[FRIAM] The Spectra and Dimensionality of Collaboration

[uǝlƃ ☣]

I like (kinda agree with) everything you say in that last post, except the following:

On 07/12/2018 09:50 AM, Steven A Smith wrote:
> I think I hear the key to your reflection here being the *expectation*
> of the band (or it's members) on you (the audience) or maybe more
> strongly but tangentially, the *need* for it.

I definitely care less about any expectation they place/have *on* me.  I care more about what that feedback *does* for them or to them.  Does it help produce the music?  Does it color/bias the music?  Does it simply energize them so that they can generate the music for a longer time?  Do they customize the music (consciously or not) based on that feedback?  Etc.  This is what I don't understand.  My attempt to parse stage bands into those that seem to feed off the audience vs. those that don't is an attempt to gain some understanding into what the feedback achieves for the musicians.

And your discussion of nearly synchronized production over the wire contributes to that understanding.  Thanks.  It reminds me of so many guitarists who seem to move their mouth/jaw/lips as they play, seemingly in ways correlated with what they're playing.  It's as if the coupling between their body and their music is either much much tighter than (or independent from) the coupling between their body and the other musicians' bodies.

But, again, I can imagine the "affectation" you refer to is a spectrum, as well.  I'm a big fan of some bands that put on a real *show* where the show is meaningfully tied to the music.  E.g. Wardruna (http://www.wardruna.com/), which uses "historical instruments" and dresses the part.  Their performances approach a play, with strong visuals coupled with the music.  So, the question becomes one of how audience feedback affects something like a "troupe of minstrels", including acrobatics and such, versus something like chamber music.

-- 
☣ uǝlƃ