OK Guys. One more slant. Webster�s defines them as:

Entertaining: to divert or amuse

Performing: demonstrating a skill in fulfillment of a requirement

Now, we all know what most ads in the paper say. They say �nightly entertainment� or �live entertainment�. That sounds like �diverting or amusing� to me. I have rarely seen an ad say �performance by skilled conservatory graduate�.

In the same light, if the ads said �Tonight: Elvis Impersonator who occasionally goes into the audience wearing a chicken hat� or �Technically proficient conservatory grad�, who do you think would get the bigger crowd?

Turn on Jerry Springer (vice PBS) and you have the answer.

R/I

Mike, the headless chicken wants its chicken hat back!
http://home.nycap.rr.com/useless/headless_chicken/

Tell you what Taeke.... you conservatory grads continue doing your things and the rest of us entertainers with our chicken hats and Jimmy Buffet tunes will keep doing our thing.... And we'll see you at the bank.

R/I

Who the hell cares anyway ? Not me .. I do what makes ME feel comfortable, but for those times when I play out, always with the goal first and foremost that I entertain my audience.

Musical snobbery on an arranger forum of all places.. Geez.. I find that to be pretty much an oxymoron in and of itself.

I'm kinda proud that I have some "musician skills". I've worked on them to the best of my ability, pretty much to the point that, even if I might be a few notches below the top echelon, I wouldn't be embarrassed or afraid to sit in with pretty much any band on the planet.


That said, I also realize how egotistical musicians can be, me included, and I'm really trying to move just a little bit away from that, because in reality, the majority of most audiences couldn't care less, as long as we can bring something that they want to see and hear.

Personally, I very much enjoy listening to quite complex musical structures, but the majority of the folks in both my family and general circle of life do not. That's just the way it is.

Chick Corea put it in perfect perspective for me in an interview a while back. For those who may not know Chick is a phenonenal keyboard player, who writes and plays some very complex music. One night he was interviewed at a Paul Simon concert. He was absolutely gushing over Paul's work. The interviewer seemed a bit surprised and suggested that it had appeared to him that what Paul had played in his sets amounted to very simple music, but Chick stated that he himself has nowhere near the ability Paul has to write lyrics and string harmonies together. He seemed to be pretty much in awe.

I do what I do depending on the audience, and when I do occasionally get a little egotistical and feel the need to "mark my territory" ( yep it happens ), I turn off all the "junk" and let fly with some ripping solo stuff. At the same time, I could wear the chicken hat if I felt the need to...

Oh yes.. I DO bring my laptop.. always. Reason being is it's chock full of VSTi's and Sample sets, and there isn't an arranger on the planet that can make some of the lovely noises that my laptop makes.

After a couple things that nearly kicked the life out of me ( literally), I think I've begun to see what is really important in life ( at least for myself and my family anyway ) which also helps a little to at least partially let me get "over myself" , and really, I think that helps a bit to make me a happier person in general. On the other hand, each day that I wake up, mostly just because I'm still here, makes me pretty happy.

AJ



[This message has been edited by Bluezplayer (edited 07-14-2007).]

Amen to that AJ!!!!!

what is ironic is that I agree that anything goes if it goes,

yet I am possibly one of the least "cheating" arranger players on this site. I never use smf, never use sequencer, use only bass/drum most of the time, and the
other time divided between using an occasional bigband
horn riff or bossa guitar strum for spice, or using just the
drum and playing lh split bass, or using no arranger and
just playing full kb. I never use intros or performance pads, just outros, fills, fades..and only use 15-20 sounds.
and the biggest "cheating" I do is using the transposer a lot--which makes no difference in what things sound like.

but that's just how I like to do it. I can do what i like
because I'm semi-retired and don't gig for a living, just
for enjoyment and supplementary income. If I had to make a living at it, a lot more "cheating" would be required--no more playing standards/jazz/latin/blues/
exclusively but would have to do top 40, 70's/80's etc..
and would have to use smf, seq, full arrangements, etc.

quality is not what most people are into, or dj's would not be considered "artists"..I'm grateful for the handful left
who appreciate quality, and for those others who may
consider me "entertaining" because i play sax, sing, and
occasionally come up with a droll one-liner off the cuff.

if people accept canned music as "entertainment" they
prefer to real musical creativity, that's just the way it is,
and I find nothing wrong with those who can provide that
in an entertaining way..that's a craft that deserves respect
too, and if a dj can "scratch" a little better than the next
guy, or has a better feel for when to play what selection
than the next guy, that's a craft too..piddling as it is.

the technology cannot be ignored. but what puzzles is this, as my friend recording engineer Vince Traina (Ex-
Atlantic Records)used to ask: Mo, rcording technology keeps getter better and better, why is it that as it improves the quality of the music keeps declining in inverse ratio? (btw he said this in 1991)

I think that the operative words here ate "live entertainment" and "live music". I'll certainly agree that the "cheating" question becomes moot in the area of live entertainment, and anything that works is great.

I also think that the above analysis of the impact of technology was pretty much spot on.

But, I use a digital back on a 4"x5" view camera which results in the generation f a 50 meg plus image. You can't get that on a hand-held anything. Cost: about $25 grand. Good photographers haven't been replaced with amateurs with cheap digitals. Talent rules. Same thing with automated recording equipment and performance equipment. There are people working in both photography and music who couldn't come close to working years ago, but they really don't threaten the folks who have the talent and have learned to enhance their work with technology, rather than using it as a crutch.

All post on page three have been well thought out and worth looking at. These are reall industry issues, and each of us has to decide where in the spectrum of possibilities we are, and how to make the right decisions to get us to where we want to be.

We all have the right to our opinions, which should be presented as the right thing(s) for us, as long as we don't disrespect those of different views and approaches.

Let's continue to discuss real issues using the reasoning shown in the last 10 or so posts.

R.

Cheating? If you can figure out how some of these new fangled arrangers work, that sure can't be cheating. Some of that stuff takes as much, if not more skill and/or talent than reading music and making the keys sounds like something recognizeable. I would only consider SMFs as cheating if you were standing there pretending to play to convince someone that you were playing.

I'm #98 - let's hit 100 !

I think many of you in the 'entertainer at any cost' camp is ignoring the fact that most people DO want to be entertained by a 'real' musician. Let's face it, if mere 'entertainment' with no skill on the part of the 'entertainer' other than amusing the audience WERE what people really want, there would be no live music at all. Anywhere...

But the live music scene is alive and thriving. The trouble is that technology exists, affordably now, that it is practical to 'fake' your way through a gig and the audience (at least those without the skills to recognize faking when they see it) don't know they are being cheated.

But ask anyone of them whether they came out to see a musician, or somebody pretending to be a musician, and most of them will say they came to see musicians. So the 'cheating' aspect of it comes from counterfeiting what they actually want. BUT NOT INFORMING THEM.

You will NEVER see an 'entertainer' step away from his faking and go 'OK, folks, I'm sorry, you all thought I was playing this stuff, but in truth, it's all just karaoke'. People understand the difference between real music and fakery. It is just that it is getting harder and harder to spot.

And you can't say 'well, karaoke is popular, so what difference is this?'. The whole point of karaoke is that there IS no trickery, the machine is out from behind the curtain, so to speak. There is no attempt made to fool the audience that this is REAL musicians, backing them up. And secondly, the important thing about karaoke is that it is an audience 'participation' entertainment, NOT going out to see a 'performer'... The performer is THEM, or their friends, or some drunk guy crying his way through 'Feelings'! It's not supposed to be some paid entertainer, pretending to play the backing. It's a social event, not a concert event.

The minute you restrict the singing to just yourself, if your audience sees you playing, they expect that it IS you that is playing. And if it isn't, that misrepresentation. Maybe not criminal, but certainly a little dishonest. Just remember how they pilloried poor Minni Vanilli after it was found out they weren't actually singing any of their hits...

Don't try to fool yourself the audience doesn't care....