IDM Mailing Archive

i have a question specifically addressed to people on this list who went to see the chemical brothers during their recent u.s. tour (e.g. not just people who went to organic, although they would be included too). a friend of mine who saw their show in san francisco remarked at how odd it seemed to him that the cb's were not playing much, if any live music--that it was mostly, if not entirely, on DAT. not only that, but that people seemed not to care. at one point early on in the performance, the DAT failed and the cb's were left sort of with their pants down, twiddling knobs onstage without anything coming out of the speakers. apparently, they left the stage (which caused a surge of boos from the crowd) then came back out and "resumed" their performance...have witnessed this, my friend proceded to ask a few people around him if it bothered them that very little if any music was being performed onstage, to which the concertgoers replied, "well, they made it at _some_ point, right? that's good enough for me..." despite my protestations that this couldn't possibly be representative of the whole crowd (although only later did i consider the one crucial fact that could potentially have cleared things up: it was the _chemical brothers_...), my friend maintains that probably it was unlikely that the majority of people even cared, and that most of them were just there to be entertained, and that music, whether performed or prerecorded, was for the most part peripheral and incidental to that. my question: do you agree? it's my feeling that, the above described scenario being the case, the chemical brothers represent an unfortunate (and unfortunately early) example of not trying very hard, and that had people known that the "performance" they were paying $15 to by entertained by was actually just theater (and, i would argue, not very interesting theater at that), that they would (the few individuals he spoke with notwithstanding) feel deceived and somewhat cheated. his opinion is that music "performance," from the image that supports it to the spectacle that feeds the continuous circulation and mythologization of that image, is constituted from top to bottom by deceptions, and that actual _live_ performance is a comparatively small and (where entertainment value is concerned) largely incidental part of that... i'm not asking for anyone to solve this argument, but i would be interested in the impressions of those who actually attended. tia, sc

On Mon, 1 Jul 1996, Sean Cooper wrote:

quoted 37 lines i have a question specifically addressed to people on this list who went to

> i have a question specifically addressed to people on this list who went to > see the chemical brothers during their recent u.s. tour (e.g. not just > people who went to organic, although they would be included too). a friend > of mine who saw their show in san francisco remarked at how odd it seemed > to him that the cb's were not playing much, if any live music--that it was > mostly, if not entirely, on DAT. not only that, but that people seemed not > to care. at one point early on in the performance, the DAT failed and the > cb's were left sort of with their pants down, twiddling knobs onstage > without anything coming out of the speakers. apparently, they left the > stage (which caused a surge of boos from the crowd) then came back out and > "resumed" their performance...have witnessed this, my friend proceded to > ask a few people around him if it bothered them that very little if any > music was being performed onstage, to which the concertgoers replied, > "well, they made it at _some_ point, right? that's good enough for me..." > > despite my protestations that this couldn't possibly be representative of > the whole crowd (although only later did i consider the one crucial fact > that could potentially have cleared things up: it was the _chemical > brothers_...), my friend maintains that probably it was unlikely that the > majority of people even cared, and that most of them were just there to be > entertained, and that music, whether performed or prerecorded, was for the > most part peripheral and incidental to that. > > my question: do you agree? it's my feeling that, the above described > scenario being the case, the chemical brothers represent an unfortunate > (and unfortunately early) example of not trying very hard, and that had > people known that the "performance" they were paying $15 to by entertained > by was actually just theater (and, i would argue, not very interesting > theater at that), that they would (the few individuals he spoke with > notwithstanding) feel deceived and somewhat cheated. his opinion is that > music "performance," from the image that supports it to the spectacle that > feeds the continuous circulation and mythologization of that image, is > constituted from top to bottom by deceptions, and that actual _live_ > performance is a comparatively small and (where entertainment value is > concerned) largely incidental part of that... i'm not asking for anyone to > solve this argument, but i would be interested in the impressions of those > who actually attended.

Hi Sean, I think that a good deal of electronic artists, perform in such a manner. I have read that the Orb is also on DAT, but he adds effects and plays around with the recording live. He also plays records and CDs over top that. Alot of the sounds that you hear in techno, can't be done in real time. Would it be better? If everything was just programmed. I saw Depeche Mode about 7 years ago, and everything was programmed, they were all hitting tambourines and dancing, etc. I saw Orbital perform up close a couple of years ago (where I was right there and could see them), they were twiddling knobs, I don't really think they were performing live. Someone told me they were mixing live, so it was already pre-recorded. If the music at the show is different from the original recording, and it sounds good and the light show is cool. I would definitely try and have a good time. B i l l S a m u e l s w l s @ U . A r i z o n a . E D U *****************************************************************************

quoted 4 lines a manner. I have read that the Orb is also on DAT, but he adds effects

> a manner. I have read that the Orb is also on DAT, but he adds effects > and plays around with the recording live. He also plays records and CDs > over top that. Alot of the sounds that you hear in techno, can't be done > in real time. Would it be better? If everything was just programmed. I

I remember this being discussed a while back, so I won't try openning the can too wide here. Basically, my feeling is that audiences will determine how much "live" electronic artists are able to get away with. If they stop showing up to see/hear groups that perform mostly from DAT, then the artists will be forced to come up with innovative ideas to get crowds back to see them. As DJs become more and more popular, the focus is being shifted (pretty dramatically imo) from the artists who create the music, to the music that is created, and the collage that results from a well mixed DJ set. I have yet to see any real innovation in live performances as of late, aside from the usual tweaking of keyboards/filters, playing a part live, adding some new and bizarre sample, and/or the usual assortment of visual treats. I thought artists like Todd Rundgren (not IDM, but innovative) were moving in the right direction progressively, by getting audiences to participate in the show. There was a rave I remember reading about too that had a "midi-ball" that when touched, caused a pattern or sound to be played. Bounced around the venue so that people could "direct", in a sense, the music that was produced. Anyways, just my thoughts... On: Underground London disc1 -- guyjr@cc.gatech.edu | I.D.M.- That stage in sleeping when your feet are a.k.a., Guy Elden Jr. | moving faster than your eyes.

Bro, Bro Bro. What in the hell is this message trying to do? We were almost over this whole Organic riff, and now this. Well, everyone knows how I feel about the Chemical Brothers music. (If you don't, I'm a BIG fan). As far as the Live vs. Prerecorded deal goes, this poses too many possible questions or replies to be a serious appeal. I.E: "Who really performs totally live anymore, anyway? Like a group that isn't electronic might have prerecorded stuff...." Bad example, but Curve was almost totally prerecorded in Phoenix. Electronic music performed live is almost a contradiction in itself. Putting complex structures of sonic textural sound together is amazing; replicating this live is something else, which is why people switch some sounds to dat, in order to put on a show that has sounds that are distinguished on albums/ep's, and to be able to layer sounds, etc.... or, "Well, a band like Orbital uses mainly sequences of PRERECORDED material and splices them together in order to perform a song. Does this mean that it's not live?" See, too tough to draw lines this way, Sean, so just enjoy the sounds and dance your arse off. That's what I do at a live gig. Peace James Benjamin Gill-----jgill@u.arizona.edu**********************************

My friend had the luck to be old enough to go to a Kraftwerk concert ages ago and he said that they werent even there - He told me that thy put Robot looking maniquans (sp?) on stage and played a tape. Im not saying that this is what i would call an awesome performance - Im not even saying that i would be happy to go to a concert and hear a tape - Just relaying some second hand info... DJ Ebben Flow Creative Collective Richmond VA

On Mon, 1 Jul 1996 EBBENFLOW@aol.com wrote:

quoted 6 lines My friend had the luck to be old enough to go to a Kraftwerk concert ages ago

> My friend had the luck to be old enough to go to a Kraftwerk concert ages ago > and he said that they werent even there - He told me that thy put Robot > looking maniquans (sp?) on stage and played a tape. Im not saying that this > is what i would call an awesome performance - Im not even saying that i would > be happy to go to a concert and hear a tape - Just relaying some second hand > info...

I think I'd personally prefer to watch a bunch of plastic dummies up on stage as opposed to a bunch of human dummies flailing about trying to pull off an air-bandesque facade of knob-twiddling with gear that's not even plugged in. Cid.

Hi,

quoted 14 lines my question: do you agree? it's my feeling that, the above described

>my question: do you agree? it's my feeling that, the above described >scenario being the case, the chemical brothers represent an unfortunate >(and unfortunately early) example of not trying very hard, and that had >people known that the "performance" they were paying $15 to by entertained >by was actually just theater (and, i would argue, not very interesting >theater at that), that they would (the few individuals he spoke with >notwithstanding) feel deceived and somewhat cheated. his opinion is that >music "performance," from the image that supports it to the spectacle that >feeds the continuous circulation and mythologization of that image, is >constituted from top to bottom by deceptions, and that actual _live_ >performance is a comparatively small and (where entertainment value is >concerned) largely incidental part of that... i'm not asking for anyone to >solve this argument, but i would be interested in the impressions of those >who actually attended.

Owning a record label and having artists on my label play live at album launches, raves and other parties i've put on i'd say that the average punter is there to hear quality music that makes them want to dance. To this effect they don't neccessarily care if it comes from DAT, is played live or a mixture of both. That's the observation out of the way... now from the perspective of the performers it is impossible to take your whole studio on the road with you when you gig. To this effect dat backing tapes are heavily used, and in one case we had the artist play every alternate track live and then in between was a dat track, will his sequencer loaded up the next live track. Also you mention that when the DAT spewed they were caught short-handed, same happens live... Plaid when they were supporting Bjork on her tour downunder had problems with their Waldorf Microwave, which unfortunately was the master keyboard so for the 1st 20mins of their set it sounded like a drum machine, with rhythm backing, probably from dat. :) Personally I like to see live performances, but when it comes down to the crunch i'm quite prepared to listen to a dat, as long as it makes me dance. In fact one of the best nights i've been to was the Rephlex night which only had one live act... probably from dat and DJ's with turntables & dats. The music was insane! Hope that helps. Regards, John /-------------------------------------------------------------------\ | JOHN BUS (aka. JOHNNY TURBO) | | SNAIL - Digital Access Records | | PO Box 1838 Macquarie 2113 Australia | | EMAIL - John.Bus@syd.dcet.csiro.au | \-------------------------------------------------------------------/

At 04:40 PM 7/2/96 +1000, you wrote:

quoted 17 lines Hi,

>Hi, > >>my question: do you agree? it's my feeling that, the above described >>scenario being the case, the chemical brothers represent an unfortunate >>(and unfortunately early) example of not trying very hard, and that had >>people known that the "performance" they were paying $15 to by entertained >>by was actually just theater (and, i would argue, not very interesting >>theater at that), that they would (the few individuals he spoke with >>notwithstanding) feel deceived and somewhat cheated. his opinion is that >>music "performance," from the image that supports it to the spectacle that >>feeds the continuous circulation and mythologization of that image, is >>constituted from top to bottom by deceptions, and that actual _live_ >>performance is a comparatively small and (where entertainment value is >>concerned) largely incidental part of that... i'm not asking for anyone to >>solve this argument, but i would be interested in the impressions of those >>who actually attended. >

<*snip*>

quoted 5 lines Personally I like to see live performances, but when it comes down to the

>Personally I like to see live performances, but when it comes down to the >crunch i'm quite prepared to listen to a dat, as long as it makes me dance. >In fact one of the best nights i've been to was the Rephlex night which only >had one live act... probably from dat and DJ's with turntables & dats. The >music was insane!

What I think is the larger question in Sean's post is whether DATs constitute a live performance as the crowd expects it, and if so, what this means in the context of a performance that supposedly offers something over and above listening to the records at home. An image just popped into my head of watching groups on American Bandstand (reruns on VH1) play their songs on electric guitars that didn't even have cords plugged into them. Would the crowd been as large if the gig was advertised as "Standing on stage while a tape plays, twisting knobs?" There isn't any reason to have anyone on stage in that case _except_ to reinforce the deceptive performance being perpetrated in front of everyone's (willing?) eyes. In Sean's friend's eyes, this deception runs to the roots of music performance anyway, and the images and concepts that keep people coming back for more are separate from and placed in front of the tiny musical expression occurring at whatever show it happens to be, which most of the crowd seemingly could care less about as long as those guys (or gals) are on stage. eric

On the wake of the recent Orbital, Vapour Space concert, I too have been thinking about the live vs memorex debate. I see at least four levels of liveness. There's playing from tape, playing from sequencer, sequencing on stage, and playing for real. No method of performing live is specifically worse than any other, but when I go to a concert I am going to hear at least some action from the last two. I don't want the performers to be on stage simply lip synching or hand synching to the music. If it appears they are performing then I think they should be performing. With regards to orbital. It is impossible to tell what those guy are up to. I think it is clear that the perfect bass lines and rhythm tracks are either sequenced or from DAT. An error at the Seattle show makes me think that they sequence the lot. I am reasonably sure (and I may be a fool!) that Orbital was at least contributing to the mix. As to the question about what people go to the concert to see and hear and do. There are several reasons to go to a concert. One is the soundsystem, much better than I have at home (or at least louder :). There's the vibe of lots of people dancing. The light show and visual effects. The proximity of celebrity. The chance to hear your favorite musicians improvise on their songs. I like to get a bit of all of this when I go out live. I can go to any club and hear music played live and enjoy dancing to it. If I pay the extra money then I want more of a light show and more improvisation or reaction to the crowd. But, everybody goes to a concert for a different reason. I heard people talking about how they didn't like Vapourspace very much and that the light show saved his set. I like him a lot. I danced like crazy for just about his whole set. [fletcher]

Hi As a non-musician, I was wondering how 'live' _do_ and _can_ performances by electronic musician get? I'm not referring to making use of (semi) acoustic instruments (like drums, guitars, didgeridoos,...). In all performances I've seen so far (admitted, not too many) 'live' meant throwing in some extra sounds or improvising and repeating a little melody. It's not that I think this type of music _needs_ more live elements, I merely would like to see what possibilities there would be. (Like, does any of the artists discussed here improvise on the _rhythmic_ structures anyhow, etc.) Arjan.

One thing to keep in mind on the "live v. memorex" equation in the performance of electronic music is that tape has been used in live settings since it was introduced. Many of the first electronic pieces were for live instrumentation and prerecorded or "realized" tapes. From Stockhausen to Feldman and Reilly, the use of tapes has provided for some amazing music to be performed in situations where it otherwise wouldn't be possible. The point is the _interaction_ between the live parts and the prerecorded parts. This interaction was the main attraction to early electronic music, but to my mind, is not being done so well by most dance acts I have seen. Most do not add much in the way of fleshing out nuances that separate a live/dat performance from their recordings. If nothing else, the attempt at live (or semi-live) pa's has just added that really bad "it's live" sound to the same music that is on the records. Music that is played just from dat might as well be played just from vinyl or 1/4" tape. If that is what the performer will be doing (i.e., hitting play and bouncing around) they should be billed as a dj. After all, Goa Gil does his sets off of multiple dat players, but he's booked as a dj not a live act... Personally, I prefer seeing shows of sequenced rhythms as opposed to dat, because a quick hand can change the sequences as they run and play other material over the top. Personally, I think Pete Namlook and Klaus Schulze are two of the best at this mixture of sequencing and live keyboard work. But, heh, when you need a dat, you need a dat... _____________________________________________________________________ Just a thought, David onnow:"Magic Tracks compiled by Juan Atkins : Magic Tracks Deep Detroit v.2"

Arjan van de Merwe wrote:

quoted 4 lines It's not that I think this type of music _needs_ more live elements, I

> It's not that I think this type of music _needs_ more live elements, I > merely would like to see what possibilities there would be. (Like, does > any of the artists discussed here improvise on the _rhythmic_ > structures anyhow, etc.)

Of late we (Human Beings) set out to play a festival in Rotterdam. Once we set up our stuff aproblem occurred. Both our MMT8's had wiped their memory and we had been so stupid not to bring any back ups. Panic. We decided to play an improvised set, to the extent that we would put the 909 in write mode and create rythms like that. Just like we did in the old days Arjen :). We would use the external track of the 909 to get some acid out of the MKS7 synth. Only we had to do 50 minutes. Thank god Speedy J turned up and brought his 303 (I could see his house from the stage). We played 50 minutes of raw 'improvised' acid with a lot of live drumprogramming, added effects and mixer tricks. The crowd dug it. and at least I thought it was live. I could go on... I cannot think of myself going on stage miming to a DAT, and I think what I generally do on stage is lively enough, mixing and matching, controlling sounds and structure... Bye, Allert -- "No corporation will ever pay a creator enough to sue them successfully." -Dave Sim, creator of Cerebus Allert Aalders - Big Time Concepts - allert@knoware.nl - KoX