MarkDrummer Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I shall do x Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colb Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I don't have a problem with it really. The Knife's current live show has attracted a lot of discussion due to the fact that much of the music isn't being played live, at some points there are mimed vocals and at times you can't tell who is playing anything and it is more of a dance performance. After reading about it I was a bit wary before seeing them at primavera sound but in the end it was probably my highlight of the festival. I absolutely loved it, had a cracking time. As for the question about DJs, that's an entirely separate issue. What do you mean is there such a thing as a live dj? All of them? If they weren't djing live that'd surely jsut be sticking on a playlist. Anyway imo a techno dj, mixing different part from different tracks to make a new whole, is doing as much live as other musicians. I saw the Knife's performance as well - i'm not sure if it was music or performance art but it was a total headfuck and one of the best things i've ever seen. I wasn't expecting live vocals and there wasn't much pretence about it so I was cool with it. My opinion - triggered sounds are fine and something i'd happily be involved with, whether that's someone playing a brass line on a synth or double tracking with a looper or manipulating sound on a laptop - as long as someone's operating it and they're onstage in the moment reacting to the rest of the band (or creating a performance from samples in the case of some artists). Pretending you're doing something and miming - singing, playing an instrument, DJ'ing when it's coming out of an ipod etc. and miming instead = bang out of order. There are always exceptions (see the Knife), but that's art and different to say, Madonna "enhancing" her performance. Playing to backing tracks to add texture to live performance, I don't like it and I wouldn't want to be in a band that did it - but I can see why it might be something a bigger band would do - you're gonna have poeople in the audience that want to hear it exactly like the record. Better if Muse etc.paid some musicians to do it and gave some guys a gig - but every penny counts!! Again, there are always exceptions and if it's musically relevant then that's cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 (edited) Would it be better tho? I dont think i would like the idea of watching the Arctic Monkeys, for example, with a string orchestra on stage with them, it would ruin the image for me. Its a rock band, with a bit of production behind it, not a band backed by a orchestra, if that makes sense. Look how uncool it made Metalica. Edited August 21, 2013 by The Milner 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soda Jerk Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 Miming is bad. But using backing tracks and samples so long as it's not being portrayed as being played live is fine. Lots of awesome bands have done it. Big Black. They Might Be Giants. Er... Big Black. And those other guys. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 IM AGAINST IT BIG TIME.i went to see roger waters my hero in 2006 and he lipsynced prettrym uch tyhe whole set. very evident hear. You should sort him out. BIG TIME. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Zero Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I'm a bit biased on this subject given that I am now dabbling with electronic music. It is essentially just piecing together pre-programmed sounds but there is an element of constructing the song and determining what fits, altering the individual sounds, etc. You still need to have some sort of ear for timing and such. Similar to normal song construction really, minus the necessary ability on a chosen instrument. It has allowed me to do something without having to find band members so i'm enjoying it. I'm going to be doing it live soon which will be about triggering various looped sounds as I see fit to try and achieve a certain mood, build up, whatever. Whether it's of true musical value, perhaps not, but some 'true' musicians can be a bit self inflated about their abilities and to be honest have seen bands that have bored me to tears and electronic performers who were fantastic. I don't see why there has to be any sense of one is better than another these days. Miming is something else entirely, thats deceit. And just getting up and pressing 'play' for a complete track just seems pointless too. A DJ requires skills in beat matching and choosing tracks that work and flow together. As for loops, again I think there is a skill in using them to decent effect and it takes a good ear to know how to fit a number of individually simplistic sounds together to make the whole. I saw a lass calling herself O Paon supporting Earth last year, fantastic use of loops using her voice and guitar only to make her backing tracks. Comparing a full band to electronic artists to DJ's is like comparing apples to bananas to pears.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colb Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 Would it be better tho? I dont think i would like the idea of watching the Arctic Monkeys, for example, with a string orchestra on stage with them, it would ruin the image for me. Its a rock band, with a bit of production behind it, not a band backed by a orchestra, if that makes sense. Look how uncool it made Metalica.I meant better Karmically - helping struggling musos off the back of their success etc. Probably not actually better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I meant better Karmically - helping struggling musos off the back of their success etc. Probably not actually better. Ah ok, sorry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Android Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 I do not accept that creating an entire song on a laptop counts as a being a musician. That's someone who is good with software for a computer. Daft Punk etc are exempt from this. So much wrong with this. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Zero Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 So much wrong with this.I know, Daft Punx are shit right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Young Adolesent Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 I know, Daft Punx are shit right?yes they are. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stroopy121 Posted August 22, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 bUT wHAT iS dAFT pUNX? xx 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Young Adolesent Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 a shitty electronicy band Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Zero Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 "Vacate thread" 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Young Adolesent Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 Ok bye Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDrummer Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 So much wrong with this. Could point mate, care to extend on it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paranoid Android Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 I think it's stupid to say someone isn't a musician just because they make their music in a different way than you think they should. And I'd like to know why Daft Punk are an exception, because you like them? So maybe people can be called a musician but only if you approve of their output? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 'Musician' vs 'producer', discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TR!ΔNGL€ T€€TH Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 'Musician' vs 'producer', discuss.I would say that a producer is someone who facilitates the musician's ideas, and advises on arrangements. A musician creates the idea from scratch, a producer will help direct the musician to a particular sound. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 Guitar vs Laptop, discuss. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 I would say that a producer is someone who facilitates the musician's ideas, and advises on arrangements. A musician creates the idea from scratch, a producer will help direct the musician to a particular sound. What about someone like Calvin Harris, would you say he counts as both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Zero Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 (edited) They are 2 different things with different skill sets,although there are of course people who can double dip.This thread is stupid but classic Aberdeen Music fodder. Nae wonder Tam Tuff Wax left. Edited August 22, 2013 by Monster Zero 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 You can definitely be both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Milner Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 This thread is stupid but classic Aberdeen Music fodder. Nae wonder Tam Tuff Wax left. Its not just Aberdeen Music tho, this is the age old argument between people in bands and people who make electronic music. Each side thinks they have the edge over the other for whatever reason, whereas the truth is both are equally as skilled as each other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkDrummer Posted August 22, 2013 Report Share Posted August 22, 2013 I think it's stupid to say someone isn't a musician just because they make their music in a different way than you think they should. And I'd like to know why Daft Punk are an exception, because you like them? So maybe people can be called a musician but only if you approve of their output? Daft Punk use live musical instruments recorded. Certain DJs do not. They use preloaded samples (that come with the program) to create music. For me (and don't call me stupid for having a different opinion to you), music is made by learning how to play something (be that preloading samples you've made yourself or learning an actual instrument) and not being handy with a bit of computer kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.