Performance VS Playback

[mobius]

I have been reading a number of post , and a-lot of people seem to have picked up on the fact that some contestants are content to press play and do nothing else. I attribute this to the number one rule of Laptop Battle, no controller! I have heard the "level the playing field "argument , but I remain unconvinced that controller give anyone an unfair advantage, because apparently you can do all the pre-programming you want months before a battle. So what would you rather see, a guy monitoring his playback, or a performer using every tool that he or she can get their hands on.

[unknown8bit]

mobius said:

a performer using every tool that he or she can get their hands on.

oof, i wouldn't want to have to imagine set up and breakdown of 16 contestants with 128 peripherals.

[russarteaga]

From a logistical standpoint it is NO different then setting up a stage for a band. in fact all you would need to do is provide a mackie LM-3204 (16 stereo inputs) as a submixer and a good size stage. Or at least those same cheapo collapsable tables that were used in SF lined up. Maybe 3 or 4. As long as everyone is connected to audio and ready to go. I don't think the performers would mind not getting center stage. I think in SF clubs like mezzanine and DNA would be perfect as far as the stage goes. Even slims, bimbos, american music hall or the filmore. I think the question would be whether or not the clubs would be into it. Having everyone (at least the first set of 8) set up together would save hella time.

[syzygy]

In reply to Mobius, the reason why we usually have a cameraman and projector at the laptop battles is so the performer is totally exposed and the audience can see everything he's doing (or not doing). While contestants are allowed to just play a track if they wanted to, they run the risk of being judged by their efforts. I've seen a lot of battles and the winners of ALL the battles were doing some form of composition on stage and in real time. There are tons of programs out there that are specifically designed to be used in a performance setting and many which weren't made for that purpose but have been used live. Check out, MixMeister, Abelton Live, FruityLoops, Traktor etc... It's more than just an unfair advantage of having 128 extra buttons to push on an external controller, its a question of how much space we have available to set up laptops as well. 16 contestants with 16 computers, mice, cables, external soundcards, drinks, etc, takes up a lot of space on the stage. Others have actually hosted battles that allowed controllers, check out the PDX Battle of the Knobs. Anyway, I hope this answers your question about the external controllers...

[chromix]

i think the whole no controllers thing is interesting in how it lends itself to a certain type of performance. it does make sense though... if you only have 3 minutes, you only have so much time to manipulate what you're doing. i've done hour+ sets before with all live sequencing... in that situation, without a controller, i'm dead.

it does seem to be a hang-up for some people who have done live laptop performances before. maybe only allow one piece of gear apart from the laptop? this at least gives people the option of using one external controller (like an oxygen 8) if they want to and avoids stage clutter.

[krismoon]

well, we had controllers in the mid atlantic battle, and i thought negative space had a really ingenious solution for how to handle it. it worked out so well, that the upcoming battles in Seattle and Portland are open to contestants using 1 controller.

there has been so much demand for controllers, i think it's worth incoroporating them. one thing i will say.... it doesn't transform contestants who are only going to press play into performance monsters or anything.

it's all what you do with it.

[cinemafia]

At first I thought this whole 'no controllers' thing was daft, but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense. At least from I get of the concept of this laptop battling, the idea is immediacy. Sure, lots of places have live music or DJ's where they typically take hours to set up and break down their gear. But in this style of entertainment, it's all about speed, having someone just slap down their laptop, plug it into the PA and go. There's a certain, satisfyingly futuristic feeling about being able to do that. And yeah, sure, one MIDI keyboard is not going to destroy the world, but having everyone able to start up and stop quickly is kinda cool.

[tshak]

From a performance standpoint controllers are critical. I've been to a fourthcity battle and for the most part an iPod or DAT would have sufficed. A few artists chose to mute tracks here and there, and rarely tweak some "knobs" with a touch pad (what a horrible thing to have to do live!).

I really like the idea of a laptop battle, but if there's no good way to control the laptop, it's less of a live battle and more of a "3 minute produced track" battle that might as well be statically delivered.

Props to the fourthcity crew for organizing this. I just personally don't find it that interesting of an event from a performance standpoint; although I'm sure I'll stop by again to check out what kind of music people are creating.