What the fuck ever happened to the true spirit of rock? (use of backing tracks)

Forostar said:
In your view when related to music business.

But if integrity exists on stage... if someone cares about a full real performance.... then why is that irrelevant?
Click to expand...

Well to me it is. I know not everyone shares the same feelings.
 
If Dave Murray would be unable to play, would you not mind if his running fingers would not be there, but they still would be "running along" on a tape?

Would you mind if:
- Åkerfeldt's vocals in Opeth would be supported by a backing vocalist, not seen on the stage (people might not notice it and think Akerfeldt is a brilliant singer with a full voice, and when Opeth would not tell what went on, you would not see that as painting a dishonest picture).
- Rush would use a drum computer on stage.
 
My stance on backing tracks is somewhere in the middle.

There are some things that you simply want to put on a studio album because it will sound amazing, never worrying about reproducing this live. When you bring it to the stage and find the song is lacking, I would rather you pipe something in then drop the song from the setlist or leave it sounding empty.

The type of situation I describe, and the type of backing tracks I am generally 100% ok with are:
- orchestration
- choir backing vocals

These are things that could not be recreated live without hiring more people, and most bands are financially limited in how many players they can bring on tour. Should I condemn a band like Symphony X for not hiring a Gregorian choir to bring on tour? No. Would I rather see Sabaton have a keyboard player onstage instead of piping it in? Sure. But I'm still gonna go see them because they play and sing everything else (including myriad backing vocals) and they are amazing live.

Now, backing tracks become an issue for me when we're talking about complete playbacking. If no one in your band is capable of reproducing simple harmonies, then you have a problem. I will give Dream Theater a pass for using playbacking during an album tour where said album features songs with 10-12 vocal tracks all recorded by the lead singer - this is obviously not something that can be done live. And when you can play like John Petrucci, John Myung, Jordan Rudess, and Mike Mangini for as long as you have, I think you've earned the right to do pretty much whatever you want without being considered "fake".

TL;DR - I'm fine with a minimal amount of backing tracks if it is absolutely necessary for monetary reasons, but I would prefer everything to be live.
 
Forostar said:
If Dave Murray would be unable to play, would you not mind if his running fingers would not be there, but they still would be "running along" on a tape?

Would you mind if:
- Åkerfeldt's vocals in Opeth would be supported by a backing vocalist, not seen on the stage (people might not notice it and think Akerfeldt is a brilliant singer with a full voice, and when Opeth would not tell what went on, you would not see that as painting a dishonest picture).
- Rush would use a drum computer on stage.
Click to expand...

Of course I'd prefer everything to be authentic. But I wouldn't lose my shit if I learned that it wasn't the case. If some help is necessary in order to put up a good show, then go for it.
 
There's an area between losing shit and be completely indifferent about it. So at least, you somewhat value integrity on stage.
 
Forostar said:
There's an area between losing shit and be completely indifferent about it. So at least, you somewhat value integrity on stage.
Click to expand...

No I don't. What I value is not "integrity", stop expecting me to agree your ideals.

I prefer everything being live strictly for aesthetic purposes. I don't give a shit about no integrity.
 
Well. I don't want to anger Flash any further. I just think that preferring an authentic performance means doing something as real as possible. And I don't see how that can be separated from integrity.
 
Explain to me how can I consider something to be part of "integrity" when I argue integrity is a myth in the first place. I don't think about integrity, I don't consider integrity, I don't give a shit about integrity. Should be simple enough. Apparently not.

Everything being live sounds better. That's all there is to it. When it's not, I don't feel cheated out, I don't feel like the artist is faking things. I don't care about the "honesty" of it all. And I made that clear right from the get go. I don't give a damn as long as the show is fun. If a performer uses a playback for the entire show but still manages to be entertaining, it's still a good show. Might not be for you, I don't care.
 
Integrity is just a word, Flash. The idea that it's not applicable to professional musicians because you think it's "a myth" doesn't really make a whole load of sense. You can make money, in any field, and still have integrity. That's my opinion, yes; but it's not some unreasonable use of the word. Maybe in the grand scheme of things "integrity" is not the word that comes to your mind to describe these people; but it's a legitimate use of the word in context, even if only to say these people lack some.
 
CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
Integrity is just a word, Flash. The idea that it's not applicable to professional musicians because you think it's "a myth" doesn't really make a whole load of sense. You can make money, in any field, and still have integrity. That's my opinion, yes; but it's not some unreasonable use of the word. Maybe in the grand scheme of things "integrity" is not the word that comes to your mind to describe these people; but it's a legitimate use of the word in context, even if only to say these people lack some.
Click to expand...

Do you expect me to agree to the usage of a word (or the concept that word covers) because it's popular? Might as well shut up and accept what's out there then.
 
I cba reading the whole thread, but I don't mind backing tracks that are done for the right reason. Examples:

- Backing vocals in case no one other than the singer can sing in the band.
- Some keyboard/orchestral arrangement that can't properly be reproduced without a backing track.
- Dark Tranquillity used a bass backing track for some time because they couldn't decide on their next bass player (still haven't but they got a stand-in).
- I'm also pretty sure Mikael from Opeth uses some voice alteration thingy that makes his growls fuller in live shows, but I don't mind as long as it makes him sound better.
- SepticFlesh's clean vocalist can't tour with the band so they play his vocals from tape. And since their last 3 albums used full orchestra, they play those recordings from tape, doubt a keyboard player could reproduce those properly.

Btw. Schmier is a cunt.
 
What about bands who use speaker cabinets as props?
 
There was was a point made about hiring another guitarist to play live, Transatlantic (Dream Theater spinoff) actually does this. They have have a live musician handling extra keyboard, guitar , and even vocal parts so that there doesn't have to be a backing track.
 
To me it depends on the intensity and also on the band in question. (Motorhead with overdubs? I guess not). I think that using of pre-recorded tracks helps the band in question achieve perfection (e. g. - such is the example of Queen), which I always valued above "authenticity". I've always been the prog guy, not the punk guy.

I have always hated the phrase, the idea and the cliche of "rock 'n' roll" and if I'll never hear the phrase again, it'll be still too soon, but I guess that's just me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top