What constitutes live performance?

Stealing Django Reinhart's technique, claiming it was his own, and playing too loud is a list of accomplishments? Anthony was really the musical soul of that group. Note, THAT group. I do not take away from Van Halen's overall musicianship. Exquisite classical pianist. Extremely talented overall musician. But put a shirt on, have enough brains to stop smoking non stop until they remove 1/3 of your tongue, stop using alcohol and drugs to excess, don't cheat on your wife, go ahead and EAT the red M&Ms, and use your God given talent in a matter HE would be proud of.

But that's just me..... Vice free me..... (Equally as wide SMILEY FACE!)

The original question was “What constitutes a live performance?”

I think I have to say that once you add any backing tracks, it ceases to be a live performance in the truest sense. But it’s still not karaoke by any stretch of the imagination. Especially for those who create their own backing tracks using BIAB or other means vs buying them. It’s an art form incorporating “live” instruments and/ or singing and computer skills to create the finished product.

But it ain’t “live”. JMHO.

P.S. Eddie. I'm not a Van Halen fan either. Too many (useless) notes in too little time.

Quote:

Stealing Django Reinhart's technique, claiming it was his own, and playing too loud is a list of accomplishments? Anthony was really the musical soul of that group. Note, THAT group. I do not take away from Van Halen's overall musicianship. Exquisite classical pianist. Extremely talented overall musician. But put a shirt on, have enough brains to stop smoking non stop until they remove 1/3 of your tongue, stop using alcohol and drugs to excess, don't cheat on your wife, go ahead and EAT the red M&Ms, and use your God given talent in a matter HE would be proud of.

But that's just me..... Vice free me..... (Equally as wide SMILEY FACE!)

Dude - you've obviously got issues which might be better addressed professionally. I would like to compare your “accomplishments” to that of this drug-crazed, cheating, shirtless chain-smoker, member of the R&R Hall of Fame (the 'Other' Eddie), but I feel that you would come up short somehow.

I must take exception with your interjection of God, though, and your particular interpretation of the proper use of His given talent, your vice-free pure lifestyle notwithstanding. He only had one Son, and you ain't Him.

Okay, off the anti Van Halen rant.... and back to topic.

Karaoke meaning "empty orchestra", I would say that by literal definition that any live performing constitutes "live". How many shows have you seen lately where there wasn't sweetening tracks mixed in from the board, or a keyboard player under the stage? It also is usually for wannabe types to sing over background music when they get drunk enough to be goaded into getting on stage. I don't consider a viable performer using backing tracks to be karaoke.

At the local level, the iPod band member came out of necessity due to club owners being increasingly and incredibly cheap. Makes me sad to think back 20 years and see the difference here where you'd expect music would always be a major presence. The bands that DO play are all either tribute, motown or classic rock. I go to see a classic rock act on rare occasion, mainly to visit with my friends who play in them, but I rarely stay beyond one set. The motown acts typically get the country club/wedding kind of gigs, and that isn't my scene. Plus I was in an amazing motown band in the early 90s and it's rough to hear pretenders play what we did better. Tribute bands - I wouldn't cross the street to pee on a tribute band if they were on fire. Also factor in that there are no more "music clubs" here. Bands play at restaurants now, and setup is at 7:30 for a 9pm start time, ohm and keep it down because people are still eating.

So we have a lot of solo acts with backing tracks. Most of them make their own tracks. Some cheat and buy them. That second group is usually singers who do not play and are not able to make tracks, so they get a free pass. (Remember how many people think using Real Band is cheating.)

Want to know the saddest part of all the truths I described above? (Pay attention 90db.)

"Here"...... is Cleveland Ohio. Home of that Hall of Fame you spoke of.

The scene here is now reduced to rubble in comparison to the 80s and 90s. There is the art house goon clique who play at coffee shops for 3 people who would prefer it was quiet. There is also the songwriting clique who have their songwriting shows. (Those are enjoyable because normally the music has to be original.) However, it's the same handful of people who perform and attend, and if you aren't in the clique, you can't get a slot. The metalheads have some clubs but that music is boring if you don't ride a Harley and wear a headband. (We don't have to wear helmets here.) Neighborhood joints have duo and trio acts because they don't pay enough to draw bigger bands, and they can't fit enough people to sell enough beer to pay 5 or 6 pieces.

I miss the days when money wasn't the way to keep score.....

Bob (90db), Eddie behave yourselves now, we are all pretty!

If adding any backing tracks makes it not "live" then i guess the singer, and guitarist then considered not live by association?

So making tracks vs buying makes it better? Oh wait, then we have to make up our own chords as well, since the other one have been used up already!

Does that mean by extension we now have to make all our own instruments as well? Better get that ol' rosewood tree chopped up soon!

Darn! can't use a electronic keyboard, cause heaven forbid them devils gots them sampled sounds in them, that ain't no reel pienanner, or geetar in thar!

What is one buys simple basic midi tracks and then takes time to rework them and adds some hand picked samples to play them, adding a RT or two to enhance the palate, ah wait a minute! I forgot Them thar traks is kareokee! I better go listen to some foggy mountain breakdown, and have a revival! (pictures a blind boy playing the banjo in mind) hears "you gotta purdy mouth!"

Just Joshin' ya there flatpicker! Don't go all west vurginnie mountain man on me!

Anyway ROG did ask a real question, and we all answered it from what i see that answer lies in the question, it is up to the people listening to decide what is too much, appropriate, whatever. If the customer wants a full band sound give it to him, if he wants you and the guitar, give him that, if he wants you the guitar, and the Olsen twins on banjo, and mandolin, well you get the picture.

Look folks these here ideers are just opinions, some are worth talking about, many are just downright putting someones craft down.

You all are a buch of slackers -- no backing tracks allowed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXMuWi0dUBc

to me this discussion boils down to definition of terms, and we aren't all defining the terms the same way. Here's MY set of definitions:

1) LIVE PERFORMANCE means exactly that... one or more live musicians performing in real time with real instruments and real voices. Nothing artificial added.

2) KARAOKE is total backing tracks and a singer, usually not such a good one and most likely drunk. If an actual instrument enters the equation, then (in my mind) it ceases to be Karaoke.

3) ENTERTAINMENT is a much broader term. Both Karaoke and Live Performance are sub-sets of entertainment. To my mind, entertainment is the combination of any skills and technologies that make a presentation that pleases an audience. From what I can tell, most of the people in this forum are ENTERTAINERS because they add extra tracks and effects to make one or two stage personalities sound far better than they would without the techno aid.

In the final analysis,the only differentiation the audience makes is whether it sounded good or not. I don't think that most audiences care whether the music is played live, played semi live with trax, played as total karaoke , played by a DJ or even a Juke Box.

We're not stars, we're background ambience

I always thought of karaoke as entertainment with a twist, because 98% of the singers are so bad that the people are there to LAUGH at them like they were at a comedy club.

That being said, I was at karaoke night once about 20 years ago (probably the last time I went) and ended up recruiting a female vocalist. She was AMAZING.

There was also a time that my band of those years wanted to play this club and we could not get them to even give us a listen. So one night they were having karaoke night, and coincidently the karaoke DJ was a good friend of ours, all 5 of us went out in our band jackets, signed up to sing, and when we were called we sang "If You Don't Know Me By Now". This DJ used to record on cassette and give them to the singer as a souvenir. We, of course, didn't care about that, but 2 girls actually got into a fistfight over that tape! We went back up later and did "You've Lost That Lovin' Feeling", and the same 2 girls were fighting until I stepped in and said "Hey, why don't you each take ONE? And better still, tell this club owner you'd come out to hear us if he booked us."

We left with a contract for 8 consecutive Wednesdays.

So, karaoke has it's place. Just not in MY place.

That's a tough one.

Leilani and I perform live over my backing tracks. We both sing, play guitar and synth and I also play sax and flute 'live' over the tracks (choice of instrument depends on the song). None of the solos are in the backing track and we always play/sing live. So it isn't karaoke - although it is definitely related to it.

We certainly are alive, but some of our music is pre-recorded.

I've gone to the ballet where the dancers performed to pre-recorded music. As a musician I'd love to hear a real orchestra accompany them, but the ballet has a difficult time surviving and are always short of money. To pay an orchestra would 'break the bank'. So in the same respect of this question - Is the ballet live?

When we performed on the cruise ships in the late 1980s, the orchestra performed to a click track while the dancers and production singer did the main show on stage. All the vocals except the lead were on the click track along with duplicates of what the live orchestra played in 'the pit'. How live is that?

Back in the 1970s I went to a multi-band rock concert to see Dr. John (unfortunately he didn't show up). In the Alice Cooper segment, they did a faux-hanging of Alice (Vince) and during the parade to the gallows, the backing tape obviously broke, because midway through, the only sound was the parade drum coming over the PA set. They continued to hang him without the feedback guitars.

I know many major concert stars no longer play/sing live but lip-sync to a special concert recording of their tunes. Why? Couple of reasons (1) there is too much money at stake to risk if the singer loses his/her voice to the flu and (2) with all the gymnastics that singers are expected to do these days, it's very difficult to sing on pitch while doing cartwheels.

I really don't know how to answer the question. Semi-live? Computer assisted? Perhaps a new term needs to be coined.

More importantly, does the audience care? Does the audience make a distinction? Or do they just care about how well they are being entertained.

We've been playing with backing tracks since the mid 80s and it has been our primary source of income for all those years. We were in a 5 piece band before that, and when we were out of work for 2 months due to personnel problems, we went duo/tracks (since my first instrument is sax). The audiences we play for like it, and almost all of our work is either repeat business or referral.

We have played cruise ships, 5 star hotels, and have appeared on MTV, ABC, CBS, NBC and The BBC using backing tracks. Probably couldn't have done that "frang-a frang-a-ing" on the guitar while we sang over that.

So obviously it works.

But is it live?

Interesting question.

We can stretch the lines anyway we want, to cover our personal views, and i can accept most of what Pat is saying, and that is why it is not a good idea to label folks.

I still say as long as part of the program is "alive" it can fall into the live category. Have we not seen vocal acts perform at a show, or even a variety TV program with a recorded backing band, and be billed as live?

Still each is due his view on these matters.

As far as karaoke, it can be a lot of fun. I remember going to a karaoke party hosted by some folks we know pretty well, and it turned out to be about 250 in the crowd. All invited guest. I met two old friends i had not seen for 20 years, one a gal that used to date my brother, i did not know she sang. With my wife's blessing she and i did a killer version of a couple old duets, plus a long time friend i used to play basketball with back in the day, ask me to do a song with him, and we did a version of the everly brothers "dream" that brought the house down. If there are a few good singers it can be a great way to hone your chops in front of a crowd, and as mentioned above the occasional train wreck can be somewhat entertaining.

Notes brings up a important point, there are those that sing over the guitar alone, and most consider that a live performance. So do I, but think about it is it always a good performance? When you sing old hits with the guitar you are doing versions of the song, and most songs have more than just a guitar in them. Some are really good versions, and some are just okay, some down right suck, but it is the path the artist chooses. Me personally i would rather hear a good mix of guitar only, and some good old classic with full tracks.As long as it is lively!

Hey maybe that is the answer, we will call it Lively music! Lively music tonight featuring "xxxxxxxx"

A forum is a difficult place to try to put nuance into a casual and fast post. I was in no way putting down anyone, I was mainly agreeing with Rachael who is a good player. From the point of view of a good player like both of us are, less is better because we're both good enough to handle it. Others are not and that's fine, no snobbery here. I mean really, I'm going to be some artistic snob while I go out and make my big time $50 or $100 a couple times a month with an occasional $200 thrown in? Please. It's all good.

We saw Nutcracker at the Redondo Performing Arts Center last Xmas and it was to tracks. I was disapointed but understand the economics of it. The reason I was disappointed was earler in the year we saw another musical there and they did use a live orchestra but I guess Nutcracker didn't rate that.

Bob

Based on conversations with musicians in this area & also what I'm reading here...I would say it's live if you say it is. It's karaoke if you say it is. It is to you...what you call it. Nothing more. Nothing less.

It's the same for the audience. There's no right answer. Only opinions.

Quote:

I go out and make my big time $50 or $100 a couple times a month with an occasional $200 thrown in? Please.

Bob

Bob,

Is the 50 - 100 for the night? Man I'd be looking to throw in some backing tracks if for no other reason just to see if they would up the pay a bit . . . just saying. Man that won't cover gas much less equipment cost and upkeep these days.

Take Care,

JazzyBobRredondoCaliBud! I hear ya, i fully understand where you are coming from, and it is not always a matter of good enough, i can play the guitar, but i Like full tracked sound. I have played guitar only for a long time, and from time to time still do.

And we are all right to a degree, it comes down to view point, and opinion. Mine is no better than yours, Bobbyflatpicker's, Note's, Pat's, Eddie's, Mik's, Danny's, or anyone. Just mine i guess.

I just wanna shake this nagging chest cold, and get back to singing some really bad karaoke!

Quote:

I just wanna shake this nagging chest cold, and get back to singing some really bad karaoke!

You could probably sing some really bad karaoke WITH the nagging chest cold!

Getting back to the OP's original question, asked on behalf of his friend:

"How many instruments can I put on before people will stop thinking of it as a live performance?"

I would say: How many instruments do you think you need to make it sound great? If you're playing Folk music covers, a simple guitar/vocal will do just fine. Conversely, if you're playing Classic Rock covers like we do (Jurassic Rock). I want a big sound. For me, it's all about the sound.

The live music business has changed drastically since we started doing a duo back in '75. Back then, we did a lot of gigs with just a guitar and a bass. Later we added a drum machine ( a horrible-sounding monstrosity I still have!), but it increased our ability to get work. We could market ourselves a lot cheaper than a full band. All of our friends in 4-5 piece bands were going hungry. It was simply a matter of necessity. In all the years we've used tracks, we have never had a patron or a club owner question the use of them. They only care about the sound as well.

This is 2012. We have fantastic technology at our disposal, so why not use it?

As for the 'people' the OP mentions – these 'people' can't even hear the difference between an MP3 and a WAV file, let alone an analog recording on vinyl. Play it fast and loud, make them dance, keep them drinking. Worry about the artistic considerations in your dotage.

Quote:

You all are a buch of slackers -- no backing tracks allowed! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXMuWi0dUBc

I think he could hook BIAB remote to that amp.

Quote:

This is 2012. We have fantastic technology at our disposal, so why not use it?

AMEN!!!

Why is it when Geddy Lee steps in a pedal that launches a sequencer, he is "triggering", but when you, me and 90db makes 3 step on a pedal that starts a sequence playing on a computer it is cheating?

All the guys I know who do solo and duo don't even use "software" when they play live. They have what they created WITH the software dumped out to MP3s and play that as the backing tracks.

When clubs were paying $2000 a night, okay, then you get the 6 pieces with the 2 horns. For $200 a night, you get me and an iPod.

one of my pet peeves is the prevalant notion that a dude on a stage with a guitar and mic constitutes a live performance... but a dude on stage with a guitar and a mic and a backing track is somehow less.

Most of the solo guitar-vocalists I've heard locally are playing at a level most of us played at in high school. In contrast, it has taken me YEARS to accumulate the knowledge to create tasteful tracks that perfectly suit my needs. Yet the part I take most satisfaction in is the part that gets a bad rap from purists.

I guess I'm more of a fusionist than a purist... I want to bring elements from every kind of entertaining to what I do.

Speaking of purists... here in NC, bluegrass isn't considered real if the the band uses an electric bass or an acoustic-electric guitar.

At some point discussions like this tend to become more ANAL than ANALytical.

Quote:

Is the 50 - 100 for the night? Man I'd be looking to throw in some backing tracks if for no other reason just to see if they would up the pay a bit . . . just saying. Man that won't cover gas much less equipment cost and upkeep these days.

That's for the 5 piece jazz band I used to work with in the restaurant 2 miles from me that changed ownership last December and they threw out the bands. Now they have steam tables for happy hour where we used to set up at 7PM until it's time for the thumpa, thumpa urban disco the place turns into at 10PM on the weekends. Great, huh? I do have 3 regular commercial duo gigs coming up this summer where I get $150-200 but there's some driving too. I'm the whole band with a sax player. Not sure yet if we're still going to do the casino thing with a third person. I'll probably get a couple of big band gigs later this year so that's what, maybe 5 or 6 total gigs and a few Xmas parties if I'm lucky. I'm sure I could do freebies in some coffee shop but I think I'll pass on that.

It's all DJ's now, they're the ones that have taken over the live music scene. I'll give them credit, they're not just schleps playing songs, they are very good entertainers, they show up with their crew and they're making $500-1,000 or more for a party. These are not regular gigs as we know them, around here they basically lease a big club for the night and put on a show. After paying the owners they keep everything including the door and the booze or maybe it's a percentage. I'm sure there's different ways to split the money. One of my young friends drove me to one and it was exactly the same as we all remember, a big lively crowd including a doorman with a long line waiting to get in, lots of noise, lots of foxy babes just no band, it's a huge sound system with one main DJ and usually a couple of guest DJ's. It's those guys who are the local stars now not musicians.

You can find these places on Youtube and see what's happening. Look up the big spring break resort areas, you'll see lots of lights, smoke, anywhere from 500 to 1000 people, lots of booze, yelling and screaming, wet T shirt contests, all that good stuff we all remember with a crew of DJ's up front. Just like 1974 on the Sunset Strip in Hollywood or any other big city in the developed world. Just no bands. Or to be precise, few bands. Yes I know there are some but not many.

Bob

Bob,

I know just what you mean man . . . the part of your response that ALL musicians should hear loud and clear is "guest DJ's", man that blows me away. The audience actually is happy for another DJ to take over the record spinning duties.

Look I was away from music for quite a few years so I don't know how the DJ came to prominence but they sure must have had some good PR and one hell of a marketing plan. As now a days when most young, under forty to teenagers, think of music in a club or at a party they think of a DJ, not a duo trio quartet or full band.

I try my best to get the point across that instead of a DJ, why not get a real band as these days the price is not too far apart. Hell I see people planning very expensive party’s and weddings and when it comes to the music they think, “we need a DJ”, not “we need a band”, not we need a DJ.

Heck the spell check would not even let me type DJ in lower case . . . not that’s good PR my friend.

Later,

Pat, that is my point in a nut shell. I know no one here means to be snooty about it, but in reality it comes off that way. It is just human nature, to think that if they don't do it my way it is the wrong way, and therefore inferior.

Take your point of bluegrass, many of us came up on it in some way or another. I grew up listening to the Oprey, and folks like Bill Monroe, and such. But other than a few big names mainstream America does not recall many artist in that genre, 'cept maybe the Dirt band. HHhhmmm bluegrass, and country mixed with a touch of rock, and roll?!?!

As far as your point about a solo guitarist/vocalist I have heard some great ones. Some who play jazz standards, classical ditties, folk tunes, Pop/rock/country standards, and many are pretty darned good, a few that were outstanding, but many are just okay. Their guitar playing was average, and vocals just about the same. Now i have heard some one man bands that were stunningly incredible, versatile, and very entertaining. What go me into creating a one man band setup was a cruise my wife and i took about 10 years ago. There was a guy, with about 3 different nice guitars, and a small laptop running a sequencer, Cubase i believe, that was routed through a Yamaha synth, and a couple rack mounted effects, and that dude could play anything, he was a very accomplished guitarist, but he sounded like a 5 piece cover band that had decades of polish. People were sitting around filing every seat around listening to every set he played.

After spending a few years early on in a band that never agreed on song list, lead singer turns, and practice times, then several years sitting around playing my guitar for any who would listen i decided to develop a show even if it was just for fun. about the time i got my system running properly, and i found BiaB, i was asked to play a going away party for a dear friend. It had been years since i had really played for people other than a with few close friends here and there, or my parent anniversary party a few years back duo-ed with my brother in law on fiddle.

I was shocked when i found myself in front of about 150 people. I played a set of about 15 songs (all i had prepared) rather than 20 or so listeners, and 130 milling around doing other things. I found myself with a pack house standing room only situation. People were amazed at what i had put together, and i received a ton of compliments. I was asked back the next time a good friend moved away. and that time put together a full show complete with another 16 songs solo, and another 6 or so with guest artist.

I am sure that is i sat there and play nothing but the guitar and sang folks would have politely listened for a while then slowly started to lose interest and i would have been forced to compete with a talking crowd. Rather than that i had the front row clapping, and the back rows dancing!

Point to be made. This software has given me something i always wanted. An opportunity to entertain, and entertain well. I gotta say the crowd was live even if i wasn't!

I got my first BiaB in 1993, and have gotten most of the up grades ever since 2004 I believe. This has opened up whole new world for me in what i have seen described as Almost Live Music. I am very successful in my retirement as a performing artist with another vocalist and my guitar. We keep very busy and now have over 2,000 songs in our catalogue. I only use my PC, and a sound system and spend a lot of time blending in diffrent tracks. It takes time, but is worth it. I use nothing but BiaB and a lot of patience and it has paid off. I really love the program. Most audiences are amazed when they realize we did this ourselves, and have no commercial tracks, just BiaB. My only desire is that we can soon get a few more good country piano tracks. We play all styles but lean toward country. And I think the prices are very good for what you get. Count me as a happy user.

Quote:

I got my first BiaB in 1993, and have gotten most of the up grades ever since 2004 I believe. This has opened up whole new world for me in what i have seen described as Almost Live Music. I am very successful in my retirement as a performing artist with another vocalist and my guitar. We keep very busy and now have over 2,000 songs in our catalogue. I only use my PC, and a sound system and spend a lot of time blending in diffrent tracks. It takes time, but is worth it. I use nothing but BiaB and a lot of patience and it has paid off. I really love the program. Most audiences are amazed when they realize we did this ourselves, and have no commercial tracks, just BiaB. My only desire is that we can soon get a few more good country piano tracks. We play all styles but lean toward country. And I think the prices are very good for what you get. Count me as a happy user.

Roger,

Welcome to the forum.

2000 songs, and I thought I was a bad @$$ with nearly 700. I guess I'll spend my weekend arranging, thanks a lot.

Later,

Quote:

Hell I see people planning very expensive party’s and weddings and when it comes to the music they think, “we need a DJ”, not “we need a band”, not we need a DJ.

The reason is those wedding parties are not in their 60's except for the parents and their friends. The bride and groom and their friends who make up 90% of the party are mostly in their 30's. They know nothing of what we're talking about, they never went to clubs and saw real bands. To them DJ's are it, period. I think the reason is their type of music can't be covered by a live band anyway. It's all mostly sequenced with very bass heavy drums and such. No way can a live drummer duplicate that and no way can a live bass player do those super heavy thumping things without a ton of equipment and it's not a bass player doing it anyway. It's from a synth. Then there's all those little but very important synthy parts and scratches that are thrown in. I've actually gritted my teeth and listened to several sets worth of modern music. By modern I mean in the last twenty years. I know, that sounds incredible but rap, hip hop and the new R & B is that old. I listen with an ear towards how would I put a band together to do that stuff live and the answer is I couldn't. Nobody could without a full studio of stuff with all the roadies. DJ's are the only way to do it and they became stars because of it. I'm not saying all young people have no taste, far from it it's just there's not enough of them to matter to us as live players and when it comes time to party they want to hear DJ Jazzy Jeff or whoever the heck he is.

Before some of you jump in and say there's plenty of different gigs around, true there is, the market is not monolithic it's just that's a very small part of the big picture.

I guess the real answer to the original question "what is a live performance?" is if you're on stage in front of people doing whatever, be it playing or being a DJ, it's a live performance and whatever goes into making it possible is irrelevant to that question. My original answer was strictly from my point of view as an old fart who can play some keyboards.

Bob

Pat,

Quote:

Speaking of purists... here in NC, bluegrass isn't considered real if the the band uses an electric bass or an acoustic-electric guitar.

Unfortunately, that attitude is still prevalent. I don't know if you remember when Newgrass Revival came on the bluegrass scene but those guys got a pretty cold reception at first primarily because of the electric bass, non-traditional songs, long hair and pot smoking tendencies. LOL. But they eventually gained a large following. Mainly because of all of the long haired pot smoking bluegrass fans.

I wouldn't even CONSIDER using backing tracks for a bluegrass gig. You would either get booed off the stage or at least get a cold reception from many in the audience. That's because there's so much emphasis placed on the musical ability of each band member, similar to a jazz setting. (Not to mention a reluctance to accept anything but acoustic instruments).

But if I were playing pop, rock or country I wouldn't give it a second thought. Backing tracks for musicians is a good thing, IMHO, (although I'm a semi-purist when it comes to bluegrass. Electric bass is fine although acoustic electric guitar is a no no in most cases).

Those who use backing tracks should feel good about about giving the listeners a "fuller" sound.

It ain't karaoke. It's a musician using the tools available to enhance the overall sound. Especially if they create their own tracks. As most of us know, it takes some work to get a good backing track.

You sir are right on about the bluegrass thing. What fans come to the festivals for is to see each picker take a lead on a song. Gotta have your chops.

I wasn't going to weigh in on this post, but now I've had 4 beers I will.
If one of "us" went to a venue where another one of "üs" was performing, I'm sure we would appreciate the amount of time & effort that was put into the BIAB arrangement of the music. Similarly, I think that another non-BIAB musician would appreciate it also.

However, would Joe Patron at the venue appreciate it?
I think not.

I liken it to a great painting.... when you look at the Mona Lisa, you don't think of the amount of thought, planning & effort that Da Vinci put into it prior to completion, you just admire the finished project.The same with wonderful architecture, a good book, or a great movie.

Similarly, when we turn on our computers and fire up BIAB, we don't always think of the effort, imagination, blood sweat & tears that Peter & his team put in to develop this wonderful product.
People just see (or hear) the end product.

I think in this case the end justifies the means.
(Rant over.... time for another beer)

Quote:

You sir are right on about the bluegrass thing. What fans come to the festivals for is to see each picker take a lead on a song. Gotta have your chops.

Yeah, I understand that is a big part of the "live performance" as people see it, not just bluegrass. That's why I've always been fascinated by musicians who can play many instruments. Even with backing tracks, if the performer solos on different instruments for each song (or even within the same song) it would be obvious that the act wasn't karaoke.

Speaking of DJs, anybody who has the gear to play with backing tracks could also do the DJ thing. Just sayin'. There are a few other skills and gear to acquire so you can blend songs tother at the same beat and add scratches... but all in all, it would be easier for US to duplicate what THEY do than it would be for THEM to duplicate what WE do.

Quote:

A forum is a difficult place to try to put nuance into a casual and fast post. I was in no way putting down anyone, I was mainly agreeing with Rachael who is a good player. From the point of view of a good player like both of us are, less is better because we're both good enough to handle it. Others are not and that's fine, no snobbery here.<...snip...>

I have to be a bit defensive about that. I'm a good player. I sat first chair in the all-state band every year that I was in school, my biography is in "Who's Who In Entertainment", "Who's Who in America" and others, I've performed as a warm up or back up act to many major headliners (some at the peak of their careers), I've performed on MTV, ABC, CBS, NBC, and The BBC, and just about everywhere a musician can play from my home in the US to The People's Republic of China. From the point of view of this good player, less can be more or more can be more. Life is about virtually unlimited possibilities, not self-imposed restrictions.

I'm good enough to handle it, but I choose to go with more. I've heard great and terrible acts both with and without backing tracks. The tracks have nothing to do with it, and the skill of the musician has nothing to do with whether or not he/she chooses to use backing tracks.

I choose backing tracks because (1) they allow me to play gigs that I wouldn't be able to play without them (2) they allow me to switch instruments on stage so I can play sax, wind synth, flute, guitar, and vocals depending on the song (3) they allow me to play a wider variety of music ranging from mellow ballads to high energy rock, salsa, or whatever and that allows me to put on many different musical 'hats' and express different parts of myself (4) I like them (5) the audience likes them.

Not that there is anything wrong with a single guitarist or pianist with or without vocals. It's just not the kind of gig I want to play at this point in my life.

There is more than one right way to make music.

---------

On DJ music:

While I agree that DJs are big competition for live music (or semi-live), they aren't the biggest problem.

The biggest problem is TV.

In my parent's generation and when I was young, TV was black and white with narrow audio bandwidth and a tinny 3" speaker. You couldn't get good entertainment at home, so you had to go out for it.

Now we have HDTV with 7.1 surround sound so you can get good entertainment at home plus with a cable TV bill that can climb to a couple of hundred dollars per month, there goes the entertainment budget.

TV is the real competition. It's the reason why so many fewer people go out to hear live music, karaoke, or DJs.

And TV isn't live entertainment at all. In fact, it isn't really entertainment - it's a sales medium pretending to be an entertainment medium.

Don't get me started on that -- oops! I got myself started

So although Leilani and I play guitars, synths, sax, flute, and vocals over our backing tracks, and although I was definitely alive when I made each of our over 500 backing tracks, I still don't know if I consider my act a live performance, a semi-live performance or a computer-enhanced live performance, and I guess I never will.

And although this thread has gotten me to ponder about it, I guess it doesn't really matter. Leilani and I have been making our living doing this since 1985 and although I do remember the days when I was in large bands with all the associated pleasures of that, I also remember the personnel problems and at this point in my life, I prefer playing in the duo with my wife.

The reason why we are a duo is associated with this thread. We were in a 5 piece "100% live" band. Lost the bass player due to family illness (read: out of work for a month with no income) and shortly after, lost a drummer due to personal reasons (read: out of work for another month) and when we finally started gigging with the drummer, we started having problems with the new drummer's religion interfering with where/when we can gig (didn't tell us that up front). So I bough a primitive sequencer and later Band-in-a-Box and we haven't looked back.

We are very lively, the music was all played live, but the backing tracks were pre-recorded using parts played by live musicians. I have the skills to do a solo act if I want to, but I choose to do a duo/track gig. Is it live or semi-live? I can't answer that.

YMMV - I repeat, there is more than one right way to make music.

Insights and incites by Notes

Notes - You're absolutely right about TV. When people have paid the cable bill they feel they ought to stay in and watch it.

That and the cheap lager from Tesco (US translation- cheap lite beer from Walmart).

Back in the 70s we we gigging five nights a week and the venues were full. Don't ever see it coming back.

Quel dommage.

ROG.

The thing about the "solo guy with guitar" thing is that there is a finite amount of what he can do. With backing tracks there is not. Plus, the 4 beer fueled post above made a great point, that is another "I play with canned tracks" guy sits down to someone using canned tracks, we know what went into those tracks. Remember, the average listener thinks all we do is play those 2 or 3 one hour sets. No practice, no prep....

Quote:

Remember, the average listener thinks all we do is play those 2 or 3 one hour sets. No practice, no prep....

Money for nothing and your chicks for free!

***

This discussion is beginning to remind me of the one in which it was finally decided that BIAB is an instrument and not just a program. I think that there is an important central truth here that will be arrived at after we bounce enough ideas off of each other. I don't pretend to know what it is, except that I think it will center around the futility of trying to apply labels.

We all know that there is music that is unclassifiable, yet record companies insist on pigeonholing everything for marketing purposes. I think it is counterproductive to try to jam our multidimensional pegs into two-dimensional holes. Note that one reason Kurt Vonnegut did so well is that he would NOT allow his books to be labeled as science fiction. Everyone knows they are, but he has enjoyed commercial success far beyond that of most self-professed SF writers.

Technology has changed everything. My preliminary take is that as long as a performer or performers is/are performing--as opposed to lip-synching or playing air guitar (remember all those pop stars on Ed Sullivan whose guitars weren't plugged in?)--then it is a live performance. As Notes says above, the most important thing is the quality of the perfomance itself. People know (well, mostly) whether it is good or not. A VERY few may think about the technical underpinnings; most are just looking for something to tap their toes to while they schmooze members of the opposite sex or dive into their favorite beverage.

Can't wait to see where this ends up, if it does.

R.

A couple of points:

Notes, if I had a talented and beautiful wife like you do, I'd prefer playing duos with her as well. Beats the hell out of 4 sweaty old dudes EVERY day of the year!

And added to all the reasons for the decline in live music, factor in the drinking age change in the mid 80s. When it went from 18 to 21 in Ohio, clubs started closing the instant the gavel hit the desk because they lost the college kids. This area went from too many clubs and not enough bands to a handful of clubs that bands were fighting over. Tha led to bands playing for what we now consider insulting money just so they could play. I hung on until about 1994 but realized I needed a big boy job and retired from music.

Then there is the added scrutiny from police DUI enforcement teams. These days we are closer to a police state than I care to be, where poklice can invent "probable cause" to just pull over random cars and make them walk the line. With what DUI fine does to your insurance rates, everybody is afraid of being that random car.

It's all interrelated, and honestly I think the size of the band doesn't matter as much as threads like this make it out to be. When you play in restaurants where the stage is a 4x8 sheet of plywood, you can't bring a real band in, so you use Real Band....

Eddie has band size envy!

Quote:

Notes - You're absolutely right about TV. When people have paid the cable bill they feel they ought to stay in and watch it.

Back in the 70s we we gigging five nights a week and the venues were full. Don't ever see it coming back.

ROG.

There's a reason why sales companies sort potential customers into demographics: people are different, and what appeals to one group doesn't appeal to all groups. While I would agree that the younger generation is indeed wired and streaming Netflix, online games, thousands of cable channels etc, I still think that as retired baby boomers swell into larger numbers, there WILL be a resurgence in gig opportunities for people playing oldies music.

As stated several months ago, the past few times I've been out to hear live music, the audience was PREDOMINANTLY older people. The upcoming opportunities won't be in clubs, but in restaurants, civic recreation areas, political rallies, animal clubs (elks, lion, eagles etc)

The boomers grew up on live music, and we played it for them the first time... we can play it again, Sam.

AS they have retirement time on their hands, I think they will seek to recreate the past when they were bored teenagers with too much time on their hands.

Boomers just started retiring recently... we haven't seen the crest of the wave yet, and won't for several more years. But I think there is opprtunity ahead for anyone who sets his demographic and starts looking for gigs where those people go.

Eddie, I'm a lucky guy. She is beautiful AND talented AND fun to be with AND fun to play music with AND she has great work ethics AND playing music together is our second favorite thing to do (can't say what's first on a public forum).

When I started playing music the drinking age was 21 and the clubs were still full. But that was still the Pre-Cable TV age of 3 channels, narrow bandwidth audio, and tinny speakers on the TV set. We played 6 nights a week and there was always a club nearby so close that we could check out the competition on our breaks and make it back in time to start the next set.

And Pat, I agree about the boomers.

I play yacht clubs, country clubs and 55+ (retirement) developments, and living in Southeast Florida, there are a lot of retirement developments (it's God's waiting room <grin>)

I've been playing these gigs for years because they pay well and have shorter hours (3 maybe 4 - max). Plus the audiences is generally very happy to see you so the entertaining is fun. The downside is moving the equipment every day, but I just think of that as weight-bearing exercise (I keep telling myself it's good for me).

When we started playing those gigs in the 80s, the music was predominantly swing era music, Glenn Miller, Artie Shaw, Frank Sinatra, and so on. I remember when the baby boomers started retiring pulling out an early Elvis Presley song and having a couple of people dislike it. But as more and more boomers entered the 55+ communities, we started playing more and more boomer music. Not too long ago someone came up and asked us to crank it up adding that "Harry James is Dead."

For the past year or two we have hardly played any standards on the gig. In The Mood still works sometimes, while Satin Doll has definitely fallen out of favor. And when the boomers throw a party, more often than not, they want a band, not a DJ because when we grew up having a 'record party' was deemed cheap and inferior to live music.

Most of the audience either doesn't notice or care that our background tracks are pre-recorded. Although many of them are BiaB assisted, none of them are 100% BiaB. I add song-specific licks, and tweak the parts until they satisfy my ears (see http://www.nortonmusic.com/backing_tracks.html for details). I take the very good output of BiaB and do my best to turn it into something even better.

I make them good enough for the audience, and then continue working on them until they are good enough for me (within the limits of my capabilities). When I learn a new song, hopefully I will be lucky enough to play it hundreds or thousands of times. So I want the parts to be just right, the groove to be just right, and I want it to inspire me to do my best with my vocals or instruments that I happen to be playing on top of the track. Perhaps I obsess too much, but if I hear something I could have done better as I'm playing along, it would bug me. In fact, as my skills have improved I wish I had the time to go back and re-do some of the songs I've done years ago, but if I'm going to spend that much time on them, I'd rather learn a new song - so that's what I do.

Every once in a while someone will come up and ask, and I simply tell them that I record all the parts that we aren't playing live at home. Then I ask if they are musicians, and if they are, I tell them more and usually put in a plug for Band-in-a-Box. I've actually sold a few copies of BiaB this way (referred them to PG Music).

I know an entertainer who has a subscription to Rhapsody and has a collection of an uncountable number of karaoke tunes. He sings and plays piano, but generally just sings to the karaoke tracks. If he doesn't know a song, he DJs it through Rhapsody, and tells me the customers don't know and don't care, it allows him to play a much greater amount of songs, and it's a lot less work. I'm not ready to go that route myself, but I can see his point -- and he get a lot of work.

We musicians care about a lot of things the audience doesn't care about. And I suppose we should, after all we are in the business and that caring is what makes our "product" valuable. But sometimes I think we care too much about some things (myself included). And I think the percentage of our music that is live or pre-recorded is one of those cases -- at least in most venues. We need to know how to prioritize what is most and least important for our gigs and we have to consider the audience's point of view when we do. After all, that is who we are playing for.

So my new answer to "What constitutes live performance?" is "Who cares as long as the audience is entertained." While I'd like to answer the question more directly, I don't think I can.

Insights and incites by Notes

Pat - I do hope you're right. You give me a new optimism.

ROG.

The DJ thing has been going on awhile.

Back in 1985 I was in the vocalist in start-up 5-piece. The college crowd (which I was part of) really enjoyed our sets of mostly metal and hard rock covers but we were not getting paid. Back then it was already very difficult to get a paid gig - it's not new.

When we finally managed to get a money gig at a bowling club, I brought home $30 for two 45 min sets.

While we were knocking looking for gigs, one of the club owners found out I was a DJ on the local college station. Much to the anger of the band-mates, I was offered $150 to spin dance tunes for an evening. I called the owner back as soon as I was alone and took the offer.

Soon after I had a regular Saturday night gig spinning tunes at the joint. This got my name out there and soon I was playing weddings and corporate parties for $200 - $250 a night!

I know there are band-members right now that are shaking their fists at the screen but I needed the money. My band was most unhappy and didn't last for long after -- but there were also "personnel" problems.

Another thing that is not new is inviting guest DJs. I wasn't much of a "scratcher" so I invited (and paid) other DJs to "play" with me. Remember this is back in 1985.

Quote:

The DJ thing has been going on awhile.

Back in 1985 I was in the vocalist in start-up 5-piece. The college crowd (which I was part of) really enjoyed our sets of mostly metal and hard rock covers but we were not getting paid. Back then it was already very difficult to get a paid gig - it's not new.

When we finally managed to get a money gig at a bowling club, I brought home $30 for two 45 min sets.

While we were knocking looking for gigs, one of the club owners found out I was a DJ on the local college station. Much to the anger of the band-mates, I was offered $150 to spin dance tunes for an evening. I called the owner back as soon as I was alone and took the offer.

Soon after I had a regular Saturday night gig spinning tunes at the joint. This got my name out there and soon I was playing weddings and corporate parties for $200 - $250 a night!

I know the are band-members right now that are shaking their fists at the screen but I needed the money. My band was most unhappy and didn't last for long after -- but there were also "personnel" problems.

Another thing that is not new is inviting guest DJs. I wasn't much of a "scratcher" so I invited (and paid) other DJs to "play" with me. Remember this is back in 1985.

hey, a man's gotta eat! Opportunity is not stationary... it moves around. Just as the Native Americans followed the buffalo so THEY could eat, it makes sense to identify trends and get prepared to offer whatever service is currently in demand. I don't see DJs as the enemy, I see them as entrepreneurs and people who did a better job of identifying trends than I did. When I get back into music after my wife's illness is behind me, It seems logical to offer a full-service musical entertainment venue, including DJ service. Same basic equipment...

There was a popular book a few years ago titled SOMEBODY MOVED MY CHEESE. If you haven't read it, you should. Your local public library probably has a copy.

Quote:

The thing about the "solo guy with guitar" thing is that there is a finite amount of what he can do. With backing tracks there is not. Plus, the 4 beer fueled post above made a great point, that is another "I play with canned tracks" guy sits down to someone using canned tracks, we know what went into those tracks. Remember, the average listener thinks all we do is play those 2 or 3 one hour sets. No practice, no prep....

around here the open mic sessions are mostly populated by the dreaded "solo guy with a guitar" (AKA "strum & Hum act") ... and when you say there's a "finite amount" of what he can do, you are being kind.

Two chords into the second song, I'm ready for the next act.

On the other hand, someone who is good at guitar, vocals, and audience skills can be a very entertaining act, similar to a good piano bar player but with an entirely different repertoire.

No matter what the gig, guitarist, piano bar player, track act, or full band, there are good ones and there are bad ones. And I've heard both ends of the spectrum.

But I don't go out to places like that too much anymore. I'm usually gigging on the same days that other people are. Fortunately they usually have symphonies on Monday or Tuesday nights, so I can support musicians by going to the symphony.

Talking about DJ's 7 or 8 years ago a good friend booked a New Years gig at a small place as a duo with a sax player. He's a good singer and uses midi files. He got sick and called me to sub for him and I don't sing. He said he's really stuck, everybody's booked, it's New Years so what could I do, with a lot of trepidation I took it. He gave me his disc's with the midi's on them along with an ancient Yamaha file player he uses. At that time I had never used midi's on stage before. The sax player is just a good player he has less stage presence than I do. As we're doing the gig with no vocals I'm playing some keyboard parts with the midi files and the show was definitely missing something so I decided the heck with this and grabbed a mic and started DJing the thing. I stepped in front of my keyboard then got back for a solo, then back out front again. I had no clue what I was doing just going with the flow with stuff like Play That Funky Music, that Conga song by Miami Sound Machine and a bunch of other disco type dance tunes. I started getting into it because the crowd was digging it. All I did was stuff I heard other DJ's do both live and on the radio, making comments about someone's foxy wife,"better not leave her alone, I've got a van outside" with a big laugh, that kind of thing and I talked some of the words to some songs but certainly didn't try to actually sing anything. In all honesty it went over great and everybody had fun including me and the sax player. I've never done anything like that since probably because I didn't have to but it's kinda cool to know I pulled it off. I see the appeal of a DJ, all people need is to see someone leading the party. They could care less about vocals.

This was New Years, everybody's primed for the biggest party of the year, I would never try that in a regular Friday night club or a restaurant dinner setting.

Bob

I'm disppointed you weren't alreay booked for New Years (if you are playing out regularly still).. but happy it all turned out well. Sounds like fun, and those are the best kind of gigs. Especially if they pay well.

The facts are that most venues are not going to hire 4-6 piece bands anymore, and they have not been for quite some time now. If you do a little research you will find that this is one of the main reasons for the timing and success of the DJ. As before BIAB and some of the other backing tracks all a single act musician had was his instrument and maybe a drum machine, while the DJ had every song ever recorded. Therefore the odds were stacked in their favor.

The music business is like any other business you have to be able to adapt to the times and what the market is asking for, the great news for us is that BIAB has handed musicians, especially older guys like me, the tools to go head to head with DJs.

Yes I would love to have a group of live musicians to gig with but it ain't going to happen for too many reasons to list here. One of the main reasons being the gig would pay the same for three as I get for one, therefore no will work for these low fees. With this said I price myself competitively with djs in my area and my selling point is that I do play and sing live for the entire show giving them a full sound (yes they want backing tracks) while most DJ just play tunes and do their best to get the club patrons involved. Plus I know very well that some gigs I not only could not handle but I just don't want, your mileage may vary.

Bottom-line is that other bands (as in the old days) are not our competition anymore, it is the DJ . . . and with BIAB any musician worth his salt has enough tools in his box to be competitive.

Just my 25 cents worth, adjusted for inflation.

Later,

What is a singer, if not a musician? And what does a good singer do but sing? So, starting on that premise (which is where I start), what does a solo singer without a band do? What constitutes live performance in THIS context?

I have a good female friend here in Vienna, with international singing experience as a backing vocalist and lead performer, who only sings - sometimes fronting a band or a small 'orchestra', sometimes in a small gospel group with one simple guitar (mind you, the focus there is on vocal harmonies in any case) and sometimes she sings in clubs with a DJ (these songs are originals, not covers or standards). I love her voice and her performances but when she works solo, I can't help but wonder why it doesn't come across as karaoke (which, to all intents and purposes, it is, as there are no instruments being physically played).

On the forum here is a Dutchman called Mike Wever ('Mike Sings') and I have been lucky enough to meet up with him in Holland and go to one of his gigs with him. He had a friend with him acting as DJ and he sang covers with backing tracks. To me, that is karaoke but he gets away with it and everybody really enjoyed his performance. Mind you, it was really high energy and he really did work hard with it. I thoroughly enjoyed it but it was still karaoke, to my mind.

Recorded backing tracks haven't been around for that long in the grand scheme of things, so where would the following artists have got to if they had not managed to find bands to front: Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Sammy Davis Jr, Elvis, Cliff Richard, Davy Jones, Mick Jagger, Tom Jones, Tina Turner, June Carter Cash, Patsy Cline, Diana Ross, etc, etc, etc? They certainly didn't play instruments, at least not in public. Would they have just ended up singing a capella like Janis Joplin did on 'Mercedes Benz'? Where would the music industry be today without these singers?

Me? I'm a singer. I play adequate guitar and have been known to play some nice leads, I can also play bass, but mainly I am a rhythm guitarist. I have 3 guitars - a strat, an acoustic and an Epiphone Sheraton. Although I do sing Folk from time to time, My preferred type of music to sing is Country and Country Rock - this needs a band. I need a band to front. I don't have one.

BUT... (and it is a very BIG but)

I am just one man. I have my own PA, a dedicated music laptop, my own mics and leads and sound cards and so on. I have over 10,000 professional karaoke backing tracks and over 30,000 music tracks by artists from ABBA to ZZ Top in Blues, Country, Rock, Jazz, etc. all on a USB hard drive. Unfortunately, I just can't seem to find the musicians I need or an already existing band to front. So what can I do?

To sing and play guitar solo is not really my scene. Though I can and have done it, I just don't like doing it and it seems too much like busking to me. Plus, I am a rhythm guitarist and I don't play fingerstyle or pick as my hands are (a) too big (b) losing power and grip due to neurological problems with trapped nerves in my spine. To sing to backing tracks seems too much like karaoke to me for solo public performance as an act so I just do not have the balls to try and pull that one off. So, does anybody have any realistic ideas as to how I can get round this situation?

For what its worth, I think karaoke is great fun, especially when done in the right environment with good singers (I don't mean the drunken wannabes who can't sing to save their lives and don't know when to shut up and stop hurting everybody's ears). I actually sing karaoke pretty regularly, with Austria's #1 Karaoke Club, and it is great for keeping 'the ear in' and keeping up public performance. In fact I am organising and will be running some karaoke sessions for free at local venues for those who are not in the normal way of things - alcoholics in rehab, prisoners, hospitals, etc. As far as work goes, I KJ (karaoke) and DJ when I can get a booking and it does pay better than performing solo, sorry to say.

My aversion generally speaking to solo singer/songwriter/guitarists is that, generally speaking, they are not particularly good at any of the 3 parts - singing, song writing or playing guitar - and I do empathise with those who are ready for the next act as soon as they are two chords in on the second three chord song. Not everybody is Bob Dylan or Joan Baez and so these people come across as buskers who have managed to come in off the street for once. They are not much better than the karaoke wannabes, with the exception that they actually do play an instrument on stage and as such can legitimately be labelled musicians, professional or not. I can honestly state this opinion as I am Chairman of the Vienna Folk Club (which I helped to set up) and we have an Open Mic night at least once a month. That said, I have actually met and heard several excellent singer/songwriter/guitarists throughout Western Europe who are the exceptions that prove the rule - many of them are now friends of mine.

So, lads and lasses, what's a poor boy to do? Primarily, I am a ballad singer and my own music is along the Country / Country Rock genre - this is not at its best when 'busking'... If you were in this situation, what would YOU do?

(PS - Sorry if this post comes across as a bit egotistical but I do think the subject is particularly relevant to my situation. Thanks for the understanding)

Sam,

I hope my comment about the "Strum &Hum" acts did not come across as a criticism for all singer-guitarists. It was made in conjunction with Eddie's observation that the same act, if he would lower himself to add backing tracks, would immediately benefit from a wide variety in his repertoire. Maybe strings in this song, a harp in that one, horns on another.. anything from full orchestra all the way back to the original hum & strum.

Also, it was in the context that the average Hum & Strum performer looks down on musicians who use backing tracks... even when it's clear that the guy is an outstanding musician in his own right. I just don't understand the double standard.

If I may say so... your post indicates that you look down on the use of backing tracks. Why? Even with backing tracks, if the same guy is in front of the mic all night it isn't a karaoke event... karaoke is more like open mic, an event in which anybody in the audience can participate.

On the other hand, if you build a repertoire of songs that you can absolutely NAIL in your performance, and if you can keep the audience interested and/or on the dance floor, then what you are doing is ENTERTAINING.

Entertainment has elements that open mic and karaoke often omit:
1) professional demeanor
2) stage presence
3) preparation of the material
4) consistent quality
5) it's treated as a business, not as a lark or a hobby

you ask for opinions about what you should do. Here's mine:

Accept the fact that times have changed. MANY working musicians now use backing tracks and play along while they sing. You have the gear and the contacts... all you lack is the resolve to treat this as a business and pursue it wholeheartedly. Don't second-guess whether the audience will like it. You've already noted that the audiences listening to Mike Wever and your female friend consistently enjoy their performances. Why would it be different for you?

I was not offended Pat. Why should I be? Your point is perfectly valid.

FWIW, I do NOT look down on backing tracks at all BUT a vocalist with just backing tracks still needs something more - hence the need for dance routines or whatever. That is not MY scene either (no more than using pitch correction software), besides it doesn't fit with ballads and crooning. 'Half playback' is the same as karaoke, is it not? If not, what's the difference?

As a matter of fact, I happen to be a damn good singer

but a singer without a band or at least an instrument does not offer much to look at for more than one or two numbers (unless he is doing cartwheels and zooming about all over the place)

Furthermore, a solo singer/guitarist will look ok doing Folk with an acoustic but doing Country Rock with an electric and backing tracks? It just won't look right IMHO. To this end, I have been looking for some time now for a female keys player to perform with - I can see THAT working (male guitar and vocals, female keys and harmonies, with or without backing tracks)

As to the 5 elemental differences you propose, I do not see that as a problem rather as a foregone prerequisite

Strum and hum, in my mind, suffers because there is nothing entertaining to me when a guitar plays a solo and there is no rhythm at all behind it. Thus that kind of act rarely has solos in it. And one voice, playing one sound palette... I find that boring. Poetry over strummed chords.... no energy. Maybe a lot of emotion, but not a lot of energy.

I think a lone guitarist and voice can be very entertaining

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nz8Kd66fyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2P8mDlXKHc

You can click on any of his videos and be entertained. I'd sit and listen to him live.

Quote:

I think a lone guitarist and voice can be very entertaining

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nz8Kd66fyw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2P8mDlXKHc

You can click on any of his videos and be entertained. I'd sit and listen to him live.

Me also but it would be relative to the gig. Yes this guy is a solid guitar player, harp pretty good also and very entertaining as well, but and it's a big one, could he pull off a three - four gig with this setup? I know I could not sit through more than one hour of some cat playing any instrument and singing unless it was a mega talent.

Later,

We are on the same page here eddie.

Later,

Well, since my name is mentioned in this thread I might as well add my $ 0.02 to the discussion.

First of all: Everything changes. So does music and the musical taste. When Sinatra, Davis Jr, Amstrong etc. where performing they did so with a bigband with up to, what, 25 musicians. That was live.

Now some clever guy invented the synthesizer and all of a sudden the horn section and the strings could stay home for the gig. We now have a band with a drummer, bass player, one or two guitar players and a keyboard player. No horns and no strings on stage but they are audible. Are we still live talking live performance? Most will say this is live. OK

I also play in a 5 piece band: drums, bass, guitars, keys and vocals. I sing, play guitar and do two songs on keys. Our keyboard player also plays guitar and does backing vocals. We used to have a drummer who could sing very good, so he did the lead vocals for several songs and backing vocals for the rest. Still live performance, agreed?

But then the drummer decided to leave the band to do a metal-project. We found a new drummer, but this one does not sing (luckily

). So I decided to buy a TC Helicon VoiceLive 2. This vocal processor among other things generates harmonies based on the lead vocals and the input of the key set, midi commands or music. So now we have strings, horns and vocals from a box. Are we still live?

OK, we're invited to a wedding. The band that's playing consists of o drummer, a keyboard player and a lady singer. We hear a bass guitar, rythm guitar, horns, strings: the works. The keyboard player has a very nice keyboard and uses sequencing. Is this a live performance?

I earn most of my living doing solo gigs. I have some $20K worth of equipment with me: sound and lights that most of the times I set-up, operate during the gig and take down myself. The usual gig lasts about 4 hours (with three 15 min breaks). I sing to professional backing tracks. The venues book me to entertain the audience, make them sing, dance, feel good and above all: make them thirsty. I and I alone am responsible for the gig and for the mood of the evening. I have to give 100% of myself every moment of that night; there is no-one to take a solo and thus the attention of the audience. I cannot use a guitar or a keyboard as a shield. It is just me and my microphone. Most of the times I don't even have a stage or a riser so I have to do a dynamite presentation to be noticed at all. It is fricking hard work. But is it a live performance? I think it is. It is me singing, improvising and reacting to the audience.

Is it karaoke? No. Karaoke is when backing tracks are played and the lyrics appear on a screen. People from the audience take the microphone and sing one or a couple of songs.
Is it a live performance in your opinion or is it something you would enjoy on your night out? That is up to yourself.

I do like playing with the band better and it sure as heck is a lot easier performing with the band standing behind me. But when I drive home after a succesful solo gig and I have made the crowd gone wild all on my own.....yes, it makes me feel good. That and the pay is a lot better on solo gigs.... A man's gotto eat you know.

DJs, karaoke performers, backing track musicians, and bands all share one important skill. The ability to read the audience, play what they need, and adapt the songs to their changing moods.

This skill is the main reason why I don't do set lists. I'm not clairvoyant enough to know what the audience is going to want 3 songs from now, much less an entire set.

I look at these artists as competitors, but not much differently from other musicians. I treat them as equals and we have mutual respect for each other.

We're in the same business, trying to get a piece of the market and survive in these tough economic times. We each have our own formula for doing it, based on our personal talents, skills, and chosen market venues.

There is more than one right way to make music.

We all have the same common enemy, TV - which isn't live at all - and is the main reason why people don't go out for entertainment like they used to.

And TV isn't even a true entertainment medium - it's a sales medium disguised as an entertainment medium. Plus it's the biggest drug addiction in the USA (and many other countries). The brain even emits Alpha and Theta waves similar to both a drug experience and hypnosis which the marketers use to plant those "buy this" post-hypnotic suggestions in the drug user's brain. They spent tons of money researching and testing the science of this and using it to their advantage.

Do you want to get your spouse to quit buying useless products like those pajama jeans, or useless 20 in one tool that will sit in the shed forever, or "frankenfood" that will just make you fat -- just turn of the TV.

I know I'm repeating what I've said before: Back when TV was black and white with narrow bandwidth audio and a 2" speaker, people had to go out for entertainment. Then TV turned color but still had narrow bandwidth audio, the entertainment factor of the tube was still lame. Now we have HDTV with surround sound PLUS a cable TV subscription that can easily top $200 per month (there goes the entertainment budget) and it's no wonder people don't go out as often as they used to.

I still don't know the answer to "What constitutes live performance?" but I'm finding the thread interesting anyway.

If anyone knows how to get the people to "Just say 'NO' to TV" and get them back in the clubs where they belong, let me know. I'll join the movement as long as nobody gets hurt

Quote:

I'm disppointed you weren't alreay booked for New Years (if you are playing out regularly still).. but happy it all turned out well. Sounds like fun, and those are the best kind of gigs. Especially if they pay well.

Actually I still play out a fair amount but I have backed off a bit on New Years gigs. My lady has to stay home and it's barely worth it. Most good players I know get a minimum of $500 for those gigs and some of the offers to me have been less than that. A few years ago instead of me doing a gig we saw Big Bad Voodoo Daddy at the Disney Concert Hall in downtown LA. I splurged for front row seats. Great show. This gig I described was strictly a favor for a friend and it was only booked for $250 each and we got a $100 tip so it was $300 and about a 75 mile drive. He lived a lot closer to it than I did. Still fun though.

Bob

Notes,

In all do respect and while I do partly subscribe to the theory that good TV (is that an oxymoron) make that great TV "Screens and Sound"" are keeping people out of clubs. I think you are blaming too much of the non-hiring of bands on TV alone. Case in point club owners, other than sports bars are not putting large screens up in their establishments to entertain their patrons, they are hiring DJ's or single and duo acts for two reasons:

#1. DJs have already proven that you don't need a big band, 4-6 pieces to motivate and entertain a crowd.

#2. Because of #1 their payout is way smaller than paying a larger group.

I may be way off base but to me it's simple economics, they are spending as little as they have to while still pleasing their patrons.

Later,

Ad to that the fact that a band requires you to pay attention to them, and a DJ just wants you to dance and have fun, the song does not matter it is the driving beat that keeps the crowds focused on themselves, and each other.

Citaat:

Ad to that the fact that a band requires you to pay attention to them,

Ever heard of backingtracks that masked your mistake by extending a solo, taking the lead or even sing the right lyrics when you blanked out?
Let me tell you, it is waaayyy easier and less scary to play with other musicians than to do it on your own.

Good point Mike, but i was talking about entertainment side of it. When a band is playing they are the focal point, when a DJ plays, you are the focal point, and the young lady with the real short skirt!

That is why clubs like DJs, they keep the crowd involved as a large group.

The other part of this is the music itself. I've mentioned before I will sometimes grit my teeth and listen to the pop radio stations for a while just to hear what's there. So much of it is completely studio created, no live players that I could hear except for some synth parts. Especially the "drum" tracks behind the poptart singers including Madonna who's no longer a tart that's for sure. Those whatever you call them tracks are certainly not drums as we know them. They're highly processed/gated/compressed sound effect parts I guess you could call them. No live band is going to do that stuff without using tracks as part of their show. Much easier and cheaper to simply use a DJ to play the original or remixed tracks. That's another thing, remixing. I don't get it and never followed it but I'm seen references to remixing contests at some clubs. I guess they have some stuff that is broken out to separate tracks and somebody gets to come up and run the mixing console? Or maybe they get to combine parts of different songs? I don't know but it's certainly entertainment to young people.

Bob

Quote:

and the young lady with the real short skirt!

And that my friend is how I always new when the stage was level . . . as the keyboard player would drool out of both sides of his mouth.

Later,

That Mr Danny is funny!

Quote:

I think a lone guitarist and voice can be very entertaining.

No denying he has talent, but I would make it through maybe one cranberry and soda and be out the door. Old copy songs dummied down for one guitar are not what I'd really go to see too often. I see that kind of performing more for sitting around the campfire when everybody is in the "Oh how cool you play guitar" mode. This guy isn't exactly going to headline at The House of Blues (and he doesn't want to - that's not the point). It all depends on what you consider "a gig". I am not in the group who plays just to play. I want the big stage, the bright lights, the big house PA.... Those kind of gigs are few and far between, so that's when I play.... few and far between.

All personal taste though.

Actually he is not dumbing down the guitar, he is complicating up the guitar to cover more of the song than the guitarist would cover in a full band. He is lead and backing guitar all in one with a touch of bass thrown in. Still you point is taken. It really comes down to what you want to hear, and play. Me personally i do not want full 5 piece band commitment. I want to play for a few folks, and play what i like to play the way i want to play it.

I confess to not having read other then the original post and a couple beyond. To me it's live if there's a live person on stage. As to Rachel's and bob's x 2 comments. It's like being just a little bit pregnant. No such thing. I don't care if you use just one backing track your in the same boat as the guy using 20.

Way to put it captain subtle! John i will be laughing at that the rest of the day!

Whoa, what's happening here? When I kicked off this thread I had no idea it would run like this! Thanks for all your input everyone.

So what do I think?

It may be over-simplistic, but I like the performer, or band, to be somehow different to the jukebox. Don't get me wrong, I've spent many hours happily drinking warm beer (this is England don't you know) and listening to the jukebox, but I don't want to sit and look at it all night.

For me, it's live if it can entertain me and hold my attention. After that, everything else is secondary.

Thanks again, everyone, for sharing your experience and views. If I hadn't learnt anything else, I know not to mention Van Halen in front of Eddie!

ROG.

Bon Jovi?

Quote:

If I hadn't learnt anything else, I know not to mention Van Halen in front of Eddie!

Not even Van HEFLIN!!

Captain opinion strikes again!!!

Eddie -

Every so often, some kid who's just got his first guitar will come through the door clutching a Van Halen CD and I just know that his parents will think I'm a lousy teacher if I can't show him how to play all the tracks in his first lesson.

People have noticed me start to flinch visibly when one of his tracks comes on the radio.

Think we could start a club?

ROG.

Kinda like hearing a new guitar player plunk through "Smoke on the Water"!!

Even worse: "Stairway to Heaven"!!

Annnnngheeey! Beeeauuutiful!

I tell this story often. In a Guitar Center store last year, there was a mid 20 something sitting on an amp just hammering the nexk of a Les Paul. I sietened until he took a breath and said "Impressive! Can you show me a Bbmin7?" He muttered an f-bomb at me and went back to hammering.

He could NOT show me a Bbmin7.....

Kids, don't learn "songs". Learn "MUSIC". Songs are made from MUSIC. MUSIC is not made of songs.

'Stairway To Heaven' is actually banned at most music shops I have been to. I wouldn't WANT to play it anyway.

The 20-something hadn't reached bar chords yet, Eddie? Now, if you had asked him for a Dbmin13b5, I might have felt some sympathy for the poor ignoramus. But a simple bar chord?

Quote:

I tell this story often. In a Guitar Center store last year, there was a mid 20 something sitting on an amp just hammering the nexk of a Les Paul. I sietened until he took a breath and said "Impressive! Can you show me a Bbmin7?" He muttered an f-bomb at me and went back to hammering.

Yep, that kind of arrogance is rampant at guitar center. You would think we would be more accepting of our fellow musicians. Alas, we are not.

We stopped at a County Fair last weekend while travelling through Arizona. They had a 7 or 8 person "group" singing on stage. Good vocals (mostly) and definitely what you would call a "live" performance, despite not having a single instrument in sight.

I let the word "karaoke" slip out while discussing them with the wife. Her quick reply was, "it's not any different than using Band In A Box" and of course she was right.

So if a group of singers constitutes a "live performance" then I would say that ANY live singer constitues a live performance. If that is the case (and not everyone here agrees that it is), then BIAB or backing tracks only ADDS to the performance, at least in my estimation.

My feeling is, if there's a "live" person performing, either a capella, with a guitar, with a piano, with a band or with BIAB/backing tracks, it is a "live performance".

The only question now becomes "what about lip syncing"????

Just my 2 pesos worth <grin>
LLOYD S

And that my friend is why I don't take my wife with me anywhere

. . . . just kidding of course.

Later,

lip syncing to a mp3 track - now we have to draw the line somewhere.

but it does anwere the age old question, "..is it Live or Memorex?"

Quote:

lip syncing to a mp3 track - now we have to draw the line somewhere. but it does anwere the age old question, "..is it Live or Memorex?"

yet its worth noting that Brittany Spears is generally considered to be an entertainer. And the ads say things like "LIVE IN CONCERT..."

After reading and evaluating all the observations made in this thread, especially Notes Norton's observations about people staying home to get their entertainment in the virtual world... I'd have to expand my definition of live entertainment to include anything in the real world (ie, NOT the virtual world) that includes real people on stage that are the focus of the audience's attention.

Stated differently, if you had to leave home and go somewhere to watch a real person put his/her ego on the line in any way whatsoever, it's a live performance by my new definition.

(This has been an Interesting and thought provoking thread)

No one would want to see a dead Britney Spears!

Wanted Dead Or Alive: Britney Spears

NOT!

I used to do a schtick where when announcing a song, I'd say, "Here is another song never recorded by Britney Spears." It got many laughs a few years ago (I usually play to an over 40 audience).

I like Pat Marr's observation.

And I'm alive, so is Leilani, so even though our tracks are pre-recorded, our performance over those tracks is live.

I've seen ads for Live DJ and always got an internal grin over that, after all, if the DJ was dead, how could he/she spin records, CDs, or digital files?

We were in a big variety show for a retirement village, and before us were some female impersonators lip-syncing to songs by Barbra Streisand and Liza Minnelli. Not my proverbial 'cup of tea' but the audience laughed it up quite a bit. The performers were definitely live.

I've also seen Elvis impersonators lip-sync to Elvis Presley records. Again, something I wouldn't pay to see, but they were performing anyway. And I'm old enough to notice how as time goes on, the Elvis-impersonators get less and less like the real Elvis.

We once got booked in a club on Sunday where the sign said Live Reggae. We knew about a dozen reggae songs, not enough, so I told the crowd my name was Reggie but my parents didn't spell it correctly. We ended up getting re-booked in that club on Sundays for about 2 years, but they changed the sign.

So I'm with you, Pat. Anything that gets them up, away from the salesman in the living room (TV) and into a club, theater, or whatever where a performer is actually performing is a live performance.

Insights and incites by Notes

...and then you have a new type of live music performance:

deadmau5 live
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vc8j0KGEtJo

Live deadmau5 - hmmmmmmmmmm

Man! I gotta get me one of those yellow heads!

Later,