I don't even mind it when you can hear the crowd cheering or singing along. To me, that just adds to the authenticity of the performance. I am aware that some people don't like a noisy crowd when they go to a concert. Their argument is, they paid to hear the band play, not the people around them. They think that everyone should sit in silence and watch the band. While I can understand the frustration of excess noise when you are trying to listen to a concert you paid a lot of money to see, I believe a live performance is an experience everyone should participate in, not just the performer. If the audience is having a good time and they want to cheer or sing along, than that is their prerogative. They also paid to be there; therefore, they should be allowed to make the most out of their experience. This ties back into my previous entry, where I argued that music is about participation, not just listening politely and simply applauding once the song ends. Any reasonable performer would want their audience to have a good time with them, and as long as it's not distracting, they should welcome audience participation.
Although live versions of songs often sound rougher than studio recordings, I believe that listening to the same studio recorded version of a song gets boring. Listening to a live version has many advantages. You can hear a more true version of a song that means a lot to you. You can get closer the experience of a live performance without actually being there. My question is, what is the difference between hearing a recorded live performance and actually being there to hear it?
I have responded to this question.....
ReplyDelete