Is it about the Music or about the Show?

REDillon · Post by **REDillon** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

So you enjoy a band who puts on a show or who are shoe gazers and are all about the music? Inquiring minds want to know......

dayzichick · Post by **dayzichick** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

If the music sucks, I can't get past that. But I think most people hear with their eyes . . .unfortunately.

DirtySanchez · Post by **DirtySanchez** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

Music>Image

Both are preferred. But if you suck I don't care how cool your stage show is.

slackin@dabass · Post by **slackin@dabass** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

DirtySanchez wrote:Music>Image

Both are preferred. But if you suck I don't care how cool your stage show is.

i think it depends on genre.

EyesOfAnguishbassist · Post by **EyesOfAnguishbassist** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

DirtySanchez wrote:Music>Image

Both are preferred. But if you suck I don't care how cool your stage show is.

Exactly. I hate a band who stands there and makes me wanna sleep but I can't stand a band that tries way to hard to rock out but can't play crap, so I prefer both, like a good stage show but you gotta be a good band.

Tegamal · Post by **Tegamal** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I don't care how much you jump around on stage, or how excited you get to be there, if you sound like ass, I won't be sticking around for long.

thebattle · Post by **thebattle** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

EyesOfAnguishbassist wrote:
DirtySanchez wrote:Music>Image

Both are preferred. But if you suck I don't care how cool your stage show is.
Exactly. I hate a band who stands there and makes me wanna sleep but I can't stand a band that tries way to hard to rock out but can't play crap, so I prefer both, like a good stage show but you gotta be a good band.

x2

I'm the same way!

REDillon · Post by **REDillon** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

My big thing is when people think a band sucks because they don't like the type music they play. They can be fantastic musicians and great at the genre they play (stage show or not) but people confuse TALENT for TASTE.

For example, GWAR. Stage show, great. My taste in genre, not so much. Good musically, sure. I won't take that away from them. But most of the public don't understand that concept. Agreed?

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I'm with Sanchez...Both.
I am a attention whore, so I love putting on a show. I love the bit's of time in between song's/set's because I like to throw in a little comedy....just me though.

nickisrb · Post by **nickisrb** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I gotta say both too. The more you dance and interact with the people the more that want to come see you again and the more you will generate a dance floor.

CrossfireRadio · Post by **CrossfireRadio** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I would have to agree with the others... Both are better...

If the musics good, and the band just stands there like statues.. its going to get boring real fast...

If the music sux, but the bands moving all around... they might as well be statues...

If the Musics Good, and the bands doin their thing... movin around getting into it... Now.. That's a show!

The Bands that have the good sound, and interact with the Audience... Shows more about a band, then the ones just being there to play, get their cash, and leave. no?

witchhunt · Post by **witchhunt** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I'd say both to a point, but I'll have to lean hard towards the music. In my opinion, more times than not, when a local band tries too hard to put on a show, they end up looking like assholes. Now I'm not talking about an extra light rig or some FX. That's cool. I'm talking about stuff like this...you get near the stage and hardcore guitar man has to headbang his sweat all over me, or Mr. cordless mic has to get up in my face and sing. Actually, I was in a band a few years ago and our singer was eveywhere but where he should have been. I had a lot of people comment about keeping him back with the band. But the best is the musician who tries to get athletic and fails miserably. I saw a band once (I think they opened for Backstreet Law) who's guitarist took a running jump to the floor from the stage and immediately hit a wet spot and landed flat on his back. I just shook my head and thought "that'll learn ya".

bassist_25 · Post by **bassist_25** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

witchhunt wrote:I saw a band once (I think they opened for Backstreet Law) who's guitarist took a running jump to the floor from the stage and immediately hit a wet spot and landed flat on his back. I just shook my head and thought "that'll learn ya".

LOL That must have been funny. I take up a large "footprint" on stage just for the fact that my center of gravity sucks. I've fallen off and tripped off of stage before.

Anyways, I want a band with presence. I've seen musicians jump around and not have one lick of presence, and I've seen musicians stand still and have more charisma than John Kennedy. It's not really a simple cut and dry type of thing. Above all, I enjoy good musicianship and good songs.

dbdrummer89 · Post by **dbdrummer89** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

Gotta be on the bandwagon and say both. If you would have talked to me a few weeks ago I would have said just music, but after seeing Cooper, both can be blended to make one hell of a show.

f.sciarrillo · Post by **f.sciarrillo** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

If the music isn't good then the show is bad. Unless you are kiss; then you can do a medley of childrens tunes and come out as being an awesome show .. So yeah, I guess it could be image ...

RobTheDrummer · Post by **RobTheDrummer** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I think music is more important, however image definitely has value. It also depends on the genre. I wouldn't expect a metal band to just stand there, and I wouldn't expect a bluegrass band to be jumping around. I think there is a "status quo" for genres and what people expect to see for whatever type of music. Rockers have an image of ripped jeans and tattoos, rappers have baggy clothes and "bling," country players wear cowboy hats and boots.

dayzichick · Post by **dayzichick** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

That's why I think acoustic is sort of more difficult. There is no stage show. You are stripped down and naked, you make a mistake, people know. So does image matter then? Sometimes I like acoustic more because I don't have to run around all night, other times I'd prefer the energy, depends on the day I guess.

RFBuck · Post by **RFBuck** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

I say both. The only band I go see when I have the chance is Bad Daze, and I'm entertained not only by their ability but by their presence. Rob does what a front man should do...moves around, gets into the crowd, and interacts. Paul & Kenny do just enough you know they're there but not to the point where they're saying "Hey look at me! Over here!!"

The Clarks are another example. I love their music, but they put on a mediocre show to me. They don't move around all that much...if Greg Joseph (bassist) moves more than a few steps at a time once every 5 minutes, it's a miracle. Rob James is an excellent guitarist and moves some but saves what flash he has for the solos. Once in awhile Scott Blasey gets to take the mic out of the stand and walk around. THEN I enjoy it. But I still love their music...I'm a fan to the core. I just don't rush to see too many shows anymore.

lonewolf · Post by **lonewolf** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

Only a Sith deals in absolutes.

Banned · Post by **Banned** » Thursday Sep 10, 2009

DirtySanchez wrote:Music>Image

Both are preferred. But if you suck I don't care how cool your stage show is.

Miles Davis used to play with his back to the audience. I wish I would have got to chance to catch him in concert. Who cares what the band is doing besides playing their music?

If you are into choreography, go see Brittany.

songsmith · Post by **songsmith** » Friday Sep 11, 2009

I agree. When I did the rock thing, it was all about the show, and we did our best to deliver, because we weren't virtuoso's. At this point in my career, though, image means almost nothing to me. My heroes are mostly old or dead.

I don't bounce around onstage anymore, and really, it'd be sort of pathetic if I did.
I try to have my clothes clean and pressed, and personal hygiene makes you more confident, I guess, that's the extent of my "image." If you're trying for the brass ring, image is important, but I'm cool with how things are now. I'm old and married. The bar is set pretty low.

--->JMS

KeithReynolds · Post by **KeithReynolds** » Friday Sep 11, 2009

Music

Post by **Jim Price** » Friday Sep 11, 2009

Good topic.

My take is that is starts with the music. The music has to be solid to start with.

Live music is a performance art, though, so performance and entertainment value are important as well. But the "show" varies from band to band and performer to performer. What works for one performer doesn't necessarily work for another, and each band or performer should develop their own aspect of "show" based on their music and personality.

Sometimes it can be theatrics and extra embellishments that add to the entertainment quality of a show. But I've seen plenty of bands and performers whose enthusiasm and confidence in their skills ultimately provides the entertainment quality without having to add anything else to the show.

bassist_25 · Post by **bassist_25** » Friday Sep 11, 2009

undercoverjoe wrote: Miles Davis used to play with his back to the audience. I wish I would have got to chance to catch him in concert. Who cares what the band is doing besides playing their music?

As brilliant as Miles was, I would have walked out if he had his back to me the entire show. You don't have the respect to face me when you perform, fuck you, I don't have the respect to sit there and listen to you perform (would that be a run-on there, Captain G., or could "fuck you" be used a conjunction?

). I also would have fired Jim Morrison from the Doors in the beginning when he wouldn't face the crowd. Granted, Morrison was turning his back due to stage fright and self-consciousness rather than pretentiousness. Luckily, they didn't fire him, though, since The Doors are one of my favorite bands. So, I guess I'm kind of contradicting myself in a way.

I see live music as a communal experience. If it weren't, I'd just as soon stay at home and listen to the CD.

bassist_25 · Post by **bassist_25** » Friday Sep 11, 2009

Jim Price wrote:Good topic.

My take is that is starts with the music. The music has to be solid to start with.

Live music is a performance art, though, so performance and entertainment value are important as well. But the "show" varies from band to band and performer to performer. What works for one performer doesn't necessarily work for another, and each band or performer should develop their own aspect of "show" based on their music and personality.

Sometimes it can be theatrics and extra embellishments that add to the entertainment quality of a show. But I've seen plenty of bands and performers whose enthusiasm and confidence in their skills ultimately provides the entertainment quality without having to add anything else to the show.

Word.