I think the dividing line comes at the point where people come to a show to see a band, have paid full price for a ticket, and the band uses tracks to perform music that could be performed fully live with the addition of maybe an extra keyboard player or two, or a keyboard player and an electronic/acoustic percussionist. To me, that’s fraud, pure and simple. Tracks are being used to save money for the promoter and band, and most people have gone to the show expecting to hear the live band.

There’s a massive divide between that and what most of us do (if we perform live at all). People are showing up to eat a meal, or grab a few drinks and try to dance with a pretty girl (or their wife!), there is seldom a cover and the venue neither has room nor budget for a 4 piece, let alone one with a horn section and percussion etc.. No one is being defrauded, no one shows up expecting a full band, certainly no one shows up because we are a big name and they want to hear us live…

Perhaps the argument could have been made back in the late 80’s and early 90’s as sequencing and arrangers first arrived on the scene and some venues that had trios and quartets for dining and disco dancing started to cut back. In fact, I recall many about it then! But that ship has long sailed, and the solo or duo with backing has become a staple for smaller venues.

But Rick’s video is about an altogether different thing, with no relevance to us at all.

As to the whole ‘audio/SMF vs arranger’ thing too many agonize about, the truth is, we’re the only people that care. The audience couldn’t care less. The meal or that dancing partner is what they care about, as it should (remember, that’s what they came to do!). Which means of automatic backing you use is completely your choice and yours alone. Both have their strengths and weaknesses, and most of each of their weaknesses are gradually being addressed by technology.

Arrangers are sounding closer and closer to live tracks, and live tracks are getting more and more flexibility about structure, key and tempo, and flow between songs (if you use the tools provided!). So which ones you use are of concern only to you.

However… I believe very strongly in NEVER giving your audience the opportunity to think that you aren’t playing at all. Their attention is always focused on the lead solos and your piano playing, and allowing the technology to do those for you while you just hold down a chord is inviting disbelief for when you actually ARE really playing..! Once lost, that audience trust is hard to reestablish. And yes, admittedly, as I said before, a whole lot of them aren’t paying any attention at all, but some are. And so are YOU! I mean, why are you here with a keyboard if standing behind a DJ deck would do the same job?

Because you want to PLAY…

So, lay the ‘audio/SMF vs. arranger’ debate finally to rest, it’s dead and buried. Use what gives YOU the most enjoyment and showcases what you do best to your audience, and sleep soundly that night (tinnitus permitting!). You’re the only one that cares.

But a major band using tracks? If I know in advance that’s what’s on the menu, I’ll stay home and listen to their tracks on my stereo and save a fortune. I don’t mind if the live performance sounds different to the CD, in fact that’s part of the reason I want to see them, to see how great musicianship pulls off great music with smaller resources. If they feel that they can’t impress their crowd without a ton of studio magic carried around on a laptop, that reflects poorly on both them AND their crowd.

Last point… I make an exception for trade shows, product demonstrations etc. I didn’t pay good money to see the band, I came to see the gear and how it was used. But a concert? I’m not paying today’s exorbitant seat prices to listen to a CD with a band on top!