Live music. Overrated.
Here I refer to non-orchestral music.
Oh, and I mean live perfromances of more than one or two instruments are overrated compared to well recorded and reproduced ones.
I will grant that the show/event/excitement aspect of seeing a live gig is absent on recordings, but in terms of sound quality give me good studio microphones, production and good domestic Hifi any day.
Ben
Oh, and I mean live perfromances of more than one or two instruments are overrated compared to well recorded and reproduced ones.
I will grant that the show/event/excitement aspect of seeing a live gig is absent on recordings, but in terms of sound quality give me good studio microphones, production and good domestic Hifi any day.
Ben
Comments
Simply because I'm not confident about making a case that recorded orchestral music can compete on sonic grounds with the listening to the real thing. Largely because I have insufficient experience of both recorded and live orchestral music, and partly because I think the scale, dynamics and quality of the sound of a whole orchestra is more difficult (for whatever reasons) to capture on a music carrier and reproduce through loud speakers.
EDIT: Also, orchestral music is usually Unamplified and so "perfect" sonically.
Ben
But Re. Jazz / pop etc.,... especially vocal stuff, it can be difficult to get a good balance between different instruments. Hence amplification, hence potential/inevitable problems.
Any live performance that is amplified will disappoint sonically.
Unamplified performances may also do so as you may get an earful of just snare drum. Though this is less inevitable if the musicians are good.
I often have been to concerts with less than perfect sound, often down to a venue as much as the PA rig, and have still enjoyed the experience immensely. This for me illustrates the biggest counter argument against the use of room treatments of the sort that manipulate and temper the sounds I want to hear. In a home system, one just can't afford to lose the energy that such treatments seem to sap from the music, even if the end result is more balanced. It is easier to enjoy a live concert in a poor venue than to enjoy the same music on a good hifi.
I agree that there are huge differences in quality between PA mics, amps and cabs. Also, there have been some big improvements in the last 20 years. But, personally, I miss many of the subtleties that I get on my system at home when I'm at an amplified gig. I get all of alan's positive aspects of being at a gig too though.
In the final analysis, i think i'm just a snob for the superior and more fragile mics, cables, mixers, etc.,... that are used in studios.
Home hi-fi may give more detail than a live sound, but one thing it can never give is the real power of a huge PA at a live event. I particularly like electronic music, which reproduces very well through a PA, from the more atmospheric electro of the 70's through to techno, there is something that can not be reproduced at home. Seeing Kraftwerk in 1997 at the tribal gathering, and feeling the bass in my ribs at the start of 'Trans Europe Express' is a treasured memory.
There are other things l like about live performance, as a drummer, studio recordings of modern music are generally done in layers, with the drummer laying down a backbone for the others to add over. This can mean that there is a lack of interaction between the drums and the other musicians, even if the track has be honed live before recording.
Possibly my favourite live performance I have a recording of is Led Zeppelin at Earls Court in 1975. This shows something else that restricts studio recordings, how they are considered acceptable for the commercial market, as opposed to a core of dedicated fans. The track 'No Quarter' had grown from a ten minute studio piece to a 25 minute epic that flits between rock, a classical piano sole, and jams into jazz-rock in the instrumental middle. The same is true of 'Dazed and Confused'.
In this way live recordings can also highlight how a band has got to know a song, and rather than a first impression of an idea, offer a finely honed version where years of performance have allowed the musicians to expand on the songs possibilities.
I must say that I am also a huge fan of improvised music, and somehow the performances of many musicians are better in front of an audience than when improvisation is done in the studio. Perhaps they feel the reaction of the audience and feed off that.
I agree that orchestral, and also other acoustic types of performance offer a much higher level of detail in the sound when seen live than amplified music tends to. Music through a PA I find to be more of an impression of the piece, but is often compensated by the atmosphere of the event, and the intensifying of the emotion.
I also like studio session performances, which sometimes offer the best of both worlds. I wish that more were available.
Another thing I often like about live performances is how the musicians interpret arrangements when dubbing in more layers of the same instrument can not happen. It is down to individual skill to convey the music, and not multiple takes and layers to achieve a cumulative result.
I also like to hear risks taken in performance, and I love when bands meld two or more tracks together, and you hear elements of on track fitted into another as the transition develops. This seems very common in a lot of electronic music, where continuous performances of several tracks are often formed into lengthy live sections. Some bands have tracks that only ever form transitions in live performance, but .do define their live feel, Underworld are one particular example. I am not a big fan of medleys however, I always feel cheated that I only get part of a song, although there are a few occasions where they have been successful, Yes and Queen for intsance.
The one thing I really do not like in live performance is a facsimile reproduction of a studio version, especially when the band is padded with session musicians who have no attachment to the pieces being performed.
I terms of sound quality studio performances almost always offer the best quality, although not always, but in terms of quality of performance both live and studio can offer their own strengths. In general I am happy to swap a little clarity for a lot of spontaneity.
I would also add that it differs from band to band, some I prefer to hear live, where as some I greatly prefer in the studio.
HiFi seems to attract a lot of drummers also, which leads in part to increasing the focus on the interplay between musicians. I used to bash a bit, and Docfoster does also - I expect there are more closet 'animals' even on this two-bit little forum!
I haven't heard that Led Zep recording, I will search it out though. Stand out live recordings/Session recordings might be a really interesting idea for a new thread?
I like the point about some bands being better when live and others better in the studio. It almosts demands a thread of its own...
(Also, I sometimes wonder whether this is why the 1st and 2nd albums of some bands can sound quite different: The 1st album might be a studio recording of the songs that the band has being honing live for years for a live audience, whereas; the 2nd album may contain songs that have been written by the band subsequent to, and in light of, their experience of recording a their 1st album in the studio - all of a sudden the band are thinking in terms of the the audience being on the other side of a music carrier rather than being on the other side of a stage. From my own experiences as an amateur musician I am aware that how and where one percieves one's audience can act on one's musical decision making.)
It's true too that it is disappointing when one sees a band live and they merely run through the staight studio versions of their songs. One of my favourites, Galliano, were always superb at not doing this.
I agree completely that a live music event has an appeal and excitement absent on a recording. No question there. The relationship/dynamic betweem audience and the performers is a phenomenon in itself, and perhaps not an inherently musical one. As well as being an influence on the confidence and performance of the performers as you suggest Jamie, I think it also acts on the minds of the audience - particularly actively participating (clapping, jumping, singing alont to) audiences - to create a particular type of collective euphoria.
The huge pressure levels created by PA systems are impressive and dramatic. Perhaps a bit like your Kraftwerk bass moment, I remember the Charlatans hammond organ liquidising my liver during Sproston Green in 91/92.
I think the squelchy and throbbing sounds of electronic music are so pleasing (PA or hifi) partly because the sounds are liberated from a comparison from any real source. No annoying part of one's brain can whisper to you that a synthesised sound doesn't really sound like that and you need to upgrade your interconnects immediately (as is sometimes the case when listening to recorded vocals, piano, guitar, etc.,...).
Anyway, of course hifi and gig listening are not alternatives. Thankfully there's plenty of opportunities for both in the course of a lifetime! It's the snobbery of some some people (musicians and listeners) about live music that I was reacting against with this thread. Of course I've had wonderful times at gigs, but I've had wonderful (but different) times on my own, in my lounge, listening to carefully crafted recordings. In fact I am driven to tears by my hifi more easily than I am by gig music. I assume this is something to do with the different parts of the brain that are activated by those 2 very different experiences.
I like the way this thread is moving. Thanks for the contributions fellas! Keep 'em coming.
Ben
I wasn't disagreeing with any points above, but merely giving a personal perspective. I do have a love of live performance and have been collecting live recordings for a long time, either recordings radio broadcasts, or as the net evolved, collecting bootlegs.
What is the forum's view on bootlegs? I made an edit of the two soundboard recordings of the last two nights of the Led Zeppelin 1975 Earls Court performances, patching in the section from the Saturday night to cover the gaps (tape changes) in the Sunday recording.
I would be happy to post off a couple of recordings, or discs of Flac files for people to pass on.
Jamie
Likewise. It's a good thread. It's moving on!
Your bootlegs sound interesting!
Ben
The easiest way is to put Flac files on to a DVD with a few shows to burn off to CD, or convert to whatever format they wish for their own use. People could then pass the disc on to someone else to do the same.
I also make artworks for a lot of the recordings I have, and sometimes as favours for others.
Here are a couple of links to my website (please feel free to delete these if you think they should not be on the forum):
http://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/01cdrlist.htm
Bootlegs, sessions, rare recordings (and some artworks) by artist, with links to individual pages for some artists. I can't guarantee being able to find all of these now though, but most are to hand, and there are always more on hard drives waiting to be burned off.
http://www.jamielochhead.co.uk/browse1.htm
Artworks for many of the above, plus a few desktop backgrounds.
There are some listings there that are just for artworks as I tend to not bother with most audience recordings.
The politics of bootleg collecting is interesting, and I largely subscribe to those of one major site 'Dimeadozen'. Passing on recordings that can not be found in any commercial (legal) way FOR FREE is fine. Selling such recordings is not, nor is copying music that has been released officially. Out of print recordings are a grey area.
This is not the view of the BPI, or RIAA, however, but that would only apply to artists under contract to their members, and many artists are not.
Quite a few artists are pro such recordings as they feel that they stimulate sales of official releases, others are very against them, either as they feel they harm sales, or they do not represent the musicians as they wish to be listen to.
I have found that collecting such recordings has greatly increased my music buying as it has exposed me to more music, and that was the case with a poll I ran on the Dime Yahoo group, around 2/3s found it increased their music buying, a few no difference, and a very few it decreased it.
Back on the subject of sound quality there is one particular recording I have of Jean Michel Jarre in 2008 which was made with mics in the audience which is better than may (most?) studio recordings I have heard.
I'll start a new thread for live recordings. When you've thought about it you can start one for bootlegs.
Nice work.
I'd be interested in any recordings that you can recommend and offer. Thanks.
:-)
I think I largely agree with your take on the ethics of bootleg recordings. I suppose if people are buying bootlegs of a particular band as an alternative to the officail recordings of the same band, it might be questionable, but I doubt that this often happens.
Ben