The Bloggers With The Most To Say
Live Music: Small and Intimate or Large and Raucus?
After a couple years of doing the festival circuits, I decided I really, truly enjoy shows in smaller venues because the focus is more on the music and the connection between audience and musician than in larger venues. Of course, there are exceptions (Radiohead at Lollapalooza 2008!), but it seems like bigger shows and festivals provide more fun in getting into random adventures with fellow listeners than really appreciating what's going on up on stage.
What do you like? Bigger shows with bigger name bands? Or getting awkward at a small club?
What do you like? Bigger shows with bigger name bands? Or getting awkward at a small club?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Benny on -
What no comments yet?
For me it's more about the way the venue's arranged. Mostly, I prefer smaller venues, but smaller venues can be anonymous, too, and some bigger venues can make you feel close to the performer.
I guess my biggest preference is a stage that's roughly on eye level. I don't like ones that are too high or too low, regardless of the size. When the stage is too high or low, I tend to perceive the place as being either too big or too cramped. But I'm realizing lately that it's actually more about the arrangement of the stage than it is about the size of the venue.
-
Permalink Reply by Sioux on -
Ah, see, being a shortling, I like it when the stage is low. Or, actually, I guess I prefer it when the ground/floor/wherever the audience is standing is gently sloped downward, so the stage looks low. Of course, that doesn't stop every 6'4 dude in attendance from stepping right in front of my sight line...
-
Permalink Reply by Ashley R on -
I suppose it depends on who I'm seeing, but in general I'll prefer smaller shows. But if the musical act can make me feel as though it's a smaller, more intimate experience, then I'm all for it. I mean, I love
d*NSYNC and their massive arena tours and even the stadium tour...and while I would have loved to be in a small stage show at the time, being in the big venue with everyone screaming is just part of the experience.
As long as I can hear the music, see the performer, and have a good time, I'll find a way to enjoy it. I definitely agree that the bigger, festival-like ones offer more of a crowd adventure though, which is always a fun time.
-
Permalink Reply by Sioux on
-
I'd agree that there are some tours best seen in the arena. Madonna IS a spectacle for almost all ages, and honestly sometimes distance between the performer and audience is good when it's a 50-year-old woman in a leotard (have you seen her scary arms?) blowing smoke out of her hoo-ha. I was happy with my 1st balcony seat for that one.
-
Permalink Reply by Jainomo on -
I prefer smaller venues myself. Larger shows tend to have more pre-determined organization, i.e. pre-arranged encore numbers and lighting setups, so there's little room for true artist to audience connection. Of course being in such a large venue with many different people can be fun at times, but I prefer the experience of having the artist right there.
-
Permalink Reply by Emma on -
I much prefer smaller venues for gigs. I thought I'd gone off festivals altogether because they're just so busy and mad and not-really-about-the-music, until I found some smaller festivals which are like smaller gigs but outside and with camping. By coincidence I wrote a post about this on my blog only last weekend
-
Permalink Reply by Holly Renee on -
Smaller venues in general but if an artist I love is playing a bigger one I am so there (except the Pepsi Center in Denver, worst sound ever). I love being able to actually see, hear, and experience the musicians and their fans. Plus, I am not one for big crowds in general. Mostly, I love live music, so if I can get my hands on some tickets I sometimes don't care where it is playing at.
-
Permalink Reply by Dave Hughes on -
The scene kid in me used to always prefer smaller venues. Nowadays though it's not so much the venue as the people in it that matter. I've watched a friend of mine go from playing small clubs to 40 people all the way to supporting a mega-star punk band at Wembley Stadium, and at each show he does it's the same atmosphere but amplified. On the flip side, I've seen bands on massive stages in arena's with a sound so thin that it would work better in a clammy club. Sum 41 spring to mind for this.
Although, I still hold out hope for seeing Springsteen play in a small club one day.
-
Permalink Reply by Sweeney on -
I agree with your assessment of the difference, but that is a big part of why I love festival shows. I still make an effort to go see my favorite bands at smaller local venues for the sake of that more intimate feeling, but that doesn't change the fact that Coachella is one of my places on earth. I love the fact that so many people are there having this outrageous shared experience. Additionally, it's a good way for some of the smaller names to get well deserved recognition.
After reading more of the other replies, though, I should clarify that I'm really just talking about festival v. small and intimate... A large, single-stage seated venue is another matter entirely...in which case, I suppose I'd have to agree that I prefer small venues but, as has been suggested, it's really just about who is there (both performing, and with you).
-
Permalink Reply by Kimberly on -
I'm totally with you- I'm all about the small and intimate. Plus, sometimes you get to talk with the band(s)! Bonus!
-
Permalink Reply by Anthony Licari on -
I only go to shows at the underground places here. Nothing to do with the scenesters/hipsters, I love being 2 - 10 feet away from the stage knowing I'm not going to get sucker punched in the back of the head and most importantly that I can walk over to the bar without having to walk a mile to pay 7 dollars for a 12 ounce cup of mostly foam.
© 2012 Created by Lisa.
