Is it live, or is it Memorex?
Jun. 15th, 2007 11:45 amIs there any way to NOT have a comment unscreened when you reply to it? Yeah, I know it only takes a click to screen it again, but I'm a lazy American, dammit! {g}
Speaking of annoying things, I don't know how I bruised my right big toe, but it hurts, and the Band-Aids (or, more accurately, Curad brand adhesive bandages) that I've tried putting on wouldn't stay.
Today at work, I was asked about what kind of music I listen to, and I basically had to say that it was stuff nobody there had heard of. I mentioned They Might Be Giants, but when asked to describe them, I really couldn't come up with much besides the trite "weird" (which really doesn't say much, and I don't think they're THAT weird anyway) and "nerd rock" (a term the Johns themselves don't like, but then, it WAS more of a negative thing back when they were growing up). It's just kind of weird, because most of the people I talk to through the Internet have at least a passing familiarity with TMBG and some of the other bands I listen to. It's kind of weird when the realization that most of the world is on a totally different musical wavelength hits home. Granted, some of what I listen to is totally obscure, but even most of the better-known bands I like aren't really part of the mainstream consciousness.
And moving on to another music-related topic (and my original intention for today's post, before all that other stuff came up), I've been thinking somewhat about the age-old question of whether live or studio music is better. For me, this is kind of divided into two different issues, to wit: 1) whether attending a concert or listening to an album is preferable, and 2) which way the actual songs sound better. Regarding the first point, concert attendance is almost always exciting, and an interesting communal experience. It's also sometimes an uncomfortable one, but if the band is good enough, that can make up for the discomfort. Listening to an album, on the other hand, can be a deeply personal thing. I know some records make me think of when I first them, or other experiences that I associate with listening to them. So it's kind of a toss-up. In terms of the actual songs, I'd say studio recordings are usually better, for obvious reasons. They're more polished, and allow for more instruments, more takes, and more production. One major exception is that studio recordings can sometimes be TOO polished, and come off sounding sterile. Live performances can sometimes bring some much-needed energy and liveliness to a song. It also really depends on the artists involved. When some musicians play live, it sounds like they're trying their best to duplicate their studio recordings with a stripped-down setup, while it's the complete opposite for others. And still other artists sound pretty much exactly the same both ways, which shows a lot of talent on their parts, but makes their live albums rather uninteresting. I think TMBG actually strikes a happy medium in this respect in that there are quite a few songs that they play totally differently live from how they sound on the albums, but they're good both ways.
Speaking of annoying things, I don't know how I bruised my right big toe, but it hurts, and the Band-Aids (or, more accurately, Curad brand adhesive bandages) that I've tried putting on wouldn't stay.
Today at work, I was asked about what kind of music I listen to, and I basically had to say that it was stuff nobody there had heard of. I mentioned They Might Be Giants, but when asked to describe them, I really couldn't come up with much besides the trite "weird" (which really doesn't say much, and I don't think they're THAT weird anyway) and "nerd rock" (a term the Johns themselves don't like, but then, it WAS more of a negative thing back when they were growing up). It's just kind of weird, because most of the people I talk to through the Internet have at least a passing familiarity with TMBG and some of the other bands I listen to. It's kind of weird when the realization that most of the world is on a totally different musical wavelength hits home. Granted, some of what I listen to is totally obscure, but even most of the better-known bands I like aren't really part of the mainstream consciousness.
And moving on to another music-related topic (and my original intention for today's post, before all that other stuff came up), I've been thinking somewhat about the age-old question of whether live or studio music is better. For me, this is kind of divided into two different issues, to wit: 1) whether attending a concert or listening to an album is preferable, and 2) which way the actual songs sound better. Regarding the first point, concert attendance is almost always exciting, and an interesting communal experience. It's also sometimes an uncomfortable one, but if the band is good enough, that can make up for the discomfort. Listening to an album, on the other hand, can be a deeply personal thing. I know some records make me think of when I first them, or other experiences that I associate with listening to them. So it's kind of a toss-up. In terms of the actual songs, I'd say studio recordings are usually better, for obvious reasons. They're more polished, and allow for more instruments, more takes, and more production. One major exception is that studio recordings can sometimes be TOO polished, and come off sounding sterile. Live performances can sometimes bring some much-needed energy and liveliness to a song. It also really depends on the artists involved. When some musicians play live, it sounds like they're trying their best to duplicate their studio recordings with a stripped-down setup, while it's the complete opposite for others. And still other artists sound pretty much exactly the same both ways, which shows a lot of talent on their parts, but makes their live albums rather uninteresting. I think TMBG actually strikes a happy medium in this respect in that there are quite a few songs that they play totally differently live from how they sound on the albums, but they're good both ways.