"Seeing" a Musical Performance

Why do people, including folks who are as dedicated to serious listening as those who post on Audiogon, but really the world at large, constantly say that they went to see some musical group in concert? I go to hear music ... or more to the point, to listen to music. I realize this seems like a trivial or possibly pedantic point, but I'm convinced there is something deeper going on, that this pervasive usage is expressive of some undesirable trend toward celebrity worship, or addiction to spectacle over dedication to substance, or "notches on the belt" for Deadheads, etc. Yes, many rock bands have impressive light shows, inflatable sharks, etc., but really, any Hollywood blockbuster movie blows away the stagecraft even the biggest rock show in terms of shear spectacle.

It is also possible that, as in so many things, people just aren't really saying what they mean, or aren't bothering to really think before speaking/writing. Anyone I've ever mentioned this observation to in the past has said (after saying what an ass I am), that OF COURSE they go to listen to music, not SEE it (unless they dropped the brown acid, of course). And as Ken Nordine said many years ago, I don't see why you can't show a sound ... but still.

I'm offended because listening isn't just enough for me when I go to a live performance. Fingers of Allan Holdsworth really worth to see for good!
I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. It's just semantics.
I really don't think I understand exactly what it is that you are trying to say. People tell you that they are going to a concert to see music? I have never said that to anyone. I will say that I am going to a concert to see a band or an artist, because that is exactly what I am doing, exactly. The group,or artist will be physically there in front of me no? Therefore I will see them with my eyes, will I not? Of course there will also be music that I will hear. To me the allure of a live show is the combination of the aural and the visual. It is a completely different experience than any movie and not a valid comparison in my opinion.
Weirdest post in a while.
Why would you think that there is something deeper going on, it's the way people bend the English language and still manfge to understand each other. How many times have you heard a conversation like this:

I said I didn't like the concert and then she "goes" that maybe I should have stayed home.

Many people, especially young people, substitute the word go for the word said. Unless you are an English professor, you go with the flow!

Let's not forget that a concert is both visual and aural. When I attend a concert, I am watching the performance as well as listening to the music. Even, if it's a basic no frills concert, you still watch the performers facial expressions and movements. Of course, that only occurs when you have good seats.
no movie can get the juices going like a great musical or concert 'live'...thats just me.
Humans are primarily visual.

Most people really do go to *see* a concert.

To some degree it is just a linguistic convention, but one must ask why it became one?

Jim in Logan Square:

I'm in complete agreement with you. Too bad more people don't go to listen. It would make the concert experience far more pleasant.
I agree with Marakanetz. I just 'saw' Allan Holdsworth at a small (300 seat) theater. I say SAW because as a guitar player, I try to figure out what he is doing and, since I sat 2 rows from the stage, right in front of him, it was easy to see. Didn't help my playing much, unfortunately :(