The differing reactions of audiences to live and recorded music

[Excalibur]

Inspired by by the dialogue in Lee Live's thread.
How often have you played your little heart out for the early part of the night, gone through every genre ( and Tamla Motown as well ) in your box, to absolutely zero reaction whatsoever, and when the band come on, they've only played two chords of Johnny B Goode, and the floor's full? Why? :confused: I've seen it time and time again.

There is undoubtedly something about live music ( and it may well be undefinable ) that just connects with punters, often in a way that we can never hope to. I still maintain that the best recipe for a successful function is a good live artist/Band and a good disco. ( And I've also worked with acts that got paid off after three songs, and you get back on early. Does wonders for my ego, mind you. :D )

It's unfair to expect live artists to do four or five hours straight, and having a DJ ready to take up the slack is perfect. As alluded to elsewhere, a laptop or CD player on autopilot, or a roadie picking random tunes does not adequately fulfill the role of DJ.

Equally, the DJ jumping out from behind the booth, and giving karaoke renditions of My Way, Pretty Woman, and Brown Eyed Girl without introduction, clear break, and a very definite lighting change from dancefloor to stage/performance area is just as poor.

Fire away folks, the floor is yours.

[Shaun]

Was there a question in there? :p

There's nothing quite like seeing and hearing a (good) live performance. Give me that over a DJ anyday.

[Excalibur]

Was there a question in there? :p

.



How often have you played your little heart out for the early part of the night, gone through every genre ( and Tamla Motown as well ) in your box, to absolutely zero reaction whatsoever, and when the band come on, they've only played two chords of Johnny B Goode, and the floor's full?

An interrogative there, I feel. :p



There's nothing quite like seeing and hearing a (good) live performance. Give me that over a DJ anyday
Well at least you grasped the concept of the thread, even if you were unsure of the question. So now, the $64,000 question:
Why do audiences often react more favourably to a live act?

[DJIanScott]

Good thread.

As we move deeper into the 21st Century, it seems that live music is becoming less popular with the younger generation in my humble experience. They are more used to the celebrity DJ culture heroes, and lately when I've been 'supporting' bands at weddings, there has been a growing call for me to get back on as soon as possible.
Personally, I love live music in almost all forms (providing the perpetrators have a degree of talent of course!) but I definitely believe it's a generation thing. I used to sing in a couple of bands, and considered the whole backing-track-vocalist thing.....but then when I gave it proper consideration, was I doing it for the audiences' benefit or mine? Too many DJ-singer combos haven't asked themselves that question......

[Shaun]

How often have you played your little heart out for the early part of the night, gone through every genre ( and Tamla Motown as well ) in your box, to absolutely zero reaction whatsoever, and when the band come on, they've only played two chords of Johnny B Goode, and the floor's full?



Never! I have them rockin' from the first song.



Ok....I'll wake up now!


Well at least you grasped the concept of the thread, even if you were unsure of the question. So now, the $64,000 question:
Why do audiences often react more favourably to a live act?

It's a good question. I suppose its partly to do with the visual aspect of the group working in tandem with each other - you can actually see them playing the music and feeding off each others vibe. Where as us lowly DJs are there (mostly) alone. There's less of a visual impact of a DJ.

[BeerFunk]

I think it's the visual/interaction side of it. The reason I say this, is because my friend booked a band for his wedding who filled the floor, but it was so blatant to anyone with half an ear for music that they weren't playing live. The singer was live, but it was clearly a backing track that they were pretending to play along to (you'd think the drumming track and lack of a drummer might have given it away).

Anyway, yes - definitely the visual/interaction element.

[Excalibur]

As we move deeper into the 21st Century, it seems that live music is becoming less popular with the younger generation in my humble experience. ..
I'm not so sure it's becoming less popular, but it's certainly becoming much more expensive. In effect this reduces their attractiveness to many people,



It's a good question. I suppose its partly to do with the visual aspect of the group working in tandem with each other - you can actually see them playing the music and feeding off each others vibe. Where as us lowly DJs are there (mostly) alone. .


I think it's the visual/interaction side of it.
Anyway, yes - definitely the visual/interaction element.
Now that's one aspect I'd never considered. Interesting.


There's less of a visual impact of a DJ
I've met you. Jury's out on that one. ;):D:D

[Jim - Scotland's Party DJ]

As someone who has played in wedding bands previously and still plays in a band (that no wedding would have :D ) I think the big difference is the energy a band can put out.

There's just something that bit more tangible about the live energy of a GOOD live band cranking out Johnny B Goode compared to playing the recorded track.

Live music is played as it was meant to be heard too more or less - what we're playing is edited, compressed, EQ'd, mixed, mastered versions of songs which a lot of the time lack that punch and raw power that the band in the studio or on stage would achieve.

[DazzyD]

Good thread.

As we move deeper into the 21st Century, it seems that live music is becoming less popular with the younger generation in my humble experience. They are more used to the celebrity DJ culture heroes, and lately when I've been 'supporting' bands at weddings, there has been a growing call for me to get back on as soon as possible.
...

I disagree. I think live music is still as popular as ever with the younger generation - and getting younger! Events like the Radio 1 Big Weekend, our own North East Live, the festivals such as Glastonbury, etc. all seem to sell out their tickets pretty quickly. The thing with concerts is that they are an "audio-visual extravaganza" to coin a phrase. It's not just about the music but about the performance, the theatre, the lighting, the special effects, pyrotechnics, etc. All these elements combined make up the experience. People want more than just to hear a song - they can listen to the radio or their MP3 players for that. Even with smaller (and much smaller!) live gigs, there is still more of a visual thing going on. People will say "I'm going to the pub to see a band" and never "I'm going to listen to the band". Yet us smaller working DJs will have people coming to hear us and dance a bit. I've never heard anyone say "I'm going to see Dazzy D this weekend".


...
It's a good question. I suppose its partly to do with the visual aspect of the group working in tandem with each other - you can actually see them playing the music and feeding off each others vibe. Where as us lowly DJs are there (mostly) alone. There's less of a visual impact of a DJ.

Totally agree. With a band there is interaction between the band members which is something we don't have. I did a few shows years ago where I was simply working the decks but working with a female presenter who was out front (imagine Lily Savage but as a real woman!!). She would interact with the crowd and also banter off me and the whole setup took things to a new level. And the audiences at the time seemed to love us (which actually got us barred from a venue once but that's a different story! ;) ). So I get the band interaction thing as well as audience interaction. Working as a lone DJ just doesn't have that kind of extra energy and performance.

[DJIanScott]

I disagree. I think live music is still as popular as ever with the younger generation - and getting younger! Events like the Radio 1 Big Weekend, our own North East Live, the festivals such as Glastonbury, etc. all seem to sell out their tickets pretty quickly. The thing with concerts is that they are an "audio-visual extravaganza" to coin a phrase. It's not just about the music but about the performance, the theatre, the lighting, the special effects, pyrotechnics, etc. All these elements combined make up the experience.

Live music as part of a festival or a totally live gig is not the point I was trying to make. When and where live acts appear at weddings and functions alongside a DJ, that's when the interest in them withers with the younger generation, whereas the older folk tolerate it more. It isn't often you get an 'audio-visual extravaganza' from a pair of tired Mackies and a hastily-assembled LED lighting t-bar!

[Shaun]

There's less of a visual impact of a DJ

I've met you. Jury's out on that one. ;):D:D

You cheeky :Censored::Censored::Censored::Censored::Censored: :Censored: Lol. :d

[BeerFunk]

As we move deeper into the 21st Century, it seems that live music is becoming less popular with the younger generation in my humble experience. They are more used to the celebrity DJ culture heroes, and lately when I've been 'supporting' bands at weddings, there has been a growing call for me to get back on as soon as possible
Just saw this post, and to be honest, I think you're right. Possibly worth another thread, but who are the 'big' bands now? I think the younger generation are being deprived of proper rock music. People I know are clambering for Killers tickets, but why? They're living off old material, and IMO haven't released a decent tune for 7 years!
And if you combine that with the fact of bands needing to tour more to earn money (profits from album sales these days are allegedly very poor) - it doesn't look great for rock/indie fans.

Anyway, that shouldn't stop wedding and pub bands from doing well, but maybe people are finding better value in DJs these days? Is it easier to find a reputable and quality DJ online now? Is it less of a gamble than a band?

[ukpartydj]

I think it's all down to the music that's being played or the energy that either we or the band bring. I've gone on after a band and played something like Crazy in Love - Beyonce and fill the dance floor and other times I've been playing what I call filler music which isn't particularly exciting just chugging along type and the band come on and play something very energetic and they fill the dance floor.

[Solitaire Events Ltd]

When and where live acts appear at weddings and functions alongside a DJ, that's when the interest in them withers with the younger generation, whereas the older folk tolerate it more.

Probably because you are talking about a different sort of act. Kids aren't going to be interested in function and wedding bands doing covers, but they will be interested in the Arctic Monkeys playing at Reading or Glastonbury.

[Jonny Boy]

Most responses have already covered my thoughts on this.... the difference AFAIC is the energy in the room created via interaction/engagement & 'visual spectacle'. Gererally, people watch people, not lights.
(And more so with a full band vs solo artist with BTs.)

On the other hand the big disadvantage a live act has to DJs is that it's very difficult to reproduce the same continuity of music as DJ provides. (Unless it's a particularly tight band or adept frontman. )
If you've got a load of "watchers" in the crowd, with a live act they've got something to watch and it's an another excuse to stay sat down and just watch.

BUT live performances, IMHO, are easier to personalise - as in make a guest feel the song is "just for them" (at least that's the aim) using eye contact and/or shifting focus techniques & interaction. This is good to involve non-dancers within the "action" - and can later coax them up when they might not have otherwise. (In theory)

There IS the danger of course of it becoming toooooo cabaret/Butlins....there's a thin line here that's down to the client's ideas, I think.

For a DJ to do this, it's down the "personality DJ" route....which for some reason some clients (in my experience) perceive as cheesey - even though it's acceptable for a live artist to use virtually the same techniques "out front". Unsure why "showmanship" for live acts is perceived as "cheesey" for DJs to do... :-/

[Javlingames]

Live bands just don't do it for me, give me a good dj or comedian any day of the week.

[DJIanScott]

Is it easier to find a reputable and quality DJ online now? Is it less of a gamble than a band?

You've hit the nail squarely on the head, I think. With a DJ, even if he/she is truly awful on the mic, etc, at least the tunes they play will be the versions that are widely recognised. If you book a function band and the singing is all over the place with long solos and self-indulgent performances, that's your night ruined.

It probably sounds like I hate live music, but it couldn't be further from the truth. I dislike poor live music, and there's far too much of it around on the function/wedding circuit at the moment.

[stormproductions]

I'd agree that a lot of it is to do with the energy.

Which significantly includes volume - in my experience even though I personally like my music loud I tend to play it at what I consider to be respectable volumes (dependent on various factors) and frequently find bands only have a 'loud' setting. I've had gigs before where I've been trying to restrain the volume so Great Aunt Edna can still have a conversation at the other end of a marquee only to eventually risk increasing the volume and finding that's the point at which the dancefloor kicks off properly.

Similarly (remembering it's mainly lighting I do) the lights can have a huge help in building the energy and atmosphere. Next time you see any TV clip of a band playing live close your eyes and see if the energy's still there.

[ckpr2]

I have been a DJ for about 40 years.
However I have also been a guitarist too.
I play mostly pop and rock music on guitar.

In latter years I often took the guitar along with the disco and if a song came up I knew I would play along with the guitar.
With lead guitar parts I would slightly be louder than the music so as to come through a bit clearer.

I basically got little reaction to this, I guess it has never been done before.
I played along to rock tracks for 3 hours one night. I got so into it I didnt feel the time pass.

[BeerFunk]

I have been a DJ for about 40 years.
However I have also been a guitarist too.
I play mostly pop and rock music on guitar.

In latter years I often took the guitar along with the disco and if a song came up I knew I would play along with the guitar.
With lead guitar parts I would slightly be louder than the music so as to come through a bit clearer.

I basically got little reaction to this, I guess it has never been done before.
I played along to rock tracks for 3 hours one night. I got so into it I didnt feel the time pass.Interesting... how would that work though? Surely the lead guitar part is already playing in the recorded track, so it would be akin to singing along to a standard audio track rather than a karaoke/instrumental track?

[ckpr2]

Interesting... how would that work though? Surely the lead guitar part is already playing in the recorded track, so it would be akin to singing along to a standard audio track rather than a karaoke/instrumental track?

With rythym guitar I play at the same level and it just mixes in with the track like any other instrument.
However on lead guitar parts I would drown out the background lead guitar by turning up my guitars volume.

Here is an example.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abkG_KeLTHo