they were a band that made brilliant albums with multiple layers and innovative production techniques. Live they sounded totally different, no harmonies, one guitar, no bass if JPJ was on keys but yet the songs and members were so strong, it was usually just as good or sometimes better than the record.

@@rrdream2400 and still kicked more ass,......

Totally understood. But name the 50 other bands that could do that? They were an anomaly. The norm is that most of live players are not very good. The fact is most of the bands you heard even back in the day when they went in the studio they had a crew of people that would actually play. Usually it was only the lead singer that would actually sing. The studio players werent even part of the band.

That was like The Who of the late 60s, especially with "Tommy", how they played it live, compared to the studio version was completely different, the guitars were much more aggressive, especially on "Sparks".

Agree 💯

that also can happen with backing tracks

Depends. If it sounds like junk without the extra instrumentation, I'd rather they used backing tracks.

It can but too often the ease and comfort of 'not upsetting the cart' precludes it from happening

@@ellwitz9838 tell me you never played with backing tracks without telling me you never played with backing tracks hahah

It depends upon your taste and personality. Most times I absolutely hate it when artists vary from the version on the recording. That's what I like about some bands who go through the effort to make their live shows sound exactly like the hit recording.

Leonard Cohen used to do something similar, not with a backing track but with a cheap synthesizer in which he'd record a loop that would continue into the song. He'd joke that once he started that thing going it would continue by itself, which scared him a bit. Doing these things openly is okay if it's only an enhancement for some songs and not hidden. Not being able to put on a show at all without your laptop is just weak.

Talking Heads also did it in the beginning of Stop Making Sense.

James Taylor did that at a show with his band, probably 20 years ago. He had a 10" reel-to-reel deck on wheels, which they rolled out for a ballad with just him, his guitar, and the voices, He triggered the voices on and off with a footswitch to harmonize on certain lines. It was a rubato ballad that would lend itself to such an approach.

That's cool. I LOVE Tull. I attended a couple of Warren Zevon's concerts. He simply did NOT have the money to pay an entire band to accompany him on every show. So, he just did what he did when he made his albums. He played every instrument and recorded these performances into his keyboard/synthesizer. For the performance, Warren sang and played piano, as usual and had the drum machine and synth play drums and guitar. It sounded FANTASTIC!

My Tull story doesn't concern the sound, which was ace. Anderson wore a red bowler hat (derby) for their Glasgow gig, on their Heavy Horses tour. At the end of one song, he took it off and whirled it over to John Evan on keyboards, who stood up, caught it, put it on and sat down in perfect timing to end the song. HUGE roar from the crowd. What were the chances of that? It was magnificent. Well, chances were greater than we thought, because the hat was a disguised frisbee!

Exactly!

Same to me, if I hear something that can't work out where it's coming from, I find it disappointing

The issue is most of the sound today is fake... so you got to keep faking it.

Tools are added to the ability to present Music. We can limit the ability to use tools, but Bobby Dylan was called a Heretic for getting Bloomfield to play 'Lectric Guitar..... I did not care for Robby R as much, too flashy.... But the evolution of Music made by Fleetwood Mac, seemed to see changes from the Greeny Days. The appearance of New Members since Bob Brunning left the group, were profitable............Right?

outstanding damn rite

True! The less modern tech you use, the more natural talent we can listen, in my opinion 😆

Meetodisfrutooo🎉😂❤

@@lukahmad5683 So you think that this guy's band with low tech, just going with the flow would sound better and be a better show than Falling in reverse with backing tracks? 🤔

Yeah, i still believe a great band can perform on any given backline. It might be different or limiting but skilled musicians should still be able to make most scenarios work.

@@AlfredHugecokk What..?

Very important point you made there. Having worked for Cirque Du Soleil I can tell you that all their modern shows have an element of Ableton live in there and an Ableton operator who can change things up when the action on the stage requires it. Its a great way to mix spontaneity with form and still get the lush arrangement of the album mix.

Intelligent approach.

@@jazzbassoonpaul yes, but then its an instrument in some sense now too, not a crutch.

Queen had to use backing tracks to perform Bohemian Rhapsody in its entirety. Because the song was to big for the band to do live. And I didn't hear this band till this current issue. Not my cup of tea. But those guys make a big sound. A way bigger sound than what a 4 or 5 piece rock band can make. With the sound they make there'd probably be 3 or 4 more people in the band to pull it off 100% live. For anyone that's a musician it should be completely obvious that those guys have to use backing tracks live. Like seriously guys. Where did you think all the EDM breakdowns, synthesizers and orchestral sounds were coming from? Hell maybe it's his Kemper and it makes his guitar sound like a 10 piece Orchestra with a bass drop at the end? Ya think? Those boys aren't up their lip syncing. They're actually really talented kids. I'm 43 and even I'll say "these old azz guys need to get over that sh!t". Times have changed. What used to be a quarter million dollar studio can now fit in a bag. A stage production that used to take a 25 person crew can now be run by 6 or 7 guys and a laptop. I guarantee in the 50s and 60s there were a bunch of old azz dudes talking about how whack Marshall Stacks and Les Paul's were and how playing acoustic guitar and stomping on an old milk crate was way cooler and took more talent. This is the modern day equivalent.

@@worldssickestmedia2713 Adding to this: Bradley Hall made a great point. Studios used to invest a lot of money into rock bands that they don't do now. Music used to make much more money. Do studios now take a band into a house to stay at for a few months, read through the lead singer's journal and find a great entry, and tell them "you should write this as a song!" (See the Professor of Rock's Story of Under the Bridge) A lot of it now is done at home.

Joe Elliot of Def Leppard admitted to using backing tracks to "sweeten" the vocals during the Hysteria tour. I read this back when the Milli Vanilli scandal first broke. This stuff isn't new. I remember going to a Cinco De Mayo festival with Gloria Trevi (look her up) singing on stage. She was hopping up and down while singing. The band was playing loudly. Then, the music stops dead cold. She kept going. 1 minute later, the music starts up and it's like the blooper never happened. This was back in the early 80s.

I agree. You can add some parts to have a better sound, but replace yourself is cheating.

twenty one pilots is fully within their rights to do that ya. and Tyler from that band creates all those sounds from absolute scratch, the drums are real and the bass is real live, its the best they can do

kiss has so many suckers willing to give them money I don't really blame them for taking advantage.

I totally agree if it just backing vocals ok but if the singer is lip syncing and not singing or the band is not playing I am not paying to see them plain and simple

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

Don´t forget that they DO HAVE a great LOT pre recorded sounds running from their ROM Disks of their endless ensemble of Keyboards and Synths. And I´m not sorry to spoil your fantasy that they were "absolutely recreating the recording on stage". It´s incredible to imagine how easy it was to fool people, and it´s been almost 50 years and still think it was "all" live. Oh my.

@@PSchmidtc Are you sure? Supertramp, Crime of The Century, 1974. ROM Disc, invented in 1983.

​@@alejandropfanner597 bud, I´ve been a Musician, very possibly, longer than you are alive. It´s some 57 years JUST as a professional Musician. No, I wasn´t there in that specific concert. I´ve watched them for the first time, 3 years later, in Munich. I guess you know that ROM stands for "Read-only memory", and those things exist since 1948! No, not the "ROM Disks". The mention to "ROM Disks" we can "thank" to dumb auto-correction in my tablet. But anyways, as I was saying, ROM cards, tapes or whatever, they exist since the 40´s. So, yes there were ways to storage data and manageable data (erasable not read-only) by the 70´s. I had the honor to meet Rick Wakeman and his bass player once, in late 70´s in my city. I was one of the local guys helping with sound infrastructure of his concert. Casually I had opportunity to exchage a few words about music and equiment with both of them. His Bass player had a device, some magnetic tape card, where he could store pre-recorded extra basslines, as per his words "it gives me an extra pair of hands (laughs)" Isn´t it incredible that smartphones (the way we know it now) have less than 20 years?! BUT if you´ve watched Blade Runner 1982 (the first movie), some 40 plus years ago, there are some pivotal scenes that shows how these things works; Harrison Ford arrives in his apartment, put his eye at the door and it opens by "iris recognition" in early 80´s? Late on that sequence he is sitting at the couch, has a picture in his hand made with some very bright flashy material. He stands up, insert that picture to what looks like a "laser disc"? Its image shows up in a side monitor, large screen. He interacts with that machine by voice, wow! Yes, Voice Command in early 80´s. "Siri" was that you by then, already? LOL. And that´s not all. He touches the screen to maximize the picture with his two fingers! Go back and watch that movie again, if ever. You will find out all those impressive things. Particularly impressive when you think that the process to make that movie started in late 70´s. So what I´m saying here, is that these technologies have been around for couple many years. Maybe not available for us, regular OEM consumers, but for the big guys in the industry? YES For sure!

Now thats craft

That would have been awesome to see … and hear!

You are not wrong! You just described the kind of spontaneity, magic, vibe, whatever you may call it, that can't be achieved with a backing track. But your friend was right, in a way. Most of us on stage get that vibe. Most audiences get a completely different vibe.

that sounds so so cool.

Funny it was an Eagles song. They were so polished from being touring perfectionists when I saw them in the 80's before they broke up after The Long Run. They did not have a flashy stage presence. They were just cool guys and the stage presence was the flawless music they made. They did Seven Bridges Road without Autotune or overdubbing. If ever you have a chance and interest look for the isolated vocal tracks of that song. I did not think the day would come but they definitely used Autotune on the last live tour recorded with Glenn Frey. BTW, if you have Serious FM they have an exclusive recording of the band with Glenn's son Deacon filling in for him. He fits perfectly with the band. He is not Glenn's clone, he fills in an area that was open and who would have ever known there was space for anyone else? He may sing Glenn's parts but he does them his way and it sounds like a space was meant for him. He has since left the band. Why? Why? Why?

Agree it's the 'wrongness' that leads to innovation and true creativity.

How’d you replace all the missing music?

@@videditorEB1 For the most part we didnt. We went through our backing track and asked our selves, Do we really NEED that live? We kept two samples that I trigger manually with a sample pad, everything else was scrapped. That also has the nice side effect that our band is now way easier to mix as the sound is not as cluttered. And you d be surprised how little people care live about the fourth layer of guitar or backroundvocals or bass drops.

The usb-cable or the software or laptop crapping out on you because of reasons xD

I don’t love some of their later albums but imo Ten is one of the greatest top to bottom rock albums ever… so your comment is saying a lot!

That's why they should stop playing live twenty years ago.

Lots of early 80s synth bands had an open reel deck on stage. OMD was another; they were (and are) really limited musicians and could never get anywhere close to their records live.

Many open reel players were actually there as echo machines (eg: Tangerine Dream and Klaus Schulze)

…and thats cool cause you know what youre paying for when you go

That's what it comes down to.

Thank you!

Rush always used tasteful backing tracks live (Roll the Bones, The Pass, and Stick It Out come to mind). It sure was cool, though, when they had a mini-orchestra on the Clockwork Angels tour!

And indeed, Ronnie was being honest!

Well said great reference

Yeah, i think its also a matter of whether you need them to perform your music live. Some bands just dont because the band is all there is.

There’s a certain something when a group of musicians play together with just what’s in their hands - and it just goes right; indescribable!

Music has really hit rock bottom when a professional band cancels a show because they can't play live.

It's karaoke.

I saw a Queen tribute band with 4 guys, so all the synths and piano's were on a track, anonther Queen trubite had 2 extra woman singers, one played keyboards, i much more enjoyed the last band, they did under pressure as a duet. Don't give me a backing track on a live gig please!

Also now when performing with Adam Lambert Roger plays off of Freddie’s piano track in his headphones and Brian follows suit

They used to have Spike Edney play piano backstage, or even some extra rhythm guitar. I loved it when he joined them on stage for Hammer to Fall to play rhythm next to Brian, or piano when Freddie would stand up to entertain the crowd.

@@funlovingvoyeur i garee Spike was great. Interesting listening to his interview about how he started with them.

@@sergeinester6261 what do you mean was? spikes still there

@@D_phillips17 where did you hear that?

Pathetic is a better word.

That's strange. I remember BAND-MAID lost their luggage in 2018 on their way from Moscow to Helsinki, including Kanami's guitar and what they called "the interface" (I think they meant the laptop with all the backing tracks). Kanami had to run around Helsinki to search for a guitar to rent. But during the show, they managed perfectly fine. A few improvisations here and there, and all the spaces were filled to everyone's satisfaction. P.S. The lost luggage was found, they said so in the middle of the show.

How can they feel the energy of the music? Performing would be boring. No backing tracks for me please.

If you can't play a single tune without, that's an issue. From my experience we would just use them to fill out a song. If things went sideways, we'd kill the backing and continue to perform that song live without the backing, which all it did was fill out what drums, bass, guitar, and the singer couldn't. For the most part though, 95% of our sets were live with those 4 live instruments.

@@mikeydesignssilkscreen473 did it feel right? I'm not judging at all believe me. I just wonder if the vibe was good. I'm not a professional musician just been a few punk bands has all, so not much required to perform you know? But yeah, I've always wondered about that.

Exactly

Static X was one of the first bands using an ADAT on stage for backing tracks, they had that many channels of backing stuff. I remember reading about that back in the mid-90s. Now, granted, bands like New Order, Depeche Mode, etc had been using pre-recorded stuff or sequenced stuff for years, in conjunction with live performance instruments on songs, too, but Static X was doing this metal-industrial hybrid and taking backing tracks into an arena that they were not normally being used in. Nine Inch Nails got away with it because they were electro-industrial first, and metal heads just grew to like them.

that's why I use cloud ☁️

What's the saying? "Have a backup, and a backup for the backup."

Yeah, people are less bothered by using backing tracks and more bothered that they can't even put on a show without them. They're supposed to be a whole rock band but they can't even play the songs together because every song relies on the laptop.

The problem is all their laptops (along with backups) were sent to the wrong place and Falling In Reverse use the laptops for their backing tracks, orchestra, some songs require a more hip hop style of track in parts and they use it for the lighting as well

This ^^^^. 5 pro musicians with their instruments find out the day before the gig their laptops are missing. Heaps of time to vary the arrangements and set list of their own songs. Instead cancel the show. 100% ok to have backing tracks at a show, but to cancel is pathetic.

I couldn't have said this better. As a band you should be able to perform / play your music, cover or original period. But you should be able to add parts if you need to but, not to the point where you can't perform if you don't have those parts. If you do need to add parts that are critical.. 1-Let the audience know 2-Make sure that what you are playing on your instrument is live and tell your audience that too. They are not gonna kill you, you just got to be honest with them. Also make your performance 50/50 or 60/40..meaning play as much as possible without tracks, this way your audience can experience both things and maybe not feel left out. It's different if you're a solo musician but, again let your audience know.

@@maxcruz666 Yes! With the ridiculously expensive ticket prices these days, do you really want the mom who waaaaaaay overspent for Taylor tickets to realize her daughters are seeing Taylor live but not hearing her perform live? "I paid a thousand dollars each for them to hear the record?!?" (Not claiming anything, just using as an example. It was New Kids on The Block in my sister's day) And in the nosebleed seats center stage so you really only see 'ant size' Taylor (or is that a backup dancer? Haha.. Which one is her?) You lose so much with today's super "like the record" performances. Back in the '60's the soul revues and r&b acts were famous for the live show that did not sound like the record, but a million times better, a little faster, and with twice as much energy, full band choreography, and a dynamic lead singer like Percy Sledge, Sam and Dave, Wilson Picket, James Brown, King Floyd, the Isley Brothers, The Temptations, the Four Tops, Ike and Tina, Diana Ross and the supremes, Aretha, etc. etc.. That was the times, but where did that vibe go? That in the moment excitement? That "extra' you got for just being there live in person? You really really got your moneys worth. In the 70's it was the extended guitar solos by the guitar greats and full band musicianship, but by the eighties something happened. It wish music would become more live again across the board and not just in the rock genre with certain types of bands.

Yeah, I don't want to see a perfect replication of the studio track I listen to on my stereo all the time. I want to hear them play it at maybe a slightly different tempo, maybe extend a solo, some improvisation.

Right on. I already own the album ... if I want to hear it note for note, I'll just put on the record. Play it slower, faster, worse, better ... but different ... warts and all ... make it real. Otherwise, what's the point?

@@ari1234a lol no more synths. Really... its been 40 years and your still crying about a device that can create new sounds.

OK...but not everybody is you. Some people don't care. They're not wrong for not caring about that stuff.

@@doublestrokeroll Most people do care for it, the concept of concert is more towards what he described, most people see concert and interpret it correctly, there is always odd people out who like to go to a digital backing track rich "concert".

tons of bar bands play to tracks in bars

Bingo! I do exactly that.

@@heartsquaremusic2953 You’re right. I mostly go to open mikes, bring a guitar or bass, and jam with someone if the opportunity arises. If a band is using tracks, I like to go up after their show and ask them how they control the mix etc.

Bars have crappy sound systems and acoustics though. Many times a good band sound no better than a garage band.

Right, the core elements are live and raw, but the additional layers of sounds are tracks. There's no way around it as there's too much going on in some of their stuff to not use tracks to enhance.

Trent and his ban members over the years have spoken about this. It has always been the case that they attempt to play as much as possible live. They often trigger samples from the original recordings, like specific kick drum sounds for example. Alessandro has even recorded loops that he plays through a 4 track machine, using the faders like an instrument of sorts (this is something Mike Mills did with backing choral vocals for REM shows years ago!) In any case - NIN are amazing to see live.

N.I.N. are creatively genius tho, and go out of their way to make a show both mesmerizing AND organic. I'm sure they leave plenty of space for human elements, and even possible mistakes. Which is a lot different to 99% of pop stars claiming to sing live when they have only ever mimed to a backing.

keep on lying to yourself that you have been on live performance and it was so "real"

I saw NIN fairly recently and as far as I could see they were doing nearly everything live to some degree. Sure they were triggering samples of specific sounds at times but it looked like they were triggering those things by hand.

Based on what Rick said, it seems to me that every show should have one or two songs without backing tracks that they can improvise with, to bring some spontaneity, to change things up, because Rick said that the truly completely live bands who could change things up have the largest live success. I assume that he wasn't simply talking about song choice and order but how they are played. When writing and producing each album, consciously include at least one song that can be played completely live, without feeling out of place.

I no longer go to any live performances other than ten dollar punk shows, because the whole point of watching something live is because it's new and real and unpredictable never going to be exactly the same experience before or since. It's watching somebody build something and knowing they could screw it up. Anything else is just a loud stereo with moving visuals, I could just turn up my volume at home and watch the VU needles for a lot cheaper than a couple seats at a recorded and overly choreographed show. This is all my opinion, but it's also my money that I'm not spending on tickets to those shows - that's not up for debate.

@@ericdegaston8201 100% agree

@@ericdegaston8201 I mean I like jazz fusion played live and snarky puppy tends to record their concerts as their albums live

you wouldn't feel this way if you weren't an audio engineer. the final stage of this progression is a sad sanitized White musical tragedy that you don't want to see.

Totally agree, that.s what I want to see in live shows, no laptops!

Karaoke with instruments.

Fans know about this. I love the Who. The funny thing is to watch them play at something like The Concert For New York after 9/11. The song begins and the tv crew keeps focusing on their touring keyboard player, the amazing Jon Carin who is NOT playing one note. 😂

@@guyincognito8440 Well, they played other tunes with keyboard parts. And surely it was Carin who triggered the programmed parts as well.

As I mentioned in another comment, the Moody Blues used a Mellotron extensively in the late 1960s. What is a Mellotron if not a machine that produces backing tracks? There is no way the Moodies could have played any song from Days of Future Passed live without the tape loops of strings that Mike Pindar activated with a keyboard.

Won't Get Fooled Again needs to be mentioned as using a backing track alongside Baba. The Who got plenty of grief from critics and fans back then for using the tracks but eventually everyone accepted their use and moved on. It is always best for performers to be upfront about using them rather than pretending they are not when they are.

One more comment. Twice I have seen Adele, an artist I love and respect, play a "live" TV broadcast, and clearly the only actual live elements are her lead vocals, maybe background vocals, and the keyboard player whom I believe is the one that starts and stop her sequences. When you see a 20-something looking guitar player miming to a nylon string guitar part with a Stratocaster in his hands, that's when it becomes silly!! Once I auditioned for a big current pop singer and was told upfront I would be miming the entire show which was "canned" including her lead vocals. We were even told we would fake a soundcheck in case a particular venue had an issue with that and wanted to sue for breach of contract. Now that is dishonest, and I don't agree with it at all.

As a bass player I approve!

Yes!

That's nice if you actually have all of the instruments you need to make up a band when you start a project.

And then you end up not changing or progressing your sound. Pretty much every artist and band has come up against this problem. That's partly why the Beatles stopped touring.

@@RebeccaTurner-ny1xx you can change your sound and progress as an artist without adding instruments and sounds that you don't actually play. If the only way you can "improve your sound" over time is by writing stuff that you cannot play then you just aren't any good.

It becomes Karaoke when the performers aren’t performing their own songs. That definition is already clearly outlined. I’m in an original alternative/hip hop duo and we have no intentions or desires to have anybody on stage with us performing the songs that we wrote, recorded, produced, and released. We rely highly on backing tracks because we don’t have or want a band. Very similar to Twenty One Pilots. There’s two guys. What else can we do?

This is the problem I've had for the longest time. I haven't been able to put a band together because I come across this mentality that: "It's just a hobby for me" Well, not for me dude, I didn't learn to play all the instruments being used in these songs, didn't made all the parts, didn't learn to produce video and audio and edit it and I'm not investing in promoting just for shits and giggles never mind the gear and the time to actually learn how to use it but also...so do I just remove the vocal and guitar track form the recording and perform "live" with it? If I, as a member of an audience walked in to a show where this is being done, I would just walk out...then again, maybe I should just say "Fuck it" and do it like that. @@DiggitySchwag

At that point it's already karaoke, though admittedly kicked up a notch.

That's similar to some of Moby's tours, where he has people who sing the vocal samples that he used in the studio. Beck has had a large backing band to play the samples. Also, if we're just talking about recreating intricate sounds, The Smashing Pumpkins added Mike Garson on piano, along with a pair of percussionists. They were going to add Lisa Germano on violin, but that fell through.

@@scottcharney1091 that costs a whole lot more. There is an over saturation of music these days and bands don’t make much touring. I do accounting and tax work for several bands in the Falling In Reverse genre.

@@markconner5341 True; those are major-label examples. The point is that "live means live." It's possible now to at least trigger the samples in real-time. They're still being "played," so to speak. Rush might have pioneered that, precisely because they didn't want to bring along a keyboardist/backing vocalist, and they refused to use a backing track.

Pink Floyd has sold how many albums? They could afford the extra musicians and effects and the logistics required to set it up every night. Most groups can't do it, which is why technology is really the only answer.

What are those "whole load of recorded effects"? Those are tracks. That's where people get really blurry and undiscerning in this conversation. Pink Floyd's songs/tracks were so involved and crazy that if you didn't have a way to trigger those sounds effects/ambience, it wouldn't be the same song. Keep in mind, Pink Floyd did this basically before anyone else did almost, and they had to do it with tape, back in The Wall days. Those guys were revolutionary.

100% agreed. And I think a fool like Eddie Trunk constantly beating his drum (to line his own pockets, really) is causing people to miss this point.

"I ain't farting on no snare drum"

Then just listen to the original through a good sound system.

Completely agree! Though I do sometimes enjoy a more simple aproach to songs when they are played live. Good example is/was Queen. Over-the-top arrangements on record, much more raw rock sound live. And of course they also used pre-recorded tracks for the opera part in the middle of Bohemian Rhapsody. Another important point people seem to miss when they complain about use of backing tracks is that in most situations it's actually harder to play live with backing tracks than without because you have to pay much more attention to the correct timing.

@@andimachovec2719 Correct. As soon as a backing Track is on you cannot fail at any point in the song. As well as a Metronom/Tempo Map. This makes everything harder rather than easier.

Hahaha a snare? That's mad

... along with a set of great tracks to fill out the sound. Unless you want to triple the ticket price for the extra musicians on stage, which is also fine to do.

@@shiftd_1114you don’t even play an instrument

Exactly. Thank you.

@@RebeccaTurner-ny1xx If you can't handle a live performance being a live performance, live performances might not be for you.

@@nietzscheankant6984 Tell that to all the fine musicians who have been happily playing live to tracks for decades. Do you include drum machines and sequencers in that category of "not live"? Although I'm no longer a gigging musician, I loved the accuracy and repeatability of sequenced tracks live, along with the obvious fact that they allowed me to create a bigger sound. As they say, you only have to punch the information into a drum machine once...

I agree, I've seen many bands play without a bass player just using a track to play along with and it's not the same. One band I seen play without a bass player at least had the track going through an actual bass head and cabinet so it sounded more authentic on stage at least.

Yes a lot of their older material has arpeggios etc that can't be played live.

I never owned an album by them, but as a drummer, I never turned them off the radio either. Such a great, pop, rhythm section.

@@haro82 So what, leave the arpeggio's out of it! If you add 2 keyboard players to a rock band, you can recreate everything so that the public hears 90% of how the record sounded, no tracks needed.

I agree with you. Leave the stuff out that can't be played live.

Saw Bad Religion at Riot Fest last month and Brian Baker's guitar messed up right in the beginning and once more during a later track. But he's a seasoned pro and played right through it and the band never skipped a step. Sound guys fixed it and the show was fantastic and high-energy.

100% with you. I don’t really listen to mainstream music for this reason...give me my jambands, Colorado jamgrass, and progressive bluegrass. I want to hear it live and hear the true musicianship and variations they put in night to night. Organic, as music should be.

Well, by that logic you should love backing tracks. The more technology you have, the more things can go wrong. Look, having all this technology is not necessarily about making things easy. Playing live to a backing track is not easy. That requires serious skills.

That is such a great point about a true LIVE performance... It's also the difference between seeing a movie or a stage play for instance...where things go wrong, people adapt and each performance is a unique moment in time.

Surprised you didn’t mention Queen! They take great pride in playing their shows live.

Jean-Michel Jarre unplugged would be interesting!

Unplugged was boring as hell.

Unplugged was Amazing!!

there's a video of them trying to play "Jump" and the synth part was on a backing track synced to a video track, but the audio was at 44.1K and the video was at 48k, so when they played back the video with the synth audio it was all out of tune and speed with the rest of the band. It's a nice way to cheat when you don't want to pay an extra band member but it clearly can make you look like a joke.

Yes, King Edward made being on stage, wailing away on these intricate licks and solos, look like the easiest thing in the world! I firmly believe Eddie could still play every song perfectly, underwater and handcuffed - the man has alien DNA. Much respect to artists who can bring most of what they do in the studio, to the stage, with LIVE playing! RUSH, anyone?

Van Halen was a live band. What you heard is what you got. And Eddie could layer, without anyone helping. He was the best.

@@edwardprete used tracks..can clearly hear it on jump

I remember Van Halen only using keyboard tracks on their later tours, on 5150 and previous tours Eddie played all the keyboard parts live and switched to guitar when he needed to. Michael Anthony even played keys a couple times.

But it could also mean that they are lip syncing, there are crappy bands that absolutely do that.

@@One.Zero.One101 And others implement live pitch correction, like auto tune, so the signing you hear still isn’t the singer’s natural voice. So instead of seeing and hearing talented musicians that have mastered their craft, you’re listening to the same song as it is on Spotify but watching actors mime to it. That is not live music, that’s acting. And while acting and music are both classified as art forms and entertainment, pretending to be one while practicing the other is simply misleading and dishonest. That’s why I have a problem with it.

That's cool and funny. Respect to Queen even more : )

Check live Aid on headphones, where is the choir on stage?

​@@eddie1brazil The Live Aid performance stops prior to the large choral portion of the song. They only do the first half.......smfh

@@brianjones8432 sorry I think you misunderstood me. I meant throughout the show not the arrangement they did for that song. But never mind, not everyone can hear or understand this.

@@eddie1brazil No, I understood you just fine. The OP was specifically talking about the middle section. The larger choral portion of the song. Queen had ALWAYS performed it that way live. They would play 100% live right up until that portion of the song, and then walk off stage and a reel-to-reel would play the middle section, and then they would come back out for the finale. There are countless videos here on KZfaq of them doing it this way at other shows. Live-Aid was no different. They just stopped at the point where they would have started the tape. They also had a supplemental keyboardist at Live-Aid as well, which they had been doing for years at that point live.

@@christo6765 what an unnecessarily elitist take. You’re sitting hear calling actual professional musicians fake because they use backing tracks for orchestral parts from their album while do all the singing and live instrument playing for the actual instruments they play. Get off your high horse.

@@jrjr.429 there's no getting through to people like that. they are so disconnected from reality, dude probably has protection around his house for 5g radiation

@UCuuhNlb60gNTX7C5-SOEjVA The fact is one person can't necessarily control a 50+ piece orchestra with a MIDI Keyboard... The music industry is one of the most innovative spaces ever - The use of backing tracks means almost anything is possible musically. Elitism has been a thing in music for hundreds of years yet it's those elitists who die out when they have too much ego to evolve.

@@jrjr.429 Uh…. Read his comment he literally said the opposite of that 🤣

@@jrjr.429 i retract the expletive i used. im not refering to the artists skill but to the product. Yes, it takes talent, artistry and ingenuity to construct and execute these productions. Can not take away from that. But automation is automation. It is what it is. If thats what you want...

Yep you nailed it there. Also there’s nothing more lame as a musician waiting for a Fukn robot to finish its section. Very different from awaiting the cue from a performer on the stage

Side 3? EPIC - UNEQUALLED. As great as "Crossroads" was, "Spoonful" was maybe even greater.

@@robertvavra414 I agree. 😊 I was going to cite Spoonful alone, but decided it was easier to just say "side 3".

Jack Bruce can surely sing them blues..and that bass

They're not going to have orchestras, full choires and 20 other people playing multiple keyboards and decks for a live show ..

@@mikepriestey2547 don’t bother explaining that. They think they want the live experience and don’t even know what that means.

@@BradsGonnaPlay It's the same as when people say "Good bands make it work in any situation!!". FIR are literally a rap/rock/electronic hybrid, without certain tracks it's impossible to make it work unless the quality of the show drops significantly and I'm sure all bands would prefer to put on the best show they can rather than half arse things. People are clueless

@@mikepriestey2547 let them be, we don’t need to save the world 😂 we know what we know and they know what they think they know.

@@mikepriestey2547 but also 100% Could you imagine going to a Kendrick Lamar show and going “THIS ISNT LIVE MUSIC” when he’s a rapper who uses tons of effects in his tracks. He even shows The Who using tracks live and they make mental gymnastics to say “no it’s not like they do today”

I have seen from hearsay that it was great.

Nowadays you can pretty easily still do all that with the tracks. All you need is a talkback mic (or hell just good hand signals) and someone competent running the tracks. I played with a church where we used tracks for most of the mix and we were still able to change arrangements on the fly if we needed to because they had a midi controller (with pedalboard like buttons) that let the singer just start a new chorus or extend the instrumental or whatever by just stepping on one of the stomp buttons.

I'm with Ren Outlaw. I don't think that most of what you talk about and using backing tracks are mutually exclusive. Specially of the backing tracks are midi you can play, stop, speed up, slow down, transpose, etc no problem at all. But if we are pragmatic, no matter if we like it or not, like electronic elements back in the day, computers are here to stay. We can complain about how using backing tracks is not playing live the same way people complained that using amplification to project your voice is cheating or that adding distortion to a guitar is "just making noise".

@@Zer0Spinn I think it's similar to the discussion around autotune where part of the negative connotation comes from the fact that most of the time if someone's utilizing it well, you're not going to notice they're using it. So people's idea of what it looks like is the sloppy instances because those are the ones that stick out.

@@renoutlaw8371 Yeah, I totally agree with that too. At the end of the day, I value the classic getting 4 people in the same room and feeling your way through the jam as much as the super planned out, backing track using, live shows if they are both well done and the music speaks to me. It's music, who cares? This types of arguments only matter for people like us who have trouble separating our egos from our artistic process haha

Agreed John. All of my band's tracks can be played organically and sound fine, but we have one with a prominent violin part, and another song with a prominent synth/organ part. We use tracks for those two songs as we don't have a violin or keys player. It doesn't take away from the live experience at all in my opinion. Especially given that we sometimes jam during sections of the other songs on stage!

That's fine if you are a one man band. And it is more difficult. If you sing and play guitar with a backing track it makes total sense and I would enjoy it!

That sounds ridiculous.

They have always done that. That's the problem with writing songs that are massively overlayed, overdubbed and overproduced. What do you do when you play it live? Well you do what Queen have always done, walk off stage, go for a piss and a cup of tea and let the audience sing it.

@@fus149hammer5 Or...you perform the most integral part, and let the audience fill in the rest. You know, what WE paid for.

@@donkeydarko77 isn't that what I said?

@@donkeydarko77, no.

I used to say that every track on Thin Lizzy's Live and Dangerous album sounded better than the original studio albums. Then I found out a huge part of the album was overdubbed! 😀

Great idea. I can can think of AC/DC's Thunderstruck from the 1991 Donington show (no backing tracks needed here).

It's like many bands could do 150 shows a years with a full orchestra.

That sounds promising!

They probably can but it will sound kind of raw.... Like a demo tape of a garage band

@@josemorales5117 that’s what I’d want to hear. If I wanted to hear the recording, could listen to that on my phone.

@@andyfab65 For a lot less money!

you nailed it

@@josemorales5117 you nailed it. also i want to add to this that most pieces of music do not sound good at all if they are raw, they will always sound better with the same instruments used on the record. i dont want to hear a raw performance which sounds nothing like the record. very boring

I would add to that; Neil Peart famously hated touring, but he did it because as he wrote in one of his books, "a real band plays live."

I listen to RUSH almost every day. I loved going to their shows. I have been to several where Alex has broken a string during a song. His guitar would drop out. As soon as the new guitar got on to Alex he would join right back into the song. I was there when Neil broke a Tom and someone replaced it during the song it was amazing to watch and hear a different drum being played for that beat while fix was being done.

Yep. Otherwise, Aimee Mann would have had to go on hiatus from 'Til Tuesday to accompany RUSH on the "Hold Your Fire" tour.

Roll the Bones

Geddy Lee could fly 2 helicopters simultaneously

And feeling that you no longer need to play live because a backing track is easier than music lessons and the 10,000 hours of practice required to be a professional.

In the case of Radke, it seems more that it was an issue of quality for the paying audience. Luke Holland is their touring drummer currently, I'm pretty sure they could swing it without the laptops, ya know if they had a gun to their heads. It was a consideration for the ticket buyers to give them the show they actually paid for.

Sure, but something like Baba O'Riley performed without any keyboard parts would be incredibly boring.

@@jts3339 what I've heard is that playing to a click is actually difficult for most musicians, it leaves little room for error.

Exactly

I think Ghost relies heavily on backing tracks... he doesnt have the greatest voice ever so there´s definitely backing vocals there ... and I m also sure that there are a shitton of extra effects as well....

or pink floyd in the olden days

@@lookmanostrings feel you... but I dont think they'll go back... Tobias likes epic sounds...there might be a chance that he d step back for one album... but I dont see a huge turnaround there...

Fair do's, that was an emergency and better than nothing. Get a drum machine that also does bass.....

The thing is DM, never hid that fact, and fully embraced it. Alan Wilder even gave a tutorial on how they pull it off in their 101 tour movie.

@@crazyralph6386 Who said that any of these bands are 'hiding it'? Obviously lip syncing is at the extreme end of the spectrum and we aren't talking about that - but, when Rick says that "the majority are doing it"(standard tracks, not full bore lip syncing), it's not like he's revealing an industry secret. Fans don't know about it because, frankly, that's how well executed it is, not because anyone is going out of their way to 'cover it up'. Most fans probably don't realize that these modern digital effects processors(AxeFX, etc.) have replaced pedal boards. Or that a lot of times the amps/cabs aren't the primary output for the guitars, sometimes they aren't even real amps/cabs. It isn't a 'secret', no one is trying to keep this from you, bands just don't put out PSAs about what equipment they use during their shows.

DM still use backing tracks, and their shows are still amazing to this day.

The whole "they already did it on the album" is a weak argument. Maybe don't make the album that way. Maybe learn some more harmony tricks that make you sound fuller.

@@thediminished98 I will take my Nine Inch Nails exactly how Trent wants to deliver it, thank you very much!

The reason is she is not that talented

@@bigjayrillah3508 I guess her sister was the talented one 😂

That goes back to the 60s where tv show performances were for the most part taped. I remember a funny video during a Mamas and the Papas performance, Michelle Phillips was pissed that they wouldnt let them sing and play for real so during the performance she started eating a banana lol.

@@mmaviator22 There’s a TV “performance” by The Lovin’ Spoonful where the bass player plays a broom, and who could forget George on the punching bag and Ringo on the exercise bike in I Feel Fine while Paul and John dutifully mime singing and playing. They had fun with it being fake. Very rock n’ roll, and I’m sure the suits in the control booth weren’t happy about it.

True, but even in metal I get quite annoyed of very synth-heavy bands basically letting half of their music run from tape (granted ... I'm a keyboarder) . When I watched Rivers of Nihil on a festival, for example, I left after a few songs because it was just too dumb to watch a band that gets most of their character from such atmospheric parts (synths or even saxophone playing) playing everything from backing tracks ... Similarly with female vocalists: If you have several songs with female backing vocals, find a damn singer and don't let it run from tape or try at least to sing high parts by youself. In contrast I really appreciate the big effort of some bands to play as much as possible by themselves (for example Soen with the 2nd guitar player doing synths and backing vocals).

@rickbeato this is really Eddie Trunk:) love ya Eddie!

Awesome response Eddie. Daily listener here.

Just listened to Free For All Monday and searched through these comments to find Ed's "Official" comment... Eddie is a man of the people! Glad you responded, Ed!

There is a huge difference between what Ashlee Simpson did and what these bands are doing though. How does it keep going back to miming and lypsincing, nobody is talking or doing that, so shouldn't even be a part of the conversation

@@suffersystemstudios Dream Theater uses some vocal backing tracks of James' lead vocals live, i am not sure if the sound man or Jordan trigger them though, and i cant say they are a lesser group of musicians for it, because Dream Theater is high caliber musicianship

That's extremely common in every single genre now. Probably almost every band you've seen live used a click, it was just a mapped out at a different BPM than the album. Nothing wrong with that. It help the people on stage keep time, and it's hard to hear up their, especially if youre a drummer.

Playing in tempo (with a metronome, etc) is part of life for any decent musician. Playing with a band/drummer that can't keep steady time sucks; so playing with a click track is not even a necessary evil - it's a good thing. I never met anyone who finds it a chore unless it's hard to hear the click.

Playing to tracks and clicks totally stinks. It makes everything stiff and stale and robotic. It actually hinders the musicians from being able to truly play together and develop real chemistry.

@@drummerman31 I strongly disagree. But to each his/her own. You do realize bands like rush and TOOL use tracks and clicks, and they're some of the best bands live.

playing in time is fun... playing out of time feels bad so, yeah playing with a click is cool

Yes, as most of the discussions nowadays, this one got way out of the point. Things need to be played live... i dont think this whole issue were ignited cause of backing tracks of stuff like choir, orchestration or anything like it... You cant compare things like a intro to a song, or the opera stuff on "bohemian rhapsody" to a full on playback... thats just a non sense comparison. Some of the newest bands have their live songs almost 100% equal to the studio version, singers are just flawless... I think theres a HUGE difference between using backing tracks and going border line mimicking songs.

@@Liece45 agreed. Sometimes it’s hard to know where to draw the line. Especially with so much of the sound being electronically produced these days.

The big difference with them was they didn't even record the backing tracks.

@@ccampau ya I know different situation for sure. That was like the ultimate lip syncing debacle.

Horrible. I am positive they never did this pre- Achtung Baby when they were at their best

They are rich 😉 12:02