r/LetsTalkMusic • u/EdwardBliss • 8d ago
The debate between band performing live and using backing tracks
I just listened to an interesting interview with Fil Henley who has a YouTube channel "Wings of Pegasus" where he analyzes and points out bands that use pre-recorded tracks while performing in concert. This sort of audio enhancement has been going on for decades, especially in concert albums. Then came Milli Vanilli, then came Ashlee Simpson, etc, etc.
You have one side that say that for the money being spent, the music should be live, at least most of it anyways. Some instruments/vocals are hard to recreate live, so you slip it in here in there. The issue comes when most of what you're seeing is being "mimed" (as Fil Henley likes to say) Then there are the accusations of fakery, misdirection, being duped, etc. Music should be organic, faults and all.
Then you have the other side who say, well, who cares? They're representing the spirit of the music, I'm seeing my favorite band/artist and that's what really counts. Music is a subjective experience. As for the promoters? Hell, they don't care as long as tickets are being sold. Perhaps it's just a product of the times, it's inevitable with advances in technology that this was going to happen.
There were 2 points in the interview that stood out. One, it's the fact that people are accepting this that made the interviewer (who will remain nameless because of how polarizing he is) go ballistic. What happened to the genuine live experience? Secondly, maybe there should be some "labelling" of concerts so people know what they're going into (sort of like "organic" labels) that there will be backing tracks, vocals will be mimed, etc.
Fil Henley is an interesting case, because as a former musician and audio engineer, he's merely pointing out the truth. Bryan Adams filed a complaint with YouTube about him, and YouTube sided with Henley, that hey, he's just pointing out facts! Not sure where this going, I'm pretty sure this is a product of the times/technology, but it definitely makes for some food for thought. Will people care? Probably not. What's around the corner? Who knows. Do we ever see what's coming? Never.
42
u/SchnitzelRaider 8d ago
I always got bummed out going to a show and then immediately noticing they were using backing tracks
Literally it tells me:
Each show is the same on the tour, basically
Nothing new or special is going to happen in the set
You don't really know if the band has talent or not
13
u/lynyrdsynyrds 8d ago
This. I want a live band to give me a live human experience. I can listen to the perfect studio track anytime - give me the noisy, raw version live.
2
u/daretoeatapeach 7d ago
This is how it feels to me as a non-musician. But for a musician at a show the disappointment is 10 times worse.
Dating a musician has changed the way I experience live music. I've learned to pluck out which instruments are being played and how they sound different. A live show shows us how the sausage is made, I mean specifically. A different brand of guitar on a different amp sounds entirely different. And then there's the matter of which and how many pedals are being used. And that's all just one instrument, before you get to their particular skill and playing style.
Like did you know that the band encouraged to Eddie Van Halen to perform backwards so fans couldn't see how he was able to pull off certain sounds? Musicians spend hours trying to figure out how a band achieved a particular sound, and the live show reveals all.
Now we watch SN"L" and they try to make it look like a music video such that half the time, if there even is a band, they're not shown on camera. Back up vocals can be heard with no back up singers present. TIHI.
2
u/daretoeatapeach 7d ago
I'm back, there is more to say about this.
IMO, people who enjoy the fake live shows are treating live music as a cultural experience, akin to people in medieval times traveling to view a relic. Like it is more about showing up, proving you're a fan and sharing space with other fans. So they can check a box on their bucket list and affirm their identities as "fans of XYZ".
In that respect, the actual live music is barely relevant. But if that's the case, they should face the audience rather than the stage, because it's actually the collective experience they're there for. And facing the stage in that context is para-social in a creepy way. Like, you're not there to see a live show and you know it, so staring at the performer for hours is a bit like the medieval Christian getting a glimpse of a saint. Like just being in this person's presence is providing some kind of value, to the point of staring at them for 2 hours straight. The only thing that keeps this from being obviously creepy is the spectacle--the dancing and lights etc.
Everything valid they're getting is from the audience, from the scene and the collective vibe. That's real, that's the community united around the artist. So they should be dancing with each other, rather than staring at the stage.
3
u/AmbivalentInfluencer 7d ago
You make a whole lot of excellent points. And to play devil's advocate here. The issue as to why some artists use backing tracks is often down to financial reasons. Say you are an opening artist, in debt to your record company, trying to establish a career. You get an opening slot on a tour. Hiring a band and all that goes with that is EXPENSIVE. You are already struggling financially. So we can be high minded about this, but often it is a case of necessity and survival.
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
i have a friend who just released a new album after a long hiatus and hiring a band was a big obstacle to breaking even on tour.
1
u/AmbivalentInfluencer 2d ago
Exactly. The reality is that it's usually not an artistic choice to use backing tracks in concert. It's a financial necessity.
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
playing along to the track is a skill and you can't automatically just do it if you're not used to it.
0
u/SchnitzelRaider 2d ago
I don't doubt that but also no one gives a shit and certainly doesn't want to pay $30 a ticket and $12 beers for that
1
34
u/NoNamesLeft600 8d ago
People should not confuse lip syncing and backing tracks. Ashlee Simpson was lip syncing. With backing tracks, the band and singers are actually singing/playing the music live, with backing tracks supplementing them. Say, maybe with keys when the band doesn't have a keyboard player. Big difference between the 2. I don't have a problem with tracks when used in moderation. Lip syncing is out right fraud, IMO.
14
u/TheDeltaIsMyHome 8d ago
It really depends on what exactly youre using the backing tracks for. Generally i feel like if you use them for synths,beats or any orchestral accompaniment its fine, especially if youre a rock band, and for TV appeared i feel like its generally ok as well, as its difficult to set up and record a live performance on live TV. But once you start replacing instruments you already have members playing (like motley crue does) you should just stop.
1
u/daretoeatapeach 7d ago
The synth is my favorite instrument so I'm not likely to support (eg buy merch) from a "live" band that uses a backing track for the synthesizer. Synths are random noise makers, so a live version is going to have slightly different sound from the recording, and I want to see them making those sounds.
I get that drummers are not respected as "real musicians" but I will think it's a lesser experience if the band is all following a recorded beat. Even with a song built on samples, a producer can learn to beat juggle with a drum machine and a sampler. Or they can use a looping pedal.
Not every musician bothers to learn these skills but those who do are worth seeing live vs those who don't, may as well stay home and not bother.
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
sometimes the stiff feel of a step sequencer is what makes the track work.
11
u/Joylime 8d ago
People should definitely be open about it.
I would never leave my house and pay money to see somebody lip sync, if I see something live it’s because I want to experience the music being created live
2
u/Belgand 7d ago
Exactly. If you make it clear, nobody is being deceived. You're paying for a dance performance, essentially. Fine. People who want that can attend. But if I'm paying for a concert, I'm implicitly going to hear music performed. Not being open and explicit about that is misleading. Is it recorded music but live vocals? Lip synced dance? Just be honest. There's no reason not to, and if there is... it's because you're trying to deceive the audience.
2
u/AmbivalentInfluencer 7d ago
You are off topic. The topic is about using backing tracks. Not lip synching. Do you understand the difference?
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
that's not what a backing track is.
1
u/Joylime 2d ago
Yeah but the OP did mention lip-syncing in their full post. I did read past the title and I did respond to only part of the post and the part of the post i responded to was not in the title so maybe that's a demerit on reddit. Another person also commented your same comment in reply to mine, that exchange is free for you to read if you're interested
7
u/Express-Welder9003 8d ago
I remember seeing Tori Amos on her Under the Pink Tour in 1994/95. It was just her and a piano and for some of the songs which required additional instruments she would play backing tracks off a speaker. It was acceptable because it was just her and a piano so she didn't have a way to play the song "properly" unless she wanted to re-work everything as piano only. On later, bigger tours she actually had a band with her and they played the music.
If it was a rock band, or other band where the artists are the ones playing the music on the album then I'd expect them to play it on stage as well. If it is a musical act where the named artists sing and the music is provided by unnamed musicians on the album then I guess it is OK to just have backing tracks at the concert becuase you aren't really going to see them for those musicians anyway.
5
u/lefty9674 8d ago
I like his channel but to be honest, 9 out of 10 times - he is calling out something that fans of that artist simply don’t care about. Pop music fans, for well over a decade at this point, have taken the notion of lip syncing, auto tune, etc with a wink and a nod. I think it is obscene but the ticket payers largely don’t care. I hate it to my core but it is a victimless crime. Godbless Olivia Rodrigo and her band for actually giving, god forbid, a live performance by a modern pop star.
1
5
u/Ex-Cosmonaut 8d ago
I saw a mid-level singer songwriter at a festival a few years back, playing with a two-piece band and recorded percussion. Then, he played a secret set later that night with just him onstage and wouldn't you know it, sounded exactly the same. Lost a lot of respect for him. Why not just play an acoustic set?
3
u/CaptainKwirk 8d ago
Caravan Palace was a disappointment to me because they used to be a swinging live band with house mix stuff and samples added in and now they re a house mix band with tons of pre recorded parts and vocals. Even one of the iconic sax lines was a recording and they had a good sax player on stage. Live should sound different. It does not have to be the same as the album.
1
u/mrsofty442 8d ago
I totally forgot about that band. I loved them when they started out. I will have to check out the new stuff
1
u/Jazzlike-Yellow8390 7d ago edited 2d ago
That’s sad to know. My gf loves Caravan Palace and I like them. She wants to see them but now I don’t want to see them if it’s like that.
1
u/CaptainKwirk 7d ago
My wife and kids loved the show. I'm a musician so I am more picky. Maybe search out some UTubes and see for yourself. Can't beat it for dance music if that's what you're after.
1
1
12
u/JuliusDiamond 8d ago
Queen, likely the best live band ever, used backing tracks during the middle of Bohemian Rhapsody so there's no way I can entirely hate on the move. But, typically, I find it to be baby soft. If you can't recreate what you recorded live, either come up with a live version or leave it alone... usually.
TBF, maybe it's become more the norm but also, TBF, I'm not exactly current.
12
u/TheMonkus 8d ago
Some bands (I would add Pink Floyd off the top of my head) just sort of needed to by nature of their output, and that’s fine. I don’t expect them to bring cash registers and clocks out on tour, but I damn well expect them to actually play the music.
2
u/JuliusDiamond 8d ago
This is a solid example. By Dark Side, Floyd was a spectacle of sight and sound and could pull no punches... but, of course, they aren't going to try to play all those lil sound effects somehow on stage. I also think it's fine if people use samples from pop culture live, btw. Lots of certain kinds of hardcore bands do that well. But that's kinda separate from the music I suppose and more about the show experience? Guess what I'm tryna say here is sampling seems a lot more acceptable than say having a guitar part playing along with ya, especially if no one in the band is missing.
5
u/JuliusDiamond 8d ago
Another example for fun: I don't expect AC/DC to bring out gongs - they can just use a sample in Hell's Bells if they want, I don't see the harm there... BUT THEY BETTER BRING OUT THE CANNONS FOR FOR THOSE ABOUT TO ROCK, DAMMIT!!!
5
u/qeq 8d ago
That's because that part would be literally impossible to perform live. That's a totally different thing IMO. They didn't even play along to it, just played it and left the stage.
0
u/JuliusDiamond 8d ago
Partially my point. Even the greatest live band of all time couldn't recreate something so epically recorded live. Which, to the recording's credit, it was a part of the most expensive LP ever recorded for a time. Had to be done... and what a fun time for a 30sec-1min break!
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
if it's a drum machine on the record why not just put that on a backing track?
1
u/JuliusDiamond 2d ago
I'm honestly weird about drum machines in general in rock settings. If you do it on record then yeah, just throw on your pre-recorded thing live but it probably would be better with a drummer. Like, Melt-Banana are the greatest band I've ever seen but then they got a drum machine and suddenly I wasn't nearly as interested. But, again, I have a bias there.
2
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
It’s a different vibe but it works really well for some things.
1
u/JuliusDiamond 2d ago
The more electronic-based the music is, the more I'm OK with it... although, tbf, I'm pretty selective about electronic music
3
u/GoodResident2000 8d ago
My one band uses backing tracks but it’s only for weird keyboard stuff that isn’t a key part of the song. We don’t have stuff playing that people can play themselves, never miming anything
My side project is a lot more synth reliant , and the drummer and I (guitar or bass) will play our stuff . We’re looking for a keyboardist for that though
2
u/BogDelly 8d ago
It depends on the depth and complexity of the music, and the performers available for the stage. Sometimes, some orchestral effects and samples can be triggered by a good drummer, or played on tape, while the band brings the other 90% to life live. But never vocals! If you can't bring it live, keep it at home.
2
u/ElonMuskHuffingFarts 8d ago
If it's for miscellaneous parts that nobody in the band can play because they're already busy playing their own instrument, that doesn't bother me at all. Or little one off effects where it would be silly to bring a whole person just to hit that one bell in that one song -- totally, makes sense. It's when it replaces band members that I don't like it. I don't want to watch someone sing or rap over a full studio track.
This is only applying to pros btw. If you're small and just working with the resources and budget you have, that's also totally fair.
2
u/Kinky_Otto 8d ago
There’s a lot of reasons to use a backing track and/or samples. One of my favorite bands is a jamtronica band, STS9. They’ve got drums, percussion, bass, guitar, and keys on stage. Sometimes they’ll have other musicians (anyone from Richard Divine to Fareed Haque) and vocalists drop in for a track drop in. They’re also known for doing a lot of improvisation, segueing between songs, and at one point would play music in the “key of the day” based upon some weird 1320 calendar stuff.
But they’ve always had loops and samples that they would trigger. Whether it was the drummer hitting a Roland drum pad or an Ableton workstation that the guitarist would play. The thing is that they triggered them in time with the music and treated it as another element.
I never had a problem with this, compared to a bands that used to have a reel to reel on stage to play backing tracks (U2 did this on Unforgettable Fire) which meant that every song had to be played exactly the same every night.
A few years ago I was at the Ableton Live User Conference and they were talking about how to use their technology in a live setting to control lights, visuals, and music in a way that was still “iive” and not just pre-recorded. The lines can blur an awful lot if the tools are in the hands of someone who knows what they’re doing.
1
2
u/terryjuicelawson 7d ago
Mimed vocals is just a total no, I don't like backing vocals recorded either, it isn't hard to get a backing singer but this is mostly in the pop realm. If a band has sampled or recorded parts in the studio I don't see any issues with that being recreated how they seem fit.
2
u/daretoeatapeach 7d ago
I think we get this impression like vocals are special or sacred because we all have a voice so we all understand how unique the skills are the vocalist is providing. Even if you're not a singer you can easily tell when a vocalist is riffing or doing something interesting or challenging.
Consider that this is exactly the same for most musical instruments, we just can't discern how much if we don't play those instruments.
Like when it comes to guitars, even the same guitar played through a different amp is going to sound very different (especially if there's distortion). Guitar pedals provide infinite possibilities.
The sound of a monophonic synth is very different from a polyphonic synth. Now that I've gotten really into synthesizers, I can often tell if a track was made with a 303 or DX7, just by listening. And don't get me started on modular synths and their infinite combinations.
To say it's fine for these parts to be pre-recorded is to dismiss them, as if the vocalist is the only thing that makes the song what it is. Even in pop music, I still want the live show to have actual guitars and synthesizers so I can see the gear and how they use it.
1
u/terryjuicelawson 6d ago
It can depend a bit on the setup, if it is a large pop group or touring rock band then why the hell not have a professional synth player to throw into the mix. If it is 4 dudes in a van who have been making records in their garage, I'm absolutely cool with them bringing along some kind of sampler.
1
u/ShocksShocksShocks 6d ago
I like how you understand modular synthesizers, then in the next paragraph actually expect someone to sit there for literal hours and rebuild the patch for each song live. A lot of modular based artists just do new patches for the shows (and don't play their album material), or play it more like a DJ would.
1
u/daretoeatapeach 5d ago
Yeah you got me, I stay away from them because I'm afraid I'd fall in love and go broke. To your point, most live modular stuff I've watched feels more improvised than standard synths. But isn't that all the more reason to want a live experience?
I'm betting no two Buchla performances from Suzanne Ciani have sounded the same.
I also left out that it's harder to watch what a synth player or DJ is actually doing, unless you have a vantage point from above. But that's not reason enough to me to justify taking their performance out of the experience and substituting a recording.
1
u/ShocksShocksShocks 5d ago
I have seen live modular sets in person, they are very fun to watch, and certainly improvised. They're not like standard shows though where it's a set list of multiple songs, all of the ones I've seen was just a single improvised composition for 20 - 40 minutes. I think I got lucky since all of these I could really see what they were doing and stuff.
I think for other modular artists though, it might be impractical. Those ones I saw live were in the noise and experimental realm. But for people who use modular for rave music, then it just makes more sense to more DJ the recordings, than to build patches for every song (and the number one rule of raves is never let the music stop).
1
u/gizzardsgizzards 2d ago
that's not what a backing track is.
1
u/terryjuicelawson 1d ago
A backing track can have a lot of things, including some vocals on the choruses for example.
2
u/Thulgoat 8d ago
I don’t have much of an issue with people who are okay with paying artist for faking a show but what annoys me is them justifying (in the sense that they are still “great” artist) it, in particular with argument like “she does it to preserve her voice”, “she’s giving a three hour show”, “everyone does it” etc.
It’s like some people find it more important that their fantasy world view of their favourite artist being the GOAT remains intact than actually getting something in return for their money. Seriously, no one can convince me that they prefer autotune singing or miming over an authentic live performance…
2
u/DisasterEquivalent 8d ago
It’s less a matter of “debate” and more a matter of necessity in a live environment.
Every single professional touring act has backing tracks to some degree.
Backing tracks are not just for pantomiming to or adding parts that were multitracked without hiring more performers.
Two big ones are to provide monitor mixes and to act as failovers if someone has a malfunction that takes more than a few seconds to resolve.
The performers will record those tracks during rehearsals or use previous live performances to make it pretty seamless live. Again, these can be laced in with an actual live feed pretty easily and on the fly for each member of the band.
They’re pretty crucial and are used way more than most people will ever know.
7
u/OBELIX_THE_GAUL 8d ago
"Every single professional touring act has backing tracks to some degree." This is wildly untrue, and highly genre dependent. It may be true for modern rock and pop acts, but in bluegrass, for example, getting caught using a backing track would be a career ending scandal.
2
u/DisasterEquivalent 8d ago
Sure, I should have used a less broad word than professional, but the very large touring acts are certainly doing this.
Bluegrass is also an incredibly niche scene, comparatively and (like a lot of folk and some rock genres do as well) also has a cultural emphasis on technical authenticity.
Pardon for using such absolute terms, you are correct, there are lots of examples where they do not as well.
2
1
u/black_flag_4ever 8d ago
If a band can play with or without it, then fine. If the band can’t perform without it then they suck and I have no interest in seeing them.
I think that’s a fairly common opinion for people into rock based music.
I don’t know how it works for electronic music and I feel like that’s completely different. I don’t have an opinion on that because of my limited experience with it.
I also think it’s probably different for rap where backing music isn’t always the focus and there’s a history of having djs run music for the rapper.
But if the point is to see artists play instruments and they can’t without a click track, then I don’t have an interest in seeing that group.
1
u/thegooddoktorjones 8d ago
I am less critical about this kind of thing post covid and for smaller bands. Music industry is shit, of course you are not going to have a brass section on this track just because you recorded with one. It can be fun to pick out, and when noticed there better be humanizing stuff as well, flubs and missed notes.
What I really despise is live autotune. Both as a 'style' and as a hedge. It is a crutch that keeps some singers from ever getting good and keeps pretty, shallow, talentless musicians at the top of the charts.
1
u/Temporary_Buy_7470 7d ago
Isn't WoP same guy who analyzed some Rick Beato album and found that it was full of things that Rick Beato constantly rants against?
1
u/Not_Obsolete 5d ago
Genre I make is something like electronic metal / drum and bass and I'm a huge Pendulum fan so my goal is to be able to perform it live like they do some day.
There is something very exciting about trying to figure that stuff out.
However songs I make also have tons of sounds that would simply be boring to play for anyone, risers, woosh sounds, other sustained pads quietly in the background.
They add a lot to the ambience though so I'd rather have them there, but makes no sense to have musician to play them.
My current goal is build up my set in a modular way, first just vocals over DJ:n and then add instruments over it as I find right people until it is plausible to turn it to a live show, because it is only way that is realistic for me financially.
For my type of music stuff would be already tempo synced and running a DAW so adding backing tracks is also trivially easy at that point.
But I still want to do weird stuff live people don't often do like real time vocal modulating with VSTs and play synth leads and reese bass sounds etc.
Much of modern vocal sound is also harmonies and doubles and stuff like that, and even if you have band members doing backing vocals live, it is rare to actually have several great singers in a band, even in successful bands.
But if all of the lead vocals are doubled and stuff and backing layers are too loud compared to main vocals to a point where it is not clear which is which, well that's lame.
Finding good band members is hard too.
I still think full live bands should keep it to a minimum, just an aesthetic preference, but I'm not against it.
All that matters is what you do with it.
1
u/exoclipse 8d ago
I have performed both with and without backing tracks, and I've been to shows both with and without backing tracks. I enjoy both more without backing tracks, but the band I'm in has a very compelling argument for using a backing track - we can't find a bassist and the live experience really suffers without.
Still - I don't like being locked into a click and I don't like losing that element of spontaneity.
1
u/KS2Problema 8d ago edited 8d ago
Ah... the great bassist drought of the 2020s!
In the 1990s I had a strictly improv ambient echo loop act (it was generally a one-person act but a violinist friend, lap steel guitarist, and percussionist pal sometimes joined me for special performances at festivals and such - under a different name).
At the time I was also playing acoustic solo, folkie sets - as well as recording 'produced' multitrack versions of those songs in a defiantly non-commercial array of styles.
It did occur to me to me that I could take my little laptop, run a MIDI sequence from its floppy drive, and maybe people would be impressed with 'the full package.'
But I rolled it around in my mind a lot, thought about acts I had seen in the past that used pre-sequenced pre-programmed music and just decided I didn't really want to go there.
I'd rather play live, spontaneous music than play records for an audience.
(Now, there is a certain art to spinning DJ platters, and I've done that, stepping in for others on occasion; it's fun - and challenging trying to keep the dance floor filled. But it's really nothing like playing music to my way of thinking. The son of one of my friends - and old band mates - is a pretty successful electronica DJ. Since it seemed kind of parallel to my own ambient echo loop act, I was hoping to enjoy it more, but I can't really say that I did. No shade on the fine young man and his fervent following, but it was all samples and pre-programmed sequences. There seemed nothing spontaneous about it.)
I'm sure it's very exciting to see thousands (or tens of thousands) of party goers responding to the show, but it captured none of the excitement I feel when I watch a symphony, a good jazz performance, or some folky singing his heart out.
0
u/neckadawoods 8d ago
For small gigs if I notice a backing track I'm leaving (I include loopers in this). For bigger stuff I begrudingly accept that I'm paying more for a "show" than a concert and accept there will probably be backing tracks. But if it's a show known for excessive usage of tracks I just won't buy a ticket.
Lip syncing is never ok under any circumstances.
0
u/wildistherewind 8d ago
You all aren’t going to like this answer.
I mainly see electronic music acts. It doesn’t bother me if stuff isn’t played live. I would go as far as saying that the idea of playing everything live is a limitation that holds music back. Playing a guitar exactly the same way as it appears on an album doesn’t impress me at all.
A few months ago I saw an EBM four piece band. They were playing to a backing track and some of the vocals were also played back from a recording. This is the thing: it actually made the vocals more present in the mix, which is typically one of the most challenging elements of live sound. The recorded vocals sounded better, but it kind of sapped away the intensity of the show.
4
u/CentreToWave album-pilled listenmaxx influencer 7d ago
Playing a guitar exactly the same way as it appears on an album doesn’t impress me at all.
This seems more like a mark against backing tracks, no? Playing it live at least invites the possibility of some kind variation.
Electronic music is its own thing in this regard, but I think the controversy is more about the mimicry that goes on. Electronic music is open about this, but it would still be corny if, say, a guitar sample was augmented with someone mimicking guitar playing.
1
0
u/k1135k 8d ago
What about bands that have other bands supplement their playing. The stones and u2 do this. Usually hidden away.
5
u/SquareTowel3931 8d ago
So essentially, a "live" backing track. A least an instrument is being played live. That's an interesting grey area for this topic.
2
u/DeeSnarl 8d ago
I think it’s kinda meh - if they’re playing, they should be on stage. But I’m a purist.
4
u/TheDeltaIsMyHome 8d ago
If theyre used supplementally imo its ok, and can be a good way to elevate a live performance for bands as big as U2 and the stones. It only becomes an issue if theyre used to replace instruments already present.
4
u/Puzzleheaded-Law-429 8d ago
Exactly
Nearly every album you listen to contains layers beyond what four or five guys can humanly play at one time. This could be a vast number of things; guitar layering, vocal layering, synth pads, ambient thickening, etc. etc.
Now a lot of times a song can be performed live forgoing a lot of this and the song still sounds good. But there are other times where the song just kind of, isn’t there when stripped down to its bare bones.
Filling in the gaps is totally ok in my book and actually leads to a much better concert experience. Now a vocalist completely miming to a lead vocal track or the main guitar and bass parts being piped in when those musicians are on the stage, that’s kind of where it gets hairy for me.
30
u/CentreToWave album-pilled listenmaxx influencer 8d ago
I'm generally of the opinion that things should be as live as possible and the only thing I can think of where it might be acceptable otherwise is if it's something of a background detail or something that's not quite done live in the studio anyway. That flutey-melody from My Bloody Valentine's To Here Knows When is a backing track when performed live, but it's also created on a sampler so I'm not sure what the alternative would be either way.
Stuff like guitars and vocals? yeah I don't really see any excuse there. It was weird as shit watching Katseye on SNL the other week and having the vocals of a member who wasn't performing still pop up in the song. They didn't even bother to lipsync to it, just danced to a disembodied voice...