Is Performing With A Backing Track Cheating?

[studio-c]

The last band I was in was a 3 piece. Bass, guitar, and marimba.
We used to have drummers, but they kept spontaneously combusting, a la Spinal Tapp...
Actually, they kept hitting on the (female) front person/bassist and were generally obnoxious, so she programmed all the drums into a Korg Electribe.
We DID put up a little drum set- kick, snare, ride cymbal, and set a skeleton on it, wearing a wig and a corset (we were a Halloween punky kind of band).

In addition to playing guitar, I had a little table of electronics- the Korg drum machine, and my laptop, which ran Reason.

For example, we used to play Oingo Boing "Nasty Habits", for which I programmed all the brass, etc, into Reason, and MIDI'd it to the Korg.

In this case, I felt it wasn't cheating, because it still contained much of the risk of performing live, and I HAD actually played all the parts on a keyboard to program it.
As a backup I had all the backing tracks on an iPod, which went into my little mixer on the electronics table. If all hell broke loose with midi, etc, I could revert to that. That would have felt more like cheating. And I felt that bands relying on actual pre-recorded tracks were cheating. So it seemed like a fine line, but I felt I had my integrity intact.

By the way, in the dive bar circuit, at least in San Diego and Orange county CA, the stages are tiny, and you can barely fit a band on there. So it was nice not having the drum set to deal with.

I guess we'll all have a place where we draw the line.

When the first string keyboards came out, I remember the musicians unions trying to force payment of x quantity of violinists in a performance. I don't think it went anywhere, but that was certainly a different place to draw that line.

It's a funny biz...

[studio-c]

Just thought of something else...

A good friend in LA used to work for New England Digital, home of the Synclavier.

He toured with Michael Jackson for years, and babysat the Synclavier, which must have been a nightmare, taking that thing on the road.

The reason they used it was because people would accuse Michael of using a taped backing track. He could honestly say, "no, there are no tape machines anywhere here."

[Cary B. Cornett]

I have found this thread an interesting read, and also found much to agree with. When it come to whether or not to "allow" backing tracks, I think the question to be answered, on a case by case basis, would be "Is the audience getting good value for the price of admission?"

In at least one tour, Pink Floyd had an 8 track tape running back stage that had a click track, various effect sound that would be too difficult to reproduce live, and even timed directions for stage hands like "release the pig NOW". I'm willing to bet the audience did not feel cheated.

I have seen performance video of The Who performing "Baba O'Reilly", where you can hear the triggered organ sound (arguably very important to the arrangement) when there is no keyboard rig in sight. I recognized the "cheat", but understood it and was not bothered by it.

There there is the other side. I saw Queen on their "Night At The Opera" tour, where absolutely everything we heard came from the band on stage. They delivered to the best of their ability and performed very well, but there were some aspects where they could NOT entirely duplicate the sound of the record. It was a good performance, but I remember having mixed feelings about the difference.

Finally, this discussion reminded me of performance videos I have seen of Led Zeppelin from their heyday, performing on stage as a straight power trio plus vocalist. Compared to their album recordings, I found these performances disappointing by comparison. Basically too few players chasing too many parts, and for me the musical texture suffered. This has left me with the feeling that the price of being a "purist" is simply too high.

But if I was really going to be succinct instead of my usual long-winded self, I would simple have posted, "It depends."

[Dave Labrecque]

I think I'm pretty much right where you are with this, Cary.

I have seen performance video of The Who performing "Baba O'Reilly", where you can hear the triggered organ sound (arguably very important to the arrangement) when there is no keyboard rig in sight. I recognized the "cheat", but understood it and was not bothered by it.

I remember reading an article years ago in Mix or RE/P that showed the technical operation for that. They had no less than three multitrack decks at the ready backstage (one main and two redundant, IIRC). I believe Moony wore headphones for the click.

Then there is the other side. I saw Queen on their "Night At The Opera" tour, where absolutely everything we heard came from the band on stage. They delivered to the best of their ability and performed very well, but there were some aspects where they could NOT entirely duplicate the sound of the record. It was a good performance, but I remember having mixed feelings about the difference.

I saw Queen twice back in the day. Both times the players left the stage as a light show ensued for the operatic middle of Bohemian Rhapsody. At one show I was pretty close to the FOH position, and remember looking up at a quarter-track machine sitting high atop the equipment rack doing its 15-IPS thing on cue. I can't imagine they would've ever tried that bit live. I was always impressed, though, with how well they covered vocals, generally; and never seemed to miss Brian May's guitar overdubs in concert. But I was young then and would probably find some details lacking in my wise old age.

[jmh]

Finally, this discussion reminded me of performance videos I have seen of Led Zeppelin from their heyday, performing on stage as a straight power trio plus vocalist. Compared to their album recordings, I found these performances disappointing by comparison. Basically too few players chasing too many parts, and for me the musical texture suffered. This has left me with the feeling that the price of being a "purist" is simply too high.

See what this one does for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWOuzYvksRw

Led Zeppelin is one of those bands I wish I had seen.

Part of the magic is that performances are all different - and of course some shows are better than others. I love it when a band is firing on all cylinders. I saw a couple of the Yes (who I've seen many times - they were always good or better) Masterworks tour. The setlist was comprised of all the stuff that was too hard to do live. Holy crap! Or if you see someone like Allan Holdsworth (rip) or Tommy Emmanuel - which is just total virtuosity. Those guys also make a total mockery of all my musical and guitar limitations - but I think its good for the head.

[John Ludlow]

See what this one does for you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWOuzYvksRw

Led Zeppelin is one of those bands I wish I had seen.

Part of the magic is that performances are all different - and of course some shows are better than others. I love it when a band is firing on all cylinders. I saw a couple of the Yes (who I've seen many times - they were always good or better) Masterworks tour. The setlist was comprised of all the stuff that was too hard to do live. Holy crap! Or if you see someone like Allan Holdsworth (rip) or Tommy Emmanuel - which is just total virtuosity. Those guys also make a total mockery of all my musical and guitar limitations - but I think its good for the head.

Watching most great guitarists makes me want to practice more: "I'll bet someday I could do that." Watching Tommy Emmanuel perform makes me want to abandon playing the guitar. At least briefly. If you don't know who he is, do a search for him and 'Somewhere Over the Rainbow' on YouTube. That shouldn't even be possible. Maybe there's a reel-to-reel inside his guitar? Or a harp? But no, you see his actual fingers actually doing that live.

I think that performers like him are cheapened by those who leave you with the impression that they actually do it - but don't. When you see a magician perform, you accept his slight of hand - but you know and accept that it isn't real. That he's fooling you. It's not pre-recordings that bother me - it's the subterfuge.

[mr_es335]

John,

I think that performers like him are cheapened by those who leave you with the impression that they actually do it - but don't.!

... John, I could not agree with you more on this point.

Have a look-see here: [Click_Me]

• 43:23 of just him a, and a guitar...though "live" with just two simple pedals. WOW!

Lastly, my favourite, playing a tune I have heard him play three times live, all different, but all still absolutely vidunderlig: [Click_Me]

[John Ludlow]

John,
Have a look-see here: [Click_Me]

• 43:23 of just him a, and a guitar...though "live" with just two simple pedals. WOW!

Note though (around 14:30) that his sound man is also applying reverb and delay and that his guitar has an active preamp with tone shaping capability that he makes full use of throughout the performance.

There's one point where he says that they get it the way he wants it in sound check - and then his sound man doesn't change it. Mmmmmm.... I don't know. Every place I ever played sounds very different filled with people in it than it does empty. Maybe his sound guy does more than he thinks and just doesn't tell him...

Or... maybe it's just that Tommy Emmanuel plays better venues than I ever did. You never hear the sound of belligerent drunks at his shows...

[jmh]

Lastly, my favourite, playing a tune I have heard him play three times live, all different, but all still absolutely vidunderlig: [Click_Me]

Yup. I tend to believe that one was for real.

I never saw Julian Bream, but for a long time have tried to see the legendary (and not so) musicians whenever the opportunity presents itself. One of the shows I passed up was Andres Segovia at a high school in Middletown NY in maybe 1976. I think my dad went, but I chose to go a party with some kids from school instead. Later I heard he had just one mic and a tiny PA at really low volume - but among the audience you could hear a pin drop. Then again it is those missed opportunities that motivate you to see shows you might have passed on as you realize you might not get that chance again.

My dad was born in 1916 and lived in New Orleans from maybe 8 to 24. He liked music and had eclectic tastes but didn't tend to mention shows he had seen.

My brother and I went to New Orleans to celebrate the hundredth (have parting responsibilities to uphold for the ancestors). I just didn't realize the magnitude of what a musically magical place that is - nor the developments that took place in Jazz - much of it right when dad lived there. I'm sure then as now, it happened everywhere from the clubs to the street corners. Anyway, I wish I has asked dad about all of it...

[mr_es335]

jmh,

I not only had the blessing and the fortune of seeing Bream play live numerous times, but I had the rare of opportunity of attending a master class of his. What I found particularly interesting, is that Bream is not necessarily the most polished classical guitarist. But his ability to explore the tonal nuances of the instrument are what really sets him apart.
• I also owned a guitar built by his then luthier Jose Romanillos.

I only saw Segovia once - I do believe he was 86 at the time. He actually has a complete memory lapse performing Bach's "Chacconne in Dm". He simply pause for a moment, and then played a completely different piece that was not even on the program! Inedible!
• I had him later sign his rendition f the Bach's "Chacconne in Dm".

I have heard of other discussing New Orleans - and they all stated very much the thing!