Re: [microsound] Performing "Live"

[jonah dempcy <jdempcy@xxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ian Guthrie Yeager" <iyeager@xxxxxxxxxxx>


> I would have to say that someone introducing dramatic elements *and*
> creating genuine improvisatory or otherwise exploratory real-time music
> would be ideal: those 2 ideas are by no means mutually exclusive.

well yeah, but the artist shouldn't have a requirement to introduce a
dramatic element in order for the audience to be entertained. it should be
dramatic enough when one displays virtuosity on an instrument!

> Or are
> you essentially taking a personality survey here? Who likes visual
> stimulus as much as aural? Who dares admit to "enjoying the show" in this
> age of ironic detachment?

well i was asking jonas which is more important to him. from his statement
it seems to be that if the music sounds good, there is no question of its
source. and that he enjoys "doing stuff" on stage by which i think he meant
playing music/affecting the sound etc, but i was asking, "does drama count
as 'doing stuff'?" because it doesn't really matter if you affect the sound,
according to his & other statements. so why not spend less time on the music
and more time on the "entertainment value" (not musical entertainment) of
your performance? ;)

and yeah, re: drama, i think really its just a distraction. which is totally
fine, most good parties have lots of crazy shit happening.. i just think its
most commonly irrelevant to the music. or rather, it can be _relevant_ but
no more so than venue, environment, etc. unless the "visual stimulus" as you
put it is somehow interacting with the music, like dancing or light shows,
it is just more environmental distraction from the music itself. (which can
be a good thing, i've been to some parties with pretty wild visual stimulus
.... i'm not complaining you know!)

-jonah