I was only speaking of my personal preference, which I suspect is quite different from the average person. But I can only speak for myself, not anyone else.
I, personally, don't care about the visuals. Others do, that's their preference. I don't mind if there's something interesting visually going on, some bands excel at that (Skinny Puppy & Tool spring to mind,) but I don't miss it if it's not there (so long as the music is good.) john. > I hear what you are saying about MUSIC having the priority. In an ideal > world, maybe it would be that way. > > BUT BUT BUT: > > The average person is more visually-oriented, I think you really have to > "sell" a lot of people with the visual presentation in order to get them > to have a closer listen. That is just the nature of performing, the > average person does relate to things as much with their eyes as their > ears. A pleasing visual aspect can really help more people understand > what you are doing musically and win a broader audience, and it by no > means needs to be cheesy or Britney choreography. Unless you think that > this music is only for the elite who don't need visual cues, of course. > > ~David > > > ---------- Original Message ------------- > Subject: Re: (313) Laptop performances > Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2004 11:01:51 -0400 (EDT) > From: "John Coleman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[email protected]> > > > Just my personal preference here, but I don't really care what they're > doing on stage or what tools they're using. All that matters to me is > the music they create. > > It's about the ears and not the eyes. If the music isn't good then no > amount of visual stimulation is going to change that. At that point, > they should just change their name to Britney, hire a choreographer and > move to a genre where appearance is valued over substance. Again, just > my personal ideals here, no offense intended towards anyone. > > That said, I wouldn't be okay if someone just put a boombox up on stage, > inserted a CD, pressed play, and then sat down and read a book while it > played. I like to know that they're having at least *some* active > influence over the sounds being created. :) > > john. > > >> So I've been having a bit of a discussion on a local messageboard >> about laptop performances. >> >> By and large, they're really BORING. It looks like people are checking >> their email. Or, if they're bopping along, it looks like they're >> checking important email but really need to go to the toilet. >> >> What's the solution? Name some laptop performances you've seen that >> were really good SHOWS. And say why they were. Is it really simply a >> case of having stellar visuals as well, or is there a whole new >> paradigm out there for this type of performance? >> >> I liked Kraftwerk's minimal-movement-black-suits-and-plinths affair, >> but that sorta ties in with their aesthetic, and I heard Aphex Twin >> did a show where he just lay on the floor and twiddled with the laptop >> - no effort at all. That appeals to me in a twisted way but is >> somewhat gimmicky. >> >> I personally wonder if laptop performances are more suited to more >> artistic interpretations - ie having a gig in an office, with extras >> sat at desks with PCs as well, and only one of them is the musician. >> Stuff like that.
