 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
67.160.130.12
In Reply to: RE: Ya want live and unedited, go to live performances. posted by Rick W on November 10, 2011 at 20:33:41
shouldn't record it until you can. A mediocre pianist, given enough attempts, can play small passages of extreme difficulty. Put them all together, and you have a very different recording than this artist could pull off "live."
It is cheating and its widespread, almost universal, adoption doesn't lessen that.
What does a thoroughly edited version of a sonata tell us? Hell, the engineer should be credited as highly as the artist.
Follow Ups:
if it wasn't written in a single stream of consciousness, without pause? If you want live performance go to a live performance.
And not just for classical music. Elvis was famous for demanding numerous takes before accepting something that could be released on record.The great Hungarian pianist Annie Fischer recorded the complete Beethoven piano sonatas one section, and sometimes a few bars, at a time, not moving on until she had something she was satisfied with. She wasn't even done with the editing when she died, but fortunately her great and famous set was released anyway. As a flute player, I can tell you that Jean-Pierre Rampal was well known by insiders to do very heavily edited records, most of which are still regarded as definitive. He was great live, too. Richter disliked the recording studio and most of his large discography is from live recitals. However, most of his repertoire was recorded repeatedly so one can pick and choose among various versions.
IMHO, a mediocre musician will never produce a great recording, no matter how much editing is done. Editing is needed in part because slight imperfections that do not harm and can even enhance a live performance become irritating when heard over and over in exactly the same places. Of course, some live recordings are so outstanding and/or historic that one lives with the imperfections.
[Ed. - And IMO the above applies to jazz as much as any other genre.]
Edits: 11/11/11
I like the idea of unedited, but it's just not a realistic expectation most of the time. Even some of the most highly regarded classic jazz recordings have obvious cuts and edits in them. Certain errors or problems in an otherwise great performance have the potential to become cloying when listened to over and over, and artists have to be sensitive to that. So they are.
dh
As I posted in another thread (I think it was last year), if you can't play the piece, then no amount of editing is going to make it sound as if you can.
How many edits is ok for a symphony, or should only 100% live/unedited symphony performances be recorded?How about 16 piece big bands? Only 100% live/unedited ok? Only 100% live/unedited opera recordings? No edits acceptable on a recording of Bach's B Minor Mass? If some edits are ok - even on a piano sonata recording, I repeat, exactly how many before its one too many and becomes cheating?
Do you have any idea how many recordings AA inmates love that were actually recorded in sections - with the rhythm section laying down tracks on Monday, the horns on Tuesday, the strings on Wednesday, and then the vocalist coming in on Friday? Obviously many recordings utilize techniques that require editing - surely you wouldn't suggest the Beatles shouldn't have "cheated" on Sgt. Pepper for example.
I seriously doubt you have experience playing/singing/recording, let alone PAYING for recording. Were every recording done sans edits the cost would be prohibitive. I'd bet you have utterly no clue how many edits are on many recordings you own, and love.
Can you name 10 musicians/groups whose recordings you like that have never performed live? With a tiny % of exceptions musicians/groups perform live, and regardless of how great their "cheating" recordings may sound, if they suck live their careers don't normally go very well.
Please tell us which pianists you've heard (more than once - anyone can have a bad performance occasionally) whose playing sounds great on recordings with "cheating", but sounded very different - much worse - when you heard them live playing the same pieces.
Edits: 11/11/11 11/11/11
Pianist records exactly as you describe it and says 'Sounds pretty good, doesn't it?' His old-school colleague replies 'Yes. Don't you wish you could play like that!'
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
