Klarinet Archive - Posting 000178.txt from 2007/05

From: X-BakerBotts-MailScanner-tom.henson@-----.com
Subj: RE: [kl] R. Kell revisited
Date: Tue, 22 May 2007 16:00:38 -0400

Hi Lelia,

I have to chime in here and agree wholeheartedly regarding your comment
about how music in the past was recorded. Tony may be a good source to
give an insight as to just how much or how little the recording of
ensemble music in the studio has changed. I know there are others that
have studio experience as well that could comment including Ben Maas.

The equipment today is bound to be all digital, but in the past it was
strictly analog. Either recorded directly to a wax master or to tape.
The equipment itself was the limiting factor and most likely the reason
recording straight through a piece was the practice and the norm. I am
sure that some could argue that this required a higher level of skill or
consistency than we generally find today. With digital equipment, it is
now very easy to take many sessions and combine them into a single
edited "performance". Even out of tune notes can be "adjusted" digitally
to make them in tune if they are on a track by themselves.

I have only had a few actual experiences in the studio myself while a
member of a military band in Germany back in the mid 1970's. We went
into the 60 track studio in Frankfurt well rehearsed, believe me. We
were told that studio time was much too valuable to not get it right the
first time. Even then, each player was hand picked for the part they
played and the clarinet section was reduced down to just 2 persons per
part sharing a microphone between them instead of the usual 4 per part.

To say that we were apprehensive would be an understatement, and I must
say, we all felt the pressure of doing a "live" recording. Did we make
mistakes and have to do retakes, absolutely. But they were few, thank
goodness, and the end result sounded as "live" as it could be with the
available equipment.

Of those clarinetist that have true "live" unedited recordings out
there, one of my favorites has to be Harold Wright. His series of 5 CD's
that are available on the Boston records label (by Wayne Rapier) is a
real eye opener in my opinion. I have listened to these recordings using
headphones and with great attention, straining to hear every detail. I
never cease to be amazed at not only the musicality of these recordings,
but of how well they display and preserve his wonderful sound. If he
sounded this good from a recording that was made using not state of the
art equipment, I can only imagine how he must have sounded in person,
live. Are there audible mistakes, yes. That is what makes it "live". But
they are few and far between. You can even hear some air leaks in the
slow and soft parts. But, his consistency and refinement really comes
through.=20

Another example that I feel is worth listening to, but for different
reasons, are the CD's put out by Larry Guy . While these CD's are just
excepts recorded from vinyl lp's, they also preserve the live sound of
Daniel Bonade and Ralph McLane. Two clarinetist from the same time as
Reginald Kell.

Tom Henson

<< Lelia Logan wrote:=20

Technically, this set is an excellent job of cleaning up records half a
century old. Evidently, Reginald Kell was Mr. Reliable in the studio.
There's nothing here to remind me that during his career, recording
sessions included far fewer re-takes than today and record production
involved fewer splices and engineering clean-ups. >>

------------------------------------------------------------------