Where is the line in this situation?

[happycannibal]

My band plays to a sequencer track. Every time we play its the same timing, length- everything! My question is one of opinion: how much 'track' is too much? I could really record and cue any insturment, synth or voice. I have done some experimenting with putting harmonies in certain places, it sounded very good.

 

Do you guys think that integrety's at stake here? I am concerned that our audiece would lump us in with the Jessica Simpsons and Brittany Spears of the industry. We would of course, never 'lip sync,' persay; only play along with insturments that are prerecorded.

 

WHERES THE LINE?!?!! What would you all do?

 

Blake Stetson.

[Chicken Monkey]

I'm going to say that in the live setting, any element that is not controlled by a human is questionable. There are some exceptions, like a drum machine, that are commonplace enough to get by. I think the "line" might be that it's dishonest to take credit for a musical sound in a live setting that you do not produce.

[bluesway]

i contract out and play guitar in a band that always plays to a sequence. i hate it. the band is always so limited by it and the group (all pros, mind you) just doesn't groove as well as when we decide to cut it out. for me, the sequence is always a bummer. (but i've done it, too)

[Geno_xl]

 

Originally posted by Chicken Monkey I'm going to say that in the live setting, any element that is not controlled by a human is questionable. There are some exceptions, like a drum machine, that are commonplace enough to get by. I think the "line" might be that it's dishonest to take credit for a musical sound in a live setting that you do not produce.

 

 

I agree. I would rather just add another member to the band to play the part.

 

Not only that but I think the music would sound alot better with live musicians playing it. Otherwise, the music tends to almost sound as if your playing a cd. well they could play the cd at home.

 

I guess it basically just depends on what you, your band, and your fans think about the music. if it works for you then just keep doing it. Just not something I would probably do.

[JSimms]

A cost-benefit analysis would come in handy here. Obviously I am not talking about monetary costs necessarily, but more so metaphorical costs. For instance, if you play in a four piece (Guitar A/Vox, Guitar B, Bass, and Drums) and there is a synth part that is the hook to a song that you wrote, i.e. it is absolutely necessary to the song, and yet the two guitar parts are just as important, then by all means use a sequencer. If, in the same band, there are harmony vocals that you like, but no one would miss if they were gone, then do not sequence them.

 

Obviously it is not always this cut and dry, but always ask yourself this before you do anything: Does sequencing this part serve the song? If you are serving the song, then I can overlook a lot of the cheese factor--No headset mics and dance routines though.

[JSimms]

 

Originally posted by Chicken Monkey [...]I think the "line" might be that it's dishonest to take credit for a musical sound in a live setting that you do not produce.

 

 

Dishonest? What does honesty have to do with anything? Aside from that, I also don't see how it is dishonest. You still have to program your sequenced tracks, so you are in fact responsible for every sound you produce.

[Chicken Monkey]

 

Originally posted by JSimms Dishonest? What does honesty have to do with anything? Aside from that, I also don't see how it is dishonest. You still have to program your sequenced tracks, so you are in fact responsible for every sound you produce.

 

 

I'm not sure that I used the best word, but there is an element of deception. In the most extreme example of this approach, we've got a group like Milli Vanilli. The backlash they saw was based on the fact that they lied/cheated, i.e., were dishonest. It gets murkier and murkier the further you get from lip-synching towards sequencing. I think that when you purport to be live entertainment, though, that your audience is expecting something a DJ can't give them.

[HMKRich]

 

Originally posted by JSimms A cost-benefit analysis would come in handy here. Obviously I am not talking about monetary costs necessarily, but more so metaphorical costs. For instance, if you play in a four piece (Guitar A/Vox, Guitar B, Bass, and Drums) and there is a synth part that is the hook to a song that you wrote, i.e. it is absolutely necessary to the song, and yet the two guitar parts are just as important, then by all means use a sequencer. If, in the same band, there are harmony vocals that you like, but no one would miss if they were gone, then do not sequence them. Obviously it is not always this cut and dry, but always ask yourself this before you do anything: Does sequencing this part serve the song? If you are serving the song, then I can overlook a lot of the cheese factor-- No headset mics and dance routines though.

 

 

U2 uses sequencing when they perform Kite. I like how obvious it is in the intro and again at the end, but how they roll the volume off during the song. It's here, if you wish to listen: (you have to listen to bono talk for 0:52 first)

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9sBsVbIQQQ

[JSimms]

Originally posted by Chicken Monkey I'm not sure that I used the best word, but there is an element of deception. In the most extreme example of this approach, we've got a group like Milli Vanilli. The backlash they saw was based on the fact that they lied/cheated, i.e., were dishonest. It gets murkier and murkier the further you get from lip-synching towards sequencing. I think that when you purport to be live entertainment, though, that your audience is expecting something a DJ can't give them.

 

Well, sure. Milli Vanilli were flat out lying. They were taking credit for someone else's music entirely. They were not performing anything at all. I don't think that anyone is advocating doing this sort of thing, but I see no harm in having a sequencer play parts that you cannot play at the same time you are playing other parts. It's technology--Not to be feared.

[TheBCProjects]

I don't play instruments live. I just bring my laptop and HUK UP DAT FROOTY LOOOPS YO, FLAVA ALL UP IN YA EAR, TASTE THE RAINBOW, BIYATCH!

[tamoore]

 

I played in a band that didn't have a bass player for about five years. Every song would have at least the bass sequenced, some with keys/horns/ and other misc.. percussion - whatever the song needed. I also used the sequence to control my guitar preamp, so the sequencer did all my changes - that was nice.. Drums were electronic, so we made kit changes on the fly with MIDI signals, and even had a MIDI lighting controller.

 

I used to get a different disgruntled musician, almost every night who would come up and yell at us from the foot of the stage: 'You guys are cheating!!!'.... And I'd just laugh, agree with them, buy 'em a drink, and forget about it.

 

It's entertainment. No normal (non-musician) patron who came to see us ever thought anything of us other than we were a damn good sounding and entertaining band. For me, that was the goal.

 

[happycannibal]

There would be no farce about it. We tell people that we compose and play to the track. The question is not weather or not we should use the sequence, rather how far is too far? I really appreciate all the feedback, though.

 

I don't play instruments live. I just bring my laptop and HUK UP DAT FROOTY LOOOPS YO, FLAVA ALL UP IN YA EAR, TASTE THE RAINBOW, BIYATCH!

 

That's what I'm saying!!

[happycannibal]

Originally posted by tamoore so the sequencer did all my changes - that was nice.. Drums were electronic, so we made kit changes on the fly with MIDI signals, and even had a MIDI lighting controller.

 

Don't forget the midi controllable effects and delays. Never let your echo be out of time again.

 

The temptation of the darkside?? The easy but advantagous route!! It has me written all over it.

[bluesway]

you asked if your integrity's at stake. yes, it is. the people (non-songwriters who will be less willing to empathize) who go to your shows will inevitably have a group within them who think you're lame for it. i know because i've been there; and it's without fail - every show.

[happycannibal]

 

you asked if your integrity's at stake. yes, it is. the people (non-songwriters who will be less willing to empathize) who go to your shows will inevitably have a group within them who think you're lame for it. i know because i've been there; and it's without fail - every show.

 

 

Its good to get some tales of experience. I shall anticipate this.

 

Blake.

[Christopher Kai]

Live? In my mind, your one short step above karaoke if you sing to a sequencer- and that's not a good thing. Studio is a different thing, but not live.

 

One work around is to hire a keyboard/synth/effects laptop player who does all the little things you need. I tend to give the band more grace then because I know that he's got skill at his craft.

 

Another work around is to play to a metronome in the drummers ear. (If it's the beat your afraid to lose.)

 

Personally, I'd rather see an honest 3 piece band instead of a flashy 3 piece band with a computer.

[crossways]

Sequence WHAT EVER you want and don't feel ONE twing of guilt. I think it's AWESOME!!

 

On my honeymoon, there was a group -- a duo. guitar and vox. Everything else was sequenced or pre-recorded tracks. It was a lot better than just an acoustic and vox. You could dance to it, and many more song possibilities. PLUS I bet they got a much bigger cut from the night.

 

The main point is GET OUT THERE and PLAY. Too many people let one thing or another stop them from gigging. If you need more parts and can't find the players, then why not sequence it.

 

If you live in the middle of nowhere and can't find players with talent or with the same interests then sequence something so you can get out there and play.

 

There is NO dishonesty to seeing one guy and hearing a full band. No one believes that the dude is doing all of the playing live.

 

I think it's more fun to create the music live if you can, but otherwise do what you gotta do. Besides that, it isn't just as simple as you may think to put together a good sequenced track.

[tamoore]

 

Originally posted by crossways Sequence WHAT EVER you want and don't feel ONE twing of guilt. I think it's AWESOME!! On my honeymoon, there was a group -- a duo. guitar and vox. Everything else was sequenced or pre-recorded tracks. It was a lot better than just an acoustic and vox. You could dance to it, and many more song possibilities. PLUS I bet they got a much bigger cut from the night. The main point is GET OUT THERE and PLAY. Too many people let one thing or another stop them from gigging. If you need more parts and can't find the players, then why not sequence it. If you live in the middle of nowhere and can't find players with talent or with the same interests then sequence something so you can get out there and play. There is NO dishonesty to seeing one guy and hearing a full band. No one believes that the dude is doing all of the playing live. I think it's more fun to create the music live if you can, but otherwise do what you gotta do. Besides that, it isn't just as simple as you may think to put together a good sequenced track.

 

 

+1

 

I agree with you. Playing with a sequencer only pisses off musicians, who think music is a contest.... People who want to be entertained could honestly care less, unless they are very-very sophisticated.

[bluesway]

 

Originally posted by tamoore +1 I agree with you. Playing with a sequencer only pisses off musicians, who think music is a contest.... People who want to be entertained could honestly care less, unless they are very-very sophisticated.

 

 

not live in NYC - standards are HIGH. unless you're really breaking ground with the sequence, you're throwing yourself to the lions, man. people are always going to respect self-contained musicians more than a guy with a computer, whether they're musicians or not. plus, there's a real hotel-lounge cover act stigma going on with people who sequence - even if they're entertaining.

 

and most of the people who are entertained STILL recognize it to be less-than-genuine. will they hate it for that? well, no, that's where the competitive musicians come in, but they'll recognize it and if you're doing original work that isn't drastically ENHANCED by a sequence, you're shooting yourself in the foot. just ask a real, successful/critical reviewer to go to your show and see what happens. get an A&R guy in to your show and see what he says.

 

the inherent problem with a sequence is that very few people are adding to the music with it. instead, too many musicians see it as a way to 'fill holes' - also, the live show suffers a lot. live music breathes and that's what makes it beautiful. people with real ears for live music usually don't like sequences. you don't have to be a musician to have high standards.

[crossways]

 

Originally posted by bluesway not live in NYC - standards are HIGH. unless you're really breaking ground with the sequence, you're throwing yourself to the lions, man. people are always going to respect self-contained musicians more than a guy with a computer, whether they're musicians or not. plus, there's a real hotel-lounge cover act stigma going on with people who sequence - even if they're entertaining. and most of the people who are entertained STILL recognize it to be less-than-genuine. will they hate it for that? well, no, that's where the competitive musicians come in, but they'll recognize it and if you're doing original work that isn't drastically ENHANCED by a sequence, you're shooting yourself in the foot. just ask a real, successful/critical reviewer to go to your show and see what happens. get an A&R guy in to your show and see what he says. the inherent problem with a sequence is that very few people are adding to the music with it. instead, too many musicians see it as a way to 'fill holes' - also, the live show suffers a lot. live music breathes and that's what makes it beautiful. people with real ears for live music usually don't like sequences. you don't have to be a musician to have high standards.

 

 

I am not going to disagree with you completely.

 

First of all, in NYC if you can't put a band together, then I don't know where you could. You're just not trying if you can't find four or five guys to create music with.

 

But what about other places in the country where you might have to drive an hour just to find a decent music store? Sometimes the options for live musicians just isn't there.

 

I agree with the hotel/lounge act stigma. That would be the first thing that pops into my head too. Esp. a 1 or 2 guys w/ a computer. I mean you just aren't going to have the people on stage to be able to capture an audience. So it would fit in much better in a "background music" kind of way.

 

I also would say though that a lot of bands ..... national bands ....use backing tracks to fill out parts.

 

As far as music breathing. I get what you are saying, and don't disagree, but consider this.

1 - so much music is created in the studio with a almost mechanical metronmic sense of timing, esp. rock/pop.

 

2 - technology is catching up to that problem. Take a look at the Notion software video on the H-C frontpage from NAMM. It is a notation/sequencer designed with performance in mind. One big feature is the ability to "tap" the beat in a live setting so that you can "follow" tempo changes, making it possible to have a rubato feel, or accellerandos, etc.

 

Again, I am not about to say, "Screw a live band setting, everybody go buy a guitar and a computer." But I also don't want to see Johnny Q set his guitar down, because he can't find enough guys to play the music he wants to play.

 

Music creation has always been about innovation. Trying new things, even when they are "poo-pood" by the the vast majority in the community.

[happycannibal]

Great responses, ladies and gents.

 

 

The main point is GET OUT THERE and PLAY. Too many people let one thing or another stop them from gigging. If you need more parts and can't find the players, then why not sequence it?

 

 

This was the principal problem. We want the big sound and production and want a tight and efficient songwriting process. We don't have time to search, audition and teach the exact person for the very specific position this would entail.

 

 

there's a real hotel-lounge cover act stigma going on with people who sequence - even if they're entertaining.

 

 

This is exactly what we fear. However, in our defense, it is not like our live sound is completely dominated by sequence or completely without mimicing natural feel. There are parts in our music where there is little or no track. And also, we write the song without the track first then add it. I design an exact tempo map for each song that mimics the push and pull of tempo that a human makes.

 

It sounds good and we like it. At least let us try and fail!!! We shall see. I will keep you all posted about our success or otherwise and if any A&R reps come see us I relay that too.

 

Love, Blake.

[Mastadruma]

Hello fellow posters!

 

This is Chris, Blakes Drummer for The Inward Stare. I really want to thank all of you for taking the time to drop some words about what we're doing, musically.

 

I think that some people might have missed the point that we're trying to make. We are a full fledged 3 piece rock trio who rocks just fine by ourselves...however, by adding the sequenced tracks (Synth/Sine waves, Horns, Special eFX...) we are trying to create a sound that is bigger and deeper than ANY 3 piece could normally pull off. Believe me, Blake spends many hours toiling over the programming of the machine slaves...they really make the 2D sound of the band come into 3D.

 

I guess we are wondering if what we are programming is too much for the track? Do you think it is original? Has this been done before?

 

Also, keep in mind that in a few weeks we will be posting the Hard Rockin' stuff. Boy's Club and Indian Woman are the songs representing the "softer" side of the rock we make. Please keep the comments coming and we'll talk more. We think this is a great place to exchange thoughts and ideas.

 

Chris-

www.myspace.com/theinwardstare

[rcb]

I prefer the sound of an all-human band, but I can understand using a sequencer if you're in a bind - i.e. not being able to find/pay musicians to fill those parts. However - this only seems passable if you don't use sequenced tracks on every tune; it's hard enough rounding up a band, and possibly even harder if you have horn players that sit out over half the gig.

 

But if you are using the sequencer on every tune, then it seems that you're streching to be a band that you're not. Does that make sense? Do you want to be a trio, or do you really want to be a sextet? Of course, I'm saying all this only having heard one song, so I may not know what the frick I'm talking about in regards to your situation.

 

With that being said, I would at least use real horns in the studio (referring to the "Boys Club" song)...that, or use a better patch. I think it's a pretty cool tune, but when I first heard that horn sound, an alarm went off that immediately screamed "MIDI!" It's a little harsh and artificially reedy.