[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

once isn't enough/documentation was re: ever-sharing



from Philippe Petit:  "...I'd say that one listen isn't
enough.  I like music that reveals more with every
listen..."

from Pelagius Pelagius:  "...Imagine listening to an
amazing piece of music with the knowledge that you'll
never hear it again.  I think that would be a very
interesting state of listening that's arguably lost
from live performances now that everything seems to be
documented."

from Andrew Duke:  "I'm with Philippe.  As an artist,
the thought that a piece of music I've written could
only be heard once scares the hell out of me.  If
artists knew a piece they'd recorded could only be
heard once, I'm sure we'd have a huge increase in
bombastic LISTENTOTHISANDPAYATTENTION-style pieces and
a huge decrease in
thispiecewillrevealitselftoyouoverthecourseofanumberoflistens style pieces.  If I knew a piece would only be
listened to once, it would make sense for me to ramp up
the *quantity* of my releases, because, with this
system, why be bothered with spending a huge amount of
time on a piece and making it detailed when no one is
going to be able to have those details unfold to
him/herself over the course of a number of listens? 
Quality wouldn't be rewarded, quantity would.  Because
only with constantly being in the listeners' faces
would an artist be noticed.  Heck, more minimal pieces
might totally pass by unnoticed, so they might stop
being recorded.  re: the documentation of live performances: 
As a performer, I am totally uninterested in attempting
to do live versions of my songs (ie for some who
perform live, the goal is to duplicate what has been
recorded; those who mime and lipsync are the epitome of
this; I am still astounded by live albums that = studio
album + crowd noise) and thus the closest I'll come to
duplicating a recorded song in a live performance is
jamming with some of the bits of the recorded song. 
Thus someone who has the released recording of song A
from me will hear a totally different version of song A
if they see me do a live set.  As a listener, I
appreciate when artists do this and I do this both from
a listener's perspective and from the perspective that,
as an artist, I would be bored if I attempted to
duplicate my recordings when performing live.  So I'm
doing it to give the audience something new every time
and to keep it fresh and fun for me too; I been told
that this fresh perspective translates.  The biggest
difference, in my opinion, between a listener's
situation in listening to one of my recordings at home
and attending a live performance from me is the
listener's loss of control (and this would be for all
recordings, not just mine).  Eg:  if a listener buys my
CD, s/he can listen to it when s/he feels like doing
so; if the phone rings, the CD can be stopped; if they
get tired and want to go to bed, they can listen to the
rest of the disc the next day, if they decide to talk a
walk, the disc can be listened to later; etc. 
Unfortunately, this control does not exist in
situations where the listener is listening to me (or
anyone else) perform live.  Surely we have all had
these situations happen at live events where we wanted
to see a particular performer:
we arrive late and miss the start of his/her set; we
arrive so late we miss the whole set; we have to go to
the washroom at some point during the set we want to
see and thus miss part of it; we have someone latch
onto us that, despite our best efforts to listen to the
set, that person talks to us so damn much that we find
it hard to hear the set we've come to hear; the
performer we want to see goes on so late we've become
tired by that point and thus can't focus on his/her set
the way we'd like to; the performer comes on so late
that we've had to leave before they go on. Etc. Etc. 
Thus there is a huge loss of control--despite our best
attempts, we cannot control how well we would be able
to hear a live set we really want to hear.  And thus I
am a fan of live documentation.  No, I am not obsessed
with documentation or collection, I just know that
there are many reasons why someone, even if they come
to a live show and do their best to focus 100% on it
might want to hear it again under better circumstances
(ie at home with no interruptions).  There is no way a
recording of a live performance can duplicate actually
being there (even if the recording is both audio and
video), so the recording of the live set is not a
replacement to being there; rather, it is a supplement.
 Both for the listener and (if it were me listening to
a recording of my own self live), myself (or the live
artist, whoever it may be).  There are many times in a
live set (again speaking from the performer's point of
view and the listener's) where magic happens and it
would cause a heck of a lot of anxiety if it were a
listen-pnce-and-that's-it deal.  Imagine this nightmare
scenario:  You're at a live show listening to a band
you love, focusing intently and listening to the magic.
 If your best friend walks up, and with no bad
intentions says "hi" to you, you might be so
hyperfocused listening for the magic moments that you'd
be like "hey, shh, I'm trying to listen to the magic
here, buddy".  I think more relaxed attitudes would be
better than don'tbugmecosi'llnevergettohearthisagain
attitudes.  Okay, enough rant. Take care. Andrew Duke  

  

out now: Environmental Politics http://and-oar.org
Take Nothing For Granted http://acidfake.tk
Sprung http://bip-hop.com 
http://warprecords.com/mart/music/release.php?
cat=BLEEP12&fc_type=CD 
*Canadian electronica album of the year nominee*
More Destructive Than Organized http://staalplaat.com
Highest Common Denominator http://pieheadrecords.com
Physical and Mental Health http://dialrecords.com 
74'02 (split with Hypo) http://tsunami-addiction.com
Waveforms: Halifax Electronic Music Compilation 
http://techno.ca/cognition

------------------------------