Going to concerts (or other arts, such as theatre or film) can be really great, though. It removes the social dimension to such experiences, and you engage with the performance itself even more. At least that's what I've found.
Why do people like concerts?
- Thread starter AmateurFilmmaker
- Start date
Going to concerts (or other arts, such as theatre or film) can be really great, though. It removes the social dimension to such experiences, and you engage with the performance itself even more. At least that's what I've found.
sitting by myself watching someone play piano i might as well watch youtube videos of kissin
It's almost never a better performance! With classical music, jazz and some ethnic ensembles it might be a better performance but very rarely, because in a recording one has far more control over the sound quality, the entire focus is on the sound quality and one can do any number of performances and then use (or stitch together) the best one. A live performance is different though, it's not just about the performance of the music but about an entire experience which includes all the senses, as well as the tribal/communal experience.
G
That "quality" is your opinion, APE. You're not the one to determine what counts as quality. Sure, you have more control over it, but that's where the performance usually suffers. This is where the term "overproduced" comes from.
There are legitimate psychological studies proving the benefit of the audience to the performance. There's a different, almost intimate energy there. (You can research this. You have the Googles)
On any day I'd take a beautiful live song over something you could produce that technically sounds good.
(Now go ahead and type your long-winded, over-aggressive response that I'm not going to read)
There are legitimate psychological studies proving the benefit of the audience to the performance. There's a different, almost intimate energy there. (You can research this. You have the Googles)
On any day I'd take a beautiful live song over something you could produce that technically sounds good.
(Now go ahead and type your long-winded, over-aggressive response that I'm not going to read)
I've seen a Knicks game 5 rows behind Spike Lee, who was court side (my brother used to get free tickets), and I've seen Raptors and Warriors games from the worst seats imaginable, and they still beat watching the games on TV. I've seen U2 from the pit, and I've seen Springsteen multiple times as a dot, and twice from the pit, and they all beat listening to the music at home.
It's a different kind of energy. You're jumping around with everybody else. You're eating some crap hotdog with everyone else. And it's just fun, the experience of it.
But remember not to take any intoxicants in the middle of a concert. You might not remember everything, and that sucks. Money wasted
Edit: You're from the UK, so I'm pretty sure you've seen a cricket match at a stadium at some point. No matter how small of a dot a cricket ball is, doesn't watching the game from the stands beat watching it on TV?
Last edited:
Not unless I'm the producer and/or the musician/s! They are the ones who decide what the "quality" of the recording is ... didn't you know this?
Huh? "Overproduced" does not come from music being produced but from being over produced. Personally I find that quite self evident!
I've researched, experienced, learnt from some of the best and professionally engaged in live performances for many years before there was a Google and still do on occasion. Google is for those who have no access to the real world!
Yep, stick with your Google sourced physiological studies, that will obviously give you a much better understanding than those who've done it professionally for decades.
G
It goes both ways. You can limit your possibilities to your experience or exeperiences, whereas someone without real world experience can google and research and decide what experience they'd like to have.
I'll just give you one example. You once said that the sound designers or sound editors (I don't remember which) don't work on watermarked footage in your experience. Well I've seen watermarked footage for sound editors, watermarked with a giant SND. That's not your experience, but it's somebody else's.
Not picking a fight. Just making a point. I personally prefer live sound. Surely, the quality is not as controlled as it can be in a studio, but I still like it better. So what's "quality" to someone like me, a non-musician, a consumer.
Edit: Also Mussonman is a comedian. I'm sure he has researched audience interaction psychology relevant to standup comedians. That's a different kind of perspective, but it's a perspective isn't it?
Google can't provide experience only information.
I can't imagine any sound designer or editor would choose to work with watermarked footage because there are no advantages, only disadvantages.
So do I! IMO, the visual aspects, the audience ambience and the whole experience of attending a live gig more than compensates for the fact that the pure musical performance is virtually always at least slightly poorer than on the studio recording. I personally find this whole live gig experience far more entertaining and involving than say sitting alone at home wearing cans.
G