How important are stage sets?

[Keith Jordan]

Importance is an hirearchical and subjective issue but how important are stage sets? I went to see Paul McCartney last week and his set was spectacular and the pre-show performance was amazing too. I saw Roger Waters last year and I thoroughly enjoyed that but his stage set was not as "spectacular" in my opinion.

How important are stage sets?

In the early days of the Floyd, the Floyd were using pioneering techniques with various gel slide projectors etc. but the sets themselves were non existent - probably due to the fact they were playing halls and not arenas!!

But how important are stage sets? Please discuss!

[Neil]

I think it's a question of balance. I think Rogers shows could have benefited from better lights, better projections etc.. Though I think Daves Pink Floyd had too much of that to be honest. I worry that people will look back at Pink Floyd now as a band with awesome laser beams, but not that much passion. Take Rogers enthusiasm/passion on stage, and add that to the recent Floyd concerts stage show and you've got something truely special...
If I had to choose between passion and how specatcular a show is though; I'd take the former every time. That's why Macca was so good I suppose - it had both.

[drafsack]

With Roger's recient shows he was playing down the stage set and placing the emphsis on the music. There was no need for the smoke and mirrors of past. This decision was bourn out by the extensive US tours where people went to see "him" and not alot of effects. You also have to remember that the stage shows in all their spendor were bourn out of a lack of band carisma. As Dave once quoted the Stones had Mick, the Who had Roger Daltrey, Keith Moon and Pete Townshend all we have is someone who pulls faces at the crowd (this might not be the exact quote but it was along those lines). So the stage show was a way from diverting the audiences attention away from the band members and it the early days the music.

With the post Rog Floyd the stage show was again important to divert the audiences attention away from the fact that there were around 10 people on the stage. The whole point of the stage show was to generate an audience, as die hard fans would see them whether they had a stage show or not. An example of this was back in the 70's I went to see Sammy Hagar. His stage set was non existant and consisted of mainly the house lighting rig. Even though people in the audience were commenting on this it was soon forgotten when he started playing. At the end of the day they had paid to see sammy not an inflatable pig, an over size mirror ball, copper vapour lasers left over from the US star wars project, they paid to see him. With Floyds last tour the emphisis was the show and people paid to see the show. There were people at the last lot of floyd shows who knew hardley any of their songs but had heard it was a good show to see. Now there is nothing wrong with that but at Rogers shows people were there top see him. The emphises of the last lot of Floyd shows was also money, thats why they had 3 stage shows leap frogging around the world so they could play to the maximum amount of people and generate the maximum amout of profit.

I did not go and see Macca as i dont like him that much (i think its envy he has half a billion in the bank and I dont) but if I did go and see him it would only be because he was once in the Beatles.

Wheras I saw Roger as I like his music and its the only place I can hear songs from Animals and The final Cut and some of the less popular songs off the other albums played live, which is important as all you get with the Post rog floyd shows is a greatest hit package.

[mosespa]

The first rock concert I went to see was ZZ Top on the Afterburner tour. From what I understand, the set was made to look like the control panel of a spaceship with a sphynx head hanging over it.

I say "from what I understand," because I didn't actually SEE the set...I was pretty much behind the band...I had a GREAT view of their backsides.

It was an impressive show...three guys made a LOT of noise...what was really cool was when they were playing "Legs" and the two guitarists spun their guitars and disappeared into clouds of steam...when the steam cleared, the two guitars were still hovering over the stage spinning...but the guitarists were gone. This illusion was only spoiled by my seating as I could see them duck down into openings in the stage...but me being me (analytical and always wanting to know how they did that,) it actually improved my enjoyment of the show.

I saw REM in 1989 and they had an enormous screen behind them that showed films and occasional text messages...this was an incredible performance which was only heightened by the visuals.

The most spectacular visual aspect of the Pearl Jam show that I saw in '94 was the candles on top of their amplifiers...but it's easily the greatest show I've witnessed yet.

Even topping Kiss in '97...with all the fire-breathing, blood-spitting, exploding stage, demon-boot wearing antics.

Visuals and elaborate stage sets have their place...but if they're trying to make up for a deficiency in the music, then they are inherently a bad idea.

If they are there to enhance the music...maybe you need to work on the music a bit more.

If they are there to complement the music and add something that music itself simply cannot...then they are being used properly...in MY book, anyway.

[pfco]

How important are stage sets?

Stage sets can be as varied in size and scope as the number of pebbles on a beach, but what works for the smaller intimate performances or venues do not always work well for the larger ones, and vice versa. They are literally worlds apart in all aspects, except for one...both seek to set a mood or create an environment.

Most people probably don't think about it much, since they are there for the music, but, a stage can be the most prominent visual at any event. It's a matter of choice whether a performer or a band leaves it bare naked or uses it to their advantage as part of their performance. For most bands, large or small, it is where the lightscapes and soundscapes are painted by the performers and their technicians. It can be a simple spotlight...or hundreds of computer driven special effects that can turn the stage into a kaleidoscope of color, light, images and sound.
Creating a mood or environment, no matter how simple or complicated, is something every performer seeks to do. So in this respect a stage set/stage effects really is a matter of importance or simple delight, for both performer and audience.

These days many bands use this environment of light, sound and image, so space becomes a place where something happens, a temporary territorial event, the space of the battle being where the battle takes place.
The Division Bell stage, for example, accomplished this sense of 'space', giving people a direct experience of the greater possibilities of their imaginations which was motivated and propelled along by the music. The arched structure in the Division Bell show had the effect of creating a tunnel or gateway into another world, and the spectacular lighting sequences brought this huge form to life and dissolved its physicality...a monster construct that evaporated at times within the music and the effects.

Every performer has their own personal preferences with high or low tech stage sets/effects, and while budgets may or may not dictate the parameters of a performers choice the end result has nothing to do with anything other than contributing to the total package of enjoyment.


Sandy

[David Smith]

Stage sets and stuff... Well i say watch a Jimi Hendrix concert, he uses almost no stage sets and his shows are among the best ever.

I think it's all about the way the artist can involve his audience in some way, be it with elaborate sets (The Wall tour) or a shared feeling (Jimi's concerts) where the fans are emtionally and mentally involved with the action that takes place on stage.

Some acts can do a minimalist concert (REM MTV unplugged for example) and make it truely brilliant, it's because of the intimacy they can create in their set.

And it's the contact with the audience from any form of professionalism that i feel is important, so stage sets are important if it's with these props that the artosts want to make this contact with their audiences.