Klarinet Archive - Posting 000564.txt from 1999/10

From: Bill Hausmann <bhausman@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Funny Nielsen recording
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 1999 07:39:00 -0400

At 09:00 AM 10/19/1999 +0100, Michael Whight wrote:
>What does this tell us about the state of recorded music then? Please do not
>start to tell me about living in the real world. Having been involved in the
>making of several hundred CDs I am not naiive but I hope we can look past
>the current marketing to a better way of presenting music. When I suggested
>in an earlier posting that the problem with recordings is that they are too
>permanent it is not as silly as it sounds. If you record music on to
>cassette tape from radio say, it is easier psychologically to erase and move
>on. CDs are presented usually to form part of a permanent collection.
>Perhaps with the advent of music files on the internet our habits of
>collecting performances will change so that we don't try to capture a single
>performance for all time as a general rule but look to re-record frequently
>so that we get a broader view of music. How many people have you heard going
>to a concert saying " it doesn't sound like my CD at home". They only know
>and accept one possibility.
>>
This, of course, is a major concern in JAZZ recording, where solos are
often completely different every time the piece is played. Multiple
recordings are then a very nice luxury, but require the musical maturity to
accept the versions different from the familiar. Not everyone has it.

Rememeber back in the old days (1920's, 30's, 40's) when a songwriter would
write a song and everybody and their brother played and recorded their own
arrangement of it? Often two or three COMPLETELY DIFFERENT versions would
achieve "hit" status simultaneously. Nowadays, the performing group writes
the song, records it their way, and that is that (greed for royalties, I
think). "Cover" versions are done primarily to fill dead space on albums.
Maybe this is evidence that you are right!
>

>>
>> Going to a concert is a totally different experience than listening to a
>> recording. A whole different set of rules apply. The interaction is what
>> gives us a sense of energy in a performance. On a recording, there is NO
>> interaction. Therefore, people are less willing to make excuses for
>> mistakes.
>
>Then all recordings must be dead performances if they do not engage?
>>
Your assumption is that the recording process destroys, rather than just
inhibits, the creative process. Actually, I should think the ease and
perfection of modern editing techniques actually allows much GREATER
freedom to take risks, since the player knows that failures can be edited
out. The pressure of one-take direct-to-disk recordings could be VERY
stifling, yet I have heard some fine ones - jazz ones, too! I guess if the
players are confident enough in their ability, the pressure does not bother
them.

Bill Hausmann bhausman@-----.com
451 Old Orchard Drive http://www.concentric.net/~bhausman
Essexville, MI 48732 http://members.wbs.net/homepages/z/o/o/zoot14.html
ICQ UIN 4862265

If you have to mic a saxophone, the rest of the band is too loud.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org