a little bit different, but this is the view from my workstation.

Your question sparked some interesting conversation. You were asking about process and the conversation ended up a debate on the purpose of live music. So my response doesn't really answer your question, but rather this second question that came up.

My opinion is that every audience goes to a show for different reason. Some are there to dance and party. Some are there to appreciate musicianship. Most are there for a mix of the two. The genre of music and its audience will figure out whatever show format makes them happy.

DJ shows, to me, seem more about the dancing and partying. What the guy does up there isn't as important to the audience as the music being played. But the good time the DJ knows how to put on for an audience doesn't mean the guy or girl isn't a musical savant. A great show here is probably when the audience finds connection with the music, each other, and the DJ made it all happen.

At a jazz show, people sit and listen. It seems to me these audiences go to listen for small nuances, maybe like perfect resonances and players grooving in the pocket. So here the musicianship is the main thing that makes a show good or bad. And a good time for this audience usually isn't defined by sweating and shared experience with like-minded peers. It's about the coordination of a particular key change between 4 players, and the polyrhythm that set up the transition into the other.

But in any case, all these people come together around the music, one way or another. I think it's kind of crazy and pointless to weigh what merit is deserved by any genre, its players, and its audiences. And in the end, no player or audience deserves anything, really. It's accrued from communities of people discovering and enjoying music, back to when it was probably hitting stones against stumps, and branches against stone.

/r/pics Thread Parent Link - i.redd.it