Video And Light Show - OH NO!

[hostVentura]

Alright, so me and my drummer were talking...and we decided it was time to take our live show one step further. Although sonically (amps, in-ear monitors) we feel like we have an excellent setup, we know visually, aside from us running around (well, me rotating), we don't have anything. My girlfriend said that "I mean, people stay because the music is good, but people act like they get kind of bored, unless they are musicians, because you don't have very much visually".

So a few different ideas came up, we are going to talk with the singer to try and get him to be a little more friendly, but on top of that, we were going to add a small video and light show - but lest we not get carried way, we need to run it.

I have a computer rackmounted into my rig, so I figured I would use that if at all possible. Here are the two things I want to do: add a video screen and (later) a few lights. Now, I know the lights can be controlled from my computer through a DMX protocol, but what about the videos? My graphics card supports a coaxial out, so I can hook up my TV, but I need a program that can display video, full screen...and I need it all controlled by MIDI. Ideally, I wish that the program could control the DMX at a later point when I add the lights, but this isnt necesarry.


Thanks in advance for the help, and if you need any clarification, just ask!

[Awake]

Back when I was involved in Modulus, they would program the lighting in a MIDI sequencer (specifically, Logic) and use a MIDI to DMX converter. This not only provided a convenient environment for programming the lighting, it made it easier to sync the audio, video and lighting, since the band would play against backing track. Modulus was a very structured show, obviously, so you'd probably not want to be tied to pre-recorded audio (although I always thought it was kind of neat that you could sync everything up, including patch changes, meaning that all the musician had to do was play, and patch changes would be taken care of), but the principal is the same.

They also incorporated six-way surround video, although I don't believe that the video was sequenced - IIRC, there were six computers hooked to projectors, and a program listened for a MIDI command to play the video file, the video thereafter being freewheeling. Looking back, this strikes me as being fairly primitive, because it has obvious flaws: the sync between the screens is entirely illusory and has to be controlled by very carefully rendering and timing the video files to sync up, not to mention if the system glitches, there's trouble (again, IIRC, the video file was per show, not per song, which meant that once set in motion, if the system crashed, it meant either abandoning video for the rest of the show or restarting the show). That may simply have been the only way to achieve it at the time, but a nightmare to manage.

See generally, Modulus (http://www.cloudbass.com/modulus/) (click "technology"). The show was just sheer genius, the two chaps who were responsible for dreaming it up and implementing it just put some incredible energy into it, and the results were nothing short of spectacular, so I was simply delighted to have been involved with it, even for a brief time, and I'm proud of the work we did.

So regarding your show, I suppose my sugestion is as follows. I believe Cubase SX allows you to incorporate video, so perhaps the way to go is to sequence each song's lighting and video cues in Cubase, either on a single machine or on two sync'd machines. You can use multiple video outs to control as many projectors as you like (I actually always wanted to fill a space by projecting onto the roof and onto screens on the side of the venue, leaving the stage clear for lighting effects).

[Awake]

More importantly, I should add that I think the real problem vis-a-vis video will more be creative content than it is technical implementation. If you're just going to project cheesy winamp visualizations (a la SFNY, although L@tB isn't much better), don't waste your time.

Regarding the lights, the danger of going cheesy is phenomonally high. I think that Willie Williams and Mark Brickman are about the only two lighting designers worth what they're paid, and they have very different styles. Williams is very architetural: he likes to draw a lighting "look" and just let it sit there, for a song, or even for an entire section of the show (although, if the latter, usually he'll have something going on within the look, for example, the use of the PIGI (http://www.prg.com/lighting/projection/large-format) during the Elevation encore). Even if there's movement of the lights within that look, it's very much a "I'm lighting the band" not a "I'm going to make you look at a lighting display so awesome you'll forget all about the band" approach. There are now five U2 shows available on DVD, all of them very different, and all of them just beautiful to look at.

Brickman is very theatrical; a lot of moving lights, a lot of activity, just a real "more is more" approach. Watch the two Pink Floyd concerts available on VHS and you'll see what I mean; PULSE is about as subtle as a tarantula on a marshmallow. Lots of lasers, moving heads and so on. It's also worth watching the Roger Waters DVD (the recent one, not the Wall in Berlin), which I think was Brickman too, which is a nice compromise between architectural and theatrical.

What I'm saying here is, think primarily about WHAT you're going to do, not HOW you're going to do it. You have to be sensitive to the venue; just as writing music is an excercise not in putting in everything, but it working out what the song needs and will support (I don't like the phrase "just play what the song needs," because of its minimalist overtones; you can put in more the song strictly "needs," the trick is to put in enough to be interesting and exciting, but not so much that it starts to detract from the song. Hence, what it will support is a better rubric, I think, than what it needs. Think Siberian Khatru), so is lighting a venue a question of what works in the size of the space you're in. You wouldn't light an arena the way you'd light a stadium, and you wouldn't light a bar the way you'd light an arena, even if money were no object. Obviously the examples I gave above are painting on a huge canvas, and there are elements which you simply can't reproduce on a small scale (for example, POPmart's use of video-as-a-lighting-element, Pulse's 90' screen and 180 degree arc of moving head lights) (on the other hand, I believe very strongly that ZooTV is emminently recreatable in a reasonably-sized venue). But what they do reflect is certain underlying approaches to light a show, and I think you can learn a lot from them, even if it's only that you want to light the room in blue and bathe the band in a soft, warm light, or have a couple of lasers running some cool chases. Just don't do sucky lighting or video because you feel obligated to have it. Lighting and video are as much a creative endeavour as the music, and they can compliment it (good), overwhelm it (not so good), distract from it (so-so) or actively detract from it (bad).

[Kurzweilfreak]

Bravo, Awake.

[Awake]

Just because I think they're incredible to look at, even as stills, here are some pics from various U2 tours:
http://www.remy.tv/remy.remy/remy/muziek

It goes without saying, of course, that still pictures of the staging cannot do justice to the lighting design; you really have to watch these shows, all of which are available on either VHS or DVD (I'd give my right arm for Popmart and ZooTV to be available on DVD).

One of the more restrained parts of the PULSE show is available through google video:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1587365434021610298&q=pink+floyd+high+hopes

My favorite two pics of Zoo TV:
http://blogsimages.skynet.be/images/000/435/801_zootv-stage-01.jpg
Outside broadcast (credit (http://the-best-of-u2.skynetblogs.be/public/))
http://u2.reicht.net/history/u2pics1992/1992-02-29-zoo-tv.jpg
The almost quaint inside broadcast,

Damnit, Hostventura! You're reminding me how much I want to be in a U2 tribute band here! And I was having such a nice day! ;)

[hostVentura]

Haha, well sorry for runing your day ;)

No, I definately undersatnd what your saying - I don't have time to respond right now, but in a few hours I'll write my follow up.

[kwstakhs]

For an extremely good video-assisted show, applicable even in small venues, watch I.Q. live. I do not have them on DVD, but I saw them in December playing the Mean Fiddler in London (a medium-sized venue).
They had 3 video screens which (although mostly showing the same stuff) were independent. My bet is that they were computer controlled, but not by any member of the band. Most probably, the videos were triggered at the start of each song by one of the band's technicians, but I don't think they'd go so far as to live - sync them to the music.

If, however, you want to do live-synching, try Ableton-Live!. Now please note that, not having worked with it much, I am not sure if Ableton supports video, but it's synching capabilities with audio are brilliant. Perhaps somebody who has looked at Ableton in depth would be able to help you here.

hope this helps,
k.

[Awake]

In relation to the discussion about the how, Nismael's website (http://www.evil-dog.com/Nismael[/url) includes something that could potentially be really handy for these purposes. Specifically, he has a tool called "Keyplug" which allows you to control Winamp via assignable MIDI messages (and therefore, without having to go from your controller keyboard to your computer keyboard, although presumably one could also achieve the same effect through a squencer, Nismael?). Here's your answer as to how to integrate video into your show: you sequence the video elements you want in a format that winamp will play, fullscreen the video display and project its contents. Then your keyboard player can control the lot for you.

[nismael]

Well my plugin understands eveything that is a MIDI signal. I don't know exactly how sequencers work but if they can send MIDI signals, that would not be a problem.

Theres is always the possibility to make a custom program too. The program could start an application when a specific key is hitted, move the video forward, etc. It could also start a macro which could do different things...