Julian Bream EDITS

Discussions relating to the classical guitar which don't fit elsewhere.
Luis_Br
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:50 pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Luis_Br » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:37 pm

Yes, but did Bream edited it? I think it is more of a bad edit than a playing fault. Reason some players prefer editing themselves, because it is also a musical decision sometimes.

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 1671
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:40 pm

Luis_Br wrote:Yes, but did Bream edited it? I think it is more of a bad edit than a playing fault. Reason some players prefer editing themselves, because it is also a musical decision sometimes.
No, JB would not have been responsible for the physical act of taping two bits of recording tape together. In this instance, it seems to me that two sections from different takes were joined at that top note of the scale. Quite possibly it was the only edit involved.
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)

Luis_Br
Posts: 2187
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:50 pm
Location: Brazil

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Luis_Br » Wed Apr 19, 2017 5:44 pm

Yes, my question was a kind of rhetorical one. I agree editing was hard in the old days, it is much easier today with pure software, so players are generally more involved nowadays. Sergio Abreu, who is extremely perfectionist, did his solo album editing even in the old days, by hand. But he took a long time to release it...

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 1671
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Wed Apr 19, 2017 6:03 pm

Luis_Br wrote:Yes, my question was a kind of rhetorical one. Editing was hard in the old days, it is much easier today with pure software, so players are generally more involved nowadays.
Well the player might have been physically present before - I think there was a reference somewhere to Bream saying something the effect 'there's a good take on that bit of tape over there' - and they might well still be present in front of the screen now.
I seem to remember that Bream had a team of two, and they all shared the same initials - the recording engineer and the producer as well as he. I think all three would have been involved in the editing, the engineer actually wielding the blade.
It occurred to me listening to it again just now, this time with studio headphones (DT100s) that there might be a couple of other places where an edit happened, and it seemed to be where there was the tiniest bit of out-of-keeping timing. That's the issue with the place that has been mentioned, where it seems the top A at the end of the rising chromatic scale is reached a fraction earlier that you would, plus perhaps a mismatch in the resonance across the edit. I imagine the editor would have used the 45 degree cut on the editing block, but then again if there wasn't time, and it had to be the 90 degree cut that would emphasise the inevitable if slight difference in underlying resonance. The point about that being that although its a rising chromatic scale, those notes will be throwing off harmonic resonances (there was a thread about this recently!) and the precise level of that sound as the two bits of tape are joined might be the issue.
Also on the exact timing thing, its way easier to experiment and move your audio round in a digital editor. I suspect analogue editing was probably more or less done in one go, replying on experience, but that would make it likely for tiny less than ideal moments to creep in.
I do know a bit about cutting tape because many moons ago - the 1980s - when I was involved in some audio things, that's exactly what we did. You had your tapes, some sticky tape (white so you could spot it coming) a razor blade, and an edit block with a gulley for the tape and three cut channels, straight across in the middle, or 45 degrees either way on either side. If you can use the 45s it helps blend the longer, often background atmos (short for atmosphere) sounds which back then included tape hiss, as well as microphone and mixer self-noise and any background noise. The only things I edited in an intensive way were spoken word scripts, editing out mistooks etc and I recorded some guitar things but in one take, then editing the pieces together into a single tape for ease of copying onto cassette. I don't think it occurred to me to try to edit round fluffed notes or join together different takes.
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)

goingeasy
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2017 8:49 am

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by goingeasy » Fri Apr 21, 2017 3:18 am

PeteJ wrote: Recording is not performing.
Well said! Actors get to do multiple takes until he/she gets it right. Then all the good pieces are spliced together to get a perfect performance.

PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by PeteJ » Fri Apr 21, 2017 11:56 am

Ha. You brought back some memories, Stephen. Bits of tape all over the studio and trying to make sure all the ends were joined in the right order. Editing was a real adventure then. I once did a session as a player where the producer edited out parts on the multitrack, not cutting the tape but cutting out slots in the tape. That was impressive. Some pop producers would do this to cut down on tape noise. editing each part tight to the beginnings and endings. Nothing impressed the punters like cutting up a piece of tape and re-assembling the track to improve the structure. It was like magic to the uninitiated. No fun to get it wrong though.

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 1671
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Fri Apr 21, 2017 1:09 pm

PeteJ wrote:Ha. You brought back some memories, Stephen..... I once did a session as a player where the producer edited out parts on the multitrack, not cutting the tape but cutting out slots in the tape.....
Golly, have never heard of that! :shock:
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)

glassynails
Posts: 5542
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:20 am
Location: Westbrook, Maine

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by glassynails » Fri Apr 21, 2017 6:20 pm

Glassynails doesn't do edits. I play live good or bad!

Editing is cheating!
"GLASSYNAILS" on Youtoob for my "no edit" - "no fakery" audio recordings. Just me, my Alhambra 7p spruce, and an Olympus ls-10 portable recorder.

Mr Kite

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by Mr Kite » Sat Apr 22, 2017 8:41 am

When I'm listening to a recording, I generally want to hear the best possible version of the piece. I don't care if it has been put together by cutting and pasting from several different takes. Sure there's a place for recordings of live performances, and in that case this kind of editing would be cheating - but otherwise I don't see it that way.

At the same time, it's good to be reminded that even the pros don't get it right every time.

User avatar
MattPM
Posts: 52
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 11:11 pm
Location: Scotland, UK

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by MattPM » Sat Apr 22, 2017 12:36 pm

The more obvious one to me was at 3:56 on the posted youtube clip.

PeteJ
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2016 12:52 pm

Re: Julian Bream EDITS

Post by PeteJ » Thu Apr 27, 2017 12:25 pm

glassynails wrote:Glassynails doesn't do edits. I play live good or bad!

Editing is cheating!
If I record a simple piece that needs no edits it's like winning the lottery. I'm not sure it's ever happened but sometimes I settle for what it is. Recording is often about creating a public and permanent record and eschewing editing is not a good plan for pleasing the listener unless you're a tip-top player. I think sometimes folks don't realise how much work goes into recording.

Jackson's 'Billy Jean' was recorded with some of the best musicians and engineers available in the world. They mixed it 92 times in search of perfection, ending up with one studio-wall hidden behind stacks of tape boxes. This is not editing but the principle is the same. Anything for a great sounding recording. (In the end they used the second mix).

Recording is often cheating but that's just the job. There might be an argument against editing live performances.

Return to “Public Space”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Aaron Powell, Cipher, CommonCrawl [Bot], fast eddie, Nick Clow, Sprucetop, SteveL123 and 16 guests