Why are musicians by default expected to perform live?

why are musicians by default expected to perform live?

you don't expect an artist to paint in front of your eyes or a director to direct a film in front of a huge audience

because that's what they've done for the thousands of years before the invention of recorded sound, numbnut

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Performing live is their only real source of income outside of becoming KISS-like whores.

I'm talking from an artistic viewpoint

imagine money is irrelevant. I'm talking about what the general public expects rather than what the musician needs to do for cash

god you're dumb

no you dont see an artist paint live but you don't see musicians write songs live, you expect to see the finished article, just like you don't see an artist paint but you see the painting

but the record is the perfected painting.

I'm not saying that live music can't be great.
I'm just talking as someone who is extremely introverted bedroom musician I've experienced it myself that when you release music the first thing people do is want you to play live

hey dude i'm with you, have a professional studio in my house, but nobody listens to me, so i play live and i have to think completely differently, and can't go down the routes ive perfected and know are amazing. it sucks that you can't play overwhelmingly emotional music live anymore because people get bored.

but that's the world we live in. people expect to be entertained, they dont appreciate music or art, they just want to be entertained

>but the record is the perfected painting.
That's like saying that a static photo that someone takes OF a painting for posting on the internet IS the painting. Paintings are unique tangible objects painters create as works of art for people to own. The equivalent of that for a musician is a performance - NOT a static recording of just ONE of your performances.

>why are musicians by default expected to perform live?
Because music is a permanence based medium
>you don't expect an artist to paint in front of your eyes
No, but we expect their art to be displayed publicly in a gallery
>director to direct a film in front of a huge audience
No, but we expect to see a film in a theater
>I'm just talking as someone who is extremely introverted bedroom musician
Maybe that's the problem.

people have trouble understanding that a lot of stuff is made in the studio in a way that can't reasonably be performed by a single person or small group of people

in a lot of cases the recording IS the work, and anything else is superfluous

>have a professional studio in my house
What's in your mic locker?

more raw and spontaneous intrepetation of fimiliar music. They can even be used subvert expectations and create even grander art. Not to mention the optimal sound quality that is not compressed digitally.

I hated this movie.

>permanence
*performance

it's not though

i've got a few microphones, shure sm58 is my go to, as its easy to use, and i can't sing, so i only ever do guide vocals, got a condenser mic a massive curtain like pop shield lol can't remember the name of it tho. its just a hobby so i record instrumentals mainly, i would do proper songs if i could sing but i cant

>Not to mention the optimal sound quality that is not compressed digitally.
I've never been to a performance that sounded anywhere near as good as a good studio recording. Optimal my ass.

How so? It has been for millions of years.
>professional studio
>I only have an SM58
ok

yeah there's recording now though

often it's largely a studio art like painting or sculpting

i think the condenser is a rode nta 2, i'd go check for sure but its 3 am and im in bed

>now though
Not relevant. It's been performance based for a million more years than it has been recording based
>often it's largely a studio art like painting or sculpting
Not at all. There';s more live music occurring in the world than recorded music.

Again, maybe the problem isn't how music is considered, but maybe it's your methodology and lack of courage?

So... you only have two mics in your professional recording studio?

i mean like i said earlier im not a singer, got like a £500 mic, and a sm57 sm58 but my latest purchase was a uad apollo which was like 1.7k, so i don't cheap out, but my voice is wasted on an expensive mic

Only in cases where the musician isn’t a professional. Just an amateur doing it for private enjoyment rather than profit.

There are celebrated artists that don't perform live. What are you complaining about?

Like who?

>Not relevant. It's been performance based for a million more years than it has been recording based
k this is just straight up retarded, sorry. history doesn't render the present situation "not relevant".

>Again, maybe the problem isn't how music is considered, but maybe it's your methodology and lack of courage?
It can be methodology, for example a solo artist doing extensive multitracking or tape splicing or whatever, but why is that a "problem"

Mostly electronic artists, because whats the point lol

lol no, I'm not talking about instrumental ability

try "performing" musique concrete

>history doesn't render the present situation "not relevant".
Of course it does. It's a statistical outlier. It should be discarded
>for example a solo artist doing extensive multitracking or tape splicing or whatever,
You an do that live. I've seen it. What it boils down to, is if it can't be done live, maybe it wasn't actual art to begin with?
>but why is that a "problem"
Oh you don't think it's a problem? Your OP implied it was for you.
Like who?
It can be done.

>It's a statistical outlier. It should be discarded
like computers? are computers used in art also "not relevant"?

>It can be done.
no it can't you absolute fucking moron

jumping in the convo here but it could be done, depends if you'd call it live. you could play anything from a laptop, not live though. but yeah i mean even shit from the 60s like the beach boys, impossible to recreate live without like 12 people, the guy you're talking to is just being pedantic / retarded

>are computers used in art also "not relevant"?
Not necessary

>no it can't you absolute fucking moron
Why not? I've literally seen it. I know artists such as Olivia Tremor Control have made tape loop-based performances in the past.

Sounds like you are just a poor artist.

Varg, Burial, Ulver, Boards of Canada, Steely Dan, Nick Drake, Brian Eno, and Jandek were all known for playing few to no live shows.

Most of those have performed live

The other half artn't celebrated

doing it "live" by faking it with most of it automated or playing from a recording is part of the problem, and this has been done for most of the history of electronic-based music (not just dance music but pop, hip hop, etc.). The audience doesn't know what's going on and is deceived into thinking that the "performer" is actually doing something important. The performance becomes purely visual and has nothing to do with music.

that's a large part of why there's still an expectation for "performance" when it isn't necessarily reasonable

because if you cant do it live, you're a hack.

k, you don't know what musique concrete is

>ike computers? are computers used in art also "not relevant"?
They’re a means to an end - not the end in themselves. Music formed using computers is performed live using computers.

>why are musicians by default expected to perform live?

also XTC, 10cc, Kate Bush

it's idiotic to say "this artist has performed live before" is equivalent to "this artist can and does regularly perform their major works"

i played in a wedding band for like 5 years when i was 18, i remember asking why we took lights and all this shit, and they explained, its about the show, not the music so i totally agree with u. the music has to be there, but its 50/50

Musique concrète (French pronunciation: [myzik kɔ̃.kʁɛt], meaning "concrete music")[nb 1] is a form of musique expérimentale (experimental music (Palombini 1998, 542)[not in citation given]) that exploits acousmatic listening, meaning sound identities can often be intentionally obscured or appear unconnected to their source cause. It can feature sounds derived from recordings of musical instruments, the human voice, and the natural environment as well as those created using synthesizers and computer-based digital signal processing. Compositions in this idiom are not restricted to the normal musical rules of melody, harmony, rhythm, metre, and so on. Originally contrasted with "pure" elektronische Musik (based solely on the production and manipulation of electronically produced sounds rather than recorded sounds), the theoretical basis of musique concrète as a compositional practice was developed by Pierre Schaeffer, beginning in the early 1940s. From the late 1960s onward, and particularity in France, the term acousmatic music (musique acousmatique) started to be used in reference to fixed media compositions that utilized both musique concrète based techniques and live sound spatialisation.

Yep it's what I thought, and it can be done.

If you are not creative enough to figure it out,m perhaps you are partaking in the wrong hobby?
Nice goalpost shifting

>They’re a means to an end - not the end in themselves.
you're missing the larger point that a computer greatly affects how something is made

>Music formed using computers is performed live using computers.
Historically much of it was rendered offline and couldn't be generated in real time. So no. Also pressing spacebar on a laptop and dancing like a retard isn't "performing" in the sense that playing an instrument is performing.

>I continue to be dense as fuck, please no one talk to me

>you're missing the larger point that a computer greatly affects how something is made
You're missing the even greater point that electronic, noise and experimental musicians can perform this live, using sound samples an manipulating them live. Have you ever seen this? Have you ever ventured out of your basement to find out?

Ooops you meant to quote Sorry about that!

so you don't know what the "fixed media compositions" part refers to, then?

odd that someone who knows so little would be so condescending

all of those artists are celebrated.

>the only aspect of musique concrete is fixed media compositions
Read a book
No one celebrates Jandek

>Read a book
You think I haven't? That's largely how it's made. It's made in the studio and can't be reasonably performed live. Because it consists of perhaps hundreds of tape splices per second (for example). And it's the plasticity of the recorded medium in a studio setting that makes it possible to begin with. If it's performed live it's typically called live electronics (i.e. David Tudor). When musique concrete or acousmatic music is "performed" it's called "diffusion" - basically a person at a fancy mixing desk directs the channels of the studio-made recording to a loudspeaker array in various ways to obtain spatialization effects.

>people have trouble understanding that a lot of stuff is made in the studio in a way that can't reasonably be performed by a single person or small group of people
Animal Collective for example

>why are musicians by default expected to perform live?
Because that is what musicians - by default - do.
There are exceptions, but they are exceptions.

>you don't expect an artist to paint in front of your eyes or a director to direct a film in front of a huge audience
Or a musician to PRACTICE making music in front of you rather than doing a full-fledged performance. At least not if you expect money to be exchanged as part of it.

>You think I haven't?
Honestly, yeah, I don't think you have.
>Because it consists of perhaps hundreds of tape splices per second (for example).
Some do, some don't. This is why I don't think you are knowledgeable about what you are talking about.
>When musique concrete or acousmatic music is "performed" it's called "diffusion" - basically a person at a fancy mixing desk directs the channels of the studio-made recording to a loudspeaker array in various ways to obtain spatialization effects.
Yes, that's what I usually do. Are you changing your arguments now after you realized you goofed?

Deathspell Omega
Boards of Canada

>you don't expect an artist to paint in front of your eyes or a director to direct a film in front of a huge audience
>being this retarded

what so you're saying that a talented musician is a hack because he can't perform properly in front of a crowd due to social anxiety

Before the advent of recorded music, skill (instrumental/singing) was a big part of the aesthetic.

I think there needs to be a return to that appreciation. Pushing buttons in FL Studio is cheap now. Sampling is cheap. Vocals are cheap (autotune). That might sound unfair to the bedroom producers, but this is the cost of the democracy digital production and distribution has allowed. It's made music, in general, a cheap commodity, so the rarer element in today's music (which seems to be knowing how to play instruments and sing without autotune) needs to have the highest premium.

I just couldn't care less. to me all that matters is how good the end product is

Ariel Pink for example knows how to make great music but can hardly play an instrument for shit in a live setting but I don't care because his records are some of the best out there

user, just imagine how much MORE enjoyable an artist like Ariel Pink would be to you if he COULD reproduce what you love about his records live on a show-by-show basis. THAT is the beauty of live performance. With the best artists, how their music sounds on record is only the BEGINNING of how good their music can be.

They're not.

see

>imagine money is irrelevant
looool, yeah stopped reading there

fpbp

I don't expect artists to perform live. There is actually some music I prefer listening to studio only as opposed to live.

>There';s more live music occurring in the world than recorded music.
spotted the dadrocker