The conversation 4

Do you think it’s always true that a live performance is better than a recorded one?

That’s a really difficult question.

I love going to the cinema.

I will happily go to the cinema on a Saturday night and watch a big flashy superhero film where there’s really good sound effects and music and visuals that obviously have already been made by, you know, computer graphics and it’s really fun, but I also have a really big soft spot in my heart for going to the theatre.

Going to the theatre to watch some Shakespeare or any modern plays − live, onstage, maybe with a band or an orchestra underneath the stage you can see or you definitely hear.

I think that has a certain magic to it that you can’t replicate on, in the cinema.

It’s a very different experience.

And is it true then that it is better for the audience to actually enjoy it more if it’s a live performance rather than a pre-recorded or a film?

That’s the thing − for me personally as an audience member, I, it’s really hard.

I think it’s difficult to say it’s better or worse or which is the ultimate best experience because they’re just very different.

But if you go to a live one though you, then you participate don’t you because you’re part of it − there’s the actors and everything that’s happening...

True.

...and then you are part of it because they’re bouncing off you and it’s, so it is true.

A lot will depend on factors other than just what’s happening in front of you on the stage or the pitch or whatever type of event it is.

If you’re sitting, let’s say, high up or with a slightly obstructed view or the seats are uncomfortable or you don’t have enough leg room − you know, there are other factors that could sway your enjoyment such that seeing a recorded version of the live event that you’ve been at would actually have been preferable.

I think a good example would be going to a major sporting event now because they’re nearly always oversubscribed, you know, crowds of people everywhere.

I was at a major rugby match recently and we were sitting way up in the gods at the very back of the stadium and they had giant screens which were kind of showing the match simultaneously and in fact, all around me I could see a whole sea of heads sort of turned to the screen because you got a better view and you could better understand what was happening on the pitch by looking at the TV screen rather than peering down at what was going on several hundred metres down below you.

As a live performance − excuse me, yeah – as a live performance though, you are involved if you are in the audience, obviously, because you’re watching and seeing what happens and you’re looking at the nuances and whatever, so I suppose it is true that it’s um, that it is more − it’s better, I suppose.

I think it also really heavily depends on what the audience is like that you’re with.

So I’ve been − I love live music, and I’ve been to plenty of live music events − concerts and festivals and things, you know, around the country, and I love them.

However, sometimes you’ll be in a crowd of other people enjoying the music and they’re talking and it’s noisy and actually I couldn’t hear anything in the first place.

I couldn’t actually hear the band or the singer or the musician I wanted to hear, so I could have just gone home and listened to a CD.

That’s intriguing isn’t it, the difference between the two.

At the end of the day, it’s very subjective. So much depends on the person, the event, the arena, and so on.