I've listened to concerts in churches and in bars, in coffee shops and in the most massive of football stadiums. I still enjoy live music, though my years increase, and I don't anticipate that changing any time soon. However, in spite of my fondness, I find one large flaw in the system, and if possible, I'd make it my mission to change that one thing.
Rock music is my favorite genre. I've never grown out of it. I like some classical music, some country music, and bits and pieces of other genres, but rock music has remained my favorite. I grew up loving what is now termed "classic rock", but at that time was just "rock". "Alternative rock" is basically a more edgy, classic rock without the obligatory guitar solos. This fondness has driven me to the concerts of my favorite artists over the years and I find one commonality among all of them.Live rock music is too loud.
It's not my age that speaks either. I've always felt that way. I've never felt that it was cool because it was loud. I consider enduring a concert that is too loud torturous, even to the point that I've begun taking ear plugs to shows and discreetly inserting them before the first chords blast out.
Not only is it too loud, but as a result of being so overdriven, it is thoroughly distorted. What assaults your ears is an accurate representation of what is being performed in the same way that a faxed photograph is an accurate representation of the original photograph. Distortion and the limitations of fax machines turn the infinite shades of black, white and gray to black or white with nothing in between.
I don't understand when or why it became this way either. It seems contrary to what musicians would strive for. If you labor for months and months, consuming hundreds of thousands of dollars--yea, even millions--to produce an album of original compositions or arrangements, perfecting every measure, why would you be less diligent in rendering it live? I realize that the volume and distortion is desirable in some cases to cover for sloppiness in how songs are played and sung, knowing that between the guitar or microphone and the speaker, the signal will be ground into an audio sausage that is mostly fat with little meat. Yet there are performers out there, always as spot-on in their performances as they are in the studio (i.e., Rush--one of my favorites), who succumb to the trap of playing music at those volumes. I blame it, not on the artists, but on the FOH (front of house) engineers--the "sound men".
I've always wanted to own and manage a music complex, a place where new artists are encouraged and equipped and where young talent can be given an opportunity to be heard. Part of that dream would be to build a venue that would render live music in a less overwhelming fashion. Levels would be loud, but not painfully so. The goal would be undistorted, clean live sound. Who knows how that would go over, but I'd like to try.
One idea, not my own, is to use a more distributed sound model where speakers are distributed around the venue instead of piled up at the front of the venue. I've read on the subject though, and the problem is not as simply defined as a speaker placement that forces FOH engineers to pump up the volume to fill the venue. There are many inputs feeding the problem, making it far to complex to be solved by moving some speakers around.
Yet the problem remains unsolved and it seems there are few out there who are interested in offering input. I find that even more a challenge. Were my dream to come true, were that music complex to materialize, I would be poised to break new ground that would--I think--revolutionize the music industry as we know it.
Dream on, right?
No comments:
Post a Comment