RA travelled to this year's Ether festival in London to spend time with a group of artists—Mount Kimbie, Apparat, Bass Clef, the Brandt Brauer Frick Ensemble—who warp the perception of live dance music.

There's something special about real instruments (being used with laptops) or analogue machines (anyone seen the video of Barker & Baumecker live set, it looks nuts: tiny.cc/s9jrnw) I've got no problem with laptops + ableton, But the times i've sene a "live" set and was blown away or felt it was worth the money have been laptops used with instruments or analogue set ups.

although I can appreciate if you are a producer starting out maybe you can't afford such set ups.

hmmmm

Fantastic read!

It seems like we're trying to compensate for a lack of stage performance. Don't you think it's part of audience's role to modify their expectations?

EDM has never pretended to make rock concerts. Not that artist who mix analog / digital instruments aren't interesting (I recently saw Matthew Dear's live band and it was mindblowing), but I think we need to be conscious about the implications of bringing instruments on stage. The laptop is already an orchestra.

Managed to catch Bass Clef a few years ago at a small university bar on my campus, attended by about 60 fans. He was blasting out the live instruments then, too, back when dubstep itself was so fresh and vital. Utterly brilliant. Good to see this guy blowing up.

Dance bands are awesome!

I concur. EDM isn't rock music, or classical. Let the DJs do their thing and if you aren't adding value with the live performance then perhaps you ought not to do it at all

omg stop saying edm

Really interesting

EDM



(OMG)

wtf i love edm it's my favourite genre of music

Love this. It's so very true. I feel, with the influx of "DJ's" and "Producers" due to the rapid growth of technology, the public and audience is eventually going to expect more from a show. I don't think its anything new however. Acts constantly are in competetion with one another and bringing a bigger, more stimulating live performance if not only expected but also necessary in order to grow their fan base, reach out to a bigger audience and... make money. It's probably a lot more fun for the actual artists too.

It's a catch 22 because, personally, I feel that these big shows are stripping away what a lot of us hold dear to us. Giving an artist/DJ the patience and appreciation to build a night or as cliche as it is, a musical journey. I personally love the shape of a DJ's set, a DJ is just as much of an artist as a band, song writer, whatever.... or at least, they used to be. These big "Concerts" are breeding a generation of ADD, drug riled kids who if they dont hear a song they know... it "sucks" or "is boring and repetitive". I understand that this vibe is still aplenty but of course, you cannot escape the new groups that will come into an intimate night with "name dj here" and moan and bitch that it's not the new Skrillex tune and then procede to the bar, get absolutley obliderated and then go home to complain to there friends they spent £8 on a shit dj with a club full of weirdo. ALAS, Reputation broken.

But who am I to say... I'm a laptop DJ tehse days too.

You have to master this whole other art of delivery so 'beyond the laptop' doesn't even cover the planning and focus you'll need to successfully pull off sets without turning into a travelling circus of roughed-out playback bullshit.

Had the pleasure of seeing Brandt Brauer Frick at Glastonbury - 3 moogs, a tuba, strings, harp... and more. Plus ballet dancers. So good both to watch and to listen to.

"DJ is just as much of an artist as a band, song writer"

Not really though are they?

Of course "dead acts" suck. If you're bringing all your set pre-programmed and there is no performance at all, it will obviously be lame.
Apart from that, only the music matters.
I'd rather see a laptop live act that has great music than a full electronic band that plays bad music.

Live acts have sure changed since when I first started going to shows back in '99. I remember seeing BT at a very small club in Dallas and even though it was just him playing loops and sh!t it was still awesome. When I saw Hybrid open for Moby in 2000 that was great because they had a live drummer and keyboard players so I think they were ahead of the curve so to speak.

Fantastic! thanks!!!!!Thumps up for the story!!!

Mt. Kimbie haz da COOLEST set-up.

DJ's are artists, but... DJ-ing is a dying art, ever notice how all the best dj's are over 40 these days? That's not to take anything away from the live production arena; this is a separate artform from dj-ing IMHO

yes a seperate and much more competent artform that involves the creation of music as opposed to it being replayed. Dont get me wrong i love DJ'ing and i DJ myself but am under no illusion that it is anything close to the creative outlet that composing and playing live is. I have a huge amount of the respect for the musicians mentioned in this article as they taking live electronic music.

guillaumedubois asks a most fascinating question above: what is the audience's role in performance? Should the audience member modify expectations for visual entertainment at a musical performance. I argue, most vehemently "yes".

Has anyone here attended an organ recital at a cathedral? The audience is keenly aware that typically an organist is tucked away in a choir loft, usually above and behind the audience. Therefore, the audience is seated while facing an empty altar and a morbid crucifix. In this case, where an electro-acoustic instrument is being played, does the audience have the right to criticise the performance because of the lack of visual stimulation? Does the audience have the right to demand to see what the organist is doing?

In all my years of attending live performance music events, I've only been mildly interested in actually seeing the performance. The performances span acoustic, electro-acoustic, electronic live, electronic recorded, and DJ acts. Recalling my experiences as an audience member, the most significant priorities for me were the caliber of the composition, the performer's execution of the composition, and the acoustics (be they room, or the output of the instruments). Is that to say I listened blindfolded? Of course not. It is also not to say that I haven't enjoyed the visual fodder, whether they originate from the performers or some other source. Going to a show, however, was really not about seeing a show, but hearing the show.

At the same time, a composer/performer needs to and must ask the series of questions most important to earn his/her keep: what is the purpose of this performance? Is this art music, or is this dance music? Does the composer have full license to take control of the performance, and the audience be damned? Does the composition and performance need to bow to every demand, since the audience is paying for a service?

Guillaume rightly points out performers (and we must focus on live electro-acoustic performers, and NOT DJs) are modifying the stage setup to provide more visual stimulus. That might be part of it. Another part of the reason for the blend (and really, this is nothing entirely new), is that musicians tire of timbres, or tire of the techniques. Musicians sometimes need to find different media (read instruments, software, setup, etc) to attain an acoustic vision. Or they are playing with the new avenues to reach unexpected outcomes, which touches on experimentation or just play. A long time ago, when electronic instruments were a new idea, acoustic performers probably sought electronica out for the new outcomes. It appears now that we are seeing electronic musicians seeking out the "old ways" by exploring what acoustic instruments can add to an otherwise electronic performance/experience. This article (Beyond the laptop), as well as another article I read in the New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/arts/music/disco-revival-in-new-york-with-crystal-ark-and-escort.html?hp&_r=0) touch on this matter. Two things have struck me about each of the articles: electro-musicians turning to acoustic instruments, often with fantastic visual results, and also that each are written from the performers' perspectives. The latter observation strikes me because the audience has added very little to the discourse. Is that not odd? Isn't the audience's perspective important? If not, then why are musicians trying so desperately to appease them by coming up with elaborate stage performances and visuals? Why on earth would the solo Ableton Live act take a pay cut by adding more performers, expensive visuals, and more setup time?

We have seen recently how live acts are trying very hard, and not without success, to add some visual stimulus to an otherwise "boring" experience when there is just one person turning tiny knobs on stage. Plastikman's recent live acts, where the artist is obscured by a tube that lights up in response to the sounds emanating from Richie's elaborate setup is just one example. Audion's Hecatomb project, while not a live act but a DJ act, is fascinating because Matthew is manipulating both music and visual software to hypnotize the dancers (who are not dancing) through the ears and eyes. Robert Henke's moniker Monolake and the Atom performance (http://www.monolake.de/concerts/atom.html) are fascinating because lighted balloons are activated by pitch and volume. The balloons, a much more kitschy way of representing sound, accomplish similar results to Plastikman's visuals. Other live artists have achieved some visual stimulus through other, more cost effective means: DeadMau5 and that awful Halloween costume, Octave One with their incessant head bopping, and even Function in his own quiet way (hunched over, wearing a shawl cardigan).

Despite the evidence before you, I still maintain that the audience must ask itself before attending an event: am I supposed to dance, or am I supposed to shut up and listen? If the audience is seated in an auditorium, then listening is the primary goal. One may ask: what is the purpose of the stage? is it not meant for presentation? I ask: what about performers who break the notion of traditional performer/audience divisions, or performers who are located in an otherwise non-traditional fashion (like a church organist)? What about podcasts, or even audio live simulcasts? Hell, even the Boiler Room productions are a little dull, and I often wonder why I am watching the video.

I, as an audience member, would rather read a program or listen to a lecture to get an explanation of why a person is standing on a stage turning knobs instead of watching a large, elaborate and messy group of people noodling their way through something that is only supposed to be somewhat danceable. The photography for the article Beyond the Laptop was quite good, but really did nothing to sell me the recent experimentations. What, pray tell, do they sound like??

good post above. Lots of questions raised, not necesarily alot of answers posed to said questions.

You talk about an audience member having to decide whether they should listen or dance? this is music, the primary reason should always be listen. dancing and listening are not mutually exclusive.

If you listen to something and it makes you wanna move then great, move, if not then dont but i dont see why a distinction must be made.

I think for alot of the artist involved in this article, they have chosen this path for artistic reasons. i.e. to further express themselves and their vision through music. I dont think they have done so thinking "we need a catchy visual element that people can look at".

People have different preferences for live electronic music and what they want to hear / see. I personally love to see and hear that the artist is taking risks and interacting with instruments in a way that is inspiring. This in turn inspires me as an audience member to interact with the music. Alot of artists that use ableton live and simply cue pre-programmed meticulous beats i find boring. This is because the performance is safe, there is no reliance on the live skills of the musician, simply reliance on the software being used and the programming skills of the artist.

I appreciate composition as much as the next man, and understand the effort it takes to craft great music in the studio, but when i see live music i like to see something more. Again this is just preference and many people feel differently.

I like this article because I started as a DJ and now wanting more out of my self have taken music theory. Also I am currently learning how to appreciate an instrument (piano). It also helps the musical arts by inspiring new talent to actually learn music and its inner workings. Instead of saying I can do that with a computer and midi instrument. (click click a new EP)

yepp

Thanks