Playing live as an instrument (Rant)

[Moverly]

Live gives me so much control that I have spent the past few months wading through the endless number of parameters I can have control of during a live set.

Given the limitations of human capability I am sure we have all come to the realization that we can only control so much before it becomes overwhelming and we lose our long term goals of having a coherent flowing set with good coherent progression.

I have looked carefully at those I believe lead the field of Live use like Henke, borrato, and bodsin to name a few.

I have identified that there is something missing from their performances, communication. For those in the crowd that don't understand the mindless button jamming and lemur wiping the performance is purely anacoustic. Not to say that the music isn't fantastic in it's own right. However there is something to be said for the presence of sensory communication to the audience.

So how do we fix this? Obviously in direct converse comparison we have a live rock band. The audience can identify each action on stage and how it correlates to the resultant sound. This window into the creation of the music allows us to almost be part of its creation. Before that string was plucked there was silence and now we have sound and I was there to witness and recognise both the action and the result.

On the other hand we have a completely anacoustic experience where I sit in a darkened room and play the rock bands cd at a comfortable volume.

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.

My question is, when will people begin to play live as an instrument instead of a collection of cue'd cdj's connected to a bunch of flashing buttons?

This technology has to give us an advantage.....

I could write hundreds and hundreds of words on this comparing the work of a turntablist and the like but I think you all get my drift.

I think the culture is beginning to shift away from "how do I set out my already written material in live so I can trigger the playback in a similar arrangement to the way it was written and meander from one arrangement to the other" 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"

Anyway there's my lunchtime rant.

Flame me if you will for insulting the way you do your business becasue maybe I'm way off the mark and you think that everyone in your crowd can really relate to knob twiddling and button pushing.

Who are we performing for? Other ableton geeks who moist over technology or the guys and girls who wouldn't know a lemur from a lamp post.

Discuss....

Dave.

[Moverly]

26 reads and no replies.

It's a hell of a rabbit hole to go down people I know but can I have some responses.

I want some examples of live expression with ableton. Concrete stuff that the crowd can really feel like they are part of.

Why not just put on your mix cd and dance with the crowd. That's certainly more involvement than most.

Anyway.

Dave.

[j2j]

Its completely difficult to play a computer as if it were a piano or a guitar or a violin.

A computer doesn't interface with the human hands like that. ( at least it doesn't for me )

I can run melodies on guitar all day long, but I really have to think when I try to make music on a computer. It isn't something that has become mindless, second nature to me.

I reckon, if people used more hardware, we would see a more live show. But its like, how do you make a huge thing portable.....

[hambone1]

Good thread.

IMO, there's too much control, too many parameters, too many possibilities... yet people cry for more! Are we just looking for the Holy Grail that will substitute the lack of creativity and talent? It's not just music, but everything to do with computers and microprocessor technology, and today's 'more more more' Western society.

It's also about the objective of live performance. Is it to entertain the crowd, or is it 'look at me'?

I'd still love to see the end of electricity...

[pepezabala]

Errr, get a Wiimote for playing live

http://youtube.com/watch?v=pHzsbamlr6c

[Noel]

There's only so much one person can do. In instrumental music, greater complexity is managed by involving multiple performers. The audience can see the instruments being played and hear how each player contributes to the overall sound.

Perhaps a similar approach is needed for Live performance of electronic music, for it make sense to an audience.

There could be a whole range of performance surfaces and a number performers moving between them, the important thing being that each surface works in a highly visible and intuitive way and has a predictable effect on the sound. I'm thinking of things like giant illuminated button grids, laser harps, arrays of multiple i-beam type controllers, giant knobs and sliders, body popping, drum pads, midi guitars, traditional keyboards...., anything as long as it makes musical sense and as long as it's set up in such a way that people can say "Oh I see, when he waves his hand around in that blue light beam it brings in that sparkly sound" or "that guy hitting those pads over there is making that marimba riff"....

That would pretty much be my ideal set up.

[Pitch Black]

My question is, when will people begin to play live as an instrument instead of a collection of cue'd cdj's connected to a bunch of flashing buttons?

Discuss....

Dave.

Hi Dave,

No flaming, but I'd respectfully suggest that my partner Mike and I (alias Pitch Black) are doing that.

Here is a quick walkthru of our setup: http://youtube.com/watch?v=1siG6_Pd-Mg

I've played keyboards in rock bands, and I can say I work as hard or harder than any of those type gigs. Our system is designed around the idea of setting up the conditions to allow spontenaity. Also, the simple fact that there's two of us both with massive control over where the song and the mix goes (the mix, by extension, meaning the song structure as well) means there'll always be a human interaction dynamic between us on stage. We also have everything set up so that we don't touch the actual computers, or look at the screens while playing, everything is done from MIDI controllers.

We happen to be doing a couple of Live workshops in the next 2 weeks in London and Amsterdam, if you are anywhere near that side of the planet. If you're in the area, please come down...

http://www.ableton.com/pitchblack-tomcosm-workshop

Finally, below is a re-post of a rant from a little while ago that I'd like to throw into the discussion.

cheers
paddy


Re: Electronic/Computer Generated Music

I believe it is me, a human, that generates the music. In this way I believe the computer or the gear is analogous to the novelist's typewriter - the typewriter records the novelists output, It doesn't tell him what story to tell.

It's been said the music industry is built on two sets of dreams: The dreams of the fans about the stars, and the dreams of musicians to BECOME stars. Unfortunately, this has led to quite an appealing fiction - [to quote a Roland Groovebox slogan] "if you can mix records, you can make music with THIS, the TB blah blah blah" - as if it is the gear that makes the music. This pervasive fiction: "if you just have THIS piece of gear - you will become a star/make better music/have respect of your artistic peers/get laid more, is what leads to the misconception that the music is computer generated. It is HUMAN generated.

We have ended up with a situation where people - musicians and punters alike - place too much emphasis on the "how", rather that the "what" and the "why" of music - the latter two are far more interesting questions IMHO. I'd liken it to: so you are now fluent in a new language, but what do you actually have to say?

This leads us back to the human. In music, the way to "get across" to people is to transmit your personal "what" and "why" as openly, directly and honestly to the audience as you possibly can, so that they feel what you are feeling. If what excites you is the incredible MAX/MSP patch you built to generate your sounds, then for God's sake, get it up there on a big projection screen so we can all see it! If you make Dance Music, then dance as you play! If you wrote it in the studio, and shook it like a maniac while you were all alone at 4am, then groove out in front of the audience. It is NOT "showbiz" or "lowest common denominator" to do so if that is the way you truly feel about your music.

PEOPLE LOVE HUMANS. Its an inescapable fact. When we connect with a piece of Art, we are in fact connecting to, and relating to, the state of the Artist: "Wow - they felt so strongly about that, they made it into a piece of art - now I feel it too". Its the direct human connection we all seek. "Art exists to reveal mystic truths" they say. Explore your own personal truths to the point where you find something that truly excites you, and then develop your skills/techniques to present that passion honestly to your audience, and they won't help but come away moved.

[fatrabbit]

Whenever i've tried to develop a live set i've been overly ambitious.

I'm sure a lot of people are familiar with getting carried away like that...

"I want to be able to have every single channel of my tracks sequenced in their original VSTs (ie. not bounced audio). I want to be able to EQ every single one of these channels and manipulate a Beat Repeat plugin on them too. I want every single channel to be routed to a reverb and delay send if I want. All these parameters should be mapped out to my Novation and padKONTROL. I also want to play my guitar and bass and loop passages using my MIDI foot controller, and use unsual sound sources like my circuit bent Speak and Maths etc. etc.!"

On the other end of the spectrum is just having one channel with your bounced track and an adjustable EQ where you turn that knob with all your might on stage.

I think the answer is to keep things as simple as possible whilst being flexible and leaving the possibility of spontaneity. Hot Chip do this quite well I think. According to the new video on the Ableton site, that Felix chap is in control of most of the rhythm parts using Live and Machinedrum etc. but the others use synths/guitars etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3rT0JbTK00

It's interesting at the end how the lead singer points to him at the end to say "stop here". They could keep the song going for as long as they liked and noodled. I remember when they first started performing live (for their first album), all four of them stood in front of their synths/sequencers (a bit like Kraftwerk) and sang live. They've brought in live instruments much more.

[chrisedmo]

Re: Electronic/Computer Generated Music

I believe it is me, a human, that generates the music. In this way I believe the computer or the gear is analogous to the novelist's typewriter - the typewriter records the novelists output, It doesn't tell him what story to tell.

It's been said the music industry is built on two sets of dreams: The dreams of the fans about the stars, and the dreams of musicians to BECOME stars. Unfortunately, this has led to quite an appealing fiction - [to quote a Roland Groovebox slogan] "if you can mix records, you can make music with THIS, the TB blah blah blah" - as if it is the gear that makes the music. This pervasive fiction: "if you just have THIS piece of gear - you will become a star/make better music/have respect of your artistic peers/get laid more, is what leads to the misconception that the music is computer generated. It is HUMAN generated.

We have ended up with a situation where people - musicians and punters alike - place too much emphasis on the "how", rather that the "what" and the "why" of music - the latter two are far more interesting questions IMHO. I'd liken it to: so you are now fluent in a new language, but what do you actually have to say?

This leads us back to the human. In music, the way to "get across" to people is to transmit your personal "what" and "why" as openly, directly and honestly to the audience as you possibly can, so that they feel what you are feeling. If what excites you is the incredible MAX/MSP patch you built to generate your sounds, then for God's sake, get it up there on a big projection screen so we can all see it! If you make Dance Music, then dance as you play! If you wrote it in the studio, and shook it like a maniac while you were all alone at 4am, then groove out in front of the audience. It is NOT "showbiz" or "lowest common denominator" to do so if that is the way you truly feel about your music.

PEOPLE LOVE HUMANS. Its an inescapable fact. When we connect with a piece of Art, we are in fact connecting to, and relating to, the state of the Artist: "Wow - they felt so strongly about that, they made it into a piece of art - now I feel it too". Its the direct human connection we all seek. "Art exists to reveal mystic truths" they say. Explore your own personal truths to the point where you find something that truly excites you, and then develop your skills/techniques to present that passion honestly to your audience, and they won't help but come away moved.

This is great. love it. Good luck with your workshops and gigs in London - i really do mean it when i say i wish i could be there...

[kuniklo]

Honestly I think live electronic music performance is a bit of a sham. A good DJ will wipe the floor with the typical LivePA act in terms of keeping an audience engaged and maintaining a dynamic and varied flow of music over the course of a few hours. The typical club crowd is out to dance and have a good time and hopefully hook up. There may be a few trainspotters that care that you're using a Lemur but do we even really care?

This is why I've shifted my own "live" efforts over to a real band, with everything played out by hand except possibly some minimal pre-sequenced percussion. I still use Live in the studio for composing my own music but after surveying the live sets of the most respected livepa folks I have to say they all sound pretty damn boring. Don't get me started on the minimal entertainment value of watching somebody hunched over a laptop for three hours either.

[Angstrom]

on the subject of Live electronic performance, and performance in general - I have outlined my ideas here

is a good faker equivalent to a good performer?

in summary :
"it's not what youthink is happening, but what the audience thinks is happening, which counts"

Robert Henke also has a classic tract on this called performance in the age of the supercomputer http://www.monolake.de/interviews/supercomputing.html

Obviously in direct converse comparison we have a live rock band. The audience can identify each action on stage and how it correlates to the resultant sound. This window into the creation of the music allows us to almost be part of its creation. Before that string was plucked there was silence and now we have sound and I was there to witness and recognise both the action and the result.

It's also important to realise that many (or most) of the audience at a rock gig will not know the difference between a bass guitar and a lead guitar. The drums are obvious, as is the singer, but everything else less so. Lets say a "radiohead gig", because "rock" is followed by hairy guitar geeks who have posters of marshal stacks.

As a musician and technical person it can be hard to believe this as our lives revolve around such definitions, but to 'normal people' the lines are all blurry. Try having a conversation with someone outside music about the process of making music. Simple questions like "what is a bass guitar and what is a lead guitar" , on to "in this radiohead song, which instrument is making the (lead guitar) noise ".

The general public are very adept at covering up any lack of knowledge, but if you push for answers it can be quite astounding how little they know about what is happening. I recently found out that four of my friends do not know what 'treble' or 'bass' are, as relating to hifi controls. Imagine that! But it isn;t important to them to know that - they seem to have got along fine without it. In fact I would be hard to name any of the technical components of their work (circus / trapeeze) , such as movements or pick out specific parts.

In a performance situation it is mainly about connecting with the audience, rather than the audience knowing what the instruments are, or how they operate. You have to impress something upon them, some performers are moody and introverted, some leap about like a fuckwit - either way - they are conveying personality which forms a kind of backdrop to the music and gives it meaning and resonance. The audience simply see a happy man and take on part of that persona ... the see a sad man and they take on that persona, they see an intelligent man and they feel intelligent.

The issue with electronic music and the constipated screen stare is : that the emotional resonance can be too similar to the oft quoted 'email checking'. The audience see a furrowed brow and they feel ... tense

My advice is simply - don't try and do too much, because you will miss out on the moment. And if you miss out on the moment then the audience will too.

[kuniklo]

the issue with electronic music and the constipated screen stare is : that the emotional resonance can be too similar to the oft quoted 'email checking'

EXACTLY! In response to your earlier question, let's consider the DJ the ultimate "faker". He's really not doing much of anything up there in any given moment, but that ironically means he can devote a lot of energy to picking out exactly the right track to keep the crowd momentum going, and to visually engage with the audience and prance around like a prick behind the decks.

In *theory* a live act can respond more dynamically to a crowd but in practice the opposite seems to be true.

[Angstrom]

EXACTLY! In response to your earlier question, let's consider the DJ the ultimate "faker". He's really not doing much of anything up there in any given moment, but that ironically means he can devote a lot of energy to picking out exactly the right track to keep the crowd momentum going, and to visually engage with the audience and prance around like a prick behind the decks.

In *theory* a live act can respond more dynamically to a crowd but in practice the opposite seems to be true.

that's exactly right - and one of the reasons that promoters were less keen to book laptop djs than turntable-users. Because the turntablers would at least look up, point at people, smile and look like they are having a good time.

For us, quite often we have the ability to make a mini symphony , like a rediculous one-man-band. My left foot is triggering clips while my right is tapping in effects - my right hand is playing lead and my left is mixing the song ... aiiiiii !

We would be better off just playing one single note every bar and really telegraphing it to the crowd!

Many performers do things which only seem to entertain and impress themselves!

The audience do not care about cunningly programmed follow actions triggering a matrix of beatrepeats, especially if they produce slightly crapper results than just playing a big sample.
Instead - performers ought to concentrate on performing the parts that really do add something to the event and eliminate all the stuff that is only really entertaining themselves

[heavensdaw]

EXACTLY! In response to your earlier question, let's consider the DJ the ultimate "faker". He's really not doing much of anything up there in any given moment, but that ironically means he can devote a lot of energy to picking out exactly the right track to keep the crowd momentum going, and to visually engage with the audience and prance around like a prick behind the decks.

In *theory* a live act can respond more dynamically to a crowd but in practice the opposite seems to be true.

that's exactly right - and one of the reasons that promoters were less keen to book laptop djs than turntable-users. Because the turntablers would at least look up, point at people, smile and look like they are having a good time.

For us, quite often we have the ability to make a mini symphony , like a rediculous one-man-band. My left foot is triggering clips while my right is tapping in effects - my right hand is playing lead and my left is mixing the song ... aiiiiii !

We would be better off just playing one single note every bar and really telegraphing it to the crowd!

Many performers do things which only seem to entertain and impress themselves!

The audience do not care about cunningly programmed follow actions triggering a matrix of beatrepeats, especially if they produce slightly crapper results than just playing a big sample.
Instead - performers ought to concentrate on performing the parts that really do add something to the event and eliminate all the stuff that is only really entertaining themselves

SPOT ON !!

Hd

[nebulae]

BJ is working on a pretty cool article about how to set up Live with enough restrictions so that humans can actually "play" Live:
http://www.covops.org/index.php/Bjorn-s ... art-1.html