Screens and LightShow

[cgfcgf]

I remember reading a few weeks ago that someone posed the question "Do you like the Screens". I guess a lot of you like the screens. I understand they are needed however....

 

1.) Stick with camera angle for more than 3 seconds. To have the screens constantly changing both angle and person gets annoying. As annoying as say watching a Live DVD with camera edits every second.

2.) Where are the old movies. During Subdivisions where are the shots from the video (basement bars/backs of cars) and why aren't they shown during the show. The end overhead view of Toronto being the most stirring. Where are the Red Barchetta 80's graphics on the screens? These shots don't have to by synched with a certain beats per minute that the band is playing to on that night. The synching issue doesn't need to be that tight.

3.) Location - Right above the band. Not good. Too distracting for people in closer rows. Can they be spread out or higher or more on the sides of the stage?

 

Lighting - You know with all the technology and lights it's amazing how little sense the light show incorporates. Lighting should enhance the mood of the song. I look at the light patterns while at the show and think how non-sensical they are. Watch the DVD videos. I understand synching to songs/BPM. But there are general sections of each song which should be lit and produced to match/enhance the song's mood. I was watching the end of the R30 DVD and the lights/lighting is not even in touch with how the song is reacting.

 

The ticket prices are high enough to demand Broadway like quality. You go to Braodway and the lighting and scenery is orchestrated as well as the rest of the show. Most Rush shows from night to night are very similar (from the pattern of 3 songs then speak a little intro to the 4th song to the scripted encore and closing songs synched to metronome click in the ear piece).

 

Drivers start your engines.

[hughes&kettner]

i'd rather hear them in my garage, with one white light. don't care about ANYTHING besides the sound quality of the mix and the house...

 

but i dig your point...i guess.

[amish_ashaman]

QUOTE (hughes&kettner @ Jun 15 2010, 01:51 PM)

i'd rather hear them in my garage, with one white light. don't care about ANYTHING besides the sound quality of the mix and the house... but i dig your point...i guess.

I'm right there with ya. They could just stand there and play, no lights beyond what is needed to see, and that would be fine with me.

[cygnus_thegodofbalance]

Go to a Muse show if you want theatrics. They have towers, lasers, seizure-inducing lights...you name it!

 

As a matter of fact, their stadium tour just recently started, and here are some things they incorporate in their show:

 

Crazy light show (obviously)

Confetti shooters

A platform they play on that extends into the crowd which raises and rotates

Drums that light up when they're hit

A suit Matt wears that lights up with orange stripes and glows

A UFO that flies around the stadium with an "alien" dangling from it

 

Too much for me. I find that when there are too many theatrics the musical performance tend to be secondary.

[Hemispheres89]

QUOTE (cygnus_thegodofbalance @ Jun 15 2010, 02:22 PM)

Go to a Muse show if you want theatrics. They have towers, lasers, seizure-inducing lights...you name it! As a matter of fact, their stadium tour just recently started, and here are some things they incorporate in their show: Crazy light show (obviously) Confetti shooters A platform they play on that extends into the crowd which raises and rotates Drums that light up when they're hit A suit Matt wears that lights up with orange stripes and glows A UFO that flies around the stadium with an "alien" dangling from it Too much for me. I find that when there are too many theatrics the musical performance tend to be secondary.

Have you seen KISS live?

[metaldad]

QUOTE (cygnus_thegodofbalance @ Jun 15 2010, 02:22 PM)

Drums that light up when they're hit A suit Matt wears that lights up with orange stripes and glows

Lame, Lame and Lame

[FOH Lights]

QUOTE

Lighting - You know with all the technology and lights it's amazing how little sense the light show incorporates. Lighting should enhance the mood of the song. I look at the light patterns while at the show and think how non-sensical they are. Watch the DVD videos. I understand synching to songs/BPM. But there are general sections of each song which should be lit and produced to match/enhance the song's mood. I was watching the end of the R30 DVD and the lights/lighting is not even in touch with how the song is reacting.

 

GAH - BLASPHEMY!!

 

Whether you understand it or not, every aspect of Rush's lighting/effects has a meaning and reason for being. Have you ever considered that your interpretation of a particular song might be different than that of Geddy's, Alex's, or Neil's? After all, THEY are the guys who give the final yay or nay to the lighting design (well, mostly Geddy, but you get my point). As the consummate perfectionists they are, if they don't like something or think that a particular part of the show is less than exactly what they want, then it gets changed.

 

Don't misunderstand me, I completely respect your opinion. However, as you watch the show this time around, try and clear your head and allow it to absorb what the band really wants you to "feel" in their music.

 

QUOTE

You go to Braodway and the lighting and scenery is orchestrated as well as the rest of the show. Most Rush shows from night to night are very similar (from the pattern of 3 songs then speak a little intro to the 4th song to the scripted encore and closing songs synched to metronome click in the ear piece).

Again, Rush shows are orchestrated exactly as they want/need them to be. The lack of variation from night to night stems from the amount of work involved in changing things, once the show is set. Most people don't realize the amount of work & programming that goes into a Rush show. Geddy is able to sing, plays bass, and keyboards (and smile!) all at the same time because of programming. When you start mixing things up, there's more chance for error and doing shows that are less than the very best they can be, is not what they're about. Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert...

Edited June 15, 2010 by FOH Lights

[BrightAntennae]

QUOTE (FOH Lights @ Jun 15 2010, 04:32 PM)

Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert...

Uhhh..NEVER.

[hughes&kettner]

QUOTE (BrightAntennae @ Jun 15 2010, 05:23 PM)

QUOTE (FOH Lights @ Jun 15 2010, 04:32 PM) Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert...  Uhhh..NEVER.   HAHAHAHAHAHAH "... bad rush concert is a Cold Fire."

[Checkster2112]

I agree with you on your second point, bring back the old school clips.

[fonzbear2000]

QUOTE (hughes&kettner @ Jun 15 2010, 01:51 PM)

i'd rather hear them in my garage, with one white light. don't care about ANYTHING besides the sound quality of the mix and the house... but i dig your point...i guess.

I disagree. For me, a big and fancy stage production is a large part of the concert going experience. But that's the great thing about Rush. They deliver both great sound and a great stage show.

[rugen]

I don't have anything bad to say about their light show, but get rid of those screens, so i can enjoy the light show and the band.

[Xanadu93]

Get rid of the screens, but slash ticket prices. That way I'll be able to see the band without using binoculars.

[FootballYouBet]

QUOTE (FOH Lights @ Jun 15 2010, 04:32 PM)

QUOTE Lighting - You know with all the technology and lights it's amazing how little sense the light show incorporates. Lighting should enhance the mood of the song. I look at the light patterns while at the show and think how non-sensical they are. Watch the DVD videos. I understand synching to songs/BPM. But there are general sections of each song which should be lit and produced to match/enhance the song's mood. I was watching the end of the R30 DVD and the lights/lighting is not even in touch with how the song is reacting.   GAH - BLASPHEMY!!   Whether you understand it or not, every aspect of Rush's lighting/effects has a meaning and reason for being. Have you ever considered that your interpretation of a particular song might be different than that of Geddy's, Alex's, or Neil's? After all, THEY are the guys who give the final yay or nay to the lighting design (well, mostly Geddy, but you get my point). As the consummate perfectionists they are, if they don't like something or think that a particular part of the show is less than exactly what they want, then it gets changed.   Don't misunderstand me, I completely respect your opinion. However, as you watch the show this time around, try and clear your head and allow it to absorb what the band really wants you to "feel" in their music.   QUOTE You go to Braodway and the lighting and scenery is orchestrated as well as the rest of the show. Most Rush shows from night to night are very similar (from the pattern of 3 songs then speak a little intro to the 4th song to the scripted encore and closing songs synched to metronome click in the ear piece). Again, Rush shows are orchestrated exactly as they want/need them to be. The lack of variation from night to night stems from the amount of work involved in changing things, once the show is set. Most people don't realize the amount of work & programming that goes into a Rush show. Geddy is able to sing, plays bass, and keyboards (and smile!) all at the same time because of programming. When you start mixing things up, there's more chance for error and doing shows that are less than the very best they can be, is not what they're about. Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert... Since your username is FOH Lights I assume you know something about FOH lights so here goes. I used to be a Lighting Director back in the day and was also a musician and performer in my own right. Anyway, I met a lot of LD's along the way and you know what? I met just as many bad ones as good ones. Many of the bad ones became LD's by default because of their technical background or because of the fact that they owned the rig. And because they weren't musically inclined or creative people they couldn't understand how color relates to music, nor did they understand the impact that light/music synchronization had on the show itself. That being said I have been to a few concerts for major artists where I definitely felt that the LD completely sucked. It wasn't for lack of equipment, it came down to colors used in songs, and seemingly random scene changes that killed the mood of the song. Anyway, the point is that show lighting is not just technical, it's an art, and there are some bad artists out there, even working on huge tours like RUSH.

[FOH Lights]

QUOTE (FootballYouBet @ Jun 16 2010, 01:38 PM)

QUOTE (FOH Lights @ Jun 15 2010, 04:32 PM) QUOTE Lighting - You know with all the technology and lights it's amazing how little sense the light show incorporates. Lighting should enhance the mood of the song. I look at the light patterns while at the show and think how non-sensical they are. Watch the DVD videos. I understand synching to songs/BPM. But there are general sections of each song which should be lit and produced to match/enhance the song's mood. I was watching the end of the R30 DVD and the lights/lighting is not even in touch with how the song is reacting.   GAH - BLASPHEMY!!   Whether you understand it or not, every aspect of Rush's lighting/effects has a meaning and reason for being. Have you ever considered that your interpretation of a particular song might be different than that of Geddy's, Alex's, or Neil's? After all, THEY are the guys who give the final yay or nay to the lighting design (well, mostly Geddy, but you get my point). As the consummate perfectionists they are, if they don't like something or think that a particular part of the show is less than exactly what they want, then it gets changed.   Don't misunderstand me, I completely respect your opinion. However, as you watch the show this time around, try and clear your head and allow it to absorb what the band really wants you to "feel" in their music.   QUOTE You go to Braodway and the lighting and scenery is orchestrated as well as the rest of the show. Most Rush shows from night to night are very similar (from the pattern of 3 songs then speak a little intro to the 4th song to the scripted encore and closing songs synched to metronome click in the ear piece). Again, Rush shows are orchestrated exactly as they want/need them to be. The lack of variation from night to night stems from the amount of work involved in changing things, once the show is set. Most people don't realize the amount of work & programming that goes into a Rush show. Geddy is able to sing, plays bass, and keyboards (and smile!) all at the same time because of programming. When you start mixing things up, there's more chance for error and doing shows that are less than the very best they can be, is not what they're about. Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert... Since your username is FOH Lights I assume you know something about FOH lights so here goes. I used to be a Lighting Director back in the day and was also a musician and performer in my own right. Anyway, I met a lot of LD's along the way and you know what? I met just as many bad ones as good ones. Many of the bad ones became LD's by default because of their technical background or because of the fact that they owned the rig. And because they weren't musically inclined or creative people they couldn't understand how color relates to music, nor did they understand the impact that light/music synchronization had on the show itself. That being said I have been to a few concerts for major artists where I definitely felt that the LD completely sucked. It wasn't for lack of equipment, it came down to colors used in songs, and seemingly random scene changes that killed the mood of the song. Anyway, the point is that show lighting is not just technical, it's an art, and there are some bad artists out there, even working on huge tours like RUSH. I hear what you're saying and that's cool. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. How much of a jerk would I be if I was to try and tell you who & what to like?

[farcryoverspilledmilk]

I just would like a very up to date show. Different colored lasers, a screen and led show like Nine Inch Nails and Tool both of whom have put on the best light shows in a decade up there with U2.

 

Green lasers and 3 video screens with Microsoft and Windows Media graphics = Lazy.

[farcryoverspilledmilk]

QUOTE (FOH Lights @ Jun 15 2010, 04:32 PM)

QUOTE Lighting - You know with all the technology and lights it's amazing how little sense the light show incorporates. Lighting should enhance the mood of the song. I look at the light patterns while at the show and think how non-sensical they are. Watch the DVD videos. I understand synching to songs/BPM. But there are general sections of each song which should be lit and produced to match/enhance the song's mood. I was watching the end of the R30 DVD and the lights/lighting is not even in touch with how the song is reacting.   GAH - BLASPHEMY!!   Whether you understand it or not, every aspect of Rush's lighting/effects has a meaning and reason for being. Have you ever considered that your interpretation of a particular song might be different than that of Geddy's, Alex's, or Neil's? After all, THEY are the guys who give the final yay or nay to the lighting design (well, mostly Geddy, but you get my point). As the consummate perfectionists they are, if they don't like something or think that a particular part of the show is less than exactly what they want, then it gets changed.   Don't misunderstand me, I completely respect your opinion. However, as you watch the show this time around, try and clear your head and allow it to absorb what the band really wants you to "feel" in their music.   QUOTE You go to Braodway and the lighting and scenery is orchestrated as well as the rest of the show. Most Rush shows from night to night are very similar (from the pattern of 3 songs then speak a little intro to the 4th song to the scripted encore and closing songs synched to metronome click in the ear piece). Again, Rush shows are orchestrated exactly as they want/need them to be. The lack of variation from night to night stems from the amount of work involved in changing things, once the show is set. Most people don't realize the amount of work & programming that goes into a Rush show. Geddy is able to sing, plays bass, and keyboards (and smile!) all at the same time because of programming. When you start mixing things up, there's more chance for error and doing shows that are less than the very best they can be, is not what they're about. Seriously, have you ever seen a bad Rush concert... Horseshit. The Dave Matthews Band have a pretty damn huge light and screen show and their set list changes every single night. There is no reason why Rush can't have an A/B set list just like they did for Vapor Trails.

[Sir Lerxst]

QUOTE (farcryoverspilledmilk @ Jun 19 2010, 05:52 PM)

Horseshit. The Dave Matthews Band have a pretty damn huge light and screen show and their set list changes every single night. There is no reason why Rush can't have an A/B set list just like they did for Vapor Trails.

With a song catalog of well over 150 songs, programming light-shows for every song would take a long time. Not to mention the difficulties created in other area's, such as sampling & keyboards, FOH sound, and Monitoring.

 

It would be possible to have a few setlist variations over the course of a tour, so long as programming exists for them, so they would need to tell the production crew weeks in advance, but changing the setlist every night, its not going to happen.

[Jake2112]

Also take into account bands like Tool and Muse who have the most bombastic light shows never change their set. I mean, Tool hasn't changed their set in over 4 years (with no new album, but that's beside the point )

[Show Don't Tell]

I hear people complaining about the screens and, for me, they are a bit of a distraction. But is it really the screens that are the problem? In my opinion, it is the usage of the screens. They were used so much on recent tours, whether it was showing graphics or music video footage or live footage of the band, etc.

 

I remember David Gilmour of Pink Floyd saying that they incorporated video screen into their show because, "We didn't think that what we were doing on stage was that interesting at all." (paraphrasing) So they just used a lot of graphics / film footage on the screens. The thing is though, that is what I find interesting -- the band members! I certainly do not come for the "theatrics", but it does add to the show. You CAN overdo it, though, and I think Rush is bordering on that, for me. I think the band and the lights should be the primary focus, and the video screens should serve a background job.

 

I remember seeing Rush in 2007 and 2008, and while I was totally blown away by the concerts, I sort of felt I had missed parts of the show. I wanted to take in everything and, well, the screens took my focus away from what I really wanted to see -- the band. And watching them on screens from different camera angles is like watching a live DVD in your home. I would much prefer to see them "live".

 

I think Rush should do more like what they did back in the days where the video screens were relatively new technology and really, they couldn't do a lot more.

 

http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u195/Number-4/Icons/youtube.png

 

Something like that is all you really need.

[Transparent Green]

In Howard U's defense...I've seen The Guys 2 or 3x each tour since Signals, and Howard IS a connsumate artist. Watch him on this tour, if you can...it's almost as if he is playing keys, lol.

 

He is also one hell of a nice guy, and if he is not too busy, he will take the time to say hello and gab, especially if he remembers your face...albeit a now bespectacled, slightly older face.

 

"YOU AGAIN!?! Do you have a job or life?!?!" HAHAHAHA.

 

Rock On, Howard. Rock On.

 

Edited June 19, 2010 by Transparent Green

[cygnus_thegodofbalance]

You screen haters are NOT going to like this tour. That's all I'm saying

[rugen]

QUOTE (Show Don't Tell @ Jun 19 2010, 01:03 PM)

I hear people complaining about the screens and, for me, they are a bit of a distraction. But is it really the screens that are the problem? In my opinion, it is the usage of the screens. They were used so much on recent tours, whether it was showing graphics or music video footage or live footage of the band, etc. I remember David Gilmour of Pink Floyd saying that they incorporated video screen into their show because, "We didn't think that what we were doing on stage was that interesting at all." (paraphrasing) So they just used a lot of graphics / film footage on the screens. The thing is though, that is what I find interesting -- the band members! I certainly do not come for the "theatrics", but it does add to the show. You CAN overdo it, though, and I think Rush is bordering on that, for me. I think the band and the lights should be the primary focus, and the video screens should serve a background job. I remember seeing Rush in 2007 and 2008, and while I was totally blown away by the concerts, I sort of felt I had missed parts of the show. I wanted to take in everything and, well, the screens took my focus away from what I really wanted to see -- the band. And watching them on screens from different camera angles is like watching a live DVD in your home. I would much prefer to see them "live". I think Rush should do more like what they did back in the days where the video screens were relatively new technology and really, they couldn't do a lot more. http://i168.photobucket.com/albums/u195/Number-4/Icons/youtube.png Rush - Mystic Rhythms 4-22-1994 Something like that is all you really need.

 

Very good point of view. I think screens are made to keep the excitement of a show going when you start to be bore with the music. It's not a coincidence that the light show and screens projections are use a lot more in the second part of the show. It's gives us something to watch while listening to the music. But i am curious to see what kind of experience i would have to live a show without screen and projections, and let's say that i have good seats...

Edited June 20, 2010 by RUDT

[Zanadoo]

based on the new pics we just got, it looks like a huge ass screen

[pedro2112]

QUOTE (Zanadoo @ Jun 20 2010, 06:55 AM)

based on the new pics we just got, it looks like a huge ass screen

They are using an ass screen for the show?