[-empyre-] live performance vs. studio/other

[john hudak <jhudak@pobox.com>]

hello folks.

i wanted to talk a bit about performing live versus recorded.  i tend to
feel that performances are something other than studio/recorded types of
expression in that they are temporal...lasting only a set amount of time,
being recorded in some abstract way by the people watching, and if recorded
digitally or analog, available for somewhat accurate listening, although
never quite the same as being there (unless someone is just playing
pre-recorded cds...and then still, the place one is hearing something, as
well as the equipment one listens on, and the surrounding environment, all
have a play in how the sound is perceived.

my background in performance art makes me always consider a visual element
when performing for an audience...not that the sound elements can't stand on
their own, but when someone is given more than one element to take into
their minds to evaluate, one tends to give a little less power to one or the
other media, so either experience isn't as serious an affair.  when one's
attention is divided, one tends to listen/look/process things differently.
the idea of the division of media in my performances comes from my ideas
about foreground and background listening.

as for recorded work, i have been concentrating on preparing recordings that
can be effective on most listening devices...from boom boxes to expensive
stereos (i listen to in-progress pieces on a boom box quite a bit).

if any of these ideas are of interest, please feel free to comment,
critique, or suggest...

best future,
john