A crowd for the audience, not the stage

It’s always disheartening when you listen to a live album and there’s more sounds there than what the band is physically capable of performing. One of the greatest aspects of a powerhouse like Radiohead is that their studio productions are so thorough and layered, yet they can reproduce and expand it live, giving it a somewhat different sound while also being able to recreate a lot of the elements through triggers and live instrumentation. While a band like The Flaming Lips showcase a great visual aid to their music, the songs themselves become second fiddle. Rather than using triggers to create quick clips or loops, they play along to full recordings of playback. Kliph Scurlock keeps it lively enough behind the drumkit and Steve Drozd does his best to play what he can, but Wayne Coyne isn’t even trying – his acoustic guitar a mere prop. The problem I have most of all would lie more with these superstar bands like The Killers, U2, or Coldplay who often feature axillary members on keyboards or additional guitar to fill out the "spaces" in their music. Since when does a live performance have to sound exactly like the studio recording though? The live performance should allow the core band the ability to interpret the songs at their essence. When the band feels it needs more members to give the audience an enjoyable performance, this takes away from the band's credibility. Sometimes all the bombast can add to the character of the performance, like the overflowing stage hyjincs of groups like The Polyphonic Spree and Broken Social Scene. Most of the time though, a nice lean band is best for powerful performances.