Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 9:28 AM, andy butler<akbutler@tiscali.co.uk> wrote: > hmm.. > I think it may be that the performer is the least > able person to judge the quality of a performance that they > just completed. Especially if there's improvised content. > I don't figure I'm usually qualified to judge my own work, improvised or not, until I haven't listened to a piece for a year. Well, that's not exactly true. I can recognize crap and really boring parts immediately (some of you may dispute that based on the evidence of my work). But there's a lot of music that I make that is just on that line where I'm not sure. It sounds nice, it flows, but is it distinctive? Why *shouldn't* I just throw it away? Those can be hard questions to answer without distance. > > Then again. a performance isn't just the sound that gets recorded. > (and often, there's sounds that weren't going through the pa that > don't get onto the recording). > A live performance is perhaps enough of a social ritual that the > music itself is only part of what makes it work. > Sometimes what works well as a live performance needs a bit of > editing to make a listenable recording...sometimes the whole > thing works better as a memory. > Hard to argue with any of that - I think it's an excellent perspective to remember. -- Warren Destroyer of Keyboards http://www.warrensirota.com