Ethical Recording Practices

[Chris]

With current technology it is pretty easy to edit recordings. To fix a note here and there - even to merge multiple takes together.

Getting note-perfect recordings is extremely difficult. I cannot even fathom going through an entire Sonata movement of moderate difficulty without flubbing at least a couple of notes. Of course, I'm not a world-class pianist.

On one hand, knowing you can fix little mistakes later may make you more inclined to take chances, throw caution into the wind, and really put your heart into everything, producing the most musical and moving recordings.

On the other hand, people who ARE able to get through these difficult pieces without making errors are extremely talented and they deserve the recognition. The difference between really good and perfect is really quite a lot.

What do you think? No edits, small edits to fix notes, or major editing/merging of takes. What is the ethical line here? It seems most artists today make use of at least some editing.

Note that I am not talking about popular music here - that is edited to death and not what I'm talking about.

[Rod]

Originally posted by Chris:
With current technology it is pretty easy to edit recordings. To fix a note here and there - even to merge multiple takes together.

Getting note-perfect recordings is extremely difficult. I cannot even fathom going through an entire Sonata movement of moderate difficulty without flubbing at least a couple of notes. Of course, I'm not a world-class pianist.

On one hand, knowing you can fix little mistakes later may make you more inclined to take chances, throw caution into the wind, and really put your heart into everything, producing the most musical and moving recordings.

On the other hand, people who ARE able to get through these difficult pieces without making errors are extremely talented and they deserve the recognition. The difference between really good and perfect is really quite a lot.

What do you think? No edits, small edits to fix notes, or major editing/merging of takes. What is the ethical line here? It seems most artists today make use of at least some editing.

Note that I am not talking about popular music here - that is edited to death and not what I'm talking about.

If there are edits they must be 'invisible'. I know of some recordings where some of the notes have been cut altogether because of a bad edit!



------------------
"If I were but of noble birth..." - Rod Corkin

[King Stephen]

No edits...
How many concerts, of professional musicians, have been attended where the orchestra or soloist have been off key or hit a wrong note? You cannot edit a live concert no more than you can stop someone in the audience from coughing. So.... perfect recordings through editing, creating an almost steril performance, should be the exception and not the rule. My complaint with live recordings is having the applause at the end of a disc.

[urtextmeister]

I think it is too late to set boundries for recordings classical or otherwise. In my mind, at least, there are two completely separate categories:
-recordings in which everything is "perfect."
-Live performances in which you expect to hear mistakes, memory lapses, balance problems, etc.

I think we have come to expect this ultimate, dream world perfection from recordings. We are addicted to it in a way. It is almost unfair to those who like to perform live.

With digital technology at every's fingertips, even amateurs can edit. I know for a fact that a lot of audition recordings sent to colleges and conservatories are actually compilations of many takes. If done by a student with some expertise, they will never know.
(Don't ask me how I know. I just do).

[Rutradelusasa]

I don't bother with studio fixes, as long as the performers show their greatness in live recordings as well, and those I consider great do. Gardiner recorded half his Beethoven symphonies live, Solti recorded (2nd time) the Meistersinger live, Baremboin Yo-yo Ma and Perlman recorded that amazing Triple concerto and the Choral Fantasia live, Spering recorded the oratorio live too. These are examples of people who do it live and what they record they perform it too, one more reason to buy from them.

------------------
"Aaaaagnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi... PAM, PAM PA RAM PAM PAM..." (Missa Solemnis)

[Gurn Blanston]

I agree with Rutr, to which I'll add the Beethoven Concerto cycle by Pollini BPO/Abbado, recorded on 3 consecutive nights. Mistakes? A few. Virtuosity? Outstanding. As far as studio work goes, I prefer no edits. Some of the great B sonata cycles have generally recognized errors (Horowitz, Schnabel), and they only add to the genuineness of the performance. I greatly prefer that a work be performed "musically" than that it be note perfect, and if that is the case, then edits are unnecessary.


------------------
Regards,
Gurn
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
That's my opinion, I may be wrong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Peter]

Then you have the extreme of Glenn Gould who I think took 2 years to record the Bach 2 and 3 part inventions - virtually every note must have been edited, surely not necessary.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Joy]

That's a little overdoing it! It doesn't have to be perfect notes for me either. I like the performance to be a little more genuine. Wasn't it Beethoven himself who said mistakes every now and then are fine but to play without feeling that's inexcusable. Or words to that effect anyway. I don't have the exact quote in front of me at the moment but I trust you all know what quote I mean.

------------------
'Truth and beauty joined'

[Chris]

Originally posted by Joy:
That's a little overdoing it! It doesn't have to be perfect notes for me either. I like the performance to be a little more genuine. Wasn't it Beethoven himself who said mistakes every now and then are fine but to play without feeling that's inexcusable. Or words to that effect anyway. I don't have the exact quote in front of me at the moment but I trust you all know what quote I mean.

That's true, but in Beethoven's day there was no such thing as recording. Making mistakes in a live performance is not so bad, because maybe the audience hears it, maybe they don't, but either way, it happens and then it's gone forever. In a recording, that mistake is set in stone for all eternity.

[Rutradelusasa]

Originally posted by Chris:
That's true, but in Beethoven's day there was no such thing as recording. Making mistakes in a live performance is not so bad, because maybe the audience hears it, maybe they don't, but either way, it happens and then it's gone forever. In a recording, that mistake is set in stone for all eternity.

Indeed, and not only it's going to be carved there for eternity but good recordings often become not only the memory of a great performance (those who make it) but a model for other recordings and performances too.
In the old days people had someone who knew the composer or was there at a concert oriented by the composer (or in a concert by someone who knew...) but today this tradition has died for there would be MANY people between us and the composers. Thus when someone does a great performance, we wan't to have it because we feel that this is how we would do it or this is how the composer would have wanted it. Thus it should be outstanding, not to say perfect. So that's why (IMHO) there is no problem in people "adjusting" their recordings still in the mixing room, as long as they can live up to what they have released.

------------------
"Aaaaagnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi... PAM, PAM PA RAM PAM PAM..." (Missa Solemnis)

[Rutradelusasa]

... also, many times we don't want live performances issues: coffing, page turning (worse: pages falling), babies, cell phones, sneezes (yes, look and ye shall find...), comments ("you missed that one", "e flat, e flat, e flaaaat!") and other noises. At least CDs don't smell .

------------------
"Aaaaagnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi... PAM, PAM PA RAM PAM PAM..." (Missa Solemnis)

[urtextmeister]

Originally posted by Peter:
Then you have the extreme of Glenn Gould who I think took 2 years to record the Bach 2 and 3 part inventions - virtually every note must have been edited, surely not necessary.

Gould was certainly an extremist when it came to recordings. He predicted that live performing would be become obsolete.

[Chris]

Originally posted by Peter:
Then you have the extreme of Glenn Gould who I think took 2 years to record the Bach 2 and 3 part inventions - virtually every note must have been edited, surely not necessary.

Why does the amount of time involved lead you to believe there was that amount of editing?

[Peter]

Originally posted by Chris:
Why does the amount of time involved lead you to believe there was that amount of editing?

Well firstly Gould had performed the complete 3 part inventions often enough in recitals, and to do the same with the two part was well within his capabilities. He himself said he needed 18 recording hours per album, but this was seldom achieved. After the complete recording was finally achieved in 1964, another 2 and a half years elapsed before release, due to endless improvements to the master tape.

------------------
'Man know thyself'

[Chris]

Interesting. If they spent two years editing, that is indeed ridiculous. It would be very interesting to compare the edited and non-edited versions. I wonder if there are any backups of the original recordings that have been preserved?