Just like Ashlee Simpson!

I'm toying with the idea of playing live again (after more than a decade of staying in the house) and I'd like to gather opinions from all of you: at which point do "backing tracks" become "cheating"?

I used to gig in a duo -- two singers, one autoharp, a drum machine, and some MIDI keys. Now it would just be me and the autoharp and -- in some from -- the backing tracks.

The easiest way to bring tracks along is a boombox and CD-Rs. Is this less "pure" than bringing along the actual noisemakers -- the drum machines and keyboards? Would a reel-to-reel, perhaps, have more "cred"?

And how much backing track can there be before it becomes suspect? Drum machine rhythm track? Some bass or keys? Backing vocals? Lead vocals? Lead vocals and autoharp and I'm at the bar enjoying an ice cold sarsaparilla? At what point do you, in the audience, throw up your hands and say, "Screw this karaoke bullshit!"

In my particular situation -- a short set of new wave-ish pop songs with an autoharp -- I suspect I may have some leeway that someone with a guitar might not, by being perceived as a novelty act (which I'm comfortable with). Is this an accurate assumption?

Feel free to wander into further discussions tangentially related. (Here is a recent New Yorker article about laptops in live performance that may be of interest.)

posted by Karlos the Jackal (12 comments total)

I don't see how a boombox would be any less pure than anything else that makes sound, at least that's how I would look at it. As far as how much to use, as long as you're still playing your instrument and singing along than use however much you want, but I wouldn't use pre-tracked lead vocals, that would be very weird to see live. I gotta say I've never seen a one man autoharp show, actually I have no idea what an autoharp is so I would be very interested in seeing something like this.
posted by BrnP84 at 4:48 AM on September 17, 2008

This is a very good question, Karlos, or should I say bundle of questions. They are ones that I've been grappling with, to one extent or another, for a number of years now. Nontheless, I have no clear answer for you. Everyone's situation is different, and a lot of this has to do with something intangible, unquantifiable... which would be, well, your persona. How you pull it off. I honestly think that, at this point, anything goes, or, anything can work, as long as you do it with confidence and clarity of purpose.

Having said that, though, there is one bit of advice I'd offer: keep your backing tracks as simple as possible. The temptation will be to make it thick, add track after track, as though you're making songs for a record. Full, lush.... like, "hey, a little more percussion here, plus maybe double that guitar line there, and add a harmony part for the lead vocal I'll be doing". But there are problems with this: 1) you'll wind up feeling like you're playing along with a record onstage, and it'll probably seem that way to the audience, too. 2) What sounds good on your home system may well sound not-so-good or really crappy on a PA. The thicker things get in your backing track, the flatter the whole thing is likely to sound on a typical club or bar's PA. 3) A spare, simple backing track, like maybe just a bass line, for example, will offer you more flexibility, I think, in your playing. The playing you're doing live. Ultimately, you want something that gives you room to breathe, that you feel you can interact with almost as easily as you could with a live player. Or maybe even more so.

Good luck with it!
posted by flapjax at midnite at 6:02 AM on September 17, 2008

I knows me a guy who busks with backing tracks of bass, guitars, vocals, drums... everything but noodling on lead guitar and he earns at least $6/hour, or so he says. FWIW.

Prerecorded tracks in live performance are anathema to me. I'd much rather hear a very sparse arrangement that is earnest. As an audience member, why would I want to hear how well you *don't* play with others?
posted by lothar at 8:06 AM on September 17, 2008

I think you're right that the type of music you're playing will affect how people react-- I saw Greg Ginn play once with a drum machine and a bass player and it just felt wrong, though it didn't sound bad. But I've seen lots of people doing acoustic songs with backing tracks and enjoyed it.

I've never seen anybody with just a boombox on stage with them though, and I think that might look a little weird. Unless you include the pauses between songs on your CD-R and never vary, you're going to be starting and stopping that boom box a lot. Pressing buttons on a keyboard will look more professional than pressing buttons on a boombox.
posted by InfidelZombie at 8:20 AM on September 17, 2008

I don't think you should worry about "cred" or you're sunk before you've even begun.
Sure, a reel-to-reel would look cooler than a tiny cd player but will quickly scream gimmick if you're not honest about your songs or people think you suck.
What do you really need to have when you're playing? Are you playing TO a track or just having some accompaniment? What does the song dictate?
If it's "new wave-ish pop songs with an autoharp," then I'd assume you need to play to a backing drum machine/synth kind of track, which I'd completely accept as an audience member. Where it gets cheesy and karaoke-ish is with backing or harmony vocals, in my opinion. A drum machine or instrument track is one thing, but a disembodied voice is weird to see (hear?) in a live setting and would bring it to a level of "And now Laura Branigan in A Very Special Solid Gold Performance," for me. But maybe that's what you're going for; irony these days, and all that.

A band I love, The Handsome Family, are a husband and wife who play kind of updated gloomy Carter Family-ish country. You probably know them. I've seen them live several times and often they tour without a drummer. Brett, the guitarist and singer, will push a button on a Roland drum machine or a CD Player and the fake, understated drums will start and they play to it. It totally goes against the genre they're playing with and you'd think they'd get trashed for being inauthentic but their songs are great and it's just a non-issue, really.

It is a great question and a very fine line indeed. Ultimately I think what defines it as cheating or gimmick vs. not-gimmick is your songs and how you perform them, because it will take the audience about a second to figure that out.
posted by chococat at 8:21 AM on September 17, 2008

One datapoint: the Flaming Lips use extensive backing tracks when they play live, and nobody seems to hold it against them (of course, generally the people who know about it are predisposed towards them to begin with). Overall, I think backing tracks are a lot more widely-accepted than they were even 10 years ago, although it's not universal. I agree 100% with chococat that in the end it'll just come down to your songs and how you perform them.
posted by COBRA! at 8:58 AM on September 17, 2008

Ween played with backing tracks until 1993. Here's a clip of them doing Freedom of '76.

Brad Sucks (MeFi's frenetic) uses plenty of backing tracks while playing live. Here's a clip that Plutor recorded at a MeFi meetup in February 2008. It was awesome.

My quick take on the difference between cheating and performing: The former is when you are trying to fool an audience. The latter is when you're sharing something of yourself with an audience.
posted by not_on_display at 1:29 PM on September 17, 2008

Yes, use backing tracks. And if you wanna come down to Portland and play, let us know (there's a good chance we'll be using them if we play).

As for CDRs, we've had problems before with weird skips (although it was usually pretty funny when it happened--we never did any jigs though), so go with the drum machine if you have one. We've got an old SP-202 that we use from time to time that's great as well, you just have to be careful with how you record the beat. Also, our pal Tom in cars & trains builds samples of himself live. I've seen a lot of bands do that in the past and it's always kind of mesmerizing in it's own way.
posted by sleepy pete at 4:03 PM on September 17, 2008

Not that long ago, I watched in awe as someone at a SongFight LA gathering hooked up a ridiculous amount of pedals to his guitar and microphone, spent several minutes making loops with these pedals and his voice, one at a time, and then started 'em all playing at once and played/sung along with it. It was terrific, because it was simultaneously a complex backing track he was playing against, but it was also constructed piece-by-piece in front of us so we knew he wasn't trying to pull a fast one.

Having said that: I think watching a person sing to a backing track would suck, as would watching someone play rhythm and sing against a complex backing track; I think watching a person play and sing to a backing track works wonderfully if the backing track provides only a rhythm section to fine instrumental/vocal performance; and I respect the hell out of people that find a creative way around the backing track problem, such as the guy I mention above and the band Local H (where the guitarist/vocalist runs two bass strings so he can play bass as well, so it sounds like a three-piece live.)

So, at least in my opinion, make sure your backing track isn't promising something your live performance cannot deliver.
posted by davejay at 7:06 PM on September 17, 2008

Hm. Wellllllllll

1. I'm pretty sure I agree with what not_on_display said - as long as you're not trying to fool an audience (which is kinda lame).... however

2. as long as the audience likes what you do, I think, it shouldn't matter if you have backing tracks, or not. Period.

Now, as far as what works, yeah. I have used boom box before - I think it looks cool, and despite being backing tracks, kinda lofi and organicky. But the audio you get from the boombox is not often the best, doesn't put out a whole lot, and sure, you could mike it and get an even more lofi kinda sound, if that's yer thing.

For years I have always admired the guys who dare to use computers and sequencers live... when I saw Erasure the last time in the 90's I thought "holy (#@*!&(#*, vince clarke has just driven on stage in a mini jawa sandcrawler with about 10 tons of gear all around him in the thing. I sure hope there's no midi jam!" (yeah I know he has previously said he doesn't use midi and sticks with his proprietary bbc computer rig because midi is 'sloppy' but you get the idea)

So! I have found my most reliable ally to be a little mp3 player, which is going to sound junkier the more sonic palette you try to cram into your tunes, but if you have a decent sound guy available it should sound alright. Unlikely to be true stereo, though.

I think when there's less going on visually, using less backing tracks is probably better, but that's just imho. Not because using more tracks is dishonest or weird, but just something about it seeming karaoke-like, ya, or, not being able to deliver visually something that matches the audio people are hearing. Perhaps this should not be the way of it - we never gave a crap if we saw jack squat occurring on stage when people premiered compositions for 'octophonic sound' in our little plain recital halls in music school..... but the average joe is not a music school student. Perhaps taking your audience into account is a good idea.

Okay, done rambling about that now.
posted by bitterkitten at 10:29 AM on September 23, 2008

If you are just playing straight backing tracks then its pointless bringing in the actual gear/drum machines synths. I have (and many others) just use an MP3 player plugged into the house. A tape deck would suck as you need to record a new tape to change your playlist/set order. but yes it would look kinda cool. - I thought about doing that myself at some point.

How much can you put on the backing track? I find it depends on a lot on your Audience. I've done various incarnations of, 1-2man 'bands' using computers, CDs, Ipods, samplers, guitars, etc.. the most minimal being me, a tamborine and an ipod - doing basically karaoke.

I had an awesome gig one night at a 'dance/disco' venue but a pretty bad time playing in a rock/indie venue... - indie kids expet you to actually play something to make the noise. - dance kids spend half their time listening to Djs play other peoples music and dont' really car either way.

Just try it. - do a few gigs with backing tracks and see how it goes...

One thing is though - The more maximal your backing tracks are then the more stage/vocal presence you need to overcome that.

Kevin Blechdom used to do some awesome shows - doing basically Karaoke + a Banjo. but she had the stage presence to pull it off and you never needed her to be actually playing all those midi keys/drums on the backing track.
posted by mary8nne at 2:54 AM on October 19, 2008

oh if you have an Mp3 player you could also do 'split stereo' backing tracks. Say for all your songs put the drums on the left channel only, everything else on the right.

Send the sound guy those two channels seperately and he can then fix your mix a bit for the location if needs be.
posted by mary8nne at 2:56 AM on October 19, 2008