I could be interesting for you to do a song for a live performance that have very intentional prominent rubato used. Then have that made into a click track. So the click track would not be mechanically regular it would have speeding up and slowing down but everybody would have practiced the song with that click track and in a live performance that would be in the in ear monitors. The rubato would be carefully made to enhance the melody and entire song but it would be set in permanent planned out way so the arrangement would have a human feel with subtle tempo variations which would be very deliberate and coordinated in everybody's in ear monitors. For an example of what I'm talking about, rubato in a funky prog metal style check out this old video on youtube: lightning (Tempo Rubato) Carlos Cruz Project
slipknot fans when jay plays psychosocial too fast: omg you suck have you heard of metronome slipknot fans when eloy plays psychosocial on time: omg you ruined the authenticity of this band by playing the actual bpm of the song you cant please everyone who's glued on the internet 24/7 who thinks they know better
The thing I'll say about this from our old drummer.. The crowds intensity is pumped. Who in turn gets him pumped. In turn means we speed up! I love it!! Even Acdc (and we know Angus is a stickler) live albums the tempo is faster. My brother who isn't a musician hates live albums because of this. He's lame..
The differences in timing and occasional sloppiness makes seeing those old bands so unique. Hearing blackened, creeping death, Custer, and surfacing at giga speed with the little variations and crowd breaks are some of the best memories of shows I’ve been to
Funny I stumbled upon this video today because I'm trying to get up my picking speed on Creeping Death and I realized while I can keep up with the record, I can't keep up with them currently live including the Chicago show I saw last month because they play at least 20 bpm faster than the record. Even if they're on a click that didn't stop them from playing fast, and songs like that benefit from such a thing.
yes, i became live concert's fan when i was watching tons of guns n roses live concerts on youtube in 2010s and they all sounded very sloppy but unique, different from each other and so raw, i loved it. Btw in my opinion these concert's vibe is ruined by modern ai "enchantments" aka fake 60fps 4k and youtube is filled with them. I always struggle to find the old original non enchanced videos i watched back then
Those who can’t play are so clueless yet spout nonsense as if they are musicians. Live shows are not all the same. Outdoor vs indoor requires different setups, especially for big bands. Genre of music can have an impact on what sound setup is required too. Most bands have songs with ambient intros or strings in the album recordings so it’s natural to use a background track to fill the parts of the song required.
Right on, most people who comment think the Musicians on stage playing hears exactly the same as what they are hearing, I personally had experiences wherein I literally cannot even hear myself even if the amp is behind me, like I do but not as much as I should to know if I am right on time or if my guitar is still in tune. Literally like being blind, walking to a certain direction you don't necessarily intend to go to.
@@SpeedAnarchyMetallica aged like a fine wine. When I was a kid 20 years ago and slipknot and all the numetal was out I hated Metallica. Thought they were old sellouts that wrote easy shit. Like eff the old heads and their taste. Then I picked up the guitar and after 20+ years of playing and becoming an old head myself i’ve realized Metallica is literally the greatest band to ever walk this planet
@@Tomcat82if you can't cook you can have an opinion on the end product (the food), not on the process of making it because you don't know what you're talking about. Same with music, if you can't play you can have an opinion on the show, but not on the technicalities how the show is achieved. The point of the original comment is to show that often people who don't understand how live shows work, pretend that they do.
What I really don’t like about metal right now is, that the sound is so manipulated and layered with sound effects, like sirens or other stuff. That makes the sound also interesting, but also some kind of „not real“ - Don’t know to describe.
I think what you're talking about is audio thresholds, and specifically, when thresholds are not loud enough (basically, a threshold, is well a loudness threshold, that when is exceeded, the louder frequencies get suppressed) It usually results in a "washed out" and unrealistic sound, which is different from what the instruments sound like. Like songs will sound more like blend of sounds rather than an actual band with musicians that play actual instruments. Thresholds are usually lowered in order to add layers without the gain impacting negatively the sound quality by creating a crakling sound. It's something that isn't just excluded to metal, but all kinds of modern productions. But in metal music, the contrast is very noticeable when you listen to Suicide Silence's The Cleansing (very loud mix), and modern Lorna Shore (weirdly washed out sound). To avoid that, I listen to live versions of your favorite songs rather than studio versions
@@wazson3178 With Lorna Shore though, the "washed out" sound is kind of the point, because of all the black metal records they've taken influence from and put into their music. On "To The Hellfire" some of the distorted rhythm guitars in the verses (they tracked a BUNCH) have reverb on them, only for them to cut out on the breakdowns and the parts that need things a good bit drier, cause deathcore tends to be pretty dry, especially compared to black metal. Combining the two, they go back and forth as needed.
Dont forget fear factor too. They have been around for a while. If you have never heard of them start with this track called Demanufacture. No need to thank me for making you nut after listening. Nuts are metal though lol
Aren't Slipknot actually notorious for playing without click tracks? The first three albums are even recorded without metronome. For example Before I Forget, the last chorus is definitely played slightly faster than the first two. I have seen them live multiple times and they were definitely changing tempos mid songs. I think even Corey said in an interview they prefer to play without metronome because they like to feed off the crowd. When I was a kid, I went to see them for the first time with my dad who is a sound engineer... He spoke with some the technicians after the show and they revealed to him that the light and pyro guys are like other band members because they launch all the effects live.
Yeah that makes sense to me. They are still one of the best acts I've seen live. They had such energy, and their professionalism just put some other bands to shame.
IMO Slipknot is one of the best live bands, and this is for sure one of the reasons. I love their 'brute force' kinda sound and that sound only benefits if it is played like that live as well.
I grew up in love with thrash but Slipknot made me realize there's something else so i loved them for a while but then i got into tech death and haven't looked back yet, especially the band Allegaeon. Mind-blowing.
The only thing I dislike with the click-track era of metal is that everything is so damn thight (which is the point, I know) and it takes away some of the experience for me, like their not allowed to make a single mistake. It's kinda like seeing some robots on stage performing. I think for some bands it's mandatory (Mushaggah for instance), but not every band should be perfectly thight for me.
I know some bands feel they need the click tracks to ensure quality for the fans that support them. I personally prefer a more raw experience, but I can understand that argument. I've been to a ton concerts and most have been super good, regardless of click track. However, it wasn't always the case. For example, I remember being super excited to see Megadeth live like 10 years ago, but when they played it was very sloppy and it took me out of it. I was very disappointed. Perhaps a click track would've helped?
Exactly this, Insomnium, Amorphis, DT, and other bands that are heavily invested into melody should keep their tightness of the songs Melody sounds bad when off-rhythm But, songs that are based on riffs, lots of solos, traditional rhythm of an ACDC style, even Megadeth to some extent, they should kinda ease-up a bit and engage with the audience more Exception ofc. being the big songs that "carry weight" of the whole performance I'd imagine wanna concentrate on the "perfectionist" side of the things for those 🤔
Yea S, Silence especially they were way better with Alex because he knew how to make tempo changes to from fast to slower on the breakdowns. Making them seem way more brutal.
Today SpectreSoundStudio's had a video about band photo's. And one of the subjects, why band photo's etc are part of being a musician: You are an entertainer. Everything you do, playing live music, making new music, but also band photo's and interviews etc are all part of the job. My opinion is that if a tool (IEM) can help you better do your job as entertainer, please use it! You would also not take modern powertools away from a carpenter, because it isn't authentic enough.
I mean, I agree to a point, we use in ear monitors on stage as well, but I hate when bands are stiff and worried about playing "perfect". I'd way rather see a guitarist play a little sloppier because they're throwing their body and guitar all over the place putting energy and emotion behind their instrument than someone who if you traced out their shoes at the start of the show they'd still be playing in that outline by the time the show is done. Use the technology but don't be shackled by it.
Thank you for your feedback. Personally, I use in-ear monitoring during shows with the band Dadabovic, and as you mentioned, it is more convenient than relying on speakers on stage. Additionally, the mix is always consistent, and I can fine-tune how much kick, vocals, or any other instruments I want to hear when I play.
Hello, as a stagehand, ex recording and FOH engineer and bass player, I like the old school for smaller venues and productions. I love the implementation of in ears and iso cabs for amps, as stsge volume if it gets out of hand is the bane of a FOH and especially monitor engineer. I've mixed monitors where no matter how maxed out I have the wedges, the singer cant hear him or herself and the feedback runs rampant. When I was touring the club circuit with friends of mine that hooked up as an opener for a much bigger headliner, they loved the stage volume to be as loud as possible : amps just cranked. Sometomes I could not get the house mix, which I was only running vocals and drums through over the stage volume of a 100 watt 4x12 guitar setup and a couple of SVT's and a pair of 8x10's. As a stagehand who sees all the major acts that run through town, you have to have that control because there are so many elements to the production that could go askew... i remember seeing The Who on their last pass through town with full orchestra in tow. I entered the side stage early to be in position to take down some lighting elements that had to go first and as quickly as possible, so I was abnle to see the nlast 20 minutes od the show. I was shocked at how low the FOH mix was...We could easily talk to each other without shouting and we were directly under an 18 box V-dosc FOH hang. The clarity and detail of the band and every element of the orchestra was stunning....like listening in my living room on an audiophile level system.
I am an older Metalhead and most of my concert days were well before all of the digital and in ear monitors. And I absolutely enjoyed every single show. Some better than others but each show was slightly different every time you saw the same band. Never bothered me. Rock on!
I still consider them a newer band. I had been listening to metal for years before they came out. I was never into them. There's a few songs I like but not really my cup of tea.
The thing is that bands don't need to play to a click. We go to see a live band to hear it live. We dont' need it to sound like it is on the record. If they are a bit faster or a bit slower we don't really care.
Music is very polished and demanding today. Listening to metal especially, band like Scardust and Nuclear Power Trio are just so precise in their mix. It's interesting that guitarists listen to their track via ear bud. Great content 👌
In-ear rigs also are HUGE in saving ones hearing. It's sort of hard to play music without hearing. Also, as a musician who's played in a band without and now WITH an IEM setup, I'm far more confident and we are tighter as a band. Additionally, it allows far more control over ones own monitor mix. Those complaining, are more often than not, not playing on a stage in front of people. We really need to stop finding reasons to hate things. It's pretty pathetic.
I’m old school on this. I prefer smaller shows and the music. I’m less about the lasers and flames and stuff and letting the music breath. It doesn’t have to be perfect every time as long as the music evokes feelings and gets you moving.
I try to avoid big shows. I have a much better time at the smaller venues with only a few hundred people. I saw Metallica last year with over 90,000 in attendance. Great show, but I never want to go to anything that big again. It was a nightmare. I'm getting too old to deal with that crap & the big shows are ridiculously expensive these days.
Eventually your body gets used to it. Most drummers don’t strive to be on the click my the millisecond, but instead to keep them on track. Sometimes after playing a moderately fast song, the next song(while still moderately fast, maybe just a few bpm less) will feel slowed down. Your body and heart rate affect your playing and timing. Not every band/song needs a click though. In the studio, some singer-songwriter songs just DO NOT work with a click track. There is movement and slight variation between sections and emotions.
@@donut_lyfe believe me I understand the multiple situations. I’d rather have my drummer have his own clock. But if you are putting on a show makes since. Also most people are used to hearing their favorite song recorded to a click. Honestly take more skill to play on time than Freeform. Just because you have a click track doesn’t mean you can’t lose it
I want to let you know that I appreciate your insights and logic in your videos. I am learning quite a bit, from your perspectives, in a good way! I had no idea that’s why the click track was used until I watched this! I agree that the answer is not definite or exact for everyone who is playing and performing music. My motivation was on a break until earlier today, and now it’s gotten some more energy, after watching this video! Thank you!
As someone whose live playing days were from around 1977 to 1988, I never had the experience of playing live with in ears and a click. In many ways I am an "old school" kind of guy, but I can't help but think these things would have made our performances better. Many nights, given the way we set up on the small stages we played on, as a bass player about the only thing I heard clearly were the drummer's cymbals!!! And I hope this tour is a big success and it's not the last time the three of you tour together, but the start of an ongoing thing like the G3 Tours (you could call it Y3 for RUclips Three)
There is something impressive about a group of musicians who can get together and put on a great reproduction of your favorite songs... It certainly takes a large amount of concentration and talent to be able to pull that off without using any modern technology, like in-ear monitors or click tracks etc. what I think people might be forgetting is that it is quite difficult to pull this off consistently... I would rather have the musicians be more comfortable and confident in delivering their art... Instead of risking slowing or speeding up certain parts of the song in an effort to become more authentic... There is nothing worse than going and seeing your favorite band and having them bomb because they messed the tempo up... There's a reason people really enjoy the studio versions of most of their favorite artists because these things are polished and refined to the point of perfection! But that doesn't mean things are edited to the 10th degree it could be that there was a really cool mistake and that was left in the song... It happens all the time!!! just try to enjoy music and don't analyze it too much is my favorite approach!
Good topic and essay. The problem is that this one can never be settled because some fans love the more human aspect of bands going organic, making mistakes, and changing shit on the fly. There's a wholesome element to it I think that makes the audience feel more connected to you because you aren't perfect. On the other hand, when I was younger, if I heard someone cover a song and they didn't nail the solo, I got disappointed. Which makes me a hippocrit because I absolutely loathe learning other guitarists' solos. Except Cobain's. Not a huge issue. but I think the issue here is, the people who want it exactly how it was recorded will label a band as "Not good live," while someone who wants an organic experience will label the band fake. You really can't win on our end.
In ear monitoring has opened a new world to me. How many times I was mad about the sound on stage. Even after an intensive soundcheck the monitor sound sucks if the venue is filled with people. Sometimes physics not really rocks. But even in case my monitor produces a good sound and I really hear everything (included myself) it is horrible to move on stage to act with the other musician because suddenly the sound is different. With in ear monitoring this is not the case. The discussions after the gig inside the band about the performance is completely different because I can reflect myself much better
I hear that a lot, too, but I don't really get it. I love metal, polished or no. Sure, they sound radically different, and I've got to be in the right mood for any subgenre, but I think it's cool that there's a subenre and/or production level for virtually every mood. With tools like RUclips and Spotify and others having libraries that have all the big acts from the 70s through now, it's a great time to be a metal fan.
@@markpommett5712I personally think we need to go back to the attitude that death metal bands and those influenced by them embodied in the 90s and early 2000s. Slipknot may be a generic mainstream act now, but in my opinion, their early albums sounded way more like old death and death-doom bands like Immolation than any mainstream band that formed after 1999 or so did.
My band uses IEMs, but only a couple of our songs use a click track (because of important synth parts that we wouldn’t be able to recreate live). It’s sort of the best of both worlds. Hearing protection and perfect monitoring from the IEMs, while also maintaining the “organic” feel of playing without a click.
I think metal and rock shows should always have a element of chaos to them. Because both have very much been about breaking away from the musical norms. So having everyone's playing, the pyro and lights all synced up to a click can take away from that. Bands needs some wiggle room to play around with. So if on the spot they decided to really up the tempo on a song or roll a couple songs together, they can.
Like Bernth says multiple times: that won't work for bigger productions. How would you propose they would work the pyro, lights, video stuff and backing tracks then? I'd rather have a show where all the pieces fit together than a sloppy mess just to be 'metal'. It's not like anyone is counting along to see if the band uses a click anyway.
You could have a lighting/effects engineer trigger them at the correct parts of the song. Lights pan up for the bridge of song A. Trigger the pyro at the end of the chorus for song B. The band obviously need to ensure they're not messing up for those cues, and you'll need someone paying attention to run those elements, but it can be done. Not like Slipknot don't use pyro is it? No harm in using a click and having the triggers programmes either though.
I think saying things like "should always" is kind of pointless. I think people should go to concerts and either enjoy them or not and not try to concern themselves with that part of it. Bands like Nine Inch Nails, Spineshank and many others played to click long ago and were the epitome of chaos. There is no rule of thumb to anything.
Great breakdown of both perspectives, and I loved hearing your point of sound in the previous video. You can't know what it's like in stage unless you've been there!
Doesnt matter if its "Rock N Roll" when its "Metal as Fuck", playing sharply and as efficient as possible means giving your best and most brutal performance... thats metal
I do love these pov videos that Bernth is sharing his content is by far the most interesting. I still love how bands like Misfits can just sound terrible live it’s just punk rock noise that is still awesome when they could even afford to record.
Thank you for the perspective. I have struggled for the last 10 years with my bass playing. I have the upmost respect for players who can play with in ears and no stack. I need the tactile feedback of the wall of air. 8x15s and 500 tube watts is getting me in the ball park. But again much respect to the players that do the stripped down modern approach because moving my rig would not be fun for anyone.. and ill never get to llay The Sphere, o well... Cheers🎉
Im on the old school side but like the new school approach. Last time I played in a band and did live shows was in the mid 90's most of the time no monitors and basic PA for vocals. It was so nice to play a show with a real PA system and monitors. It was more fun for us and never serious as far as being a musician. As Amateur as it can get. but we had fun. music is awesome.
As a guitarist I think if I was to use in ear monitors I'd have drums but no click in my mix so I could play to the drummers groove rather than separately playing to the click. Cos I've found when recording to a live drummer I stick to the click too rigidly if it's there instead of pushing or holding back with the drummers feel. Cos despite what anti click people say, you can shift the feel of the tempo with a click track there, but also if the drummer wants to push faster and ignore the click then come back to it later I can go with them.
Been playing live with and without in ear monitoring/click - and the feedback improved so much when we changed to in ear. The whole performance improved a lot because no band member stepped out of the line too much. And its helping a lot if you want to headbang or run around while playing - without click you tend to speed in those situations
The thing, that has worked for our band for a while really well, is only the drummer having a mp3 midi click track in his ears that he records via phone and a wedge for the full mix on the side, for the rest of the band also just wedges and regular ear plugs. The downsides are if the mixing engineer sucks, then the sound on stage prob wont be that great (although a raised off the ground 2x12 behind or on the side does wonders) and the songs have to be well rehearsed as a band, the upsides are, not much can go wrong, and the perfomance time is consistent and tight, but if something does go wrong, the whole band can react fluidly outside the click, as the rule is, follow the drummer, thats it. This has also worked really well for syncing recordings to the live shows, to add a bit clarity, as not allways stems from the mixing desk are available
Just yesterday I rehearsed and we had the chance of using a different (better) rehearsal spot than the usual one. Biggest difference was the drumset being equipped with extra loud paiste cymbals and boy oh boy, the higher frequencies of my hearing were gone until the next day
I've played with bands using both methods, and you're were pretty spot on. I do enjoy having the IEMs for different reasons. I can hear myself (or whatever else I want) better, hearing protection, and it does save room when playing on smaller stages. I don't like the disconnect that you get from the crowd and your band so I'll usually keep one out or mess with them all night. The click track... yes I know syncing of backing tracks & effects (different conversation), but my entire musical career I've always been taught listen down to the drummer which as a bass player is key. I'd much rather follow a tempo impaired drummer instead of having CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK in my ear for the entire show. Enjoyed the video.
I'm justvabout to change to in ear monitoring and it's kind of hard for me because I'm not used to it. I totally agree with you that it's much better for the tightness of the player! I'm really looking forward to play more often with IEM and getting my mix perfect for my taste. Thanks for that informative video!!! 🤘🏼🤩
I saw you guys (Seiler und Speer) live and loved the show because of how on point you were. And as for metronomes/click and monitoring it really depends. I prefer the chaotic live energy, the imperfections and the unpredictabilty of a real live show, which is also why die Ärzte (German three piece punk/rock/whatever you want to call them) are my favourite band of all time. When I go to a show, I don't need perfection, as long as the performances are still good. And even if the babd fucks up, it can still make for a great memory.
When I was playing shows I wish I had in-ear monitoring, especially at venues with inexperienced sound guys. Always good stuff on this channel! Cheers!
Have you played with a "crowd mic" mixed into your inears? I feel like it helps a LOT with connecting with the audience's energy when you can hear them chant and scream, even mixed really low and behind the click. Can be distracting though hahaha
Hey Bernth, nice video. I don't care what people are saying on social media. I went to 4 slipknot concerts already, the 5th is coming on december and i love their music. keep on rocking 🤘🤘✌
I wish i could have had in ear monitors back when i was playing live in a band. We didn't have techs, never got time to do soundchecks and we never got to use our own equipment. I could never hear myself or my bandmates and I just had to trust myself that at least i was doing my part in playing the songs right.
I’m a 💯 with you on answers being somewhere down the middle. You could also argue that tje majority of folks that criticize bands (old and modern) have never played live music. On that note (pun intended), even if you play as a hobby, I encourage everyone to at least perform at an open mic. Youll build an entirely new skill and i believe this also makes you grow as a musician .
For someone who's starting to gig recently, playing with a click will be a blessing, i love to play with in ears and ill not switch them for regilsr wedges never in my whole life
Thanks for your balanced and thoughtful discussion of the pros and cons of both approaches. When it comes to music, we are all different. Beauty is in the ear of the listener. If you like what you are hearing, that is really all that matters, not what others may say or think about how it was produced. 😎👍
I feel like using in ears is great) Though I feel like the chaos is something that live shows are for, it just gives more energy imo) But you still have to keep in mind that music is a business so whatever works better and cheper is preferred depending on the type of show you have.
I think it the same with a lot of stuff: people who don't really know why something is done in a certain way make up an explanation for themselves and judge the person doing the thing accordingly. For example if you don't know how big modern productions run the musicians not being able to keep time without a click might be the first or only thing you can think of and that's actually pretty understandable. It's the judging part that I can't understand because in today's world with so much information being available it should be the standard to actually inform oneself before forming such a harsh opinion about other people and how they approach their job. The same way I might think the way some people run their business seems a bit inefficient but since I don't know everything about that business I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. There might be a really good reason for something that I just can't see from the outside.
I started out with old school metal as a youngster, but even back then I felt like I wanted a cleaner, tighter sound from my music (That still manages to be heavy). I'm 100% for the way metal is going in most instances, and when I try to imagine what I'd like out of a more old school band, it's hard for me to do at all without thinking I'd rather hear a more current or even progressive/futuristic sound.
If I am going to see an artist or a band live, of course I'm hoping it will be great, though not perfect. If I want it to be like the studio version, I go home and listen to the studio version. If I'm taking the time and paying money to see someone live, I [generally] enjoy and make room for imperfections, changes, songs being different/longer/shorter, unexpected solos or encores, etc. Those things are what makes the experience wonderful and, well, human.
I'm a one man band. If I use click I need to use IEM. But as I play with a time aligned backtrack no issue. The thing is : I don't play in huge venues, I'm alone with my amps, my PA, my whole gear. If I can avoid transporting extra stuff I do. But one thing is important : ear protections. Makes me play loud, but I have a full box for the audience. It ain't rocknroll but I like it
I have loved seeing shows that had programmed stufd but on the flip side my favourite versions of songs have been those slightly looser live versions in the school approach.
I saw Slipknot on the pledge of allegiance tour for Iowa (Denver Coliseum) and again at Ozzfest 2004 for Vol 3 (Fiddler's Green). The shows were vastly different. The coliseum was like a live CD, while at Ozzfest was straight chaos, was just noise, I would have rather stayed home and listened to a CD. Could have just been how the audio was engineered due to the type of venue, but my other favorite bands at Ozzfest 04 didn't sound all chaotic. Meh lol
I like both approaches. The Foo Fighters (old school) put on an excellent show, with walls of amplifiers and giant monitors. Unleash the Archers (new school) also put on an excellent show, with superbly balanced speakers, direct input (no amps on stage!), and IEMs for everyone. There's nothing inherently wrong with either method. They each have advantages over the other, naturally. It all comes down to what the group practices with and how it turns into a spectacle for the audience.
I agree that the answer is highly contextual. I think that in a small venue, the old style would be a lot more fun, but for a large show with a ton of effects, using the more modern system makes sense.
On stage, all we need to hear is what we're playing, and whatever gives us the musical cues we need, if any. Worst case for me, as a bass guitarist, is that all I hear are myself and the drums, and that's still all I need to play correctly and consistently. The drummer usually uses me as a metronome.
I’ve done a few pop cover band concerts before (not for a band any of you will have heard of, it was a college credit). We always used in ears, and for a group like that, you WANT to be able to hear all the precise intricacies of what you’re playing. By the way, playing consistently to a metronome is not as easy as it seems; especially at slower tempos, it can be very easy to start rushing. I got several looks from the musical director because I was rushing, and his feedback made me a tighter musician. On the flip side, I’ve done a few jazz combo gigs, and it’s never worth using a click track for that, because all of what we did was improvised on the spot, even down to what songs we’d play. And all we had was a few charts to go off and the feel of each other. One of my favourite improvised moments was when the bassist was out of tune and only noticed in the middle of the song, so after a solo, he and I played each string so he could tune, and it was to the tempo of the song, until we came back in with the main form. There are good reasons to use both approaches. Neither is objectively superior, because it’ll change on a case by case basis. However, if we’re talking a pop gig, I’d rather play with in ears than without.
For a medium-level performer as I was...no click and in-ear monitoring would be a good "in-between". U have always played with old-school monitoring and getting the right mix was always a pain in the ass, but it was a matter of resources...I'm talking about playing from 1995 til 2005... it was impossible to have in-ear monitoring.
Craziest chaotic thing I saw live was Protest the Hero while they were still just handing out their first demo. They played Blindfolds Aside at such a crazy tempo it was total chaos but it's also one of the performance I will always remember. It wasn't as tight as it could be but holy shit was it entertaining.
Although I'm a nobody, I have played guitar on stage with metal bands, we had no click tracks back in the day. I found it easier to play with safety ear plugs. The plugs make it easier to keep an ear on the song but you loose alot of trebble.
I love the chaos of oldschool shows. If I want to hear the band like on the record…. I listen to the record! I want the different , dirty, live sound from my live bands 😁
I'm 61 years old and love using IEMs with a click and prompts. Especially if I'm playing with other musicians I don't know all that well. As long as we have the click and prompts we will sound tight like we've been playing together for years.
I've done both in the bands I've played in. To me it's nothing either way. In the end it all comes down to how well rehearsed you are. It takes a minute to get used to a clic as much as it takes a minute to get used to loud amps and time all over the place. In the end you will do it and get used to it. Or you will lose your job. Personaly I prefer the clic. I've played in bands where they do both. Play some songs by feel and speed some parts up or slow them down kind of on the fly, then have some songs to a clic because of backing tracks. You end up getting it. Those who don't, never get called back. You will encounter both situatons and your best bet is to be overprepared. You have to know the songs blindfold, no need to hear the rest of the band to play the full songs through. But I prefer the clic.
For the longest time it's felt like most bands play slightly faster than the recorded versions. It helps compensate for the time lost from stage banter and helps get more songs in the set list. I've been going to concerts for over 30 years. Pre click (Suicidal Tendencies and Queesnryche in the early 90's. Queensryche may have been using a click. It was a pretty organized and thematic show. Operation Livecrime/Building Empires tour.) to a modern show (Coheed and Cambria and Incubus last night) with choreographed laser light shows and they almost always play fast. Even bands like Deicide. Just when you think they can't play any faster, here comes Once Upon The Cross at 1.5x speed. At least as far as rock and metal bands. Maybe bands like Phish or Mumford and such play at album tempo but most of the shows I've seen, even bands like Muse, The Black Keys, Smashing Pumpkins and Silversun Pickups, the bands are playing fast and hard and trying to squeeze as many songs into the setlist as they can. At least that's why I assumed they did it.
Sometimes it is just for energy and aggression sake that they play faster like Metallica did for example in the 80's, not to squeeze more songs into the setlist.. common
I agree with protecting musician's hearing. I also think arena rockers should think about how much damage they cause with the sound coming out from their end. I'd rather stay home and watch things on youtube than see a show and have ringing in my ears all night, but ideally I'd see the band I like without that bother. Also anyone else remember that drummer who played the whole show when his in-ears kicked out? That was a great story only possible because the tech is common.
We used to get our drummer to wear a click track, it made everything tighter. And as a drummer it is a little more relaxing when you cant hear your band.
I was at a consert a couple of years ago of a band I'm a big fan of, but I had a hard time even hearing what song they were playing at times. It was a great show and I had a great time, if you want perfection just listen to the recording, you come for the experience the show not for perfection.
we do a hybrid way in our band forcing only the drummer to hear a click track :D . that way the rest of the band listens to the stage monitors and can interact with the audience easier.
I never had the opportunity to use in-ear monitors. They would have been nice when playing outdoors, where there’s nothing to reflect the sound back to your ears.
I think there was something beautiful that was lost with the click tracks. Music that went faster or slowed down, at least for rock. But I understand the need of it when you have fireworks and a big show behind. Other than that, I think the technology just help musicians: Having your own mix, hearing yourself, etc.
In the not exactly words of Mick Thomson, in an interview with i think fishman: “When we play live, we just pop off.” And that’s pretty true. Just they go nuts and really *play* the music
It’s not that some music sucks it’s just that sometimes the new material doesn’t blow your mind the way you heard the old stuff the first time you listened to it. Into Eternity and Cellador used to blow my mind the first 20 times listening to Buried in Oblivion and Enter Deception. Enjoy what you like and if you don’t like something no one is torturing you by making you listen to Skinny Puppy
As I approach the end of my 30s, I grew up with stuff, that I love to this day and thought to be perfect, and after that I learned that the the world changes, and nothing stays the same. I feel like at some point, people find something where they say "that's it, this is how it has to be." and just stop evolving and being curious. I personaly love the new possebilitys and tools, that allow me to improve on the things I love. At the end, I care for the result and not the path to get there. I enjoy the rawness off oldschool stuff as much as the clean, well produced modern stuff. Because they are two seperate things in my eyes. And for me personally: I played a lot of gigs, where the sound guy was a total idiot, and my monitoring was like non existent, while the venue had shitty accoustics beyond beliefe... Horrible! Fuck that shit, I take IEM every day of the week! Having more controle over the artistic result, is always a plus in my book.
Depends on the band too... Like a one off with inears and click track is perfectly fine to get ahead of miscommunications on stage... But when you're Megadeth on a tour and every single concert sound exactly the same, it can get boring pretty quickly to not have any spontaneity or audience interaction. Technology's great and makes our lives easier, but the human factor of a live show will start becoming the new delicacy as AI music rises and bands become more and more robotic.
I found the “oldschool” live approach to be best when you are not gigging with your own sound tech. So many things can go wrong with in-ears and backing tracks and levels if you have random crews each time. Also if you are an improvisation-leaning band, as you said, no click is best. But even with a great sound crew, listening to “pristine” sound mix in in-ears versus on stage… I just felt like I am not fully present at the show… I felt like I was just doing “work” until the end of show. Bottom line for me is- which approach delivers the kind of energy and show to the audience that you want to deliver….
Some of mainstream bands from the past, in live situation sound very bad, lack of metronome in drummers in ears is overall is big issue. My self had a lot of shows when monitoring on the stage disappeared after couple songs, then you have to go basically by visuals, front is delayed. With complicated setups, there is a lot to go wrong, playback, in-ears and many other things. I would say in-ear is way to go, drummer definitely needs metronome. But have to be prepared and able to pull through a show if something craps out in the middle of a gig, having onstage side-fills, or couple monitors with most important things to play with.
I like a little of both. Honestly though, as long as I can hear myself in the mix and there isn't a wash of noise causing feedback, I'm good with about anything.
![[DRAGON BALL LEGENDS REVEALS ＆ STUFF] LEGENDS FESTIVAL 2024 Special Edition Part 1](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mV5bGIswTtQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Get your ticket for my upcoming tour with Charles Berthoud and Ola Englund here ▶ bit.ly/3WBqCLE
is this the band youre playing with in the video it looks very cool you should be in the trans Siberian orchestra
grandioses lineup:)
#Bernth - why did you guys leave Hungary out? There are so many people here who would like to see/hear you guys!
I could be interesting for you to do a song for a live performance that have very intentional prominent rubato used. Then have that made into a click track. So the click track would not be mechanically regular it would have speeding up and slowing down
but everybody would have practiced the song with that click track and in a live performance that would be in the in ear monitors.
The rubato would be carefully made to enhance the melody and entire song but it would be set in permanent planned out way so the arrangement would have a human feel with subtle tempo variations which would be very deliberate and coordinated in everybody's in ear monitors.
For an example of what I'm talking about, rubato in a funky prog metal style check out this old video on youtube:
lightning (Tempo Rubato)
Carlos Cruz Project
slipknot fans when jay plays psychosocial too fast: omg you suck have you heard of metronome
slipknot fans when eloy plays psychosocial on time: omg you ruined the authenticity of this band by playing the actual bpm of the song
you cant please everyone who's glued on the internet 24/7 who thinks they know better
No doubt. Thanks to the internet everyone knows everything now. 😂
The thing I'll say about this from our old drummer.. The crowds intensity is pumped. Who in turn gets him pumped. In turn means we speed up! I love it!! Even Acdc (and we know Angus is a stickler) live albums the tempo is faster. My brother who isn't a musician hates live albums because of this. He's lame..
You forgot about Joey fans
Mick Thomson said in an New interview on the Knotfest Channel that Slipknot never played to a Clicktrack 😂
@@lucki_metal6850 😂
The differences in timing and occasional sloppiness makes seeing those old bands so unique. Hearing blackened, creeping death, Custer, and surfacing at giga speed with the little variations and crowd breaks are some of the best memories of shows I’ve been to
And by comparison, modern metal sounds even worse -for the comparison- .
Funny I stumbled upon this video today because I'm trying to get up my picking speed on Creeping Death and I realized while I can keep up with the record, I can't keep up with them currently live including the Chicago show I saw last month because they play at least 20 bpm faster than the record. Even if they're on a click that didn't stop them from playing fast, and songs like that benefit from such a thing.
yes, i became live concert's fan when i was watching tons of guns n roses live concerts on youtube in 2010s and they all sounded very sloppy but unique, different from each other and so raw, i loved it. Btw in my opinion these concert's vibe is ruined by modern ai "enchantments" aka fake 60fps 4k and youtube is filled with them. I always struggle to find the old original non enchanced videos i watched back then
Those who can’t play are so clueless yet spout nonsense as if they are musicians.
Live shows are not all the same. Outdoor vs indoor requires different setups, especially for big bands. Genre of music can have an impact on what sound setup is required too. Most bands have songs with ambient intros or strings in the album recordings so it’s natural to use a background track to fill the parts of the song required.
Right on, most people who comment think the Musicians on stage playing hears exactly the same as what they are hearing, I personally had experiences wherein I literally cannot even hear myself even if the amp is behind me, like I do but not as much as I should to know if I am right on time or if my guitar is still in tune. Literally like being blind, walking to a certain direction you don't necessarily intend to go to.
Anyone who says Metallica and Slipknot both suck can be immediately dismissed.
For real and Metallica has gotten better with age idk about slippers they keep losing original members
@@SpeedAnarchyMetallica aged like a fine wine. When I was a kid 20 years ago and slipknot and all the numetal was out I hated Metallica. Thought they were old sellouts that wrote easy shit. Like eff the old heads and their taste. Then I picked up the guitar and after 20+ years of playing and becoming an old head myself i’ve realized Metallica is literally the greatest band to ever walk this planet
Every Metallica song sounds the exact same
@@ericv5435 Objectively false
Metallica has aged well except for the fact that James lost his voice in 1991
Hmm Social Media People = 💩 😂
Yeah agreed
@@vitalepitts I think you didn't get the joke of that comment
Actually RUclips technically is social media
I SEE what you did there sir.
A pun that someone who has heard Slipknot before would understand.
Well played.
@@AsP-ov4cz Considering some of the comments on here that just proves his point
It's always the ones that can't play that are the first to criticise. Just enjoy the performance instead of trying to find fault.
You don't need to know how to cook to have a valid opinion on a meal.
@@Tomcat82why people are criticizing the metal AFTER theyve seen the chef Cook? If the show is good, both cases are valid If they are employed
@@Tomcat82if you can't cook you can have an opinion on the end product (the food), not on the process of making it because you don't know what you're talking about. Same with music, if you can't play you can have an opinion on the show, but not on the technicalities how the show is achieved. The point of the original comment is to show that often people who don't understand how live shows work, pretend that they do.
@@Tomcat82 "valid"
What I really don’t like about metal right now is, that the sound is so manipulated and layered with sound effects, like sirens or other stuff. That makes the sound also interesting, but also some kind of „not real“ - Don’t know to describe.
I think what you're talking about is audio thresholds, and specifically, when thresholds are not loud enough
(basically, a threshold, is well a loudness threshold, that when is exceeded, the louder frequencies get suppressed)
It usually results in a "washed out" and unrealistic sound, which is different from what the instruments sound like. Like songs will sound more like blend of sounds rather than an actual band with musicians that play actual instruments. Thresholds are usually lowered in order to add layers without the gain impacting negatively the sound quality by creating a crakling sound.
It's something that isn't just excluded to metal, but all kinds of modern productions.
But in metal music, the contrast is very noticeable when you listen to Suicide Silence's The Cleansing (very loud mix), and modern Lorna Shore (weirdly washed out sound).
To avoid that, I listen to live versions of your favorite songs rather than studio versions
@@wazson3178 With Lorna Shore though, the "washed out" sound is kind of the point, because of all the black metal records they've taken influence from and put into their music. On "To The Hellfire" some of the distorted rhythm guitars in the verses (they tracked a BUNCH) have reverb on them, only for them to cut out on the breakdowns and the parts that need things a good bit drier, cause deathcore tends to be pretty dry, especially compared to black metal. Combining the two, they go back and forth as needed.
know what you mean.. even real instruments are chopped in a way that they sound like a vst
@@EbonyPope it's like "I can tie by war, bro.." yeah.. fine.. use the tuner or we don't record
You mean "synthetic"?
A live show for me is about connecting with the music and musicians and other fans, and not how precisely the band can replicate the album version.
Metallica and slipknot don’t suck they are legends
True legends.. there my favorite 2 bands olus megadeth
Dont forget fear factor too. They have been around for a while.
If you have never heard of them start with this track called Demanufacture. No need to thank me for making you nut after listening. Nuts are metal though lol
You can suck and be legendary. I'm not saying those two suck but there are bands that exist or existed that suck. That's probably down to taste though
Metallica does and has sucked since the Black Album and all the records after…
Metallica does suck actually they're pretty shitty and Lars is one of the worst experienced drummers period
Aren't Slipknot actually notorious for playing without click tracks?
The first three albums are even recorded without metronome. For example Before I Forget, the last chorus is definitely played slightly faster than the first two. I have seen them live multiple times and they were definitely changing tempos mid songs. I think even Corey said in an interview they prefer to play without metronome because they like to feed off the crowd.
When I was a kid, I went to see them for the first time with my dad who is a sound engineer... He spoke with some the technicians after the show and they revealed to him that the light and pyro guys are like other band members because they launch all the effects live.
Yeah that makes sense to me.
They are still one of the best acts I've seen live. They had such energy, and their professionalism just put some other bands to shame.
In people=shit intro the tempo change is one of the best parts tbh, it wouldn't have that if they just played with straight metronome
IMO Slipknot is one of the best live bands, and this is for sure one of the reasons. I love their 'brute force' kinda sound and that sound only benefits if it is played like that live as well.
I grew up in love with thrash but Slipknot made me realize there's something else so i loved them for a while but then i got into tech death and haven't looked back yet, especially the band Allegaeon. Mind-blowing.
Slipknot have just started using clocks for the first time now with their new drummer.
The only thing I dislike with the click-track era of metal is that everything is so damn thight (which is the point, I know) and it takes away some of the experience for me, like their not allowed to make a single mistake. It's kinda like seeing some robots on stage performing. I think for some bands it's mandatory (Mushaggah for instance), but not every band should be perfectly thight for me.
I know some bands feel they need the click tracks to ensure quality for the fans that support them. I personally prefer a more raw experience, but I can understand that argument.
I've been to a ton concerts and most have been super good, regardless of click track. However, it wasn't always the case.
For example, I remember being super excited to see Megadeth live like 10 years ago, but when they played it was very sloppy and it took me out of it. I was very disappointed. Perhaps a click track would've helped?
Exactly this, Insomnium, Amorphis, DT, and other bands that are heavily invested into melody should keep their tightness of the songs
Melody sounds bad when off-rhythm
But, songs that are based on riffs, lots of solos, traditional rhythm of an ACDC style, even Megadeth to some extent, they should kinda ease-up a bit and engage with the audience more
Exception ofc. being the big songs that "carry weight" of the whole performance
I'd imagine wanna concentrate on the "perfectionist" side of the things for those 🤔
@@doocies This is real music. They're just ensuring they play the songs with as few errors as possible.
@@doocies Do the recordings sound robotic?
Yea S, Silence especially they were way better with Alex because he knew how to make tempo changes to from fast to slower on the breakdowns. Making them seem way more brutal.
Today SpectreSoundStudio's had a video about band photo's. And one of the subjects, why band photo's etc are part of being a musician: You are an entertainer. Everything you do, playing live music, making new music, but also band photo's and interviews etc are all part of the job.
My opinion is that if a tool (IEM) can help you better do your job as entertainer, please use it! You would also not take modern powertools away from a carpenter, because it isn't authentic enough.
I mean, I agree to a point, we use in ear monitors on stage as well, but I hate when bands are stiff and worried about playing "perfect". I'd way rather see a guitarist play a little sloppier because they're throwing their body and guitar all over the place putting energy and emotion behind their instrument than someone who if you traced out their shoes at the start of the show they'd still be playing in that outline by the time the show is done. Use the technology but don't be shackled by it.
Thank you for your feedback. Personally, I use in-ear monitoring during shows with the band Dadabovic, and as you mentioned, it is more convenient than relying on speakers on stage. Additionally, the mix is always consistent, and I can fine-tune how much kick, vocals, or any other instruments I want to hear when I play.
Hello, as a stagehand, ex recording and FOH engineer and bass player, I like the old school for smaller venues and productions. I love the implementation of in ears and iso cabs for amps, as stsge volume if it gets out of hand is the bane of a FOH and especially monitor engineer. I've mixed monitors where no matter how maxed out I have the wedges, the singer cant hear him or herself and the feedback runs rampant.
When I was touring the club circuit with friends of mine that hooked up as an opener for a much bigger headliner, they loved the stage volume to be as loud as possible : amps just cranked. Sometomes I could not get the house mix, which I was only running vocals and drums through over the stage volume of a 100 watt 4x12 guitar setup and a couple of SVT's and a pair of 8x10's.
As a stagehand who sees all the major acts that run through town, you have to have that control because there are so many elements to the production that could go askew... i remember seeing The Who on their last pass through town with full orchestra in tow. I entered the side stage early to be in position to take down some lighting elements that had to go first and as quickly as possible, so I was abnle to see the nlast 20 minutes od the show. I was shocked at how low the FOH mix was...We could easily talk to each other without shouting and we were directly under an 18 box V-dosc FOH hang. The clarity and detail of the band and every element of the orchestra was stunning....like listening in my living room on an audiophile level system.
I am an older Metalhead and most of my concert days were well before all of the digital and in ear monitors. And I absolutely enjoyed every single show. Some better than others but each show was slightly different every time you saw the same band. Never bothered me. Rock on!
Slipknot is oldschool now? Damn I feel old. Even though they had been playing for about 10 years when I started listening to them.
Same here
Today music is obsolete in six months longer ... Youths this days 😂
@feeltchad3811 I mean I'm still a youth.
I still consider them a newer band. I had been listening to metal for years before they came out. I was never into them. There's a few songs I like but not really my cup of tea.
@@KnozLo me too ... A 46 young man
@@feeltchad3811 I'm 28
The thing is that bands don't need to play to a click. We go to see a live band to hear it live. We dont' need it to sound like it is on the record. If they are a bit faster or a bit slower we don't really care.
To a certain extent, yes.
Music is very polished and demanding today. Listening to metal especially, band like Scardust and Nuclear Power Trio are just so precise in their mix. It's interesting that guitarists listen to their track via ear bud. Great content 👌
In-ear rigs also are HUGE in saving ones hearing. It's sort of hard to play music without hearing. Also, as a musician who's played in a band without and now WITH an IEM setup, I'm far more confident and we are tighter as a band. Additionally, it allows far more control over ones own monitor mix. Those complaining, are more often than not, not playing on a stage in front of people. We really need to stop finding reasons to hate things. It's pretty pathetic.
I’m old school on this. I prefer smaller shows and the music. I’m less about the lasers and flames and stuff and letting the music breath. It doesn’t have to be perfect every time as long as the music evokes feelings and gets you moving.
I try to avoid big shows. I have a much better time at the smaller venues with only a few hundred people. I saw Metallica last year with over 90,000 in attendance. Great show, but I never want to go to anything that big again. It was a nightmare. I'm getting too old to deal with that crap & the big shows are ridiculously expensive these days.
It’s actually a fuck ton harder to play to a click live. Especially for drummers. Most people struggle to record to. A click.
I never understood playing to a click. Especially if you can just program your drums
Eventually your body gets used to it. Most drummers don’t strive to be on the click my the millisecond, but instead to keep them on track. Sometimes after playing a moderately fast song, the next song(while still moderately fast, maybe just a few bpm less) will feel slowed down. Your body and heart rate affect your playing and timing. Not every band/song needs a click though. In the studio, some singer-songwriter songs just DO NOT work with a click track. There is movement and slight variation between sections and emotions.
@@donut_lyfe believe me I understand the multiple situations. I’d rather have my drummer have his own clock. But if you are putting on a show makes since. Also most people are used to hearing their favorite song recorded to a click. Honestly take more skill to play on time than Freeform. Just because you have a click track doesn’t mean you can’t lose it
@@markusaurelius777 it Ment for big shows with timed events like fire lighting backing tracks extra layers of vocal to help support main vocalist lol
I want to let you know that I appreciate your insights and logic in your videos. I am learning quite a bit, from your perspectives, in a good way! I had no idea that’s why the click track was used until I watched this! I agree that the answer is not definite or exact for everyone who is playing and performing music. My motivation was on a break until earlier today, and now it’s gotten some more energy, after watching this video! Thank you!
As someone whose live playing days were from around 1977 to 1988, I never had the experience of playing live with in ears and a click. In many ways I am an "old school" kind of guy, but I can't help but think these things would have made our performances better. Many nights, given the way we set up on the small stages we played on, as a bass player about the only thing I heard clearly were the drummer's cymbals!!!
And I hope this tour is a big success and it's not the last time the three of you tour together, but the start of an ongoing thing like the G3 Tours (you could call it Y3 for RUclips Three)
In ears are a game changer for us bass players. You can hear every note and the rest of the band isn’t complaining about your stage volume
There is something impressive about a group of musicians who can get together and put on a great reproduction of your favorite songs... It certainly takes a large amount of concentration and talent to be able to pull that off without using any modern technology, like in-ear monitors or click tracks etc. what I think people might be forgetting is that it is quite difficult to pull this off consistently... I would rather have the musicians be more comfortable and confident in delivering their art... Instead of risking slowing or speeding up certain parts of the song in an effort to become more authentic... There is nothing worse than going and seeing your favorite band and having them bomb because they messed the tempo up... There's a reason people really enjoy the studio versions of most of their favorite artists because these things are polished and refined to the point of perfection! But that doesn't mean things are edited to the 10th degree it could be that there was a really cool mistake and that was left in the song... It happens all the time!!! just try to enjoy music and don't analyze it too much is my favorite approach!
Thankyou for sharing behind the back scenes. So interesting.
Good topic and essay. The problem is that this one can never be settled because some fans love the more human aspect of bands going organic, making mistakes, and changing shit on the fly. There's a wholesome element to it I think that makes the audience feel more connected to you because you aren't perfect. On the other hand, when I was younger, if I heard someone cover a song and they didn't nail the solo, I got disappointed. Which makes me a hippocrit because I absolutely loathe learning other guitarists' solos. Except Cobain's. Not a huge issue. but I think the issue here is, the people who want it exactly how it was recorded will label a band as "Not good live," while someone who wants an organic experience will label the band fake. You really can't win on our end.
In ear monitoring has opened a new world to me. How many times I was mad about the sound on stage. Even after an intensive soundcheck the monitor sound sucks if the venue is filled with people. Sometimes physics not really rocks.
But even in case my monitor produces a good sound and I really hear everything (included myself) it is horrible to move on stage to act with the other musician because suddenly the sound is different. With in ear monitoring this is not the case. The discussions after the gig inside the band about the performance is completely different because I can reflect myself much better
And it also protects your hearing and allows you to not have to lug loads of guitar cabinets around.
This has been said quite a bit but metal is too polished atm. Not all bands but you guys know what i mean.
I hear that a lot, too, but I don't really get it. I love metal, polished or no. Sure, they sound radically different, and I've got to be in the right mood for any subgenre, but I think it's cool that there's a subenre and/or production level for virtually every mood. With tools like RUclips and Spotify and others having libraries that have all the big acts from the 70s through now, it's a great time to be a metal fan.
My ears get fatigued with new metal. It's total crap and lacks the raw attitude of old school.
@@jasonbajis4878so then how come almost every band you hear these days has the exact same guitar tone, vocal style, and drum patterns?
@@markpommett5712I personally think we need to go back to the attitude that death metal bands and those influenced by them embodied in the 90s and early 2000s. Slipknot may be a generic mainstream act now, but in my opinion, their early albums sounded way more like old death and death-doom bands like Immolation than any mainstream band that formed after 1999 or so did.
@@eeyorehaferbock7870 Couldn’t agree more!
The very second you said hearing loss my ears popped and my hearing went weird for a few moments.... what is this sorcery! 😂
My band uses IEMs, but only a couple of our songs use a click track (because of important synth parts that we wouldn’t be able to recreate live). It’s sort of the best of both worlds. Hearing protection and perfect monitoring from the IEMs, while also maintaining the “organic” feel of playing without a click.
I think metal and rock shows should always have a element of chaos to them. Because both have very much been about breaking away from the musical norms. So having everyone's playing, the pyro and lights all synced up to a click can take away from that. Bands needs some wiggle room to play around with. So if on the spot they decided to really up the tempo on a song or roll a couple songs together, they can.
Like Bernth says multiple times: that won't work for bigger productions. How would you propose they would work the pyro, lights, video stuff and backing tracks then? I'd rather have a show where all the pieces fit together than a sloppy mess just to be 'metal'. It's not like anyone is counting along to see if the band uses a click anyway.
You could have a lighting/effects engineer trigger them at the correct parts of the song.
Lights pan up for the bridge of song A. Trigger the pyro at the end of the chorus for song B.
The band obviously need to ensure they're not messing up for those cues, and you'll need someone paying attention to run those elements, but it can be done. Not like Slipknot don't use pyro is it?
No harm in using a click and having the triggers programmes either though.
I think saying things like "should always" is kind of pointless. I think people should go to concerts and either enjoy them or not and not try to concern themselves with that part of it. Bands like Nine Inch Nails, Spineshank and many others played to click long ago and were the epitome of chaos. There is no rule of thumb to anything.
Slipknot doesn't need a click track, they have 3 drummer's n 2 DJ's 😜 they were also my first, Aug 2004, epic! Killswitch n Unearth opened!
1 drummer 2 percussions, 1dj 1 samples
multiple drummers and electronic stuff IS precisely where a click tracké would be useful hahha
Great breakdown of both perspectives, and I loved hearing your point of sound in the previous video. You can't know what it's like in stage unless you've been there!
Can't wait to see you guys in Poland ! 💪🤘
I think the biggest takeaway here is the protect your hearing. No one wants to go without hearing especially if you play.
I think Slipknot plays with a click now, not that Eloy can’t keep tempo because he is a living fucking metronome
Doesnt matter if its "Rock N Roll" when its "Metal as Fuck", playing sharply and as efficient as possible means giving your best and most brutal performance... thats metal
It matters in plenty of Rock music, and remember that Metal is a subgenre of Rock.
Eloy Casagrande solved this issue for Slipknot. He's a human metronome.
I do love these pov videos that Bernth is sharing his content is by far the most interesting. I still love how bands like Misfits can just sound terrible live it’s just punk rock noise that is still awesome when they could even afford to record.
Thank you for the perspective. I have struggled for the last 10 years with my bass playing. I have the upmost respect for players who can play with in ears and no stack. I need the tactile feedback of the wall of air. 8x15s and 500 tube watts is getting me in the ball park. But again much respect to the players that do the stripped down modern approach because moving my rig would not be fun for anyone.. and ill never get to llay The Sphere, o well... Cheers🎉
Im on the old school side but like the new school approach. Last time I played in a band and did live shows was in the mid 90's most of the time no monitors and basic PA for vocals. It was so nice to play a show with a real PA system and monitors. It was more fun for us and never serious as far as being a musician. As Amateur as it can get. but we had fun. music is awesome.
As a guitarist I think if I was to use in ear monitors I'd have drums but no click in my mix so I could play to the drummers groove rather than separately playing to the click. Cos I've found when recording to a live drummer I stick to the click too rigidly if it's there instead of pushing or holding back with the drummers feel. Cos despite what anti click people say, you can shift the feel of the tempo with a click track there, but also if the drummer wants to push faster and ignore the click then come back to it later I can go with them.
Been playing live with and without in ear monitoring/click - and the feedback improved so much when we changed to in ear. The whole performance improved a lot because no band member stepped out of the line too much. And its helping a lot if you want to headbang or run around while playing - without click you tend to speed in those situations
I love the comment you scroll through about “honestly never hearing a click track at a show” oh, oh people…
The thing, that has worked for our band for a while really well, is only the drummer having a mp3 midi click track in his ears that he records via phone and a wedge for the full mix on the side, for the rest of the band also just wedges and regular ear plugs. The downsides are if the mixing engineer sucks, then the sound on stage prob wont be that great (although a raised off the ground 2x12 behind or on the side does wonders) and the songs have to be well rehearsed as a band, the upsides are, not much can go wrong, and the perfomance time is consistent and tight, but if something does go wrong, the whole band can react fluidly outside the click, as the rule is, follow the drummer, thats it. This has also worked really well for syncing recordings to the live shows, to add a bit clarity, as not allways stems from the mixing desk are available
I play guitar and I’ve seen Slipknot live, and they absolutely play live, 100%
Just yesterday I rehearsed and we had the chance of using a different (better) rehearsal spot than the usual one. Biggest difference was the drumset being equipped with extra loud paiste cymbals and boy oh boy, the higher frequencies of my hearing were gone until the next day
That happens to me on smaller stages. WAY to close to those smashing cymbals. But I hate the feel of earplugs.
I've played with bands using both methods, and you're were pretty spot on. I do enjoy having the IEMs for different reasons. I can hear myself (or whatever else I want) better, hearing protection, and it does save room when playing on smaller stages. I don't like the disconnect that you get from the crowd and your band so I'll usually keep one out or mess with them all night. The click track... yes I know syncing of backing tracks & effects (different conversation), but my entire musical career I've always been taught listen down to the drummer which as a bass player is key. I'd much rather follow a tempo impaired drummer instead of having CLICK CLICK CLICK CLICK in my ear for the entire show. Enjoyed the video.
I'm justvabout to change to in ear monitoring and it's kind of hard for me because I'm not used to it. I totally agree with you that it's much better for the tightness of the player! I'm really looking forward to play more often with IEM and getting my mix perfect for my taste. Thanks for that informative video!!! 🤘🏼🤩
I saw you guys (Seiler und Speer) live and loved the show because of how on point you were. And as for metronomes/click and monitoring it really depends. I prefer the chaotic live energy, the imperfections and the unpredictabilty of a real live show, which is also why die Ärzte (German three piece punk/rock/whatever you want to call them) are my favourite band of all time. When I go to a show, I don't need perfection, as long as the performances are still good. And even if the babd fucks up, it can still make for a great memory.
When I was playing shows I wish I had in-ear monitoring, especially at venues with inexperienced sound guys.
Always good stuff on this channel! Cheers!
Have you played with a "crowd mic" mixed into your inears? I feel like it helps a LOT with connecting with the audience's energy when you can hear them chant and scream, even mixed really low and behind the click.
Can be distracting though hahaha
Hey Bernth, nice video. I don't care what people are saying on social media. I went to 4 slipknot concerts already, the 5th is coming on december and i love their music. keep on rocking 🤘🤘✌
I wish i could have had in ear monitors back when i was playing live in a band. We didn't have techs, never got time to do soundchecks and we never got to use our own equipment. I could never hear myself or my bandmates and I just had to trust myself that at least i was doing my part in playing the songs right.
the hearing loss is absolutly dangerous. IEMs will save many musicians.
I’m a 💯 with you on answers being somewhere down the middle.
You could also argue that tje majority of folks that criticize bands (old and modern) have never played live music.
On that note (pun intended), even if you play as a hobby, I encourage everyone to at least perform at an open mic.
Youll build an entirely new skill and i believe this also makes you grow as a musician .
For someone who's starting to gig recently, playing with a click will be a blessing, i love to play with in ears and ill not switch them for regilsr wedges never in my whole life
I put one side of my in ear and I'm both modern and old school :) I'm interacting with the audience while I'm hearing myself and my band mates fully
Thanks for your balanced and thoughtful discussion of the pros and cons of both approaches. When it comes to music, we are all different. Beauty is in the ear of the listener. If you like what you are hearing, that is really all that matters, not what others may say or think about how it was produced. 😎👍
I feel like using in ears is great) Though I feel like the chaos is something that live shows are for, it just gives more energy imo) But you still have to keep in mind that music is a business so whatever works better and cheper is preferred depending on the type of show you have.
I think it the same with a lot of stuff: people who don't really know why something is done in a certain way make up an explanation for themselves and judge the person doing the thing accordingly. For example if you don't know how big modern productions run the musicians not being able to keep time without a click might be the first or only thing you can think of and that's actually pretty understandable. It's the judging part that I can't understand because in today's world with so much information being available it should be the standard to actually inform oneself before forming such a harsh opinion about other people and how they approach their job. The same way I might think the way some people run their business seems a bit inefficient but since I don't know everything about that business I'll give them the benefit of the doubt. There might be a really good reason for something that I just can't see from the outside.
I started out with old school metal as a youngster, but even back then I felt like I wanted a cleaner, tighter sound from my music (That still manages to be heavy). I'm 100% for the way metal is going in most instances, and when I try to imagine what I'd like out of a more old school band, it's hard for me to do at all without thinking I'd rather hear a more current or even progressive/futuristic sound.
If I am going to see an artist or a band live, of course I'm hoping it will be great, though not perfect. If I want it to be like the studio version, I go home and listen to the studio version. If I'm taking the time and paying money to see someone live, I [generally] enjoy and make room for imperfections, changes, songs being different/longer/shorter, unexpected solos or encores, etc. Those things are what makes the experience wonderful and, well, human.
I'm a one man band. If I use click I need to use IEM. But as I play with a time aligned backtrack no issue. The thing is : I don't play in huge venues, I'm alone with my amps, my PA, my whole gear. If I can avoid transporting extra stuff I do.
But one thing is important : ear protections. Makes me play loud, but I have a full box for the audience. It ain't rocknroll but I like it
I have loved seeing shows that had programmed stufd but on the flip side my favourite versions of songs have been those slightly looser live versions in the school approach.
I saw Slipknot on the pledge of allegiance tour for Iowa (Denver Coliseum) and again at Ozzfest 2004 for Vol 3 (Fiddler's Green). The shows were vastly different. The coliseum was like a live CD, while at Ozzfest was straight chaos, was just noise, I would have rather stayed home and listened to a CD. Could have just been how the audio was engineered due to the type of venue, but my other favorite bands at Ozzfest 04 didn't sound all chaotic. Meh lol
I like both approaches. The Foo Fighters (old school) put on an excellent show, with walls of amplifiers and giant monitors. Unleash the Archers (new school) also put on an excellent show, with superbly balanced speakers, direct input (no amps on stage!), and IEMs for everyone.
There's nothing inherently wrong with either method. They each have advantages over the other, naturally. It all comes down to what the group practices with and how it turns into a spectacle for the audience.
I agree that the answer is highly contextual. I think that in a small venue, the old style would be a lot more fun, but for a large show with a ton of effects, using the more modern system makes sense.
On stage, all we need to hear is what we're playing, and whatever gives us the musical cues we need, if any. Worst case for me, as a bass guitarist, is that all I hear are myself and the drums, and that's still all I need to play correctly and consistently. The drummer usually uses me as a metronome.
I’ve done a few pop cover band concerts before (not for a band any of you will have heard of, it was a college credit). We always used in ears, and for a group like that, you WANT to be able to hear all the precise intricacies of what you’re playing.
By the way, playing consistently to a metronome is not as easy as it seems; especially at slower tempos, it can be very easy to start rushing. I got several looks from the musical director because I was rushing, and his feedback made me a tighter musician.
On the flip side, I’ve done a few jazz combo gigs, and it’s never worth using a click track for that, because all of what we did was improvised on the spot, even down to what songs we’d play. And all we had was a few charts to go off and the feel of each other. One of my favourite improvised moments was when the bassist was out of tune and only noticed in the middle of the song, so after a solo, he and I played each string so he could tune, and it was to the tempo of the song, until we came back in with the main form.
There are good reasons to use both approaches. Neither is objectively superior, because it’ll change on a case by case basis. However, if we’re talking a pop gig, I’d rather play with in ears than without.
For a medium-level performer as I was...no click and in-ear monitoring would be a good "in-between". U have always played with old-school monitoring and getting the right mix was always a pain in the ass, but it was a matter of resources...I'm talking about playing from 1995 til 2005... it was impossible to have in-ear monitoring.
I'm old school fluff but in ears save lives people! And your hearing too!
Craziest chaotic thing I saw live was Protest the Hero while they were still just handing out their first demo. They played Blindfolds Aside at such a crazy tempo it was total chaos but it's also one of the performance I will always remember. It wasn't as tight as it could be but holy shit was it entertaining.
Although I'm a nobody, I have played guitar on stage with metal bands, we had no click tracks back in the day. I found it easier to play with safety ear plugs. The plugs make it easier to keep an ear on the song but you loose alot of trebble.
I love the chaos of oldschool shows. If I want to hear the band like on the record…. I listen to the record! I want the different , dirty, live sound from my live bands 😁
I'm 61 years old and love using IEMs with a click and prompts. Especially if I'm playing with other musicians I don't know all that well. As long as we have the click and prompts we will sound tight like we've been playing together for years.
All I hear is the drums behind me and some weird out-of-sync noise from the monitor.
I totally agree with not using an ear and paying attention to your drummer. I would never play listening to what you said you hear during the show.
My takeaway is modern click tracks for big venues where you can't see band properly and old approaches for smaller venues.
I've done both in the bands I've played in. To me it's nothing either way. In the end it all comes down to how well rehearsed you are. It takes a minute to get used to a clic as much as it takes a minute to get used to loud amps and time all over the place. In the end you will do it and get used to it. Or you will lose your job. Personaly I prefer the clic. I've played in bands where they do both. Play some songs by feel and speed some parts up or slow them down kind of on the fly, then have some songs to a clic because of backing tracks. You end up getting it. Those who don't, never get called back. You will encounter both situatons and your best bet is to be overprepared. You have to know the songs blindfold, no need to hear the rest of the band to play the full songs through. But I prefer the clic.
For the longest time it's felt like most bands play slightly faster than the recorded versions. It helps compensate for the time lost from stage banter and helps get more songs in the set list. I've been going to concerts for over 30 years. Pre click (Suicidal Tendencies and Queesnryche in the early 90's. Queensryche may have been using a click. It was a pretty organized and thematic show. Operation Livecrime/Building Empires tour.) to a modern show (Coheed and Cambria and Incubus last night) with choreographed laser light shows and they almost always play fast. Even bands like Deicide. Just when you think they can't play any faster, here comes Once Upon The Cross at 1.5x speed. At least as far as rock and metal bands. Maybe bands like Phish or Mumford and such play at album tempo but most of the shows I've seen, even bands like Muse, The Black Keys, Smashing Pumpkins and Silversun Pickups, the bands are playing fast and hard and trying to squeeze as many songs into the setlist as they can. At least that's why I assumed they did it.
Sometimes it is just for energy and aggression sake that they play faster like Metallica did for example in the 80's, not to squeeze more songs into the setlist.. common
I agree with protecting musician's hearing. I also think arena rockers should think about how much damage they cause with the sound coming out from their end. I'd rather stay home and watch things on youtube than see a show and have ringing in my ears all night, but ideally I'd see the band I like without that bother. Also anyone else remember that drummer who played the whole show when his in-ears kicked out? That was a great story only possible because the tech is common.
Love your Tool drum head. I have one too, snare drum head from a show I went to!
We used to get our drummer to wear a click track, it made everything tighter. And as a drummer it is a little more relaxing when you cant hear your band.
I'm thinking about switching from drummer to guitarist. Any tips?
I was at a consert a couple of years ago of a band I'm a big fan of, but I had a hard time even hearing what song they were playing at times. It was a great show and I had a great time, if you want perfection just listen to the recording, you come for the experience the show not for perfection.
“Chaotic” is one way to put it but id say enlightening. Joey was the soul.
we do a hybrid way in our band forcing only the drummer to hear a click track :D . that way the rest of the band listens to the stage monitors and can interact with the audience easier.
I really like it when bands play to the absolute best of their ability, but i also love chaos in shows, so im in between.
I never had the opportunity to use in-ear monitors. They would have been nice when playing outdoors, where there’s nothing to reflect the sound back to your ears.
I think there was something beautiful that was lost with the click tracks. Music that went faster or slowed down, at least for rock. But I understand the need of it when you have fireworks and a big show behind. Other than that, I think the technology just help musicians: Having your own mix, hearing yourself, etc.
In the not exactly words of Mick Thomson, in an interview with i think fishman: “When we play live, we just pop off.” And that’s pretty true. Just they go nuts and really *play* the music
It’s not that some music sucks it’s just that sometimes the new material doesn’t blow your mind the way you heard the old stuff the first time you listened to it. Into Eternity and Cellador used to blow my mind the first 20 times listening to Buried in Oblivion and Enter Deception.
Enjoy what you like and if you don’t like something no one is torturing you by making you listen to Skinny Puppy
This is why Rush was go good .
As I approach the end of my 30s, I grew up with stuff, that I love to this day and thought to be perfect, and after that I learned that the the world changes, and nothing stays the same. I feel like at some point, people find something where they say "that's it, this is how it has to be." and just stop evolving and being curious.
I personaly love the new possebilitys and tools, that allow me to improve on the things I love. At the end, I care for the result and not the path to get there.
I enjoy the rawness off oldschool stuff as much as the clean, well produced modern stuff. Because they are two seperate things in my eyes.
And for me personally: I played a lot of gigs, where the sound guy was a total idiot, and my monitoring was like non existent, while the venue had shitty accoustics beyond beliefe... Horrible! Fuck that shit, I take IEM every day of the week! Having more controle over the artistic result, is always a plus in my book.
Depends on the band too... Like a one off with inears and click track is perfectly fine to get ahead of miscommunications on stage... But when you're Megadeth on a tour and every single concert sound exactly the same, it can get boring pretty quickly to not have any spontaneity or audience interaction.
Technology's great and makes our lives easier, but the human factor of a live show will start becoming the new delicacy as AI music rises and bands become more and more robotic.
I found the “oldschool” live approach to be best when you are not gigging with your own sound tech. So many things can go wrong with in-ears and backing tracks and levels if you have random crews each time. Also if you are an improvisation-leaning band, as you said, no click is best. But even with a great sound crew, listening to “pristine” sound mix in in-ears versus on stage… I just felt like I am not fully present at the show… I felt like I was just doing “work” until the end of show. Bottom line for me is- which approach delivers the kind of energy and show to the audience that you want to deliver….
Some of mainstream bands from the past, in live situation sound very bad, lack of metronome in drummers in ears is overall is big issue.
My self had a lot of shows when monitoring on the stage disappeared after couple songs, then you have to go basically by visuals, front is delayed.
With complicated setups, there is a lot to go wrong, playback, in-ears and many other things. I would say in-ear is way to go, drummer definitely needs metronome. But have to be prepared and able to pull through a show if something craps out in the middle of a gig, having onstage side-fills, or couple monitors with most important things to play with.
I like a little of both. Honestly though, as long as I can hear myself in the mix and there isn't a wash of noise causing feedback, I'm good with about anything.