We Need A New Word For Live Set.
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» v.2-1 replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:19pm |
 Coolness: 159145 | Didn't we establish that that was called a " show " ?
Whoa, this is starting to get confusing. |
| I'm feeling in the past but right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» greatjob replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:19pm |
 Coolness: 282480 | Well don't you like it when Pink Floyd does little changes in their songs live, as an example?
That's all I meant, I like bands that are able to do different things, instead of just playing the album as is. |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» v.2-1 replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:30pm |
| Coolness: 159145 | True. Although Pink Floyd usually tends to change the VISUAL aspect of their shows more than their music per se. |
| I'm feeling in the past but right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» No_Comply replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:30pm |
 Coolness: 84960 | Why must there be one set-in-stone definition of a "live" show/performance?
adjective 1. actually being performed at the time of hearing or viewing; "a live television program"; "brought to you live from Lincoln Center"; "live entertainment involves performers actually in the physical presence of a live audience" /thread? |
| I'm feeling rejecting fate right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» databoy replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:34pm |
 Coolness: 106140 | Originally Posted By VERSION2MINUS1
True. Although Pink Floyd usually tends to change the VISUAL aspect of their shows more than their music per se. I'v never seen them live but i doubt that Gilmore changes a single note in his solos. He would probably piss all the air guitarists off if he did. |
| I'm feeling 80 hz right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» ufot replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:37pm |
 Coolness: 93125 | i thought we were debating "live" not "show"
Ufot=AM I LIVE^ |
| I'm feeling lies wif da hax!! right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» No_Comply replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:39pm |
| Coolness: 84960 | Originally Posted By UFOT
i thought we were debating "live" not "show" Ufot=AM I LIVE^ We aren't? No_Comply=precorded |
| I'm feeling rejecting fate right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» databoy replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 2:45pm |
| Coolness: 106140 | Improvisation is not a factor.
Having the creator of the music present his music to an audiance is live. Its up to each creator to decide how he will present his music to the audiance, he gets to chose his tools. Each producer defines or redefines what a live set is. |
| I'm feeling 80 hz right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Screwhead replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 3:11pm |
 Coolness: 685615 | Having the creator of the music present his music to an audiance is live.
Its up to each creator to decide how he will present his music to the audiance, he gets to chose his tools. Each producer defines or redefines what a live set is. That works even better. |
| I'm feeling sausage-wallet right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» Mayday replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 6:55pm |
 Coolness: 46550 | Okay I am too lazy to read this whole thread, but here is what I gather.
I know people that play off laptop, and like when I pick my records (or now play list off my computer for DJ software) they pick a series of pre-made loops, basses, synths etc. beforehand, but sequence these sounds on the fly, and in different arrangements all the time. The sounds they use may vary from show to show, and some may stay constant, cause they like them (much like when a band plays a hit tune.) Furthermore, SO MANY "live" artists lip sync and don't even actually play instruments "live" so if we're gonan really start throwing tomatoes here, so to speak, we're going to be here for awhile. The line is getting very blurred as to what "live" really lately and I agree with that, but I think this is actually a VERY expansive topic, that reaches far beyond what people who play live off of laptops are doing. Overall, I think this has less to do with renaming something, or giving something else a new name, and more to do with people, whether it be singers, performers or people playing on a laptop, not "cheating" when they do shows, so to speak. And that's all I have to say about that. |
| I'm feeling glskjglldkfjlkj right now.. | |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» greatjob replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 6:57pm |
| Coolness: 282480 | Originally Posted By MAYDAY
Furthermore, SO MANY "live" artists lip sync and don't even actually play instruments "live" so if we're gonan really start throwing tomatoes here, so to speak, we're going to be here for awhile. Nuff said bub :p |
| Good [+1]Toggle ReplyLink» databoy replied on Tue Mar 25, 2008 @ 7:32pm |
| Coolness: 106140 | The important thing for most tv producers, radio producers,and perhaps party producers is that there be quality entertainement and there be NO DEAD AIR.
Those are the requirements of the industry. No one throws tomatoes at Stalone or Bruce Willis for not doing there own stunts. A producer playing his songs puts his balls on the chopping block every time he performes. Its his talent as a musician/composer that is under scrutiny and if the crowd dosent like his music (probably the worst fealing ever), he cant just go serching through his records for something that work for the crowd. Its hard to create original music that people will like, way harder than going down to the record store to chose cool new songs. As a producer, you are up against dj's that can pick and chose between ten's of thousands of songs, a lot of witch are tried and tested crowd pleasers. |
| I'm feeling 80 hz right now.. | |
We Need A New Word For Live Set.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
Post A Reply |
You must be logged in to post a reply.
[ Cumbre de Página ] |
