Hey kids, do ya like the rock and roll?

I know I do, but I have a hard time going to rock concerts because in the land of rock audiences, the Me Decade never ended.

I've been a musician in some capacity ever since my parents plunked me into piano lessons at the tender age of five. I apparently forced their hand, as well as that of the piano teacher (Miss Jackson, her house smelled of old books, old woman, and gas heat), by being more talented than the average five year old. Miss Jackson didn't take students until they could reach an octave, and I could barely reach a fifth, but I had an ear for music. My brother and sister were both in lessons, and I would sit in the living room while my brother practiced his Beethoven sonatas and Chopin etudes, and when he finished practicing he'd get up, I'd go over to the bench, and pick out what it was he'd been playing. By ear. He was 14 and playing things that apparently are a bit more involved than the average five year old should be able to pick out.

But anyway, since I've been doing this music thing for so long, I've been on stage or in the hall more than most people, and I have to say that I don't understand what it is that makes people think rock musicians aren't due the respect that other musicians get.

There is only one difference between a rock show and any other musical performance: volume. And frankly, I could do without that, if it were possible. But it isn't. Because people seem to think that it's worth the ticket price to go somewhere a musician is playing, and then yell to make themselves heard over the music. Excuse me? Can somebody please explain the logic? There are environments much more conducive to talking than a rock concert, so if you're planning on having a conversation, why not make use of one of them instead?

See, I don't get this. If I pay to hear a band, I'm paying to hear them, not you. I don't want to hear you talk, I don't want to hear you sing along, I want to hear the people on stage, whose names are on the marquee, whom I paid to hear. The volume of the music doesn't give you permission to talk. Frankly, I'd prefer that they turn down the volume at most rock concerts, as I'm not currently deaf and the only thing that's going to make me so is hearing damage caused by attendance at too many loud concerts.

You want to dance? Great. I'm all for that. Dancing is quiet and doesn't detract from others' enjoyment of the show. You want to smoke? Please heed the rules of the venue. If it's a non-smoking venue, it won't kill you not to smoke for the two hours you're inside. If it's a smoking venue, I know that going in and I can decide if it's worth dealing with for me to see that band (and I have skipped shows because I knew that the venue would be too smoky, so I hope all you smokers enjoy your (1) concerts, (2) emphysema, and (3) lung cancer).

You want to sing? Do that in the car or the shower. Start your own band. Don't sing along with the band unless they ask you to. If they ask, I'll sing along too. But it's not about you, it's about them.

You want to tape the show? Unless the band specifically approves of taping, NO, NO, NO. The price of admission is a contract, an agreement that the performer(s) will do certain things, and you will do certain things. It does not, in any way, give you ownership of what you hear that night. You do not have the right to keep a recording of the show unless the band says so. Your ticket price allows you to experience the concert, but not to tape it. It's not about you, it's about the band.

Here's why this is important: the musician's value is in his performance. You wouldn't pay thirty bucks to hear the crazy old man singers do "Old Grey Mare." You wouldn't pay to hear somebody mimic a concert that happened before (Now! Live! These random five people imitate the concert that happened last night with air guitars and humming!), with the possible exception of those "1964" people who mock up a Beatles show, but if you read this diary you probably wouldn't pay money to hear them either (and there's the argument that what they're doing constitutes theatre and not a concert besides). So the thing that makes the concert of value at all is the musician's (or musicians') performance. "Tonight, one night only, the exact set of circumstances that will combine to make tonight's show!"

If the musician doesn't want you to tape that, it's his right and you have to respect it. He (please add "or she" wherever you see fit) makes his living by providing something unique every time he appears. That's why they call it live. You wouldn't pay to see somebody push "play" on their latest CD, would you? The concert you see exists as a unique point in space and time, which is the sole thing the musician has to offer. If the performers wish for you to respect that uniqueness and refrain from recording their performance, please do so. That uniqueness is the only thing the musician has.

(Yes, I've been to two Phish shows. Yes, I know that they encourage taping. Other bands don't. The argument that some bands allow and encourage taping, so this one should too, does not apply. There is no right or wrong, there is only Zuul, please do what the band wishes and don't apply one band's rules to another just because you think they're more favorable rules).

Sure, you bought all the CDs, and you know all the words. I did too, and I do too. But if I go to an opera, I can't sing along with the tenor just because I know how and I paid for my ticket. I can't tape it because I think it's too expensive not to do so. I can't talk to the people next to me throughout the show, because that would actually be recognized as rude behavior in any venue except for a rock show. Why don't you give rock musicians the same respect?

(23 sep)