The conundrum of live performances of classic records

[hermes1]

This is a thread to discuss why I find the performances of classic records so wanting in real life. I am specifically referring to the verocai and axelrod performances that have happened in the last couple years but this could apply to many of the classic records that I love that were recorded in the 60s and 70s. First off, this is not meant to disparage the hard work of those who made these performances happen, its amazing and i am grateful that they did this.

however, my issue has to do with the actual sonic quality of the performances. i guess my gripe is why is it that a live performance of the verocai and axelrod recordings sounds so clean and borderline "world muzak" live ? dont the musicians understand that the reason why these records became so big and crossed over was due to the raw heavy drums and the gritty symphonic quality of the original product ? i mean if i had heard the verocai and axelrod recordings from the way they are performed live now i would have never been into those records.

has anyone else not noticed this ? i feel like its the big elephant in the room that none of my collector friends wants to talk about because the happiness of seeing those records performed live outweighs the fact that the drums, the vocals and many of the parts just lack the verve and soul of those original pieces.

another question of mine is that is it possible to have musicians and equipment that would recreate as closely as possible without sounding like some muzak version of the og ? you know what im talking about, those bright poppy studio musician sounding drums with no real depth, the hollow string sections and the vocals that really fail to rise ones emotional state like the original did.

btw,. i know this is soul strut and i expect some snarky comments but would really appreciate some sober objective response to my question. bottom line is that the verocai and axelrod records mean alot to me,hence my strong response to the live "sonic" quality of these performances.

here are some live videos to get an idea of what im talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8titCZgwW78

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LVj7Elh7Z8

 

[fishmongerfunk]

i kind of hear what you're saying.





steely dan still uses a rhodes in concert and without one it would just be weird sounding and thin. then again, dudes like stevie wonder proabbly haven;t touched the keys of a rhodes piano in 25 years and probably for good reason. alot of those anologue instruments are clunky, the action isn;t always so hot, and the range of sounds available may be more limited.





also, i think its sort of about who is the artist is now even if they are reinterpreting their older material.





essentially, i am not sure what i think about this but i guess if you want absolute fidenlity to an original then just put on the record and turn out the lights.....

 

[PABLO]

 

[hermes1]

i dont require "absolute fidelity" but i would prefer for the drums ( a huge reason why these records are big ) would be warm, thick and dense, not hollow and tinny. this doesnt just apply to the drums btw, its mostly everything, the guitars, the poppy studio bass lines that end up sounding like bela fleck ugh. also i think the strings on the verocai performances were great the other stuff sounded like a "world band" you hear in barnes and noble .

 

[jaymack]

i def feel ya. but i wouldnt go into a verocai or axelrod show expecting replicas of the albums sounds. those are hard to capture live, nevermind in a studio.

 

[day]

A lot of what you're talking about has to do with equipment and the engineering on those records. They're not gonna run everything through an analog board and record it to tape to make the drums "bang". I mean, I understand your point, but it's just not realistic.





The sonic limitations of that time are what most of us love, but best believe if they had pro tools back then (or an SSL 9000 etc. etc.) everyone would have used it. I'm just thankful it was documented at all.





face + melt





http://music.vtechphones.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/14-flying-to-la-128kps.mp3

 

[hermes1]

day said:A lot of what you're talking about has to do with equipment and the engineering on those records. They're not gonna run everything through an analog board and record it to tape to make the drums "bang". I mean, I understand your point, but it's just not realistic.





The sonic limitations of that time are what most of us love, but best believe if they had pro tools back then (or an SSL 9000 etc. etc.) everyone would have used it. I'm just thankful it was documented at all.





face + melt





http://music.vtechphones.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/14-flying-to-la-128kps.mp3




So you are saying Verocai and Axelrod could not recreate the sonic experience of the OG record even if they wanted to ? Or are you saying that even if they wanted to it would cost too much money ? Also, how is it not realistic to want to recreate the very record that brought you back from the dead 30 years later ? Remember, my point is that if we had heard the Verocai and Axelrod recordings with those instruments that are shown on the youtubes above no one would be creaming over those records. If anything, most of us would call it passable "contemp jazz" brazilian and symphonic music. My suspicion is that Verocai and Axelrod dont realize that much of the "soul" for lack of a better term is lost in the live performance when they have these "studio sounding" instruments and players

 

[Brian]

hermes1 said:So you are saying Verocai and Axelrod could not recreate the sonic experience of the OG record even if they wanted to ? If you had the same room, equipment, musicians, and engineers, and everyone did their job the exact same way they did it the way it was recorded, you sure could.

 

[Hawkeye]

Let me start this with a confession that a lot of people disturbs when I bring it up in conversations: I hate live concerts !!!!





I'm a sound fetishist, I cant stand the weakness of the non-manipulated real sound of bands.





Thats the reason why I listen to Rap music, it is made out of samples, and when it is performed live the main sound comes of a record, sounding the way it should sound.





BUT





What people like me have to understand is that for most other people it is not about the sound, for them it is about composition.





Thats why kids can listen to bad sounding mp3s on their mobile phones, without any bass, it doesnt matter to them.





And for most non HipHop musicians I met it is the same. Bob James told me he cant understand why everybody sampled the cowbells from Mardi Gras. He said to me "Why arent these people take a cowbell by themselfs and replay the pattern and record it ??".





It is the SOUND.





For people like me it is the composition AND the sound which makes a great record. A great composition can be destroyed when its presented in weak sound.





Now here comes the problem.





WHAT is weak sound ??





Ask a guy who is audiophile and he will probably tell you how weak and destroyed the stuff sounds we listen to.





So hermes1 can the sound be recreated live ??





1.


Yes it could, but first you need people who are aware of this "problem". And like I showed you, most people do not care like us.





2.


It will never 100% be like the sound we know ffrom the studio recording, but it would be no problem to let it sound shitty like it should be.





So I cosign hermes1 and I cosign Gabe Roth with everything he wrote in this article, especialy what he wrote in the Intro:

For those who want to digg deeper into the sound of funk I recommend both articles of Gabe Roth regarding the recording of Funk.





Article 1: How to play Funk (The one shown above)


http://westtownrecording.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/shitty11.pdf





Article 2: How to record Funk


http://westtownrecording.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/shitty2.pdf





Peace





P.S.


By the way, there are great recordings of live concerts which sound very well shitty !!!

 

[disco_che]

I'm sure the raw sound we want to here in these performances could be recreated even live. Hearing people like The Poets Of Rhythm, The Boogoos, Radio Citizen or The Qualitons perform live in the last years proves that to me. The main point is that these musicians come from the same background as "we" do, they grew up with rap and sampled sounds and they're striving to recreate certain sound asthetics as close as possible. Also most of these musicians play original equipment from the 60s and have but as much effort in learing how to sound right as they did to play right.


But I guess finding a whole orchestra consisting of 60s70s sound purists with vintage equipment would be close to impossible.

 

[knewjak]

Recreating the sound and feel of the old records is not that hard of a task. The issue at hand is that they are dealing with modern studio players who are hired because they can read on sight, and get the job done without messing up.


If these performances were a regular thing (ie a tour) I would like to think that more time would have gone into recreating the sound better. However, the players they use are not cheap, and when it appears to be a one off performance, you are lucky to get a few rehearsals and then its showtime. Remember, the promoters/producers of these shows arent doing it for 'the love', they are there to make money.





Regarding equipment. Yes, that shit makes a huge difference. I'm not saying the bass player needs an original 1965 Fender 'P Bass', but using flatwound strings, a foam mute, and a B15 amp would not hurt either.





One other example of a live recording not working is the Galt MacDermot 'Live in Nashville' (featuring Pretty Purdie and Bad Bascomb). That combination sounds sick right? but the end result is the biggest smooth jamz phat funk turd fest you can possibly imagine. They might has well hired Les Claypool and Chad Smith to do that shit. But again, the reason behind the show in the first place is not to make some wonderful homage to a classic LP, it is to get paid.

 

[hertzhog]

knewjak said:Remember, the promoters/producers of these shows arent doing it for 'the love', they are there to make money.





But again, the reason behind the show in the first place is not to make some wonderful homage to a classic LP, it is to get paid.




People do stuff for reasons other than money, too, you know.

 

[knewjak]

hertzhog said:knewjak said:Remember, the promoters/producers of these shows arent doing it for 'the love', they are there to make money.





But again, the reason behind the show in the first place is not to make some wonderful homage to a classic LP, it is to get paid.




People do stuff for reasons other than money, too, you know.




yeah, but lets be real. They would have done it right otherwise.





But lets just say the producers weren't just 'in it for money'. They made the mistake of hiring players who obviously were. Think anyone on that stage had heard an Axelrod LP before the show?

 

[Otis_Funkmeyer]

I think it's pretty tough to recreate the effect of tape distortion and plate reverb in any live situation, let alone the sound of vinyl.

 

[Horseleech]

This thread is well on it's way to winning the Most Misconceptions Per Square Inch Award.

 

[day]

I know I made a flip comment up there, but the bottom line is there are just too many variables to exactly re-create what you hear on a record live. Brian already laid it out above. I think the bottom line is people just don't care to make it sound "old". They care about the actual music. Not to mention it would be a major pain in the ass to record.





And as far as doing this for money...just how much of a profit do you think they're making? I doubt there's a huge market for semi-obscure artists from other countries who recorded in their prime 40 years ago. Not to mention flying them out, hiring musicians etc. etc. I can tell you that Miguel Atwood Ferguson is not in this for a paycheck. There was heavy financial sponsorship from VTech to make this happen (read: social branding ala :scion.

 

[day]

knewjak said:hertzhog said:





People do stuff for reasons other than money, too, you know.




yeah, but lets be real. They would have done it right otherwise.





But lets just say the producers weren't just 'in it for money'. They made the mistake of hiring players who obviously were. Think anyone on that stage had heard an Axelrod LP before the show?

 

[48volts]

Im an engineer who has mixed many legendary jazz cats, and have been involved with a lot of recordings of them. The mix that is released as a recording is multitracked at the gig, with extremely high end mics, then mixed professionally and mastered at a studio. It is not the mix you would hear in the room. On most professional released live recordings, everything is double mic'd then split for the house and the recording, meaning the house gets mics that are made for stage which reject more sound giving you better feedback control, and the recording can get studio quality mics for tracking. Sometimes we share for things like vox, but usually things like the drums, bass, piano, are split or have mics up that the house isn't even seeing.





So that is the clean polished sound you are referring to. Its was edited, mixed and mastered, just like a studio recorded release. And this is how most labels want it. I prefer gritty more "live" recordings like a 2 track off the board, but for any release now and days its just doing what the gear and technique have led us to. Those old recordings are just dated gear and recording techniques, which are favorable to us, aren't really preferred by commercial mixes.

 

[pcmr]

 

[batmon]

If an artist wants the audience to re-live the album, why not just step on stage w/ a record and play it. I think its silly to expect a duplication of the studio exp on stage.