Live or studio recording?
Oct 31, 2008 at 5:38 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 29

Seamless Sounds

Previously known as HeadFi Fanatic
Joined
Oct 25, 2008
Posts
655
Likes
23
Location
Chicago
What's your preference when listening to music?

As an arranger, I prefer studio recording because I find it easier to transcribe music this way. In a live recording everything seems meshed together and it isn't flexible for the composer to make tweaks to their music.

On the otherhand, I prefer live recordings for orchestras and classical music. Seems more natural this way.

Overall I still prefer studio recordings.
 
Oct 31, 2008 at 6:05 PM Post #2 of 29

krmathis

Head-Fi's Most Prolific Poster
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Posts
34,764
Likes
76
Live for sure.
But only when its done properly. Keeping the noise down to a sheer minimum, but capturing the dynamics and depth of the music.
 
Oct 31, 2008 at 6:10 PM Post #3 of 29

acidbasement

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jan 29, 2007
Posts
1,292
Likes
16
I agree with krmathis. Live is best when done right, but downright atrocious on rare occasions. In the metal genre I find live recordings are often substandard, probably due to the higher volume in the room. For bluegrass and jam rock, you cannot beat the energy of a live recording, aside from being at the show yourself.
 
Oct 31, 2008 at 6:33 PM Post #4 of 29

Nocturnal310

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Posts
3,588
Likes
33
I prefer Live performance to Recording of any kind.

biggrin.gif
 
Nov 1, 2008 at 5:05 PM Post #5 of 29

progo

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 14, 2007
Posts
1,592
Likes
14
Studio is the fidelity, but sure a good live recording is finest at best. Studio can be overprocessed, yes. There are some records that sound better at live just because they aren't compressed whereas the studio master is a brickwall. And the spirit is usually very good with live recordings. Voted for studio still.
 
Nov 1, 2008 at 9:47 PM Post #6 of 29

jonathanjong

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 4, 2008
Posts
4,041
Likes
12
I voted Live, but there's a caveat: It's not just recording-dependent (e.g., keeping crowd noise down), it's also artist-dependent. Some artists just don't perform as well live as in the studio.
 
Nov 2, 2008 at 3:40 AM Post #7 of 29

feNcheL

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Posts
231
Likes
11
I went for Studio, because in my experience, the voice of the singer starts to fatigue pretty soon and makes everything rather unlistenable.
 
Nov 2, 2008 at 8:12 AM Post #8 of 29

chadbang

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 2, 2001
Posts
5,993
Likes
30
Studio - of course, a LIVE TAKE in a studio. I mean, this is how most of the audiophile recordings come into being. Jazz muscians don't do multitracking in general. It's cue up the machine and "lets go" for another take. If it's a non-overdubbed recording done in a studio, is it a live recording or a studio recording? Miles Davis "Kinda Blue" Live or studio? Well, its a mix.
 
Nov 2, 2008 at 2:44 PM Post #9 of 29

miscreant

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 12, 2006
Posts
293
Likes
12
studio-live.
so everybody can be 100% making 1 music for that 1 music.
 
Nov 9, 2008 at 6:59 PM Post #11 of 29

tjohnusa

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 5, 2006
Posts
1,537
Likes
16
Quote:

Originally Posted by punk4trev /img/forum/go_quote.gif
it depends...sometimes a band sounds awesome in the studio, but sounds awful live..lol.


I second that....Aerosmith live is sooooo loud I walked out after a couple songs. I voted studio but love Gentle Giant's Playing the Fool and Be Bop Deluxe Live In The Air Age.
 
Nov 9, 2008 at 7:07 PM Post #12 of 29

Happy Camper

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Posts
9,043
Likes
260
Location
STL area
The live recording, if all else being equal, allows the artist more creativity in the song. While I will buy the studio issues, I won't necessarily get the live editions. As has been mentioned earlier, some bands just can't play to a crowd. Those that do will be who I buy live.
 
Nov 10, 2008 at 1:16 PM Post #13 of 29

paaj

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
2,139
Likes
22
Location
Amsterdam
if done right, live is best. It has the right energy.
Ever listened to the Sepultura - 'Chaos A.D.' cd? some versions have two live songs at the end, awesome.
And Tool - 'Salival'. It illustrates how it gives the musicians the room to do something different.
However, I voted for studio because it seems harder to do live right and I don't often find live recordings that are better than the studio versions.
And some 'studio' versions listen just like a good live recording (or maybe they are 'live'... ?) eg Albert King with Stevie Ray Vaughan - 'In Session', Art Blakey - 'Moanin'.
 
Nov 14, 2008 at 5:41 AM Post #14 of 29

Libertad

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 20, 2007
Posts
1,062
Likes
147
Studio is nice for all of the production effects but nothing really gives your that sense of fun a live recording does. Now not all of them do this right (example too much crowd noise) but if done right it just has that magical feeling to it that i just can't put my finger on that really makes your headphones shine and get your feet tapping.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top