Artists conforming to audience .vs. Artist freely changing

[LittleBrother]

I am going through a complete rebuild of my style as a songwriter and player. Acoustic guitar has brought me full circle and I am enjoying my 25-30 original songs I have written as if they are brand new. This freshness is reviving my entire attitude and melting what I considered a few years ago a cold and frozen musical heart. Severely jaded on the local music scene and determined to never play again in public. I have since found that about 95% of all my friend musicians go through the same cycles and I am just starting to climb out of this pit.

 

The the other day I heard someone discussing how they were always disappointed about Clapton unplugged playing Layla different. And that is just one example. I heard someone else making the same arguments about Dillon and many others.

 

This bubbled up when several of my dearest player friends began giving me feedback on my new versions of my songs. some like them slow, some liked them fast. It was hard for me to figure out what is "best". Except I know what I like best.

 

Even the guy at my studio that records me said he like my old version of one of my songs alot better (The deal goes down). The old version depresses me and puts me to sleep all in one stroke. Drains my heart of emotion. Like a lamp being slowly turned down. I literally cannot play it that way unless I am getting paid for it and have less choice.

 

So this has really made me understand how people should view artists. If you are a pop star you might have to duplicate your music but for some unknown artists I think it's okay to evolve and change your music with your heart. Nothing to loose.

 

As a fans and listeners I wonder if it's better for us to ask writers/artists to flex themselves to our tastes and ears or let them wander and see where they take us. Seems like both sides of the coin are good but it makes for some interesting thoughts. maybe there are times and places for each way. Or a mixture.

 

Sorry if this topic has been worn out before. It's pretty interesting to me right now. I've been meaning to post a thread on this to see other opinions...

 

Should we be mad if James Taylor starts playing electric guitar and speeds all his music up, or starts adding rap to his songs ? Or should we just let him go and perhaps just not buy what we dont like and let him make up his mind on his own. Man that was a sicko example. You are all intelligent enough to decode my twisted mind.

 

Thanks

[LouisP]

I think an artist listens to his or her inner voice, a performer listens to anyone. I have always appreciated different versions of songs; an exceptional song, like a great painting, should be open to many interpretations.

Long live artistic freedom!

[SurrealMcCoy]

Originally posted by LouisP I think an artist listens to his or her inner voice, a performer listens to anyone. I have always appreciated different versions of songs; an exceptional song, like a great painting, should be open to many interpretations. Long live artistic freedom!

Excellent response!

That "inner voice" is our guideline as artists. That's what makes us unique and different from the other voices.

Follow your heart!

[irpacynot]

Ditto!

When Dylan picked up an electric he was probably at the height of his popularity. He took quite a rap for it, but I think his being around for the long haul is perhaps due more in part to his desire to keep doing it more than the public allowing him to do so. There's always been fans that kept coming around, and plenty who probably later opened up to what he was doing.

Personally, I'd love to see JT pick up an electric - that boy can use some funk .

Tony

[daddysguitar]

when I was much younger, I always got the new Joni Mitchell album when it came out. Lots of other folks, of course, but she's the best example I can think of.
Every time she came out with a name album, past a certain point, I HATED IT! Then, I'd give it a few more spins, and I'D LOVE IT!
She listened to her muse, and ran with it, and ended up taking her "fans" with her, those who chose to go. And..she ended up making many more fans than she lost, in all probability, whether that was her intent or not.
She wasn't afraid of losing some sales; only concerned about making the music she heard, and let the chips fall where they do.
now back to your regular programming.

[Chirpy_72]

I think it's a good thing to have different arrangements of the same song in your arsenal. Pick and choose with the mood.

To go back to your Clapton reference, since the "unplugged" album, I've heard Clapton play Layla both ways.

[orsino]

IMO a good song/book/painting/script etc. is seperated from the bad ones usually because the good ones come from the heart and/or tell some sort of truth. If an artist can change the style of the original art and not LOSE that inspiration that made it good to begin with, then it will be good art once again. Too many times I see artists changing the style just to change the style. Some critics call this "creative". Creativity comes from something internal, not an external change in technique. In those cases the art seems "cold" because of the lost inspiration. I've seen this so many times in the theatre that it's scary.
Nothing wrong with changing the way a tune is played as long as you don't lose the initial essence. Many tunes have been changed and have been very successful. Some even better than the original. I think that if the tune loses the heart in the translation, the artist and the audience will be better served creating a new tune to express what's coming from your heart at the time. Nothing wrong with Neil Young taking on different styles in nearly every album. I enjoy it. But, an up-tempo electric version of the message in Old Man would be difficult to capture IMO.
The upbeat version of Layla is an example of a song having lost its heart. This is not me dwelling on the past and holding up a lit cigarette lighter. If Clapton can do it differently and not lose the heart, I'd be all for it. I've heard the original thousands of times I'm sure and would welcome the change. The Unplugged version is not it.

[LittleBrother]

Originally posted by orsino Nothing wrong with changing the way a tune is played as long as you don't lose the initial essence. Many tunes have been changed and have been very successful. Some even better than the original. I think that if the tune loses the heart in the translation, the artist and the audience will be better served creating a new tune to express what's coming from your heart at the time.

 

 

Wow, "CLICKING SOUND" , you really hit me with that comment. No doubt that is the way to go.

[EvilTwin]

Originally posted by daddysguitar when I was much younger, I always got the new Joni Mitchell album when it came out. Lots of other folks, of course, but she's the best example I can think of. Every time she came out with a name album, past a certain point, I HATED IT! Then, I'd give it a few more spins, and I'D LOVE IT! She listened to her muse, and ran with it, and ended up taking her "fans" with her, those who chose to go. And..she ended up making many more fans than she lost, in all probability, whether that was her intent or not. She wasn't afraid of losing some sales; only concerned about making the music she heard, and let the chips fall where they do. now back to your regular programming.

Good to see ya posting, DG.

Great response, too. The perogative of any artist is to follow their own artistic vision. It gets murky when you go into the pop world...you never know if it's pressure from their label, or genuine artistic interest that leads to exploring other territories. Either way, it's their choice.

But I think it's interesting to watch the evolution of an artist. If Eric Clapton never changed, I wouldn't even be half as interested in him as I am.

The journey can be more interesting than any destination.

Originally posted by orsino Nothing wrong with changing the way a tune is played as long as you don't lose the initial essence. Many tunes have been changed and have been very successful. Some even better than the original. I think that if the tune loses the heart in the translation, the artist and the audience will be better served creating a new tune to express what's coming from your heart at the time.

Well put.

Man, it's nice to see a civil discussion on topics like this. The endless trolling on subjects like this in Guitar Jam is what made me swear the place off!

[orsino]

Originally posted by EvilTwin Man, it's nice to see a civil discussion on topics like this.

 

 

Amen on that Bro. The man who started this thread is the main reason that these civil discussions are more the rule than the exception here.

[Blackwatch]

Great subject LB. I'm in the same frame of mind right now. I love to play late at night and treat my songs (that I've played a 1000 times) like they are the vehicle for some kind of new expression. I want to take it to a new level with my songs as a medium to a sort of jazz. And the rub is bringing it to a live venue situation. My bass player fights me on it.
And it was expressed very well previously. You're a performer or an artist......Or combinations of the two.....
Good luck LB.....

[Carle]

I prefer an artist over a showman or performer. I have been to many concerts since I have started playing again and I enjoy hearing someone that is playing with their heart and soul. The problem with most people is when they hear a tune they want to hear it the same way everytime. I think fellow players are more willing to hear tunes played different than the non playing listeners. A player that plays from the emotions doesn't play a tune the same each time.

The guitar players I have talked to after their concerts said they prefer players in the audience to non players even though it may make them a little more nervis because the players understand the music. I was telling a friend that plays the blues for hire and I told him I wanted to learn enough tunes to play out at small places. He said the best way to destroy your love of music is to play for hire as you will soon tire of the struggle to please an audience. He said jamming with friends is fun and playing for hire is a job. I play for my own satisfaction and may never be willing to please an audience.

ToLB and everyone on this forum that plays for hire please keep one thing in mind. Music is very personal and when you play a tune some will love it and some will hate it. If you play and feel satisfied that you put your soul into it that's good. If you played to capture an audience you have lost yourself. Think about this, if you play something someone likes they will very likely tell you, If you play something they don't like they won't come back.

I hope I am not the leaning tower of babble with all this. I just love music, guitars especially, and I want to keep it that way. Be true to yourself for in the long run you have to answer to yourself and the One.

[EvilTwin]

Originally posted by Carle I prefer an artist over a showman or performer. I have been to many concerts since I have started playing again and I enjoy hearing someone that is playing with their heart and soul. The problem with most people is when they hear a tune they want to hear it the same way everytime. I think fellow players are more willing to hear tunes played different than the non playing listeners. A player that plays from the emotions doesn't play a tune the same each time. The guitar players I have talked to after their concerts said they prefer players in the audience to non players even though it may make them a little more nervis because the players understand the music. I was telling a friend that plays the blues for hire and I told him I wanted to learn enough tunes to play out at small places. He said the best way to destroy your love of music is to play for hire as you will soon tire of the struggle to please an audience. He said jamming with friends is fun and playing for hire is a job. I play for my own satisfaction and may never be willing to please an audience. ToLB and everyone on this forum that plays for hire please keep one thing in mind. Music is very personal and when you play a tune some will love it and some will hate it. If you play and feel satisfied that you put your soul into it that's good. If you played to capture an audience you have lost yourself. Think about this, if you play something someone likes they will very likely tell you, If you play something they don't like they won't come back. I hope I am not the leaning tower of babble with all this. I just love music, guitars especially, and I want to keep it that way. Be true to yourself for in the long run you have to answer to yourself and the One.

 

 

Great post, but I kinda disagree in some respects.

 

I used to be a hard core blues and rock fan. That was it for me. That's what I wanted to do and wanted to be.

 

Then my guitar teacher came to me with an offer a few years ago. He plays bass because no one else in the area he lives does -- and the cat can play the hell out of a six-string bass. He said he needed a guitar player because he just couldn't find one that fit in with him.

 

The band was a country/rock band...music I didn't like. However, I grew to love it. I learned more about being a musician, and music in general, in the three years I played out live with them than in any other point in my development as a guitar player.

 

I didn't want to go out and try to please people while playing music I didn't even like. But it sure helped me.

 

A guy like Jimi Hendrix just wouldn't have been Jimi had he not played the chitlin circuit. He learned a lot more than blues there.

 

I think there's a lot to be said for the learning experience that comes with being a travelling musician.

[auditorium]

i think that it's really an artist's job to change. the most interesting artists to me are the ones who have evolved as musicians, acting on the impulse to always create interesting music, rather than the kind of music they have always made. the flaming lips, bob dylan, and radiohead are good examples of this methodology, while stabbing westward, skynard, and tom jones became parodies of themselves (not that jones wasn't really kind of a joke to begin with...that said, i love some of his songs. mmm, lounge music...)

creativity, by its nature, enforces change.

[LittleBrother]

I guess artists will always strive to please because they live off the feedback of others to see how effective their message is. I also guess there are private players that just want please themselves and content with that. I think that may be some of the difference between a songwriter and a showman (showperson for better P.C.).

I guess there is no "correct answer" to this but I like what Rick Nelson sang in the late 60s in that song Garden Party. Cant please everybody so you might as well please yourself. That's how I have been living and playing.

Great discussions and this thread really made by rusty brain think. Thanks and keep em coming

[sec12196]

Personally I see it as a natural progression as long as you remain true to yourself. We as humans evolve and change. I know I am not the same person I was 5 years ago. So I wouldn't expect to be playing the same way 5 years ago. Of course you will continue to progress technically and your knowledge of music continues to grow but if you stick to your guns and play what affects you most then your style HAS to change. It is also easy to stick to what you know. It is safe and the familiarity of it can be warming. I think these things are cyclicle because change is very gradual. All of sudden you realize that you aren't enjoying playing as much as you used to. Why? Because your tastes have evolved but what your playing hasn't. Then you start searching for what really rings true to your heart and you'll know it when you hit it. It could be a totally different sound or style or maybe an interesting twist on the ol' tried and true. But if you aren't fulfilling yourself why play? For the money? Your choice. Me, I just strive to feel that grin on my face when I'm gettin' it right. There's no feeling like it as I think all of you would agree.

[WGH]

Originally posted by sec12196 Me, I just strive to feel that grin on my face when I'm gettin' it right. There's no feeling like it as I think all of you would agree.

 

 

Right...and it never ceases to amaze me what I thought was right when I was 20, and what I think is right now (42).

 

I also wonder what I'll be thinking is right next year and each of the years after.

[redman]

I'm not the best person to express an opinion on the subject since I don't perform in public (except the obligatory family get togethers) and really don't write much. That said I think an artist just has to be true to themselves. You have to please yourself first and foremost. Let's say you perform in front of 100 people, that's 100 different personalities with varied tastes that you have to please. I don't know if that's possible. Write and perform for yourself, the audience goes along for the ride. They can sense if you are enjoying or not enjoying yourself. And the only way you can really enjoy yourself is to enjoy what you are doing.

If you change the way you do a song there will be some that don't like it because it's not the original. Some will like it because it's different than the original. You can't please everyone, so you might as well please yourself.

You mentioned James Taylor. I've seen more than a few of his concerts and he changes the way he plays songs. I remember not recognizing a song of his until he started the lyrics. It was Mexico, done really different. I liked the original better but the version he did that night was still pretty darn good.

By the way, hearing James Taylor do rap would be good for laughs, once!

[irpacynot]

Originally posted by LittleBrother I also guess there are private players that just want please themselves and content with that. I think that may be some of the difference between a songwriter and a showman (showperson for better P.C.). Thanks and keep em coming

 

 

Before I came up to do my little bit for the LB Jam, I had been talking with Dan [Gore] for about 15 minutes - just about life and gear and stuff. He was very enthusiastic about his feelings that artists need to be aware and remember that they are entertainers. They must learn how to speak to and entertain an audience. I listened and took it all in, and then of course after playing my first tune later that evening I felt the need to confide in those of you that were there about my conversation and joked that I think my schtick is my lack of schtick. I don't know whether Dan is right or wrong, and it's probably both depending on who you're talking to, and when. But for me, in my life right now, it's been one of the hardest things for me to struggle with. Not deciding whether or not I am also an entertainer, but staying with my right path by remembering that that is neither here nor there - I am an artist.

 

LB, I'd probably fall into the songwriter category with regards to performing. I always hope people get off when I play, and I try to give everything to the audience, but only as it stays in line with what is honest expression of me.

[EvilHippy]

Originally posted by LittleBrother Should we be mad if James Taylor starts playing electric guitar and speeds all his music up, or starts adding rap to his songs ? Or should we just let him go and perhaps just not buy what we dont like and let him make up his mind on his own. Man that was a sicko example. You are all intelligent enough to decode my twisted mind. Thanks

Man...what have you been smoking LB??? ~EH

[EvilHippy]

Two musicians who have had major change: Eric Clapton and Jimmy Buffett.I really like the new Eric.I met him backstage at Willie Nelson's birthday party concert and I have to say...his style is different from when he started in the 60's.Back in the Cream era it seemed like Ginger Baker, Eric Clapton, and Jack Bruce were all doing their own thing at concerts.They sounded like they were all playing different songs at once.But if you seperated them or heard solos, they were great.Eric is a different man.No longer an alcoholic or a heroin addict, he really focuses on his music.I think he has pretty much retired from touring except for a few concerts back in the UK and special occasions.He plays more blues and jazz and his old stuff is better and improved.I never really thought much of Eric Clapton as an acoustic player but he is great at his unplugged stuff.I like the new acoustic version of Layla.If you have'nt listened to his newest stuff yet go buy the new album "One More Car,One More Rider" (I think it's 2001 or 2002).It's a 2 CD combo and some come with a DVD of the concert.I have the CD's and the DVD.Outstanding work.I have a psychedelic painting of Eric Clapton on the wall just to the right of this desk in Purple,Orange,and Yellow.It's an original by Chris Juul, a dutch born artist who lives in florida and is an interior decorator for a bunch of rich and famous in West Palm Beach.He manages an Ethan Allen store too.Also, Jimmy Buffett has really changed from his old Margaritaville stuff to newer more acoustic stuff....actually, 80 percent of his stuff nowadays is acoustic.Get Far Side Of The World..."tonight I just Need My Guitar", a solo acoustic song about a man and his guitar on the beach and nothing else.Great albums.Love em'.~EH

[telenate]

I don't conform to any audience with my playing, but some of you might think it sounds like "indie" music. In the wrong bar I'd get my ass kicked for my songs for sure.

I like to mess with covers, too. I do punk versions of country songs and vice versa.

I try to play original sounding music but then temporarily slide into playing blues, bluegrass and jazz styles. Sometimes I'll do Telecaster punk rock, but that's becoming rarer as I'm hitting my late 30s. The youthful angst is no longer there much and extra-loud music makes me uncomfortable.

They're all subject to change since I haven't committed them to CD, but I have about 10 songs and 50 melodies or so. I've written down the melodies and some lyrics in pencil. Someday I'll get an album out, but I want to record and produce it myself. A friend wants to do my album in his studio ... maybe, if I get to keep control of the project.

As for now I'm working on my technique. I've recently picked up two-finger fingerpicking; that's thumb and forefinger. It's not the Rev. Gary Davis, but my wife say she likes it. I can do a half-decent version of Hesitation Blues. I had been a flatpicker exclusively for years.

I'm into unformed or semiformed sounds a lot of the time, which probably explains why I've developed so many original melodies.

I've always considered it a hobby.

Excellent topic, LB.

[talkgtr]

The artist who can sing, write, play AND produce himself is a rare bird. You can play your music live and get great response only to have the same material fall flat on recordings.

I enjoy it when an artist will reinterpret their material, I love to hear the subtleties of a new version (most of the time, but not E.C. acoustic album), if it's done for an artistic reason rather than simply repackaging the old stuff.

If you find out what folks like about your material (by watching the audiences reaction while you play rather than what they say after the set is over), that may get you closer to what's good about your stuff and help you focus your approach.

[mrbluetone]

When playing out live...I have found that the crowd comes and goes, their emotions move around the floor like a snake....sometimes you can catch them, sometimes not.....and even when your whole performance is just as good as your last one.

Maybe when you do get hold of your audience you get to take them for a ride......other times you ride alone. In both cases your riding...and when it does click and they are right there you can have so much fun. There is nothing better than making good music come alive!

[JacoMon]

I have always pretty much refused to play songs that I hate. Ive' had to perform a few that I wasn't blown away by. But unless there is some inner conection between the musican and the song, it will not be right. As for original songs. If someone has made millions of dollars and is charging big bucks for crowds to see them perform those tunes, then yes there is some pressure to do a recognizable version of what brought them there. But, in general, if you wrote a song, its yours to do with as you please. When performing for an audience, you always try to pick the songs that will touch those in front of you. I limit myself to choose from the songs that I like to play to try to please them. If it was nessesary for me to start scratching records and busting out with RAP to please an audience, I am in the wrong room.