Affordances and Experiential Dimensions of Digital Concerts: Closer the Eye, Farther the Crowd Free

To date, the field of research on the experience of streamed concerts is scarce (for a detailed review on classical concert streaming, see Weining et al., 2024). Particularly studied is the aspect of the social experience, which obviously differs between in-person and digital concerts. The feeling of social connectedness is hypothesized to be either decreased by the isolated streaming situation or enhanced by digital features. On the one hand, a loss of social experience has been documented from the perspectives of both the producers (Green et al., 2022; Hylland, 2022) and the audience (Haferkorn et al., 2021; Vandenberg, 2022). On the other, ways to increase the feeling of connectedness through specific digital features also have been investigated. Studies report the positive effect of chats and online interaction (Haferkorn et al., 2021; Vandenberg et al., 2021), of live streams compared to on-demand streams (Swarbrick et al., 2021), and of shared digital concert attendance through YouTube or conference platforms (Onderdijk et al., 2021; Wald-Fuhrmann et al., 2023). d’Hoop and Pols (2022) confirm these ambivalences with an ethnographic study of a digital concert and emphasize the event character of a live stream in regard to the feeling of community between audience and musicians. They additionally point to the unique streaming-related importance of camerawork, an aspect not yet covered in any quantitative studies on the streaming experience. In that sense, the analyses of mediated music performances of Pibert (2022) and Prigge (1999) examining audiovisual aesthetics add an important contribution to the field, as this is a core aspect of what audiences actually experience and evaluate. Producers also emphasize the aspect of visual aesthetics and its potential for streaming concerts. Alongside the strategies of intimization and intensification, emerging from interviews with musicians and streaming producers, Kjus et al. (2022) synthesize the strategy of expansion; that is, the integration of streaming-related visual possibilities to enhance streamed concerts.

When it comes to empirical studies of digital concerts, the research foci on the social experience, feelings of connectedness, and aspects of liveness neglect the actual situated experience in terms of audiovisual reception. However, this last perspective is necessary for deeper understanding of what people experience when watching and listening to a classical concert stream. Methodological limitations through standardized questionnaires and quantitative analyses prevent, to some extent, more aesthetically relevant results, central for understanding an audiovisual digital concert experience. Another methodological problem is that most quantitative studies are hypothesis driven; this closes off access to unexpected but significant results for unexplored phenomena. Besides the field’s general lack of qualitative studies, the question of the circumstances and situations in which people watch concert streams is also ignored. Nevertheless, the context in which people stream concerts and the secondary activities they engage in while viewing seem to be relevant.

The listening situation, which has an effect on the musical experience, can be understood with the concept of frame (Wald-Fuhrmann et al., 2021). The frame encompasses the “environmental properties” (p. 3) of a concert situation that influence the listening experience (space, light, concert format, atmosphere, etc.). In the case of digital concerts, the frame exists on multiple levels: on the one hand, in the video stream itself—that is, at the time of the concert, transmitted by the sound and video recording—and, on the other, in the actual streaming situation, such as at home on the sofa while knitting, where environmental aspects frame the situation and influence the experience. Wald-Fuhrmann et al. (2021) use the concept of affordance (Gibson, 2015) to conceptualize the frame’s effects on the experience. Frame components can afford certain musical behaviors and trigger certain experiential dimensions. The streamed stimulus in its mediated form, consumed on a certain device, creates affordances for the recipient in terms of listening behavior, visual perception, and overall engagement within the concert experience.

To motivate research in this direction and address the methodological problems, the present study focuses on an analysis of participants’ free-form comments on the experience of classical concert streaming. This approach allows us to interpret their unguided and raw thoughts on their experiences and thus to investigate experiential dimensions of classical concert streaming in a nuanced and unbiased way. Our goal with this approach is to uncover medium-related affordances of digital concerts and their impact on the experience of classical concert streams.

We conducted a large-scale online experiment to empirically investigate the experience of watching an audiovisual, on-demand, streamed chamber concert of Western classical music. Participants watched one of two versions of a professionally filmed and produced concert film, which differed in length (40 or 75 min). The two versions were produced from the same video footage, with some movements cut from the short version. These two concert films were framed within four formats: the short (1) and long (2) versions as they are, the short version with an introductory talk (3), and a “social-event version” for which the short stream was embedded within a virtual meeting platform where groups of participants simultaneously watched the stream together in a virtual concert hall (4).

Participants were surveyed with standardized entry and exit questionnaires right before and after watching the stream. The data analyzed in the present study is based on the final question of the exit questionnaire, which was the only open question or task: “Feel free to add comments and general thoughts about your concert experience here.” The space provided to respond was limited to 150 words. This allowed participants to share their thoughts on the digital concert experience in a free and unguided way, providing a valuable qualitative counterpart to the quantitative results of the study.

The questionnaires further included questions on sociodemographics, musical background, affective states before and after the concert, listening modes during the concert, and many other aspects of the experience. Besides some sociodemographic variables to describe the sample, all standardized quantitative questions are excluded from the present analysis to focus on the qualitative analysis of the free text field.

We found no relevant differences between the participants’ comments for each of the four formats, apart from a few differences in the quantity of references to certain topics (pointed out in the “Results” section). This indicates that the formats had no remarkable influence on the content of the comments, especially concerning the main inquiry of this study. Therefore, we do not compare the formats in the following analysis. A detailed account of the influence of the concert formats on the participants’ experience can be found in the study based on the questionnaire results by Wald-Fuhrmann et al. (2023).

The filmed concert took place in September 2020 at the Radialsystem in Berlin, an established venue for classical and contemporary music, dance, and performance. Despite the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic at that time, the concert could take place with a limited number of audience members, sitting spread throughout the concert hall with empty seats between them. A string quintet, consisting of internationally well-known classical musicians performed three quintets, by Ludwig van Beethoven, Johannes Brahms, and Brett Dean. The shorter concert film left off the first movement of Brahms’s piece and the fourth and fifth movements of Dean’s.

The concert was professionally filmed, edited, and produced by two filmmakers using industry-standard camera and sound equipment. Three cameras covered different angles of the stage. In the produced concert film, the shots shift between a wide perspective and close-ups of the faces, instruments, and bodies of the musicians. Moving camera shots were also included.

Participants were recruited through an online survey used to investigate potential concert stream consumers’ preferences regarding various streaming features (see Wald-Fuhrmann et al., 2023). This pre-survey was advertised via public radio, newspapers, newsletters, various webpages, and social media. A total of 1,640 participants took part in the pre-survey and were asked to participate in the stream experiment at the end of the questionnaire. The interested participants (n = 1,301) were then randomly and equally allocated to the four streaming formats and invited to participate via email. They received a link allowing them to start the experiment whenever they wanted. First, they completed the entrance questionnaire, then watched the concert on demand, and finally completed the exit questionnaire. Only the participants of the social-event format were required to book one of eight slots for the streaming event on the virtual meeting platform. The experimental procedure there was similar to the other formats, except that participants could get to know each other within the virtual environment before starting the entrance questionnaire. In total, 631 participants took part in the study, of which 102 people dropped out during the experiment. Of the remaining 529, a total of 341 (64.5%) used the option to write free comments, all of which were included in the analysis.

Participants (n = 341) were on average 54.8 years old (four missing, SD = 14.2). Other key demographics: 59.3% identified as female, 40.1% as male, 0.6% as diverse (six missing); 91.5% lived in Germany, 2.2% in the UK, 1.9% in Austria, and 4.4% in other countries (one missing); 83.6% had a university degree, 7.3% a vocational qualification or college degree, 9.1% a secondary school diploma or less.

Of the participants, 31% reported having a profession in classical music, 30.2% a profound knowledge in classical music, 36.9% an interest in classical music, and 1.9% no specific relationship toward classical music (one missing). The number of comments was almost equally spread throughout the four different concert formats: 23.1% (format 1 – short), 27.3% (format 2 – long), 24.9% (format 3 – talk), and 24.6% (format 4 – social-event).

The motivation for collecting free comments at the end of the questionnaire was to detect further aspects of the concert experience not considered in the questionnaire. Therefore, the approach to the data was inductive. The research question thus developed in the course of the coding process and evaluation of the emerging themes. The data coding process draws on the thematic analysis method (TA) described by Braun and Clarke (2006). The elaboration of the coding system and the development of themes are subject to the authors’ specific knowledge and experience, and their theoretical stances. These presume interpretations and assumptions about topics found in the data. Consequently, although the approach was inductive, there is a degree of inference on developed themes that gives a specific direction to the research inquiry.

Especially in the first phase of analysis, we also followed the principle of the content analysis method of emphasizing the quantitative aspects of the data that made important topics for the participants based on their high recurrence more explicit. High recurrence informs the results by providing more angles on certain topics. Most importantly, though, we considered themes and subthemes from the perspective of their quality and interpretative relevance with respect to the research question; that is, if a subtheme has only a few references, it can nonetheless indicate relevant discussion points.

The amount of data was extensive. Familiarization with the data included memoing, which helped identify recurring topics. During the initial coding of the entire data set, these topics were summarized into codes that we identified at a semantic level, exemplifying the explicit meaning given by the participant and avoiding interpretation. The aim was to generate as many codes as possible in order to describe the developed themes in more detail and with more nuances. The codes were all systematically described and quantified.

Then, we identified hyper-categories—overarching themes containing multiple codes—thus making relationships between codes clearer. During the repeated engagement with the data and re-elaboration of the coding system, codes were renamed at a more latent level, indicating more implicit dimensions and concepts, while some data was reallocated to different codes.

As we identified the central research inquiry, the data was assembled in new ways that supported the aim of the research. Further levels of interpretation emerged and the main two themes were reshaped by including all the codes that to some degree were related to the research question. Other themes, which contain remarks less relevant to the research question, were quantitatively assessed but excluded from further interpretation and discussion. In this way, we created a thematic framework focusing on the research question, generated and discussed patterns, and further linked the data to more abstract concepts.

The collaboration between the authors was consistent throughout the analysis process. The initial coding phase was conducted independently to gather different perspectives and achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the data. Following this, the coding criteria were compared, and the codebooks were discussed and adjusted. Subsequent steps described above were also subjected to thorough discussion between the authors, ensuring inter-rater reliability and shaping the developed codes and themes, thus providing stronger support for the research inquiry.

We identified two main traits of the open comments: content related and experience related. The comments are, to varying degrees, content related when they refer to the concert itself (e.g., the music being played or the musicians’ interpretation). The more experience-related comments give further insights into how the participants experienced the concert. The latter mostly relate to the digital mediation (e.g., cameras, microphones, screens) through which the concert was attended and the consequent affordances and the adjustments they required. Importantly, these two traits must be seen on a continuum, as the comments contain both traits to different extents and are open to interpretation. Nevertheless, this distinction made it possible to cluster the second kind of comments, which provide the largest part of the data for this study.

The comments varied in length from 2 to 150 words and the majority contained at least one complete sentence. For the four formats, the response rate to the voluntary open comment was fairly even: n = 79 participants (59.4%) from the long format, n = 93 (64.6%) from the short format, n = 84 (58.3%) from the talk format, and n = 85 from the social-event format (78,7%). The larger number of comments provided by the participants of the social-event format are to be attributed to the theme concerning technical issues, primarily describing problems related to the technical requirements for viewing this particular concert format.

The 65.3% of the participants who left a comment can be considered as representative for the experiential dimensions of all participants. Nonetheless, this group might largely consist of participants who are more motivated to leave a comment due to intense experiences during the concert, potentially leading to strong reactions, while excluding the more moderate ones.

The quotations of the participants in German, which are the majority, that have been translated into English by the authors are indicated with a *. The comments that the quotations originate from are identified by the comment numbers (“C”) in square brackets.

The iteratively developed codes were distributed into eight main themes (see Table 1) and became subthemes or sub-subthemes. Only a few comments (labeled as Not specified, n = 3) were discarded because of their lack of reference to the concert, thus not delivering any valuable insight into the participants’ experience. The remaining comments (n = 338) each comprise one or more remarks on single or multiple topics, coded within respective (sub)themes. Additionally, individual remarks may be double-coded and belong to multiple (sub)themes.

The themes to which the highest number of references could be distributed are: frame medium related (n = 346), comparisons with other musical experiences (n = 176), and frame concert related (n = 112). The first two (T1 and T2) are the most relevant for the current study and are therefore described in more detail. These account for 74.2% of the total number of responses, indicating the participants whose responses were coded in T1, T2, or both. The other themes are not further reported and discussed as they represent topics not central to the research inquiry.

Theme 1 gathers codes that refer to the digital mediation of the concert to varying extents (see Table 2) and gives qualitatively valuable insights into the medium’s influence on the concert experience, alongside some general acknowledgments (subtheme general, n = 14). Accordingly, we converged all the codes that link in some way to the topic of digitization and its function in framing the concert. In Theme 2, we included all explicit comparisons participants made between their digital concert experience and other musical experiences they had previously.

Themes 1 and 2 revolve around the different ways the digital medium can frame the audience’s concert experience. Participants provided partial descriptions of frame components and their effects on perception and overall experience. These descriptions generated a thematic framework that complements the quantitative questionnaire results discussed in Wald-Fuhrmann et al. (2023) in two ways. First, it provides more descriptive details and nuances through subthemes representing aspects briefly addressed in the questionnaire (e.g., parallel activity) and gives other perspectives on central topics (e.g., audience). Second, the (sub)themes present novel topics not covered by the items (e.g., close-ups, gaze obligation). Through these means, we were able to extend some of the seven experiential dimensions identified from the questionnaire results from other perspectives (Wald-Fuhrmann et al., 2023, p. 7). These include immersion, social experience (as togetherness), and concentration, integrated in this study as part of the broader idea of commitment. Furthermore, we were able to point out and discuss additional dimensions—namely, closeness and intimacy—drawn largely from the subthemes directly concerning the medium (e.g., camerawork and sound quality), thus depicting topics not covered by the questionnaires.

In the following, we discuss the findings relevant to the research question in terms of the types of affordances that the digital medium instigates, these affordances’ influence on experiential dimensions, and the link of these dimensions to forms of liveness that can be mediated through digitization.

We can interpret and systemize the subthemes based on which aspects of the concert experience they influence. Some subthemes directly refer to the specificities of the medium, and others describe aspects of the listening situation that are affected by or are the result of adopting the digital medium. Taking this difference into account, the subthemes can be grouped into four types of affordances, which impact multiple experiential dimensions (see Figure 1 for a schematic depiction).

The immediate sensory perception depends on affordances directly related to the digital medium (e.g., microphones, cameras, and reproduction systems). These affordances are represented by six subthemes from T1: camera work (n = 114), gaze obligation (n = 15), sound quality (n = 32), audiovisual quality (n = 8), visual details (n = 22), and streaming potential (n = 10). They operate on three interdependent levels: they confer visual closeness to the performers, provide an enhanced visual and sound perception, and direct the listener’s gaze. As has been previously shown (e.g., d’Hoop & Pols, 2022), multi-camera video recordings of concerts have several potentials regarding the arousal of visual cues during music listening. Some participants express their disappointment regarding unexploited potentials (subtheme streaming potential): “It should take advantage of being online and do things not possible at live concerts” [C2]). However, most of them describe the effect of the concert streaming on their sensory perception.

The subtheme camerawork contains a notably higher amount of coded remarks than the other subthemes. It refers directly to the digital medium, specifically to the camera’s video-recording techniques. The three sub-subthemes—close-ups (n = 55), camera perspectives and direction (n = 33), and relation to music (n = 9)—cover different topics and reflect the potential of the camerawork, an aspect that the audience rather explicitly emphasized. The sub-subthemes are closely related and often interchangeable with one another. Other, more general remarks about the camerawork gathered in the sub-subtheme general (n = 18) describe the camerawork using a diverse array of adjectives: “excellent” and “good” but also as “bad,” “strange,” “not suitable,” and even “disastrous.” Relatively few references from participants of the social-event format (n = 6) could be coded in the subtheme camerawork. This is probably due to these participants’ focus on the chat aspect specific to this format.

The sub-subtheme close-ups contains the most remarks within the subtheme. “Close-up” describes camera shots that zoom into details. The participants describe them as “suggestive,” “fascinating,” “interesting,” and even “superior,” but also highlight that these shots focus exclusively on one musician or might be too intimate. Yet, the possibility of seeing the musicians, their interactions, and even their facial expressions at such close range is mainly considered a beneficial potential, increasing the intensity of the experience for many. Seeing the musicians so closely also made it possible to feel in a way physically close to them: “[…] the focus on single players, details, almost bodily closeness”* [C35].

Close-ups allow the musicians’ music-making process to be observed more precisely, bringing the audience closer to not only the players but also the music itself: “I experience close-ups in a way that I am not only closer to the people, but also to the music. A nice intimacy emerges”* [C143]. The closeness to the music was also considered helpful in understanding the music and its “emotional shifts,” thus supporting both an analytical and an emotional listening, intensifying the experience: “You develop much more feel for the emotional developments and changes in the music. The music experience is much more intense”* [C315].

The visual approximation of the close-up shots thus conveyed a feeling of closeness to the performers. The performers’ playing and bodily interactions could be seen more clearly, and this gave the participants the feeling of actually being close to them. By being closer to the performers, they also felt closer to the music. As these quotes exemplify, the additional layer that close-ups contribute to the experience is often described with superlatives (e.g., “much more intense”) or metaphors, further emphasizing the importance and unusual dimension that they generated.

However, by intensifying the experience, close-ups can also “distract the eye”* [C307], eventually leading one to concentrate more on the musicians than on the music: “[…] I paid more attention to the musicians (their way of playing, the coordinating gestures they gave to each other) than to the music”* [C115]. Furthermore, while they enable closeness to a specific musician, the others become ignored. Some wanted to see musicians not currently in the shot: “As a listener, you might find interesting precisely the part that is played by a musician who is not shown”* [C30]. This comment implies a highly attentive kind of listening that is somehow restricted by the visual dimension.

A similar issue is pointed out by the remarks coded in the subtheme gaze obligation from T1 that describe the guiding of the gaze through the framing of the cameras. The listener is constrained to looking at what the camera is focusing on, determined by the video editing. It is perceived as a lack of freedom to visually concentrate on elements of one’s own choosing: “[…] you also would want to look somewhere else”* [C167]. The camera decides which instruments to focus on, even if these are not the ones the listener is interested in: “You cannot decide for yourself, which musician to follow and when”* [C160]. The lack of the task to look around during the concert—that is, an active gaze direction—also leads to distraction from the music: “I just need to slightly move the head to look from one musician to the other. I need a task to pay attention to the music, otherwise I do things on the side”* [C16].

The camera’s transitory focus on certain musicians is also related to the use of multiple camera angles, giving different visual perspectives on the performance, as described by references from the sub-subtheme camera perspectives and direction from the subtheme camerawork. Changing between angles during the concert gives additional points of view and a more dynamic visual perception: “[…] there’s not only one fixed point of observation […]”* [C32]. Similar to close-ups, these transitions are perceived and considered in a whole range of ways. Depending on one’s taste, they can be perceived as balanced and calm, but they can also distract from listening to the music: “The constant changing of point of view, of shot size as well as the camera movements were disturbing. I had to close my eyes very often to be able to concentrate on the music” [C150]. Nevertheless, the multiple cameras made it possible to see the performance from wide-ranging viewpoints, breaking certain conventional borders between audience and stage: “[…] as if you could see beyond the stage toward the concert hall”* [C112].

Inevitably, using this potential also neglected and constrained other aspects, such as perceiving the ensemble as a whole: “I would have preferred seeing the whole concert from one single/fixed point of view […]” [C150]. Constantly adjusting viewpoints also prevented a deep involvement in the music and reduced the listener’s freedom of choice: “I find the shot changes very disturbing, they keep me from the music and prevent me from freely moving my gaze (in a concert, I don’t change seats every 1–2 minutes)”* [C16]. When considered altogether, the camera direction was perceived and judged rather negatively, with expressions such as “too harsh,” “simple,” “boring,” and “conventional,” suggesting a “disrupted” concert experience.

The camera direction and variety of camera angles, providing, for example, a more intimate perspective from on stage, also contributed to the visual closeness made possible through close-ups. Physical closeness to the performer, which is ordinary to live concerts based on co-presence, was thus turned into a heightened visual closeness to the performer. Additionally, the high number of references to close-ups indicates to what extent the audience was aware of the potential this type of camera shot held for the experience.

Heightened visual closeness contributes to an enhanced visuality of the performance, which generally has a significant impact on the experience (e.g., Thompson et al., 2005). Mostly, though, such enhanced sensory perception is made possible through both the audio and the video renditions of the performance, as acknowledged within the few remarks from the subtheme audiovisual quality (“Through the video images and the very good sound […] I was very involved with the Beethoven [piece]”* [C235], “The acoustic and visual closeness to the musicians makes the differences”* [C27]). The overall high quality enhances sensory perception both in terms of quality and quantity, thus “optimizing” the concert experience: “The concert experience at home with good speakers and repeated close-ups, where I was able to observe many things in detail, stimulates me more in comparison to a real concert. I am sitting in the best possible place with the best possible impressions, so to speak. I can therefore listen very carefully and also perceive a lot”* [C67].

As described by the remarks coded to the subtheme sound quality from T1, the recording provided a high sound quality. For many, it was superior compared to a live concert (“I heard the music in a much higher quality in this form, compared to hearing it from the seat that I can normally afford”* [C173]) but for some also inferior (“[…] through the membrane of the loudspeakers – direct hearing is still something else”* [C89]). A high sensory experience of the sound was possible through using headphones: “Because of listening with headphones sometimes the music, especially the composition of Brett Dean, was properly ‘in my head,’ in a certain sense in the skull itself. A unique sensation”* [C115]. However, hearing the music better also implied hearing more ambient noise than usual: “Noises from the musician’s clothes and breathing came out disproportionately clear in the recording”* [C117].

Participants often mention the type of technical equipment they utilized to attend the concert, such as headphones and speakers, sometimes praising their suitability and other times pointing out their flaws and distractions deriving from them. At times the type or good quality of the equipment can intensify the experience, as suggested in the quotations above. Accordingly, we can assume that, depending on the participants’ equipment, high-quality media has the potential to enhance the whole (visual and auditory) perception, instigating a certain kind of visual and sound immersion in the performance.

A sufficient level of quality in the sound rendition can trigger a “hi-fi experience” that gives the possibility of “capturing listeners’ attention to details of the sonic reproduction” (Volmar, 2018, p. 404). This is an immersion in the sound as implied by the participants, which could be further enhanced through using headphones. Besides, as Adorno (1963/1976, p. 369) observes regarding the radio: “the technologically mediated [sound] gains a corporeal proximity which the immediacy of the live performance often denies to those whose goal is a concentrated reception.” High sound quality has the potential to enhance the understanding of the musical work.

Bringing a listener closer to the performance can also affect commitment, in this case channeling concentration on the performance. The ability to reach higher levels of concentration allowed participants to feel more committed to the concert in general. We can speculate that this is especially true for, and therefore positively judged by, those participants focusing more on the perception of the performance (i.e., seeing better and hearing in more detail) than on other frame components or dimensions, such as the venue or belonging to an audience. This commitment could be further assisted by directing the gaze from wide shots to close-ups and through different camera angles, offering quantitively “more” to see.

Directing the gaze through multiple cameras is meant to replicate the audience’s “wandering eye,” as argued by Auslander (2023, p. 39) in regard to television and its potential to replicate the live experience of theater. During the streamed concert, cameras also directed the gaze to single instruments involved in performing important parts of the music at that moment. This technique relates the visual dimension to the music heard and can support the experiential dimensions of analytical listening and intellectual stimulation developed from the quantitative questionnaire results (Wald-Fuhrmann et al., 2023, p.5), sometimes enabling what participants refer to as “understanding.” Some remarks, coded in the sub-subtheme relation to music, indeed describe how the camera direction coherently relates to the musical structure in different ways. Participants perceived the camerawork as coherent with the musical structure (“Camera direction close to the musical score”* [C73]). Other details perceived in this regard include the shots’ tendency to emphasize the single instrumental voices (“It was fantastic that one could often follow the single voices through the camera direction”* [C165]) or specific structural features of the music: “The camera direction helps me understand better, more than in an actual concert, the structure of the piece, sequences, distribution of the voices, and so on”* [C31].

The camera directed the gaze not only on details of the performance but also on details in the concert hall, which were therefore magnified: “I paid more attention to the colors of the socks and shoes and found it unprofessional that the musicians played from worn copies. I probably wouldn’t have noticed these things in a live [concert]”* [C171]. At the same time, these details can also be appreciated for their aesthetic dimension: “I found the idea of the red socks in contrast to the red shoes fantastic!”* [C101]. Also prominent were details concerning the stage (“The music stands, the microphones, an empty bottle, the red shoes, broken strings [sic] from the violin bow […]”* [C162]) and the interactions between the musicians (“[…] to see the musicians and their traits (both the personal and the way they played music with their instruments), thanks to that the musical experience was intensified and deepened”* [C138]).

Overall, the visual accompaniment related to the performance further enriches the close reading already supported by the high-quality sound rendition. As such, video recordings have even more potential to enhance understanding of the musical work. At the same time, since the gaze direction is dictated by the camera, it can have the opposite effect, taking over one’s active involvement of looking around and therefore reducing the commitment to the concert in general.

The digital mediation of the concert not only altered the sensory perception of the performance but also affected the perception of other audience members and the sharing of the experience; that is, the social connectedness (subtheme audience, n = 33). Both the audience perceivable on the video, attending the concert on site, and the digitally attending audience are considered. The audience’s visual and auditory perception is not an intrinsic aspect of the streaming medium, unlike the subthemes relating to the sensory perception of the performance. It is rather mediated through and depends on the situation created due to the digitization of the concert. Remarks on the audience represent the relevance of the social dimension of the concert for participants. Some report perceiving the absence of other audience members, while others emphasize the elements that marked the on-site and digital audiences’ presence. The talk format had relatively more references coded in this subtheme (14 out of 33). Presumably, the composer’s personal introduction led the participants to reflect more on the presence of others during the concert.

The audience attending the concert in person was not physically co-present but nonetheless perceivable mostly through the applause heard in the recording. In this regard, a few participants expressed their irritation: “[a]nd it annoyed me that the audience could only be seen as shadow […]”* [C119]. Yet, perceiving the in-person audience in some way, particularly through applause, mostly conveyed positive feelings: “It was nice to feel part of the audience, also digitally and time displaced, to hear the applause, also to see the reactions of the musicians”* [C43]. The applause of the in-person audience constituted a relevant means for sharing appreciation or even for replacing one’s own physical presence at the concert: “The audience was basically in my place in the hall and applauded for me”* [C133]. It was enough to trigger a sense of togetherness with other audience members.

As expected, the heard applause could not entirely substitute the social experience of a live concert, as other studies have shown (e.g., Onderdijk et al., 2021), and neither could it replace the “value of ‘Being There’” (Radbourne et al. 2014). In general, not being physically co-present made participants feel less like they were sharing an experience with others “It the [sic] feels more like a shared experience which adds to the pleasure” [C25]. Other than the applause, the background noises and other signals of other people’s presence that can interfere with concentrating on the performance were mostly missing. Although, for some, this was an advantage: “[…] I liked this streaming very much, especially the fact that I wasn’t disturbed through other audience members (coughing, chatter, candy wrapper rustling, look at mobile phones) […]”* [C301]. Accordingly, a kind of “virtual” togetherness was made possible, characterized by the audience’s (heard) positive feedback on the one hand and the lack of disturbances on the other. This could be further complemented here by the opportunity to partake in the experimental concert, which participants often explicitly mentioned in the comments with thankful words (coded in the theme questionnaire and study gathering all remarks concerning the questionnaire or the study often directed to the researchers).

The possibility to socialize with other participants was a central frame component of the social-event format of the concert, where physical presence was literally replaced by the virtual presence of other participants. The chat offered the possibility to enhance the feeling of togetherness, including in ways not possible at live concerts: “The big advantage of this variant was the exchange with other interested participants. It wouldn’t take place like this in an actual concert hall”* [C185] (subtheme virtual social dimension, n = 30). This exchange was appreciated depending on the participant’s expectations of the concert. Many of the participants perceived it rather negatively. The chat implied a situation that, for many, led to an obligation to interact with others: one single virtual space was shared by all the participants, not a physical one where they could spread out, keep distance, and decide whether to be present and engage in conversations (“This constant invitation to behave in a certain way in certain places was a bit exhausting for me”* [C195]). Nonetheless, sharing one’s own and hearing others’ opinions could constitute the feeling of a shared experience and the awareness of others’ presence during the concert and therefore enhance the overall feeling of togetherness.

In addition to an altered experience of togetherness, not being physically present at the concert hall implied a different situational framing of the participants’ concert experience. As for the broadcast experience in general (Baade & Deaville, 2016), the mediation of the concert on a monitor screen relocated the concert into one’s own home and provided a particular kind of accessibility to and control over the concert. These are affordances depending on the situational conditions and are represented by those subthemes that are not linked to the technical aspects of the digital frame but rather depict the affordances of the participants’ environments. These subthemes are: concentration and distractions (n = 24), parallel activity (n = 16), comfort and accessibility (n = 14), and freedom and control (n = 14).

The remarks coded in the subtheme comfort and accessibility acknowledge how the streaming entails flexibility in terms of the place and time of attending the concert, giving the possibility to be in places not easily reachable: “I would have had to drive very far to experience a concert of such quality!”* [C4]. The concert involves less effort to be enjoyed: “You can make new discoveries without much effort (musical works, composers, musicians)”* [C107]. One is also able to choose the right time to enjoy the concert to one’s own liking: “[…] you can listen to the concert when you’re relaxed and awake and not in the evening tired from work”* [C328]. The relocation of the performance into one’s home also gives the possibility to watch the concert in the first place, increasing accessibility to the concert for everyone, including those lacking resources: “[…] recorded concerts are good, when you don’t have time/money to be there in person […]”* [C160].

The more informal environment of one’s home provided the freedom to abandon certain etiquette (“[…] no dress code”* [C320]) and behavioral conventions (subtheme freedom and control). This scenario can have positive effects on the experience (“[…] that I’m not subject to certain etiquettes (sitting still, not humming, not moving, or similar), enhances my feelgood factor and my attention”* [C67]) and offer behavioral freedom (“[…] at home, you can jump and dance with Brahms […]”* [C172]).

The informality was accompanied by a certain freedom of control that arose from the concert reproduction itself, as one can stop the recording whenever one wished: “I could make a break at any point and stop the concert briefly, without disturbing anyone”* [C164]. Similarly, it was possible to replay parts: “[…] I can hear again, go back and deepen things already heard”* [C24]. This control could also convey a further element of comfort: “[…] you have no sense of shame when turning it off if the concert is not for you”* [C302]. At times, though, it can in fact convey too much flexibility and offer possibilities that, for some, are not appropriate for the context: “Unfortunately, the temptation to leave or to fast-forward during a minimal loss of concentration during concert streams is extremely high”* [C11].

As the comments also make explicit, the participants’ level of commitment to the concert also depended on the situational conditions. Bringing the concert into one’s home enabled participants to set up personalized concert situations. These eventually affected the level of concentration or enjoyment, for example, due to their informality, which in turn impacted the level of general commitment: “They facilitate not being totally concentrated on the music, because of my own mistakes (not putting aside the mobile phone, distraction in my apartment, and so on)”* [C95] (subtheme concentration and distractions). However, the domestic environment fostered intimacy and also offered the possibility to concentrate more on the performance (“to have fewer distractions”* [C277]), allowing for exclusive dedication to the concert (“I really enjoy listening to music alone in my own home without having to tune in to anyone or anything other than the music”* [C270]).

In this way, the immersion in the performance can also be favored by specific situational conditions, beyond the enhanced sensory perception made possible through the technological equipment. As it emerges from the data, not only is immersion (i.e., a deep involvement) possible through full concentration on the performance, supported by a lack of surrounding distractions, but it also could be fostered by the presence of other visual components or even dedication through multitasking. In remarks from the subtheme parallel activity, some participants suggest that multitasking can constitute a distraction or alleviation from full dedication to the concert: “[…] distraction and multitasking at an online concert are unavoidable […]”* [C279]. However, others point out the possibility of informing oneself about the music during the concert, enabling a higher level of commitment: “[…] clarifying terms not familiar to me with the help of my smartphone (e.g., Epitaph), without getting too distracted from the music”* [C10]. Being in a private concert situation gave participants the possibility to engage in parallel activities without distracting others or going against certain etiquette. Interestingly, these activities also can support engagement in the experience overall: “During the concert I could knit, and yet I was immersed with my thoughts in the music, or even because of that. Nothing distracted me”* [C12].

The experience situation depends on a specific concert frame as determined by the participant, reminiscent of watching television. In this respect, Auslander (2008a) argues that the viewing areas that viewers construct in their homes are characterized by “both absolute intimacy and global reach” (p. 16). Similarly, the digital concert, with an actual stage and renowned performers, was relocated into one’s intimate and private space. Along these lines, intimacy is a dimension made possible due to the situation itself and further sustained by the visual closeness provided by the camerawork. Hence, in their private space, participants were more independent and in charge of their commitment to and immersion in the concert, as it was not predetermined by and channeled through the venue and its attendant etiquette.

Many participants compared their digital concert experience to other musical experiences they had previously. The digital concert was a recording of an actual live concert, and this was perceivable through many components, including the on-site audience and the concert stage. For the participants, the digital concert brought to mind mainly memories of live experiences but also other media sharing common characteristics with digital concerts, such as audio recordings. Some implicit comparisons also emerge in the theme whole concert (n = 104), containing more judgment remarks on the concert in general. However, the explicit comparisons that build this section are gathered in theme 2 (comparisons with other musical experiences, n = 176).

First, the significant prominence of live performances in participants’ minds is highlighted quantitatively through the subtheme references to live experiences (n = 91) from T2. This subtheme gathers all explicit references to in-person concerts, here indicated as “live,” and considers only remarks overtly mentioning these concerts. References are counted only once for each participant, meaning that 91 out of 341 participants explicitly mentioned live concerts. Participants used these concert experiences as benchmarks to better describe aspects of the digital concert experience or to make a direct comparison. Live experiences are described in rather general terms, mostly as incomparable to and irreplaceable with a digital concert (“A ‘spell’ comes into being for me only through a live experience with real people and a real hall”* [C27]), but also as similar: “digitally it is not much different than in a concert venue: I preferably close my eyes to listen carefully to the music”* [C33]. Many of the remarks coded in this category are double-coded elsewhere, because, in comparing the experiences, the participants introduced other topics.

Second, participants also delivered qualitative insights into aspects of the concert experience that they were missing or did not experience as greatly as at live concerts (coded in the subtheme dimensions missing, n = 69). Live concerts are generally not overtly mentioned but rather implied. The single sub-subthemes representing the dimensions do not contain a large number of coded references quantitatively speaking, but they represent aspects of live experiences important to participants that should ideally be involved in all concert experiences (see Table 3).

Some missing tangible aspects, such as the rituality of a live concert, can lead to a different perception of the event: “The concert loses something of the character of the ‘singling out of the daily routine,’ similar to a church service”* [C89] (sub-subtheme Ritual, n = 5). However, it is particularly the dimensions described in more abstract terms that participants use to gauge their digital concert experience. These include the atmosphere (sub-subtheme Atmosphere and ambiance, n = 17), described in terms of its specific “aura,” made up from a mixture of senses: “[…] the ‘aura’ of a hall, the background noises, the smells are missing, and so on”* [C273]. The atmosphere also enables specific sensations (sub-subtheme bodily and sensory experience, n = 12). In this regard, participants sometimes generally refer to a general sensory “resonance” and other times more specifically mention the smells or background noises that are all part of the atmosphere of a concert: “[…] acoustic, smells, noises and movements on-site in a particular hall”* [C72]. Some also described more abstract sensations that can be felt through the body: “The joint breathing, the sound (the vibrations) in the bones, cells to feel […]”* [C300].

Other missing dimensions refer to the impossibility of immediate (physical) presence at the concert: “[…] the immediate experience, the presence is not replaceable”* [C277] (sub-subtheme presence and immediacy, n = 7). Co-presence entails unpredictability, which creates part of the tension of the concert: “Part of the tension of an analog concert consists in the reciprocity between stage and hall: unpredictable things can happen any time from both sides […]”* [C213]. Consequently, the energy, which can be transmitted from the music and the musicians only through their physical presence (i.e., “without mediation”), is lacking in a digital concert: “The energy and intensity don’t get transferred in a digital concert”* [C287] (sub-subtheme energy and intensity, n = 7),. Neither do the “oscillations”* [C335] or an “exchange of energy between musicians and audience […]” [C286] take place (sub-subtheme interactions with musicians, n = 9).

Finally, comparisons of the digital concert to listening to the radio and audio recordings referred mostly to the visual dimension (subtheme comparisons with other media, n = 16). This can affect one’s dedication to the concert: “With the video it is easier to dedicate yourself to the music than with the sound source only; there the distractions are stronger”* [C108]; “With the radio it’s different, because you ‘must’ only listen and you can dedicate yourself to other things”* [C172]. Staging elements visible in the concert hall also contributed to emphasizing the perception of a digital concert as an event, leading to a more concentrated experience: “[…] because the framework is a bit better set and it gives more importance compared to when one listens to music ‘only’ in the background”* [C142].

Theme 2 thus represents a type of affordance built on previous musical experiences, which is not directly linked to the digital medium itself, but functions as a lens through which the digital concert is evaluated. The comparisons also reveal expectations and common practices defining a personal sociocultural understanding of the context, which ultimately influences the ongoing experience. This creates a feedback loop composed of both previous experiences and the ongoing experience.

In line with Auslander’s (2008b, p. 115) concepts of internal and external mediation, we can categorize the first three kinds of affordances as part of the internally mediatized experience; that is, the experience that depends on internal mediating aspects that make up the ongoing experience of the performance. As discussed, this ongoing experience includes not only the performance on the stage and its audiovisual mediation but also all other situational frame components, and thus the perceivable surrounding environment. Participants’ previous experiences, on the other hand, constitute externally mediated experience; that is, the experience that depends not on elements of the performance itself but on embedded social factors. In effect, this “external” experience becomes internal as soon as it plays a role in the ongoing internal experience.

These two levels of mediation are also implied in Scannell’s (2016) distinction between live immediate experience and lived accumulated experience. Importantly, they depend on one another. Previous experience filters and channels experiential dimensions; that is, it has an impact on the extent to which different dimensions emerge and are perceived by the listeners during the concert. Thus, while the digital frame triggers expectations derived from specific previous experiences, as in a feedback loop, for instance, the effect of close-ups is emphasized because it is more common to not be able to look so closely in concerts. Similarly, distractions from one’s surrounding environment are perceived in a heightened manner against the standard music-centered classical concert situation, which usually requires and favors the highest level of dedication.

While accumulated musical experiences influenced participants’ perception and experience of the concert, it is also true that features underlying live experiences—that is, features triggered by the physical co-presence of audience and musicians—can be individuated in the experiential dimensions of digital concert experiences. The concept of liveness is understood in a broader sense, referring to phenomenological experience rather than the pregiven condition of spatial and temporal co-presence. In this way, liveness can result from the perception of a listener’s multifaceted connections: with the other audience members, with the performers, and with the performance itself. These connections can develop at different strengths throughout the course of the experience, not only through physical co-presence but also in a digital context.

Accordingly, we can individuate a corporeal liveness (Sanden, 2013), mediatized and remodeled through the closeness provided by the camera close-ups and the enhanced audio quality. This closeness, allowing one to perceive the interactions between the musicians and eventually imperfections, gives the listener the possibility to sense an unpredictability, an oft-debated feature of liveness (e.g., Georgi, 2014; Roselt, 2020). Similarly, the musicians’ interactions and engagement, but also their inaccuracies, in the process of music-making convey a higher awareness of the human process necessary for music production, a concept discussed by Philip (2004, pp. 47–48) in regard to the advantages of recordings of live performances over studio recordings. Taken together, these factors enhance the sense of an imagined presence behind the sounds heard, bringing the listener closer to a physical presence.

This specific kind of togetherness also conveys a sense of community, which is seen as one of the core advantages of live experiences over recordings (e.g., Auslander, 2008a, 2023; Gracyk, 1997). At the same time, the feeling of intimacy that can result from physical co-presence in the live setting is emulated and made possible in the digital concert through both the enhanced visual closeness to the performers and the transfer of the concert into one’s own personal space. As such, intimacy constitutes a feature of experiencing performance in general (e.g., Pibert, 2022). Finally, there is a commitment specific to digital performance, afforded by the cameras’ shifting direction of focus/gaze, environmental distractions, and a time-flexible accessibility. Through these aspects, the listener has the feeling of being there, shifting their focus of attention, and being, to varying degrees, absorbed with, connected to, and, ultimately, live at the concert performance. At the same time, through headphones, enhanced quality and volume of sound reproduction can offer a way to be “transported (mentally) ‘elsewhere’” (Keightley, 1996, p. 169). To use Benjamin’s (1970, pp. 14–15) words, the aura emerging in the “Here and Now,” implied in the unrepeatability of live performance, becomes in the digital concert an aura scattered between the “Here, There and Now,” relying on the singularity of a multifaceted self-constructed situation.

We collected the data for this study during the COVID-19 pandemic. The lockdown restrictions greatly affected people’s lives, reducing opportunities to socialize and attend any kind of performance. This specific time frame most likely influenced the participants’ concert experience and comments. The digital concert gave them the opportunity to attend a music performance at least remotely, nostalgically reminding them of the feeling of attending live performances and potentially enhancing the appreciation for attending the concert in general. As the results show, participants were ready to accept missing dimensions because the digital concert experience was “better than nothing” when considering the sudden cutback in in-person concerts.

Acknowledging this context, we created the opportunity in the exit questionnaire for participants to leave open comments regarding their digital concert experience, which has proven fruitful for understanding the diverse effects of mediatization on the musical experience. The open and unguided mode of free field comments made it possible to capture unforeseen aspects of the experience not covered by the quantitative questions. Although the comments are short and often do not express phenomenological experiences in depth, their frequency and the patterns they bring to light make explicit how an audience’s aesthetic experience during a concert acquires distinct qualities through the digital medium. Through analysis and interpretation of the data, supported by inter-rater reliability measures, we were able to identify affordances specific to the medium, which mediate the sensory perception of both the performance and the audience and make the relocation of the performance experience possible. Hence, the results underscore the importance of qualitative approaches to investigating audiences’ musical experiences.

The affordances were extrapolated from the coded comments by leaving out the valence of the participants’ judgments; that is, whether an affordance was described as positive or negative. We coded missing dimensions as such, in order to highlight the participants’ comparisons with previous experiences. Regardless, five main experiential dimensions that were shaped by digital affordances were found to come into play and eventually influence the whole aesthetic experience: closeness, intimacy, immersion, togetherness, and commitment. Generally speaking, the visual potential of the camerawork as well as the audio and video quality provided additional features and were acknowledged by the participants. The social connectedness to others fell short for those who saw the experience as a concert experience. For others presumably valuing more “solitary” experiences of music, more typical to recordings, this shortfall did not represent a limitation. Having the concert brought into one’s home was considered a relevant commodity but “not comparable” with an in-person concert experience. Understandably, the digital concert enables another kind of experience with its own particular characteristics. Finally, we discussed how feelings of liveness—not relying on physical co-presence alone and whether consciously perceived by the participant or not—can be conveyed or even enhanced into this mediatized form of performance.

Overall, this research inquiry presents a novel framework delineating multifaceted affordances and their impact on experiential dimensions, thereby providing valuable insights into digital concert experiences. The findings show that digital concerts enable distinct listening experiences. They are not entirely perceived as actual concerts, when comparing them to traditional onsite ones because they lack dimensions audiences are familiar with and are not willing to abandon. Nonetheless, some dimensions may become more prominent, such as the intimacy made possible in one’s private space, and others manifest differently (e.g., the closeness to the performers transitions from being spatial to being visual). In this way, the findings support and emphasize the claim that how musical experience is framed in a specific context is just as crucial as what is being listened to. This context is interdependent with the medium through which music is experienced.

The audience comments including remarks to some extent related to the medium were more numerous than remarks that concerned the actual concert, such as the music performed or the performing musicians. The diverse topics were spontaneously raised by the participants; that is, they weren’t explicitly included in the quantitative questionnaire. Apart from providing an understanding of different aspects of subjective musical experiences, the frequent acknowledgment of the medium alone points out the importance of considering such medium-related issues in future research designs. Research questions taking into account visual proximity to performers or gaze guidance through video cameras in connection with music perception could be addressed.

The participants’ free choice to leave any kind of comment can be limiting: it provides unsystematic and scattered data within a selected large participant sample. Also, the quantitative questionnaire completed before the open comment section not only further temporally separated the concert experience and free reflection on the experience but also may have biased the content of the comments, by suggesting topics to the participants. Regardless, the qualitative approach suggests further directions for research. Free-form comment sections and more extensive free reports could be systematically integrated as part of mixed-methods research designs in studies on concert experiences. Furthermore, qualitative data may inform the development of more quantitative approaches to empirical research on digital or aesthetic experiences in general, for example by including specific item batteries considering the outlined affordances.

Altogether, our findings contribute to the understanding of an actual audience’s musical experience, which is shaped by the implications and technological progress of current society. The very large range of participants’ reactions towards single aspects of digital concerts, from extremely positive to extremely negative, indicates the divergence of how new media are perceived in the context of an art form, such as Western classical music, embedded in strong traditions. As such, on the one hand, the findings support the feasibility of digital concerts becoming part of the broader offer of more and more artists and institutions. On the other hand, they point out possibilities for digital concert design as well as the application of certain frame components affording specific experiential aspects in hybrid forms of classical concert performances. Consequently, our findings further suggest the potential to address different types of audiences, from those who enjoy having their gaze directed towards details of music-performing actions to those longing for elements from traditional settings, such as background noises of a concert hall. In short, new media technologies can be employed not only in case of necessity or missing alternatives, such as during lockdowns, but also to discover and cultivate new possibilities to create novel performance spaces and reach new types of audiences.

The authors received funding for the data collection from the Volkswagen Foundation, under the grant for Experimental Concert Research and Digital Concert Experience. We wish to thank all our colleagues from the Experimental Concert Research group for their valuable suggestions.

The authors have no known conflict of interest to disclose.