I have never enjoyed a “live” performance less than the Mannheim Steamroller Christmas concert. The music was perfect, the production was perfect, the acoustics were perfect. All it lacked was anything that made me believe it was not exactly the same as the 100 times Mannheim Steamroller had performed previously and the 100 concerts that would follow. To this day I’m not sure the entire concert hadn’t been recorded and the musicians on stage were just pretending to play.
Funny you should describe it that way.
Back around 1985 GF and I attended a Mannheim Steamroller Christmas concert at an outdoor venue in greater Phoenix. I’d heard their music before and although I was no musical connoisseur the concert was nice enough.
When they got to the last number, they’re all playing and the music is blasting, etc. Then the keyboardist stood up and silently walked off stage. No change in the sound. Then the drummer did the same. No change in the sound. Over about a minute and a half the entire band stopped playing and walked off one at a time. With the music continuing utterly unchanged.
Then it faded, the lights came up, and the concert was over.
At the time I thought it was a cool trick. But I bet your explanation makes more sense for the whole concert. It was a sync job from the word go and all you or we heard was the sound system blaring out their studio recording while they banged away on their silent instruments.
His last few movies have been that way. Not the majority of his career though.
Up until I was about 30, Rush was one of my favorite bands. At that time, I began to realize that they aren’t one of the greatest bands ever, as I used to think. I’m not saying I dislike them now, I’d say they’re still somewhere in my top 50 bands of all time. But closer to the bottom of that list, rather than the top.
Anyway, when I was talking about Mike Mangini upthread, I almost said something like “Neil Peart had the same problem.” (About being too mechanical.) But I decided I didn’t want the flak. 
Art Tatum had perfect technique, but he always sounds to me like he was showing off rather than being musical. “Listen to how fast I play! What wonderful arpeggios! I’m a genius!”
I’d much rather listen to Thelonious Monk. His fingering could be sloppy, but he played with the feeling that I don’t hear in Tatum.
A better way to put it is, “All the proficiency doesn’t matter, if you don’t have good materials to work with.”
A few years ago, I watched my state’s high school All State concert on our local PBS station. They have choir, orchestra, and band. The band music that year was unlistenable, because it was mostly atonal and had no discernable melodies. I don’t know how they got the kids to play it, or if they could tell if they made a mistake.
(That may have been the same year where I saw one of the choir members and thought, “Hope her parents have 911 on speed dial, in case her water breaks!” The camera zoomed in later, and it wasn’t even a girl at all, but an overweight BOY who had long hair. Oops)
When I was in high school, some of my bandmates encouraged me to audition for All State, but I really wasn’t that good, and even if I had been, I wasn’t interested.
“And I can’t even see what I’m doing!”
Reminds me of a stadium show I saw in college of Tom Petty. (I mainly wanted to see Squeeze - the opener.) I remember when TP ran up on some risers and struck a pose just as the spot hit him, thinking, “I suppose that is intended to appear spontaneous and exuberant.” We left the show in progress shortly thereafter.
Boston was another one. At one point a bunch of organ pipes rose up. Supposed to be dramatic, I assume. Meanwhile, the music sounded EXACTLY like it did on the album.
Excellent example (and the contrast with Monk).
Oscar Peterson, on the other hand, somehow combined Tatum-like chops with Monk-like soul.
Art, like beauty in general, is in the eyes or ears of the beholders. When asked about that weird 160+ ton monstrosity in Daley Plaza, Picasso answered basically that it’s meaning is whatever you think it is.
That’s interesting because from what I’ve read Steve Vai’s first gig was basically transcribing parts for Frank Zappa. Stuff that was too difficult for Zappa to actually get down Vai would figure out and write out so it could be played.
That’s kind of what his music sounds like to me - the solution to a very elegant math proof.
And there is a whole genre of music that is built around mathematical principles in composition. I’m sure it’s very impressive, but I can’t really get into it emotionally. Which, perhaps, is the point.
I see what you mean on this, but I have to disagree. I think Rushmore and Royal Tennenbaums have plenty of artistry and emotional resonance. Some of his later movies do seem to be “Wes Anderson making a Wes Anderson movie”, but that’s also not uncommon for artists - falling into the trap of just re-making what they’ve always been making.
Elvis performed brilliantly, but never actually wrote a song in his life.
That count?
I remember the “neoclassical” heavy metal style that was popular for short while in the mid 1980s. All my cool guitarist friends were in to it. The King was Malmsteen, of course, and every “serious” guitarist wanted to emulate him. His 1984 album Rising Force was considered essential listening.
Other guitarists got on the bandwagon. Tony MacAlpine’s 1986 debut album Edge of Insanity took the style to the extreme, with each song sounding exactly the same, and comprised with nothing but back-to-back arpeggios played at lightning speed with zero feeling. Here, have a listen… drop the needle anywhere in the album. Incredible gymnastics in those fingers, but I can only take about five minutes of it. It is so over-the-top that it could be easily mistaken for a parody. (There’s a happy ending, though: Tony mostly abandoned that style many decades ago, and now makes much better stuff.)
Bob Ross has excellent technique and he paints what makes him happy which is great because that is exactly what he is teaches.
But no one under 70 would hang a Bob Ross on their wall at home if it was painted by a random anonymous artist.
I remember feeling this way about Joe Satriani when Surfing With The Alien came out. I mentioned to a friend that the album sounded a bit sterile. He said he got the same feeling about Jeff Beck’s work. In reply, I suggested he listen to “Cause We’ve Ended As Lovers”.
Agree. But thinking about it more, I find myself not minding “sterility” if there’s something else going on that I like. Take Frank Zappa, for example. The vast majority of his songs have no feeling or “soul,” but offer something else that’s appealing to his fans: witty & clever parody and humor.
I wonder what the tabs for that would look like.
No. His interpretations of songs other people wrote or recorded first were uniquely his own for good or bad. That’s one reason there are so many bad Elvis impersonators. Not only was he doing something with lyrics nobody had done before, but also something that was quite difficult to even imitate.
I also saw Boston, in 1995, and that happened there too. It was disappointing, although I’m not sorry I went. Anyway, the extreme high notes were hit by an understudy, who also sang on most of the “newer” songs, which the audience for the most part didn’t recognize.
Steve Lukather, David Paich and Jeff Porcaro were all enormously successful studio musicians. They all also happened to be members of Toto which still plays to large audiences.
They aren’t the only ones. Honestly, the stereotypes about studio musicians in this thread are somewhat ridiculous. If you don’t have the ability to be artistic on demand, you aren’t going to be a very good or successful studio musician.