When I'm working, I usually have music playing in the background. Today a band called Jellyfish came on, which got me thinking about the songwriting and recording process.
We're at a time in the music business where it is very easy to go crazy when recording something. Unlimited tracks, samples, effects, etc. And there are plenty of people who take advantage of all this stuff, by adding, and adding, and adding things to the mix. More samples, more instruments, more harmonies, etc.
Here's the problem... Does it work live?
Live performance isn't the only way to make money in the music business, but it's where most independent musicians and bands make the majority of their money. And to be successful at it, you have to have material which works well via live performance.
It's great to have a slickly produced record. It's great to take advantage of new recording technology. But don't forget that the purest form of connection with fans is made via live performance. They can hear you, see you, smell you, touch you, and receive a complete experience, not just the aural one they get with a recording.
If you're song doesn't work in a stripped down, able-to-be-played-live way, how are you going to connect like this?
You're not.
If you're musician who plays live, when you're writing and recording songs, ask yourself, "What will it sound like live?" And if it doesn't work live, don't do it.
Put this into the mix when you're working on a new album and I promise you it will change your career.
You didn't mention which way you thought Jellyfish went. :) I saw them live a couple times and they were fantastic. Sure, not all the bells and whistles were covered, but the songs stand on their own without them. And I think that's your point.
Personally, I always road test a song for a few months before recording it. You're always going to find the little tweaks that make it work best in front of an audience. Then add gravy in the studio.
Posted by: Phil Johnson | October 09, 2008 at 02:01 AM
By the way, Jellyfish sounded pretty amazing live.
Posted by: Jerry Chapman | October 09, 2008 at 10:19 AM
I find it interesting that you would mention Jellyfish when talking about music that sounds good but doesn't work well live...I saw Jellyfish some years ago with World Party, and I still consider it one of the best shows I've seen. Jellyfish was a great live band, and while not exactly like the recorded versions, the music was outstanding.
Queen is another example of an absolutely amazing live act that didn't play the exact duplications of the studio recordings. Also Pink Floyd, The Police, The Grateful Dead, Bob Dylan, The Who, The Rolling Stones, The Beach Boys. I actually enjoy when acts don't attempt to sound exactly like the recordings; it lends a different perspective to great songs (which is what it is really all about).
Posted by: Gary Hawkins | October 09, 2008 at 12:48 PM
Yeah, agree with you on Jellyfish. A great act and definitely a band that could pull it off both in the studio and on stage. Most bands at that level of production aren't able to recreate the sound live though.
Posted by: David Hooper | October 09, 2008 at 03:19 PM