"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.

Thoughts?
jiminlogansquare
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 :(