
• playing two records and making the playback speeds match up? is that live?
• manically turning one dial for an hour? is that live?

These days it's not all black and white - "he's miming, not singing"

it's more like: "he didn't start the tracks because it's a multitrack playback which starts at the beginning of the gig , but he is mixing it, well actually he's sending the effects and muting the odd channel, but not the drums, because that's a stereo mix done in the Townhouse last year."

is that live?

What actually counts as un-live? When the pressing of a button means little to the audience. And it's near impossible for an educated audience member to know. The whole point of my mentioning my friend was : people from this forum saw this act and did not know.

A man - pressing a button repeatedly, on a black box. punching the air.
is that real ?

again, it's not what is actually happening, it is what appears to be happening which forms the concensus reality.
And by 'appears' I mean in both cases - 'fake' and 'real'.

real gigs can seem fake, and fake gigs can seem real.

Angstrom wrote:I think the audience certainly expected that the performance would be in some way live ...

there you have it.. expected..
this all comes down to how it was promoted..

Angstrom wrote:But the thing to consider is - what is a 'live' performance here. Which of these actions are "Live", and therefore meritorious.

• pressing some mysterious buttons on a black box (8 presses per minute) Is that live?
• Clicking some icons on a laptop screen (8 clicks per minute) Is that live?
• pressing the spacebar, once per song and sometimes using some effects? is that live?
• playing two records and making the playback speeds match up? is that live?
• turning one dial for an hour? is that live?

whooaa.. I knew this topic still is bottomless..
i again have to say: promotion versus integrity..
There lies the answer to what is live or not..

How many knobs per minute he does is not relevant,
as long as there's no discrepancy between 'the announced' and 'actual performance'..

Angstrom wrote:These days it's not all black and white - [/i]

I know..
but somewhere in that grey fog there are still some pretty clear lines to me..

heh,
it's amusing to think about though eh.
OK, perhaps it's just me.

I come from a conjuring / mentalism background and in that world manipulating perception is everything. The entertainment isn't in the reality - it's in creating the perceptions of reality. Which is equivalent in a subjectivised system.
The idea that we can use our senses to ascertain the total objective reality and grasp 'the truth' is hopeful at best.


"Cogito ergo sum"

or would it be

Percepio ergo sum?

Angstrom wrote:heh,
it's amusing to think about though eh.
OK, perhaps it's just me.

naah.. not just you..
absolutely interesting..

it's a definition that needs to be redefined constantly because the market is constantly changing as well..

Poster wrote: How many knobs per minute he does is not relevant,
as long as there's no discrepancy between 'the announced' and 'actual performance'..

Angstrom wrote:These days it's not all black and white - [/i]

I know..
but somewhere in that grey fog there are still some pretty clear lines to me..

bingo!
me too.

Heres my definition of a live electronic act:
Pattern launching and/or pattern creation via live step sequencing - live input - overdubbing, mute/un-mute, volume - eq - aux - pan - control per channel, Fx control, playing an instrument or tweaking one that's being controlled by a sequencer

as far as I'm concerned, you should be stringing a set together using those techniques and at any given moment be in the middle of carrying out one of those tasks, give our take to call yourself a 'live' act.


playin a fuckin DAT isn't any kind of act at all, if you ask me.

soul may not be obvious for everyone, however when you see it it does glow.

amen brother