Do musicians' appearances matter more than their sound?

[i'm only sleeping]

Yes, according to a recent scientific study ("Sight over sound in the judgment of music performance"):

 

 

http://www.nature.com/news/musicians-appearances-matter-more-than-their-sound-1.13572?WT.ec_id=NEWS-20130820

 

Below is the abstract. Full paper here: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2013/08/16/1221454110

 

Abstract

Social judgments are made on the basis of both visual and auditory information, with consequential implications for our decisions. To examine the impact of visual information on expert judgment and its predictive validity for performance outcomes, this set of seven experiments in the domain of music offers a conservative test of the relative influence of vision versus audition. People consistently report that sound is the most important source of information in evaluating performance in music. However, the findings demonstrate that people actually depend primarily on visual information when making judgments about music performance. People reliably select the actual winners of live music competitions based on silent video recordings, but neither musical novices nor professional musicians were able to identify the winners based on sound recordings or recordings with both video and sound. The results highlight our natural, automatic, and nonconscious dependence on visual cues. The dominance of visual information emerges to the degree that it is overweighted relative to auditory information, even when sound is consciously valued as the core domain content.

[tinnitus photography]

[Mr. Heartbreak]

In a word: no.

[IRememberDBoon]

[Mr. Heartbreak]

My thoughts exactly. They just stood there and played their instruments.

[tinnitus photography]

too bad their music sucked.

 

 

 

[LouieB]

Even with the Dead many people really dug watching Bob Weir, who was the good looking member of the group.  Of course appearance matters.  Musicians are entertainers after all.  This may be sad, but true.

 

LouieB

[tinnitus photography]

[PopTodd]

[Winston Legthigh]

[tinnitus photography]

[lamradio]

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Even with the Dead many people really dug watching Bob Weir, who was the good looking member of the group.  Of course appearance matters.  Musicians are entertainers after all.  This may be sad, but true.

 

LouieB

Appearances may matter, but in the presentation of music, I can't ever agree that they matter more than the music itself. That was the basis of the thesis here.

And tinnitus, you're entitled to your opinion, but the Dead-bashing can get pretty tedious. I don't suppose the Wilco guys would agree with you either, since they just covered Bird Song, Dark Star, Ripple and Friend of the Devil with Bob Weir.

[tinnitus photography]

If I only looked to Wilco for validation of my musical tastes, my collection would take a significant decline in quality.

[Vacant Horizon]

I thought of Phil and Jerry immediately too!

[Ghost of Electricity]

yeah, but man, jerry looked, like really weird after those two tabs i dropped.  i could totally see his beard growing.  and phil's shirt was dancing.

[lamradio]

 

I'd hit it.. 

[Vacant Horizon]

yeah, but man, jerry looked, like really weird after those two tabs i dropped.  i could totally see his beard growing.  and phil's shirt was dancing.

 

ironically, i loved their appearance.  the rug, the wires, the speakers and just standing there playing.  watching any one of them just play is compelling.

[ih8music]

I think performers who specifically don't dress up "in costume" are even making a statement about their appearance.  What they choose to wear on stage is always a conscious decision.

[Moss]

[lamradio]

"Indie rock is such a bratty culture, and I don't see a lot of ugly people in it, either. I feel very proud to be hideous. Thank God I don't look like every other fucking dude wearing their girlfriend's fucking jeans out there on stage." - Bradford Cox from Deerhunter

[mountain bed]

Even with the Dead many people really dug watching Bob Weir, who was the good looking member of the group.  Of course appearance matters.  Musicians are entertainers after all.  This may be sad, but true.

 

LouieB

Well, we have to speak about the whole Artist/Entertainer thing. Many in the Rock idiom are not much more than entertainers - not necessarily a bad thing, but I prefer musical chops more than any 'presentation'. 

 

Of course the best of the best are both - Bowie certainly, Gabriel, a few others. I think of the GD as more of a Jazz mindset - they're just practicing their craft onstage, and looks or cheerleading the crowd ("It's SO GREAT to be here in Cleveland!") never figured into it.

[NoJ]

In my opinion, the old saw "form follows function" applies here.

[Lammycat]

ironically, i loved their appearance.  the rug, the wires, the speakers and just standing there playing.  watching any one of them just play is compelling.

Bingo.

 

And, I disagree with whoever said that even performers who don't dress up in stage costume are making a statement. A lot of performers just wear whatever the hell they wore all day onto the stage. Of course, what anyone puts on in the morning is a conscious decision/staement I suppose when you get down to it....

 

Katy Perry should definitely wear what she feels comfortable in, too, on stage such as that outfit she's in above.

[Moss]

I agree.  I was not making any kind of statement.  I just wanted an excuse to put that Katy picture up.  I tend to prefer bands that just get up and play with no big thought around dress or choreography but I don't think any less of Lady Gaga, or Beyonce or any others where that is an important part of over all image and why they are successful.  I do have an aversion to overly contrived image but I can't say I can tell when someone is more contrived than someone else.