|
27 Nov 09 - 08:21 AM (#2774822) Subject: Live recording? From: Mr Happy Some albums are labelled 'Live' - what's this mean? |
|
27 Nov 09 - 08:26 AM (#2774826) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: MGM·Lion It means recorded during an actual performance in front of an ordinary paying audience, rather than in a studio with possibility of retakes &c. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 08:32 AM (#2774833) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Mr Happy So a recording in a studio isn't live? |
|
27 Nov 09 - 08:39 AM (#2774836) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Sugwash Ah well, sometimes an artist will say the the album was recorded "live in the studio", by which they tend to mean performed as if 'live' in front of an audience, but in the studio. So no multitracking, overdubs etc. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 08:41 AM (#2774840) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: MGM·Lion Well, when you are in the studio you are not dead, certainly. I think it is short for "recorded in front of a live audience", rather than implying a state of decease within a studio context. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 08:53 AM (#2774847) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Mr Happy Similarly, the label 'acoustic' is used. If it's a recording, how can it be acoustic? |
|
27 Nov 09 - 09:01 AM (#2774848) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: MGM·Lion I think that refers to use of acoustic, rather than directly amplified, instruments. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 09:02 AM (#2774849) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Nick One of the defintitions of acoustic is "Designed to carry sound or to aid in hearing." That's what a recording is isn't it? |
|
27 Nov 09 - 09:03 AM (#2774851) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: MGM·Lion "Acoustic', of a guitar, means non-electric, i.e. not plugged into its own amplifier. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 09:37 AM (#2774865) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: GUEST,Goth necro folkie Permit me to widen and further complicate this 'lively' pontification by introducing the sonic industry concept of "Dead Acoustics" |
|
27 Nov 09 - 10:02 AM (#2774878) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Jack Blandiver I often use the suffix LIVE to indicate that the final mix of particular piece was realised in REAL TIME using the software programme Ableton Live which is designed for performance. Such a piece I did yesterday - in which the various instrumental parts were done separately but that particular version of the piece was mixed as a real-time performance using Ableton. See HERE for further details & download info. Musicians of my generation (& younger) tend not to draw too many lines between performance & recording having been raised as much on Musique Concrete as the archive recordings of Harry Cox. I'm just as happily singing a traditional ballad accompanying myself on a laptop computer as I am using a fiddle. I think I'd be quite happy recording with a wax cylinder too - a real live acoustic recording machine! |
|
27 Nov 09 - 10:33 AM (#2774908) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Leadfingers Went to see 'Fairport Acoustic' some years back - They just DIDNT have Dave Mattocks with them on Drums ! |
|
27 Nov 09 - 10:33 AM (#2774909) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Will Fly If you're listening to something via a recording or broadcast medium - cassette, CD, vinyl, radio, DVD - it's ALL modified in some way or other. By the recording and playback technology of mics, amplifiers, transmitters, speakers - unplugged or electric, "live" or in a recording situation. You could say that the only truly "acoustic" sound is that transmitted directly to your ear with nothing in between but air... |
|
27 Nov 09 - 11:02 AM (#2774926) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: GUEST,Russ If we change the definition of "live performance" or even abandon it altogether, then at some point, when we decide that we want to distinuish various types of musical events linguistically , we'll just have to come up with a new term. Russ (permanent GUEST) |
|
27 Nov 09 - 01:01 PM (#2774986) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Darowyn "Live" or "Acoustic" are examples of those terms which are used as either inclusive or exclusive definitions. Those who believe in exclusive definitions will rule as outside the definition, any performance in which the slightest aspect of recorded material or sound reinforcement is present. Those who believe in inclusiveness, will count as live any performance which is capable of being performed live, even if it was, in this particular case, not performed to a live audience. Similarly an acoustic ensemble might include some amplified instruments, or use sound reinforcement. The difference seems to be intrinsic to the particular personality types who clash here so often. As the song says, "mostly saying hooray for our side." Purely as a personal observation, I would count miming to a backing track onstage as a live appearance, but not as a live performance, and would not feel any reluctance to hear an acoustic act which included bass guitar or simulated acoustic piano produced by an electronic keyboard. I would also far rather hear them through a good P.A. than not be able to hear their unamplified efforts at all. Cheers Dave |
|
27 Nov 09 - 01:10 PM (#2774993) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Stringsinger Some "live" albums are made when the audience applause is "flown in" by the engineer. Also, "live" albums can be edited where the "clams" are removed. As to so-called "acoustic" guitars that are plugged in by a direct box, they don't sound natural like real acoustic guitars. The closest you'll get to that through amplification is with a good condensor unidirectional mic. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 01:12 PM (#2774994) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: michaelr This thread is a wind-up, folks. |
|
27 Nov 09 - 02:05 PM (#2775034) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: Tim Leaning Damn and I was waiting for the fireworks |
|
28 Nov 09 - 12:14 PM (#2775578) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: stallion It is interesting though, Having done the lay one track down at a time, record in a sudio one song one take, and recorded live at a festival. Just didn't get on with the first, ron sang his part, then i sang mine and then martin sang his, didn't enjoy it, lasted two songs then we reverted to singing one song all the way through with three voices, much better. When we listened to the live recording I thought it was much better than the studio stuff, more bounce and intonation had a few glitches with forgotten lyrics but i thought song for song it was better. A friend once said she was exhausted having worked non stop for six weeks on a new cd with all of six tracks on it. It sounds lovely but six weeks. Maybe I ought to make distinction between "this is my artwork" and "this is us" |
|
28 Nov 09 - 12:30 PM (#2775585) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: olddude I figure all of mine are live, since I don't know how to play then go back and sing and have to do it all at the same time it must be live. and I haven't figured out how to dink with anything but the reverb which I tend to put too much on as I sing it must be live. But most certainly because the pain in my back hurts right now a lot so I figure I must be a live cause if I was dead it probably won't hurt ... |
|
12 Sep 16 - 07:26 PM (#3809719) Subject: RE: Live recording? From: GUEST,John Titor From: GUEST,Russ Date: 27 Nov 09 - 11:02 AM If we change the definition of "live performance" or even abandon it altogether, then at some point, when we decide that we want to distinuish various types of musical events linguistically , we'll just have to come up with a new term. "présence saillante"? |