I've literally never heard anyone under the age of 70 express this opinion and I let them off because I wouldn't expect them to have any idea of what does goes into it. It takes a lot of talent and technically can be considered an instrument. They're using a device to manipulate sounds in real time.
Yes you can get some hack who just plays a mix-tape but that's not what the likes of Daft Punk are doing when performing live.
So they’re great producers. That’s different to performing actual live music. I appreciate and acknowledge the technical skill that goes behind putting together recorded music, mixing sounds, crossing genres etc but it is still fundamentally done on a computer. That to me and many people doesn’t equate to performing “live” music.
He… sang and played instruments………
I mean, it’s fine not to like it. I don’t much care for Ed Sheeran, Coldplay, U2. But it’s not like I wave my hand and say ‘Needs more iMac’.
Really odd hill to die on. Daft Punk are literally in the Pantheon of ‘Greatest musical acts of all time’ and have one of the best Live performances of all time (Alive 2007) acknowledged by pretty much everyone across all sorts of genres… and you wave it off as nonsense.
I mean he played instruments in the same way Liam Gallagher plays his tambourine. It didn’t add much to the performance. This type of music performed live as actual live music isn’t actually live music by definition . People are free to interpret it as live music as they wish and give it all magnitude of praise. But they have to accept a lot of people will disagree with it massively.
I don’t really see much difference in what DJs do to what someone producing an album does. I wouldn’t pay money to see James Ford (produces Arctic monkeys albums)
stood on stage putting together an arctic monkeys album, editing in sounds, creating loops etc. But I guess some people would…