PDA

View Full Version : Concert performance


AdrianD
November 21st, 2012, 10:38 PM
Would you rather pay to see a singer sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind them, (dancers, pyros, etc) or do you want to see all those extra things but that singer is Par or perhaps sub par? But you can not have both.

Esper
November 22nd, 2012, 11:02 AM
I'd easily choose to see even the singer unplugged, no band or anything, over a sub-par performance. I don't think a lot of the music I like would even use dancers or pyrotechnics in their performances anyway.

Performances are great and all, but I care about the music and that's what I'd pay money for.

Oryx
November 22nd, 2012, 11:18 AM
I'm the opposite of Scarf. I can hear the music on an album, in a video, through headphones. I go to concerts for the performance. If it's a band I like, I would prefer the band put on a great show even if that affects the musical performance negatively. Kind of reminds me of when I watched a video of a Katy Perry concert and she was jumping around and interacting with fans and that involved her being breathless while she sang and sometimes even not singing, and I found that really commendable, not worrying so much if her voice was "good enough" in concert but instead putting on a fun show for the fans.

Mr. Magius
November 23rd, 2012, 01:42 PM
As much as music is my passion and it's all great to see a single person with exceptional talent, what I'm paying for is for entertainment. He/she might be the greatest singer ever, but I won't be as entertained without all the other stuff going on in the background. What makes me go see a show is for the energy of the performance, if I want to simply hear their music, I can just listen to their studio stuff.

Sverige
November 23rd, 2012, 02:19 PM
I will nearly always go for the theatrics and show-y concerts.

Harley Quinn
November 23rd, 2012, 08:52 PM
Kind of reminds me of when I watched a video of a Katy Perry concert and she was jumping around and interacting with fans and that involved her being breathless while she sang and sometimes even not singing, and I found that really commendable, not worrying so much if her voice was "good enough" in concert but instead putting on a fun show for the fans.

...That's exactly what happened when I saw her live in 2010, lol. Nowadays I don't look upon that moment with much pride, considering how embarrassing Katy Perry is to be/be around/look at, but it's an example as to how much I like the concert experience. I saw Gaga live in 2009 or 2010, I can't remember, but it was when she was commencing her Fame Monster phase and I thought the whole experience was really cool, not crazy and downright stupid like her current era, if we are technically in the Born This Way era and not ARTPOP or whatever.

King Goodra
November 23rd, 2012, 09:56 PM
Depends on the artist and how I feel about their vocal ability. How I feel about their vocal ability really dictates what I expect at a show if I buy their ticket. I'm going to use the big pop acts right now for examples:

I would go to a Beyoncé concert with the expectation to see Beyoncé sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Katy Perry concert with the expectation to see Katy Perry sing on par or below par with the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Rihanna concert with the expectation to see Rihanna sing on par or below par with the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to an Adele concert with the expectation to see Adele sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Nicki Minaj concert with the expectation to see Nicki Minaj sing on par or below par with the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Christina Aguilera concert with the expectation to see Christina Aguilera sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Florence + the Machine concert with the expectation to see Florence + the Machine sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Lana Del Rey concert with the expectation to see Lana Del Rey sing exceptionally well without all the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Britney Spears concert with the expectation to see Britney Spears sing on par or below par with the extra things going on behind her.
I would go to a Lady Gaga concert with the expectation to see Lady Gaga sing both exceptionally well and have all the extra things going on behind her.

If it's an underground / indie artist, I would go to see them sing exceptionally well.

Elite Overlord LeSabre™
November 23rd, 2012, 11:41 PM
Most of the singers I listen to wouldn't have all the fancy special effects anyway, so the talent without the theatrics wins. Last concert I went to was for '80's pop-ballad singer Richard Marx for his acoustic tour, and it was just him, a guitar, and a piano accompaniment.

Mr Cat Dog
December 12th, 2012, 09:42 AM
This is actually a surprisingly difficult question for me. Partially because I genuinely don't know what I'd say, and partially because I've had very little concert experience so haven't got much of a benchmark to go off. On the one hand, if I like this artist/band/whatever, I'd presumably think that they were good musicians; however, I wouldnt want to just listen to them playing all of the songs off their album in the same way. I want something special from the concert, given that I'd probably be paying a fair amount of money accordingly. On the flipside, a sub-par musician with an above-par pyrotechnic budget would certainly get my money's worth from entertainment, but I don't know if I'd feel anything apart from bombardment and sheer dazzlement (wait, is that even a word?)

I'm probably going to go with the better musicality. Watching stuff like The X Factor has highlighted to me how you really can't polish a turd, even if you flood it in lights and back-up dancers. The contestants on shows of that ilk are very much sub-par singers - especially in a live context - drowned out by the background. Provided the venue was suitably intimate, and the ticket prices cheap, I'd much rather go with the sparse awesome musician.

Keiran
December 12th, 2012, 06:00 PM
I don't go to a concert to be entertained with just my eyes and ears. I think when an artist needs extras in the background it's to make up for lack of talent and connection between the music and the fan. I don't pay to hear someone sing well, either. I go to concerts to be one with the music/band/crowd and just dance and have a good time. Unplugged, chill and intimate shows are also very lovely.

xxkaylabby
December 12th, 2012, 08:02 PM
I don't go to a concert to be entertained with just my eyes and ears. I think when an artist needs extras in the background it's to make up for lack of talent and connection between the music and the fan. I don't pay to hear someone sing well, either. I go to concerts to be one with the music/band/crowd and just dance and have a good time. Unplugged, chill and intimate shows are also very lovely.

that's how i am. i rather see a concert that is crazy and entertaining. i dont care how well the singer is as long as i'm having fun (:

Squirrel
December 29th, 2012, 09:49 AM
I think both are certainly important, but seeing the band perform incredibly well means a lot more to me than watching all the pyrotechnics and such. All of the special effects do help to make the whole concert experience seem that much more impressive but if I'm paying to see someone perform live, I'm paying mainly because I love the singer/band. However, if the person I'm seeing is someone that I'm aware isn't that great a singer when playing live then I'd rather all the pretty fireworks and explosions were there to drown them out whilst I listened to the songs on my iPod instead.

antemortem
January 3rd, 2013, 08:56 AM
I don't pay for concert tickets to go see a show, necessarily, but rather that singer perform. If perform means that they sit on a stool with their microphone and belt out the lyrics I know and love, then so be it. If it's preferred that they start a rave by moshing and jumping around the stage to the beat of pyrotechnics and a laser light show, then so be it. Overall, a perfect concert experience, for me, is fulfilled simply by the artist.

Toshiro.
January 3rd, 2013, 09:29 PM
I would rather go for the actual music quality and not the background stuff. While I admit that dancers and stuff in the background is entertaining, I would rather see that on some award show or something like that because when I go to a concert I go for the band. I want to hear them and not be distracted with everything else. You know? Plus I paid good money and I want them to be good.

Cosmotone8
January 4th, 2013, 06:34 PM
I came for the music, not the pyros or dancers as you say. So my answer's pretty obvious - I'd rather have the good singer.