Is recording in sections cheating?

Creating a home studio for recording the classical guitar. Equipment, software and recording techniques. Amplification for live performance.
User avatar
Denian Arcoleo
Composer
Posts: 6166
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 3:39 pm
Location: Somerset, England

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Denian Arcoleo » Wed Jul 15, 2015 8:36 am

Rusty is simply being logical.

Arts Category A
Films are made by recording the parts and then editing them together; so are classical (including guitar) recordings.
Books are are made by writing and then going back and editing until the finished product is as close to the authors concept as possible; so are classical recordings.
Paintings by gradually building up and editing until the final result is what the artist had in mind; so are classical recordings.

Arts Category B
By contrast theatre performances, live concerts and dance shows have no such editing option, although all of that kind of work tends to be done beforehand in rehearsal (the exception being improvised performances).

The audience for category A works interact with the art through an artefact (celluloid or digital film, book, painting or sculpture) The audience for category B interact with the work by being in the same space as the performers and witnessing the performance.
In my view category A are all essentially the same in their MO. Likewise for category B. But A and B are different from each other.

User avatar
Tom Poore
Posts: 1129
Joined: Fri Aug 25, 2006 4:00 pm
Location: South Euclid, Ohio, USA

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Tom Poore » Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:00 pm

If the editing of audio recordings upsets someone, then this will raise hackles:

Search Youtube for "Rumores de la Caleta" (1971)

This apparently live performance is actually a video synched with Parkening’s studio recording. I’ll bet this was and still is very common. I recall many years ago watching The Mamas & the Papas performing on a television variety show. While they were “singing” Cass Elliot was eating popcorn. She wasn’t subtle about it.

Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA

User avatar
Stephen Kenyon
Teacher
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:26 am
Location: Dorchester, Dorset, England

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Stephen Kenyon » Thu Aug 06, 2015 11:15 pm

Tom Poore wrote:If the editing of audio recordings upsets someone, then this will raise hackles:

Search Youtube for "Rumores de la Caleta" (1971)

This apparently live performance is actually a video synched with Parkening’s studio recording. I’ll bet this was and still is very common. I recall many years ago watching The Mamas & the Papas performing on a television variety show. While they were “singing” Cass Elliot was eating popcorn. She wasn’t subtle about it.

Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA
Not questioning, but I wonder what reason there is to say this?

Its a bit different with pop and the like, in terms of miming?
Simon Ambridge Series 40 (2005)
Trevor Semple Series 88 (1992)
Louis Panormo (1838)
Alexander Batov Baroque Guitar (2013)
Simon Ambridge 'Hauser' (2018)

ronjazz
Posts: 764
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 11:10 pm

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by ronjazz » Fri Aug 07, 2015 8:05 pm

A recording is a big lie; even "live" recordings are often sweetened and fixed in the studio. A solo guitar recording is exactly the same as a movie in that the goal is repeated experience, and the flaws must be minimized in order to achieve that goal.

There are precious few solo guitar recordings that are not manipulated since the invention of tape recording. And there is absolutely no reason to eschew the technology available to create a satisfactory (to the artist and producer) result.
Lester Devoe Flamenco Negra
Lester Devoe Flamenco Blanca
Aparicio Flamenco Blanca with RMC pickup
Bartolex 7-string with RMC pickup
Giannini 7-string with Shadow pickup
Sal Pace 7-string archtop

glassynails
Posts: 5616
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 4:20 am
Location: Westbrook, Maine

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by glassynails » Sat Aug 08, 2015 1:55 am

ronjazz wrote:There are precious few solo guitar recordings that are not manipulated since the invention of tape recording.
Just about all the "amateur" classical guitar video recordings on YT are not manipulated, save for maybe adding reverb. Most of them are completely "live". I've never once manipulated any of my recordings on YT, they're all done in a live take.

Here's a live recording right here
[media]https://youtu.be/ecN9JEwZZGs[/media]
"GLASSYNAILS" on Youtoob for my "no edit" - "no fakery" audio recordings. Just me, my Alhambra 7p spruce, and an Olympus ls-10 portable recorder.

AndreiKrylov

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by AndreiKrylov » Sun Aug 09, 2015 3:44 pm

I made many live videos... :)
here some of them...

[media]https://youtu.be/BupOkGntGZA[/media]
[media]https://youtu.be/v5JKVyRk-rY[/media]
[media]https://youtu.be/t0_CcogH9Z4[/media]

bikooo3878
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 10:23 am
Location: Cairo

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by bikooo3878 » Wed Feb 07, 2018 6:42 pm

AndreiKrylov wrote:
Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:42 pm
What is recording in general? Is it just a memento of your performance, which reflects the best in your physical and emotional, mental reproduction of certain piece in certain day. frozen in time? Is it like you take part in some kind of competition with others showing that you did reproduce it with minimum or no mistakes at all? That you did not "cheat" on this "exam" or "competition" and did honestly according to your shape, state and age? In other words is it really something very similar to sport performance? Then maybe a music itself is a sport... like heavy lifting or running, jumping etc. and then, sure if you are younger and healthier you could achieve much more result that anyone old and unhealthy...
But... maybe Music is not a Sport, but Art!? And as a piece of Art you could take as much time and "takes" as it necessary to fulfill your conception, finish your structures and details, put colors and nuances, create soundworlds, atmosphere, draw your musical painting using as many technical means as you could in a way in which your listener could relive your experiences and inspiration, to fill your emotions and ideas to share poetry, despair or happiness, love or indifference...
So...is it Sport? or Art?
I'm really inspired of this answer. Never thought of it this way :)

User avatar
Rick Beauregard
Student of the online lessons
Posts: 1287
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2014 5:23 am
Location: Blaine, WA

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Rick Beauregard » Wed Feb 07, 2018 9:38 pm

Simon Powis' latest podcast discusses this. https://www.classicalguitarcorner.com/c ... o-editing/

His primary point is: don't be so hard on yourself if your playing or live recordings don't sound as perfect as the recordings and videos you hear. They're edited. No judgements (not much) on whether its cheating or not.
All this time I thought I was making music; it was making me.
2015 Steve Ganz "Solidarity"
1980 Dauphin D30
1962 Fender pre-CBS P-Bass
National Triolian Uke ca.1930
Almost as many fly rods as guitars
_/) _/)
_/)

AndreiKrylov

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by AndreiKrylov » Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:01 pm

withdrawn
Last edited by AndreiKrylov on Tue Feb 13, 2018 10:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AndreiKrylov

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by AndreiKrylov » Wed Feb 07, 2018 11:02 pm

bikooo3878 wrote:
Wed Feb 07, 2018 6:42 pm
AndreiKrylov wrote:
Thu Apr 23, 2015 1:42 pm
What is recording in general? Is it just a memento of your performance, which reflects the best in your physical and emotional, mental reproduction of certain piece in certain day. frozen in time? Is it like you take part in some kind of competition with others showing that you did reproduce it with minimum or no mistakes at all? That you did not "cheat" on this "exam" or "competition" and did honestly according to your shape, state and age? In other words is it really something very similar to sport performance? Then maybe a music itself is a sport... like heavy lifting or running, jumping etc. and then, sure if you are younger and healthier you could achieve much more result that anyone old and unhealthy...
But... maybe Music is not a Sport, but Art!? And as a piece of Art you could take as much time and "takes" as it necessary to fulfill your conception, finish your structures and details, put colors and nuances, create soundworlds, atmosphere, draw your musical painting using as many technical means as you could in a way in which your listener could relive your experiences and inspiration, to fill your emotions and ideas to share poetry, despair or happiness, love or indifference...
So...is it Sport? or Art?
I'm really inspired of this answer. Never thought of it this way :)
Thanks! Glad if this could help! :)

rpavich
Posts: 686
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:23 pm
Location: West Virginia, USA

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by rpavich » Thu Feb 08, 2018 6:23 am

I just got done reading Parkening's book called "Grace like a river" and he talks about the recording process of a couple of his albums. If memory serves, he did them in one take. Many times it took him many multiple takes to get one that he liked and that others thought was the best one but they didn't splice takes together and he didn't overdub mistakes.
Asturias AST-100-heavily modified by Robert England.

Conall
Posts: 281
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2017 10:26 am
Location: Scotland

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Conall » Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:52 am

Forgive me the following has already been mentioned as I haven't read all 86 posts before me.

A professional studio recording is intended for repeated listening so needs to be as perfect as possible. Nothing irritates more than hearing or predicting a mistake at exactly the same point every single time you listen to the track. I believe it is common to record an entire work of many movements at least 3 times & later the best movements are put together.

A public performance is quite different in that the ambient sounds and general atmosphere is different & exciting as it is happening in front of you. In this situation any mistakes are easily forgotten once over. Truly great musicians will allow live recordings because their performances are sometimes near flawless. But yes, some editing (not splicing, but perhaps attempts at cleaning up buzzes & other non musical noises) will take place.

Home unbroken & unedited recording for analysis purposes is a great idea & gives you a real impression of your strengths & weaknesses.

CliffK
Posts: 99
Joined: Wed Jan 03, 2018 12:42 pm
Location: Virginia

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by CliffK » Thu Feb 08, 2018 11:39 am

Agree with Krylov who said at the outset that we are in the realm of Art. How the professional artist presents himself/herself in live performance on location or in the studio is for them to decide with their artistic judgement. Location and studio are two separate situations. On location there are many issues just as in the studio. Outdoors, indoors, the room and its acoustics, the recording equipment and set up, mics, mic placement, sound reinforcement, EQ, equipment available in the studio, recording and editing tech, so many factors and artistic opportunities as well as challenges.

If the performance is recorded then that is also part of the artistic process which involves modern technology. The artist should be fully engaged in this process to optimize expression and deliver the statement they intend.

A cousin of mine who is an oil painter controls the means of his expression from mixing his own paints from walnut oil and pigment, to making the stretchers, to making the frames. I control as many factors as possible on location or in studio and then in the darkroom when making fine art black and white prints so as to enhance expression. I have cousins who are professional musicians and they are very involved with the recording process in the studio.

The recorded product involves an editing process. Mics themselves have different sound qualities and so they edit. If on location then using sound reinforcement with EQ is one factor. Using modern software like ProTools opens a huge universe for artistic expression. Getting the final artistic statement the artist wants may involve a number of takes if in the studio and considerable thought and effort in the editing. If on location, IMO the artist should be involved as much as needed with the sound engineering process in order to optimize the performance live and any subsequent studio post production.

So sure, the use of modern recording equipment and techniques is a normal valid and valuable part of the overall artistic process to optimize expression and make one’s statement.
Michael Thames 2010 It Spruce/BR
Rockbridge SJ cedar/mahagony 2007, cutaway, inlay

User avatar
Mark Clifton-Gaultier
Posts: 1348
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2009 1:03 pm
Location: England

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by Mark Clifton-Gaultier » Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:08 pm

Conall wrote:A professional studio recording is intended for repeated listening so needs to be as perfect as possible. Nothing irritates more than hearing or predicting a mistake at exactly the same point every single time you listen to the track.
I don't buy recorded music in order to admire the skill of the engineer. I appear to stand alone here but I find that I am indeed more irritated by the coldness of this modern style of multi-edit presentation than by the odd minor error, squeaks (or in some cases even breathing/extraneous noise) - to the extent that repeated listenings simply don't happen.

I recently bought a CD by a guitarist that I've enjoyed live many times and who's performances are full of passion, intelligence and individuality. The CD is simply not representative of their work - what incentive then for me to listen to it again?

I accept that any recording process impacts on the resultant sound - efforts to mitigate this are understandable. I prefer edits correcting performer error to be at least minimal, preferably absent.

rpavich
Posts: 686
Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 7:23 pm
Location: West Virginia, USA

Re: Is recording in sections cheating?

Post by rpavich » Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:43 pm

Mark Clifton-Gaultier wrote:
Thu Feb 08, 2018 12:08 pm
Conall wrote:A professional studio recording is intended for repeated listening so needs to be as perfect as possible. Nothing irritates more than hearing or predicting a mistake at exactly the same point every single time you listen to the track.
I don't buy recorded music in order to admire the skill of the engineer. I appear to stand alone here but I find that I am indeed more irritated by the coldness of this modern style of multi-edit presentation than by the odd minor error, squeaks (or in some cases even breathing/extraneous noise) - to the extent that repeated listenings simply don't happen.

I recently bought a CD by a guitarist that I've enjoyed live many times and who's performances are full of passion, intelligence and individuality. The CD is simply not representative of their work - what incentive then for me to listen to it again?

I accept that any recording process impacts on the resultant sound - efforts to mitigate this are understandable. I prefer edits correcting performer error to be at least minimal, preferably absent.
I'm with you. I don't mind slight errors, they make a performance human and unique. My favorite part of lots of music are the little things that make them special, the part of a Beatles song where Paul drops a syllable, the part where Hendrix cranks a tuner right in the middle of playing...etc.
Asturias AST-100-heavily modified by Robert England.

Return to “Classical guitar recording and amplification”