forum

I have always been under the impression that we listen to music with our ears ... not our eyes and I like, even prefer, to listen to recorded music without visuals. I think a live performance today especially pop music relies on visuals to sell the music or should I say the image of the performer, listening to the same music without the video often reveals the lack of quality in the music and the skill in which it is covered up with cheap effects and good production techniques.

There is something wonderful in being at a live concert but it is not necessarily about the music, it is more about the atmosphere created and the visual performance, it has to be exciting rather than an accurate rendition of the recorded piece. This is not as pronounced in the classical world as in the pop world but the more visually exciting performers are the ones who get noticed rather than the performers who are not entertaining. I wonder how many people at concerts of orchestral music close their eyes to listen rather than watch?

One of the differences that live music makes is often the acoustics of the concert hall which can add some beautiful harmonics and echoes to quiet solo pieces which are not often simulated in recordings or sometimes applied falsely to improve the sound. Bad acoustic can wreck a whole performance however well played.

The number of pop groups who cannot reproduce live their recorded works or whose renditions of their own songs leave much to be desired when compared to the recordings seems to be increasing and more and more credit is given to those who did the recordings and produced the finished work. How many times do session musicians re-record and overdub after the stars have played it badly, I'm sure they wouldn't say publicly and I'm sure they smile wryly when someone raves about a guitar solo that they actually played rather than the "star" who was supposed to have played it.

So in answer to your question "Does the visual aspect of a live performance make a difference to the music?" I would say that it does make a difference to some music in that it is inferior to the recorded works and this perfection is sacrificed for the entertainment value and excitement of a live performance. In more orchestral music the opposite is true the imperfections of a performance the slight nuances in the texture, the tempo and the natural acoustics add to a more individual interpretation and appreciation. So, for me, the answer is yes and no, depending on the music and the performer. I think they are two different experiences with different criteria for each: would we forgive a bum note on a recording - no, we wouldn't. Would we forgive a bum note in a live performance, of coarse we would.

Consider this, most recordings are played live, even if it is only in a studio, it is still live.

David Lang has some interesting thoughts on that here: http://tinyurl.com/2ffxjeb

He says, "Now, everything can be gotten immediately and perfectly on the Internet for free. Every piece of Beethoven that you ever wanted to hear, you can hear it perfectly recorded by the greatest musicians of all time at no cost 24 hours a day. So why would you go to a concert? The reason why you go is because the act of seeing people struggle to accomplish something is the doorway through which people translate someone else's experience into their own. The thing that happens in live performance, the theatre of it can't be replaced."

Live and non-live recordings are two different animals, but we need both!
To experience a live concert is to experience a certain electric energy, whether as player or audience. There is a certain amazing synergy that happens in a live concert between the player and audience that is truly unpredictable and LIVE. It is EXCITING. I am lucky enough to live and work in a place which has incredible live performances available often. So, I take advantage of it! I realize not everyone has that opportunity, but there is no way to truly experience the full enchilada, unless one goes to hear music live at some point.

Yet, as a creator, I learn so much from recordings and recording my own takes, as a stepping stone to the eventual and ultimate live performance which is what true musicians and lovers of music strive for.

I think it's misleading to isolate the 'visual aspect' of a live performance, as though this is what makes it different from a recording. There are so many factors that affect the live experience. The person coughing next to you is always incredibly irritating, whereas watching the the glasses slowly slipping down the nose of the Shanghai Quartet's first violinist at a concert a few years ago just enhanced the excitement and tension of the ensemble's brilliant playing. I've always loved the Elgar cello concerto, but hearing it live for the first time a few months ago gave me access to its majesty in a way no recording ever has.

The other issue is sound quality. I think the perfection achievable in a studio has skewed people's expectations about sound quality in concert halls. Not that I'm advocating lousy acoustics, but simply making the point that a perfect acoustic is not the only measure of a perfect live performance, and it certainly doesn't guarantee one. What an experience might 'lack' because of various technical imperfections - not to mention a coughing neighbour - it might gain back in spades because of some aspect of the live experience that can't be controlled. I suppose this is my version of David T Little's David Lang quote above...

Nothing quite beats a live concert hall performance. I still recall my
first concert and the spine tingles. My local hall is the "Sage" in Gateshead G.B.
and being only about five years old has perfect acousatics. I think you may have to
spend a lot of money on equipment to equel the sounds Ive heard recently.

I have almost come to the point, that i almost never listen to classical music at home or on my ipod (the exception is my car :)). I have kind off become addicted to going to listen concerts of classical music. Its not only about the music, but its about the experience and the atmosphere that is created when listening to a live concert! I love seeing people performing, seeing them in their most vulnerable and almost private state of mind they are in when performing. It is very thrilling for me when i go to listen to concerts on which my friends are playing! I am sometimes amazed by the fact how much people change when they are on the concert stage. Some people almost go through some sort of metamorphosis on stage and they become a totally different character then in "real life". I always find that most exciting and amazing.

I think classical music lives with live performances. Life is becoming faster and faster and everything is run on the "fast food" bases. But classical music is still one of those things that keeps solid ground (well most of it...), fights the ongoing trends of moderns fast life and can make you run from reality for a bit. That's why i think its important (at least for me) to attend concerts with quality music and to create quality music.

That said, i think its also important to know that classical music is loosing "ordinary people" public (with that i mean people, that are not musicians themselves). Because of that composers (as i am myself), should not only think about themselves and their music, but also how to portray music in a fashion that is understandable to the ordinary persone.

Anže