Oh boy. Lmao. Talk about a deep ol' rabbithole. I think when we talk about being "deceived", that's a "category error". It assumes that recorded music and live performance of music are the same thing, and they're not.
They're not,
They're not,
They're not.
I have to repeat this for emphasis, because too many smart people have either conflated the two, or thoughtlessly accept the conflation.
They are two different extensions of the same art form, and one should not be mistaken for the other. A record is literally that; a permanent "record" of an otherwise ephemeral artwork. The alleged "deceptions" arise solely from the tools and tactics the technicians use to satisfy the demands of such permanence; such that the process of the record's creation takes on a life of its own.
This should be a stipulation, not a revelation. And yet, many people (including very many on this app) continue to view the two separate experiences as from the same bag; or worse yet, view live performance as some "poorer brother" of recorded (and enhanced) performance. The question is, which one contains the "soul" of the artists' art? That depends upon the artist, and what they are expressing through it. Some express different facets through each; The Beatles + The Who being prime examples. And that should be cool too.
The problems begin when it ain't; and that's a habit of mind too many folks inside and outside the music business have adopted.
I'm probably saying all this shit wrong. But as a live musician who makes records bc he has to, who works for a guy who's pretty much the opposite; it's something I feel in my bones.
Live Music is one experience; a record is another.
Embrace each for what they are, and *only* what they are, and you'll never feel "deceived".
Man I love this piece. It resonates with thoughts I have every time I hit “undo” in Logic. There is no contemporary music without layers of something like…artifice. Thanks for saying this all so clearly.
Every time we hear a rock band with both a drum kit and a singer—and the singer is audible…we’re hearing something “unnatural.” Do most non-musicians really get that?
Great piece, Chris. I, too, used to get rather hung up on the idea of “real” music - whereas now I’m endlessly fascinated by all the ways that even just acoustic instruments can be manipulated to achieve different sonic (and emotional) ends. As John Lennon sang in “Strawberry Fields Forever,” nothing is real – and nothing to get hung about.
I loved reading this. The experience came with a distinct sense of unburdening. It's so so true that what matters with music is emotional resonance -- does it move people?
Frank Zappa wrote that there is no way to arrange the instruments and singers in a rock band so that it sounds like a record—that there’s manipulation in any form of recording. As you point out, that’s true of Frank Sinatra in front of a big band as well. I mean, literally anyone can tell the difference between a live band and a record without looking.
BTW, do you know a book called The B-Side, by Ben Yagoda? Some of it is just “Let’s remember some Tin Pan Alley guys,” but he has a lot of great stuff on how technology changed the music—not the music business, but the actual music. Really worth checking out.
Great post. Would suggest reading Abbey Road’ by David Hepworth if you haven’t already. He makes the point that The Beatles were the ghost band to talk explicitly about the way used the studio. I’m not sure it’s right to say ‘Strawberry Fields’ is a deception. It’s certainly not a band playing live, and in many ways that’s the point.
Reading the snobbery line hit me right in the gut. I, too, was like this and missed out of being “in the moment” with a lot of great music. While not being able to enjoy the music at that time, I definitely enjoy it now. It also took me a long time to wrap my head around electronically created music as being legit. But what do I know? At the end of the day, if it moves people… it’s legit.
Did Wilson review or share his thoughts on Miles Davis’ In A Silent Way? Was he still around for the extreme logical extension of In A Silent Way, Talk Talk’s last two albums: Spirit of Eden and Laughing Stock?
Any style of music from any era, well-executed, can be transcendent. However, I would argue that adding layers of artifice will date music, often times to its detriment. What makes music eternal are the components that can be preserved independently of artifice: rhythm, melody, and lyric. From Moonlight Sonata, to Moon River, to Bad Moon Rising there is a timelessness in those works that makes them feel as if they've been with us forever. Production can never be fully stripped away, but the more you tinker, the more you pigeonhole it to a time, place, and trend.
Oh boy. Lmao. Talk about a deep ol' rabbithole. I think when we talk about being "deceived", that's a "category error". It assumes that recorded music and live performance of music are the same thing, and they're not.
They're not,
They're not,
They're not.
I have to repeat this for emphasis, because too many smart people have either conflated the two, or thoughtlessly accept the conflation.
They are two different extensions of the same art form, and one should not be mistaken for the other. A record is literally that; a permanent "record" of an otherwise ephemeral artwork. The alleged "deceptions" arise solely from the tools and tactics the technicians use to satisfy the demands of such permanence; such that the process of the record's creation takes on a life of its own.
This should be a stipulation, not a revelation. And yet, many people (including very many on this app) continue to view the two separate experiences as from the same bag; or worse yet, view live performance as some "poorer brother" of recorded (and enhanced) performance. The question is, which one contains the "soul" of the artists' art? That depends upon the artist, and what they are expressing through it. Some express different facets through each; The Beatles + The Who being prime examples. And that should be cool too.
The problems begin when it ain't; and that's a habit of mind too many folks inside and outside the music business have adopted.
I'm probably saying all this shit wrong. But as a live musician who makes records bc he has to, who works for a guy who's pretty much the opposite; it's something I feel in my bones.
Live Music is one experience; a record is another.
Embrace each for what they are, and *only* what they are, and you'll never feel "deceived".
Man I love this piece. It resonates with thoughts I have every time I hit “undo” in Logic. There is no contemporary music without layers of something like…artifice. Thanks for saying this all so clearly.
Every time we hear a rock band with both a drum kit and a singer—and the singer is audible…we’re hearing something “unnatural.” Do most non-musicians really get that?
Great piece, Chris. I, too, used to get rather hung up on the idea of “real” music - whereas now I’m endlessly fascinated by all the ways that even just acoustic instruments can be manipulated to achieve different sonic (and emotional) ends. As John Lennon sang in “Strawberry Fields Forever,” nothing is real – and nothing to get hung about.
Interesting read. I think you’d like David Byrne’s book “How Music Works.”
This is totally fascinating -- and so similar to this NYT article about VFX in movies...
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/16/movies/visual-effects.html
I loved reading this. The experience came with a distinct sense of unburdening. It's so so true that what matters with music is emotional resonance -- does it move people?
Frank Zappa wrote that there is no way to arrange the instruments and singers in a rock band so that it sounds like a record—that there’s manipulation in any form of recording. As you point out, that’s true of Frank Sinatra in front of a big band as well. I mean, literally anyone can tell the difference between a live band and a record without looking.
BTW, do you know a book called The B-Side, by Ben Yagoda? Some of it is just “Let’s remember some Tin Pan Alley guys,” but he has a lot of great stuff on how technology changed the music—not the music business, but the actual music. Really worth checking out.
Excellent! Another grade article with interesting insight.
Great post. Would suggest reading Abbey Road’ by David Hepworth if you haven’t already. He makes the point that The Beatles were the ghost band to talk explicitly about the way used the studio. I’m not sure it’s right to say ‘Strawberry Fields’ is a deception. It’s certainly not a band playing live, and in many ways that’s the point.
Does it sound good. That's all that matters
Reading the snobbery line hit me right in the gut. I, too, was like this and missed out of being “in the moment” with a lot of great music. While not being able to enjoy the music at that time, I definitely enjoy it now. It also took me a long time to wrap my head around electronically created music as being legit. But what do I know? At the end of the day, if it moves people… it’s legit.
Did Wilson review or share his thoughts on Miles Davis’ In A Silent Way? Was he still around for the extreme logical extension of In A Silent Way, Talk Talk’s last two albums: Spirit of Eden and Laughing Stock?
Great post !
Any style of music from any era, well-executed, can be transcendent. However, I would argue that adding layers of artifice will date music, often times to its detriment. What makes music eternal are the components that can be preserved independently of artifice: rhythm, melody, and lyric. From Moonlight Sonata, to Moon River, to Bad Moon Rising there is a timelessness in those works that makes them feel as if they've been with us forever. Production can never be fully stripped away, but the more you tinker, the more you pigeonhole it to a time, place, and trend.
This was interesting, thx.
oh well, all good art is to some degree a parlor trick ( "look what I can do!"). The rest is just a matter of instruments at your disposal.