On the subject of audience shot videos of performances

[David Houck]

I just watched an interview with Pat Metheny where he talks about how videos shot by people in the audience and then posted to youtube have changed the nature of live performances.

He gives the example of how this has affected comedians.  In the past, a comedian would insert new material into a show to try it out on an audience.  If it worked, then it would be added to the routine; if it didn't, it wouldn't.  Of course, if you were booked on the Carson show, you only brought your best stuff.  But now, if your every show could be put up on youtube, you can't be trying out untested material in a live show; you have to come with your best stuff.

It brings to mind how bands/performers often play a small club or two before embarking on a major tour, just to test the set out in front of a live audience, work out some of the kinks, and tighten things up a bit.  But now that first test set at the small club could be on youtube the next night as the world premier of the new tour.

It's something I hadn't previously thought much about.  Of course, as far as I know, there's only one video of me on youtube shot by someone in the audience; so it's not something that has affected me directly.  But then when I think back to all the mistakes I've made playing live, I'm kinda glad none of that stuff is out there.

The interview is here.

[funkyjazzjunky]

Mr. Houck,

I grew up in a different era.  Boot-legging was illegal and performance venues assiduously protected the artists.  Now when I see a you-tube video of an artist made by a member of the audience, I rarely watch it.   

Vann-Di

[rv_bass]

This brings to mind for me a couple of things:

1. If the band is into trying out new things and pushing the limits of their music, then they likely won't be too concerned about video taping.  For instance, the Grateful Dead would work out tunes at live shows for a couple of years before settling on the studio arrangement (or never record them in the studio and just play them live), and they were constantly trying out new things at shows, sometimes it worked, sometimes "well that was interesting".

2. Dylan has always had a knack for modifying his lyrics at live shows, and the jam bands were always improvising on the spot (Grateful Dead, Allman Bros, Traffic, Hot Tuna, King Krimson, Dixie Dregs, etc.)

3.  Improvisors in Jazz are always trying out new stuff live, soloists in the 50s an 60s, fusion in the 70s (e.g., check out some videos of Mile Davis in the 70s; or Herbie Hancock and the Head Hunters), and the digital effects of the 80s through today (Rudresh Mahanthappa and many others).

So, I think it's a comfort level thing for the musician or band, how willing are they to take chances live and let the mistakes fall where they may.  In a sense, the videos or audio recordings are a historic record of development for the tunes, which is pretty nice to have.

That said, the only videos I really watch are the older ones of musicians I admire but did not have a chance to see live.

Rob

[cozmik_cowboy]

Yes, Rob, but the Grateful Dead tapers were, for the most part, fanatic in sharing the band's feeling that taping was fine - as long as you did not profit from it; in the instances where people sold their recordings instead of trading/giving them, litigation did ensue.
Audience vids are using the artist's image & intellectual property to make money for someone else (the taper - vidder? - YouTube, someone) other than the artist, without the artist's consent or involvement.

Peter

[dtothec]

On the flip'side our band has had people come see us play because they saw a video, we've even had them come from out of town from seeing a video. Many people have been discovered, had their careers started or reborn on YouTube. So it can be a blessing or a curse!

[pauldo]

I don't understand why someone would put effort into capturing a live performance instead of being present and enjoying it. 
It's one thing to set up mics and let the tape roll, but the whole 'hold up your iPhone and video capture' escapes me (and irritates when it obstructs my view).

[rv_bass]

Thanks, Peter. Being an old taper I guess I live in that euphoric memory.  I did not know that people were profiting from audience videos, thanks for pointing that out.  And Dave, thanks for starting the thread, interesting topic!

Rob

[cozmik_cowboy]

I don't understand why someone would put effort into capturing a live performance instead of being present and enjoying it. 
It's one thing to set up mics and let the tape roll, but the whole 'hold up your iPhone and video capture' escapes me (and irritates when it obstructs my view).

Back when bungee-jumping was the big thing, the late, great Mike Royko wrote about seeing some (then) 20-somethings - now probably pushing 50 - jump, run over to the place that sold you a video of your jump, watch themselves, then five-five and jump around; it wasn't real for them when they did it, only when they saw it on TV.  This trend has become ever more pronounced since, and for my money comes under of the heading of my dad's favorite old-fart lamentation - "The whole world's turning to horse manure!"


Peter (who must quote Dad because he himself is, of course, far too young for old-fart lamentations.....)

[keith_h]

Yes it is much different today from the old days where people traded cassette tapes. All of these free sights aren't really free. They are making money off the content they show whether they pay for it or not. That revenue might come from advertisements or user statistics and if the content isn't being shown under license then the artists are losing money.

Another issue I could see with video taping is the audience. One night you are playing a place and all of a sudden it looks like Bob's Country Bunker. Although it is a one in a million event videos get out and you start losing gigs as you are considered to drawing too rowdy of a crowd.

[hammer]

Interesting topic both with respect to music and other areas of life. Personally, I've never been to a live show that I enjoyed where afterwards I heard a tape or saw a video of it and thought, "that was as good as being there." Standing or sitting through a live performance and only seeing it through one's iPhone or iPad is not my version of an enjoyable evening.

While on a board of this nature the topic in question is typically discussed within the context of music, the taping, photographing, etc. of the works of others that involve intellectual property rights has gone far beyond that at this point.  I've found videos and sets of PowerPoint slides for lectures and presentations I've delivered related to the support of persons with disabilities posted on you tube, and a variety other sites.  The worst scenario was an entire course I teach posted as a distance education class on a site of a for-profit University (I use the last word very loosely here) at which I have never taught nor desire to have associated with my name. It was charging a very nice sum for a 3-credit class based on my work for which I was not even credited. 

I'm all for sharing the information I develop with others as long as due credit is provided since it doesn't have high commercial value.  On the other hand, a colleague of mine from the University's pharmacology program presented a while back at a international conference on the results of clinical trials he was undertaking on a new drug to help treat children with  seizures.  He provided a bit too much information on the chemical composition of the drug and low and behold it was being produced and sold a year later by a large pharmaceutical company in a country that does not require extensive clinical trials.  At first he thought this was a coincidence.  However, investigation by our University's general counsels office found absolutely no evidence that the company in question was working on such medication prior to its release.

[JimmyJ]

Good topic. 

I've always enjoyed how the Dead approached it, setting aside a prime spot for the audience to set up their mic towers and gear.  What a sweet way to deal with, and completely defeat, the problem of bootlegging for profit at that time.  And the tapes became part of the legend and the "buzz" about the band so in the end a kind of publicity.  Really smart.

Now that everybody has video and audio recording equipment in their pocket it has gotten weird.  I don't think anybody is making any serious money with their audience shot videos but not only is it an odd thing to do, it's still not legal.  Buying a concert ticket does not entitle you to OWN the performance.  With the exception of those like the Dead who may actually encourage it, most every ticket you buy or venue you go to posts "no recording allowed". 

And seriously, what's the point of posting your concert vid?  I suppose we all need to see the moment the dancer falls off the riser and breaks his leg - and I'm sure there will be several angles to choose from...  But otherwise, it just strikes me as bizarre that people think they need to share every experience they have on their Facebook page.  Is it bragging?  Do they think their followers don't have any experiences of their own and wish to spend time living through them?  WTF?

Yes, I am old.

Two short stories.  One was quite some time ago on a visit to the Louvre.  Interestingly, photography was allowed in the museum as long as you didn't use a flash.  The Mona Lisa is there for all to see and enjoy and it's quite a small painting so the crowd has to kind of rotate in for a close look and then step aside for the next viewers.  I saw a guy using not a phone but an actual small consumer video camera move in towards the painting and ONLY look at it through the viewfinder while he shot the video.  He was 3 feet from the Mona Lisa and never laid eyes on it.  But boy, that's gonna be a great thing to watch on his TV when he gets home!

Next case, played with James Taylor in a fairly small theater once and there was an older couple in the front row whose kids must have just given them a fancy new iPad.  I'm jumping to that conclusion, but can you see what's coming?  They watched THE ENTIRE SHOW on the ipad screen while shooting the video.  They were 10 feet from JT and more often than not had the iPad in front of their faces.  Hey, we can see that from the stage you know.

That's just ... bent.  Sometimes it's important to experience something as it is happening.  No need to time shift our entire lives.  Then again I may have mentioned, I'm old.  Extremely old.

Drummer Vinnie Colaiuta has always had issues with people taping.  In a club situation he would occasionally stop playing until the cameras or recorders were put away.  Now, I think because of the current state of affairs, he simply doesn't play in clubs - which is a real shame.  I think this case is partly because he has always been a studio guy and compensation is "per service" in the legit sideman for hire business.  Live gigs pay x, recordings pays xxx and recorded live gigs pay XXXX.  But it may have also been a psych thing about taking musical chances (and man can he take them!) and being recorded while going for something.  He may have also thought people were steeling his s#it but that's ridiculous because nobody can do what he does...  Anyway, it doesn't seem to bother him when he is working for Sting or Herbie or Jeff Beck.  At that point it's just gonna be on YouTube so I don't know how he has come to terms with it these days. 

So again, I think the possibility of people monetizing their YouTube concert video footage is minimal.  It's not like the old days of bootleg records potentially making somebody a lot of cash.  It's also quite easy to shut down YouTube posts if you can prove you own the content.  But the burden is on us to do that which is kind of a drag.


Brian's stories of stealing intellectual property and re-selling course presentations is much more serious.  Yikes!

On the positive side of it ... it really really is amazing to have clips of long gone musicians and performances at our fingertips.  Easy to fall into the screen for many hours linking from one thing to another and really researching somebody.  I try to never use it just to hear music that I want to own, I'll still buy from iTunes (I'm ancient).  I also believe it gives new talent a great opportunity.  Any kid from any small town anywhere can put his music up and have a chance to have it heard like never before. 


Excuse the long post, I must be on the road. 
Cheers all,
Jimmy J

[David Houck]

Thanks for that perspective, Jimmy!

[edwardofhuncote]

Sometimes it's important to experience something as it is happening.  No need to time shift our entire lives.  Then again I may have mentioned, I'm old.  Extremely old.

They say "with age comes *something" Jimmy J... I can't quite remember what though. 

I've enjoyed the read today as well. I am a YouTube addict, but a technological dunce. You can't believe how long it took me to edit this post on my antique Android phone. Sadder still, it probably does video too, but I wouldn't have the first idea how to post it, and even if I did, I wouldn't want to be distracted at a concert. I don't even have an iTunes account or an iPad to put tunes on. I have downloaded exactly 0 tunes, ever. I buy hard-copy CD's, often direct from the artist, and spend the first hour reading liner notes... I'm *that* guy. (staring down 48 if you're wondering)

I'm playing a winery tasting room this weekend. So far, nobody is recording us.

[keith_h]

So again, I think the possibility of people monetizing their YouTube concert video footage is minimal.  It's not like the old days of bootleg records potentially making somebody a lot of cash.  It's also quite easy to shut down YouTube posts if you can prove you own the content.  But the burden is on us to do that which is kind of a drag.

A great over all post.

The thing with YouTube or the other file sharing services is they are making money off of the bootlegged content even though the poster doesn't. While I believe some have general licensing agreements for sponsored content I don't see how they can fairly cover every fan posted video or record album on their site. While I have never been fond of how ASCAP/BMI operate their systems at least have some semblance of fairness to the song rights owner. While it is nice for the end user to get free stuff folks need to come to the realization it isn't free. Someone has paid to make it whether it be with their time, a company to record it, buy supplies, etc. and the creators deserve the opportunity to get some return on their investment.

You brought up the iPad couple. One of the things that drives me nuts is the audience member sitting in front of me holding up their phone to record the show and seeing the display flashing along. For me is becomes a distraction that ruins the show. I would say it's a tossup with that 6 foot plus guy who puts his girl friend on his shoulders in the front row blocking those of us of normal statures sight line. 

[pauldo]

Peter, your Dad is right. And because I (like Jimmy) am also oldish (53) I find that my Dad was right about a lot of stuff also. 

YouTube is a blast and is easy to waste a whole afternoon linking from one performance to another . . . Then I end up seeing that guy with the huge cyst on his back and ask myself how I got to the dark side of YouTube?


Seriously, these days I balk at going to a live performance because of the disconnect between audience members who aren't present for the performance.  There are certain genres/ performers that you can be pretty sure they will be engaged with the performer, then there are the other ones. Sadly (and strangely) I recall seeing Hot Tuna on the tour prior to Steady as She Goes and it seemed like half the audience walked into the wrong venue, talking/ texting/ doing everything EXCEPT enjoying the show. Then I saw the Steady As She Goes tour and it was perfect, engaged and appreciative audience.  Best part was the family sitting next to us with two pre-teen children that enjoyed themselves (and one fell asleep) .