Live? not at all...what a rip.
View: thread | inline
-
Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 15 2007 at 10:37pm by This show may be the band looking, and actually playing live in Abbey Road studios, but the majority of what we, the viewers are hearing, is NOT LIVE! Prime example, during Iron MAidens performance of the first song, just before Bruce D. starts to sing the first verse, there is a vocal track, some backwards? type vocal swell, that he is obviously not singing, the camera is on him and his mouth is shut until the first actual word comes out.
The horns on the Gypsy Kings main track...what horn section? Don't say, keyboards, those are real, pre-recorded horn.,
I am assuming that the producers (feel free to answer since you are availalbe on this forum) let us hear some noodling, or vocal type ad-libs, then blend in or replace the live performance with, some type of studio mastered track, whether it is the original version form the record, or another source, it is not 100% live for most of the acts and their songs.
Sorry, this is a complete let down, unless you were raised on the "Top of the Pops" which I was not.
Thanks Victor
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 16 2007 at 2:33pm by Hi I am one of the producers on the show. I hate to dissapoint you but the show is recorded live. The horns on The Gipsy Kings came from their Keyboard player and were performed live with the band . If you don,t believe me then ask the band. There are no tricks , just that we spend time with the acts getting it right .. If it is not right we do it again. The Iron Maiden show is completely live ..they wouldn,t have had it any other way. It amazes me that when the effort is put into giving the musicians the time and the equipment to perform that you think it is all fake. Listen again , this is why this show is different . We actually care ,
Peter Van HookeRE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 18 2007 at 4:10pm by Peter,
keyboard horns...I will accept that. but please explain the vocal track that Bruce Dickinson was not singing, that was playing just before his first verse vocals started.
I honestly think that shawn colvin was live, and Ray L where live, but hey lets talk about Snow Patrol, I heard them live, on another program and they sopunded like...but on here...JUST liek the record.
I would imagine that in abbey road studios anything can sound amazing, as it should.
I would love for this to be all live, but in all honesty, I cannot believe that at this point.
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 16 2007 at 3:32pm by I disagree. I don't listen to Natasha Bedingfield, but her version of "Unwritten" on Abbey Road was amazing. Her passion and talent clearly showed in the live setting. Same with the Gypsy Kings - the guitar playing was outstanding, and you could feel the live vibe flowing.
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 19 2007 at 10:47pm by almost every "live" act you go see at a club or any larger capacity venue play with backing tracks these days. the audience at a show expects to hear something close to what they hear on a record/ CD/ radio. this is the way artists cover such ground. sure, they're probably firing auxiliary vocal tracks (background parts, or effects) and maybe even extra guitar overdubs WHILE performing their instruments "live", even at the taping of a show like "Abbey Road".
i am a recording engineer and producer and i also love seeing and hearing live music. trust me, i can tell from a mile away what is actually being played and sung, and what is being played off an instant replay machine or Protools. I've spent many hours in the recording studio MAKING these backing tracks while working on a record. it is a necessary evil for many artists to perform to/ with tracks these days. however, i don't feel that any of this takes away from their musicianship and showmanship. also, because i am an engineer and producer, i EXPECT tracks that come out of abbey road studio to be nothing less than stellar. so far i am very impressed! whether or not the audio has been edited, overdubbed to, tuned, etc. - i'm sure that's to the discretion of the show's producers - does not effect my enjoyment of what i am hearing and seeing.
all i can say is that a tv series like this, dedicated to showcasing great music, is hard to come by. i hope that the naysayers will not discourage the network or the producers from continuing this series for true music lovers like myself.
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 20 2007 at 7:41pm by Hi Victor.
Keep listening to the programs. You have to understand one of the reasons for Live from Abbey road. It was based on our belief that live music never really has a chance on television. If you happen to be a musician ,which I am ,Live television is about damage limitation ,how do you get to play and perform to your best when you are made to play in TV studios which only are interested in getting you on and off with the minimum of fuss and set up for game or talk shows.. I think the public have been diserviced over the years. Musicians are capable of great performances , but they have to be able to hear themselves and be involved in their performances. Abbey Road is all about creating an atmosphere and giving the creative time to deliver to you something that they have had the time to develop. The whole show is run by musicians and it is why we are so fiercely independant.
Snow Patrol ,again is live / Iron Maiden again is live.
Try and be less cynical, enjoy the music ,we need your support not your suspician. there is some great shows to come ,Dr John...you are in for a surprise there,Wynton another one.
Thanks
Peter Van HookeRE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 22 2007 at 8:23pm by It is a sad state of affairs that anyone would lay criticism (unfounded) on one of the highest quality TV shows focusing on live musical performances I have ever seen. I am a performing professional musician, as well as a recording engineer, and am completely thrilled with this show. I was mesmerized by the recent performances of Randy Crawford & Joe Sample, and David Gilmour and his band. This show clearly displays the joy musicians experience when creating live music in an atmosphere conducive to that process. It may seem strange for some to watch a live musical performance without a screaming live audience, but I am struck that this presentation format so clearly displays that these musicians and singers are artists, in the true sense of that word. To see these artists at the "top of their game", in such a fantastic venue, is virtually bliss producing. Abbey Road is completely living up to the legend, and is providing a sound quality never before enjoyed in live musical performances created for television. To the producers and sponsors of this show, as well as to all the technical people making this show a reality, I want to express my heartfelt appreciation. I watch far more television than I should, so I have logged a lifetime of hours watching shows come and go, and I have never hoped a show would enjoy as much success and longevity as much as I hope Live From Abbey Road does. THANK YOU!!!!
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 23 2007 at 12:02pm by Peter,
Thanks for your patience adn understanding, I am a musician, and more so totally and completely addicted to music and everything that goes along with it, which does include your program. I love the show, and I feel, for the same reasons that you explain you are doing the show, that there is NOT a good showcase for LIVE music on television, at least not here in america, that is why I was left saying, Oh my god when I saw my first promo for your program.
I watched the Amos Lee episode lastnite, amazing brillian performances on the program, I will continue to watch the show regardless of my insecurities of modern technology (pro-tools, editing, all the neccasary evils that make life a reality nowadays) Look back at how dry some of the 70's live television perfoprmances are, thus not leaving a doubt that they are live..
Peter, maybe the old adage applies here...seeing is believeing, I would love to be a guest of the shows to ex[erience first hand how it that you can deliver such stellar performances from your lovely studio to our homes.
Did that work?
If so aweosme I will pack my bags and await my ticket!.
I am not trying to anger anyone here in the forum, and as you can see I have, I just felt like as a music lover and fan of live perfrormances, this show was going to be the absolute best, and I will look at the first few episodes to re-visit my opinions.
Thank youRE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 2 2007 at 8:45pm by Hi. If you are over in the UK let us know. Why don,t you go for the competition on Sundance free tickets hotels the lot!!!
Hope you are enjoying the shows.
Best
peter
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Jul 27 2007 at 9:00pm by The concept of a live show if fantastic. PBS ran one for several years but, to my surprise, it ended.
I am not surprised someone questions the "how live is live" argument/definition. As another stated even during live shows musicians click on their own tracks in order to thicken a performance. The recent Police (over priced) Tour had Steward Copeland doing just that during a song.
I think the real question to ask is how do we reformat the program so it does not have all the commercial interruptions?
I hope to see "live and uninterrupted" as a common theme.-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 3 2007 at 2:47pm by I don't want to wade through all the bitching and naysaying. I for one am very happy with this series, piped right into my home, for free. Any good music is hard to come by, ticket prices are outrageous and sometimes your favorite acts disappoint after you drop $$$ to see them live.
As far as talk shows and even SNL, even my favorite bands sound crap on those showcases. I absolutely hate them, and I hate them being rushed as well.
Thank you Sundance, the artists and everyone involved in bringing this series to fruition. There seems to be something about Abbey Road, is it in the Norwegian Wood ya think?-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 13 2007 at 5:09pm by Interesting... and interesting to read the thoughts of one of the producers of the show. I just watched the performance of Jamiroquai and NOTHING about his vocal performance seemed live and frankly neither did the musicians. The background vocals did sound live at times. but really... I have that single and it sounded pretty much EXACTLY like it. When i compare it to the RHCP performance which was CLEARLY a taping of a live performance by a band. Hmmm.... i-on know about that one...
I guess I would say I'm enjoying the series overall but the performances seem to vary greatly in terms of both quality and live-seemingness...RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 14 2007 at 10:08pm by Finally, someone that is on the same page as me..if nothing else the video editing is not a continuous live shot, it looks like perhaps it is numerous takes edited together..
Again I argue that the intro vocal of Bruce Dickinson is pre-recorded, there is a BACKWAR vocal effect happening into the first verse, and Bruce is shown clearly NOT SINGING the backwards part, but going into the frist lyric which follows immediately after the vocal effect.
Still love the show, James Morrison was great, Dr.John funny as hell, and funky.
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 17 2007 at 8:28pm by jamiroquai are 100% live .You,re wrong .Jay Kay works his band hard and they tour hard. He was truly exhausted after these sessions and his commitment was 110%. The whole concept of these shows is that the artist has the opportunity to keep working until he feels that HE has got what he wants out of the musicians and himself. I know its a cynical world but I was there and its live.
Best
Peter Van Hooke / producer-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 31 2007 at 3:57am by Quote:
jamiroquai are 100% live .You,re wrong .Jay Kay works his band hard and they tour hard. He was truly exhausted after these sessions and his commitment was 110%. The whole concept of these shows is that the artist has the opportunity to keep working until he feels that HE has got what he wants out of the musicians and himself. I know its a cynical world but I was there and its live.
Best
Peter Van Hooke / producer
Ok well thanks (?), nice to know I'm "wrong". I thought I was a viewer expressing my opinion. I didn't make my statement as fact, I said it did not SEEM live. I also certainly never said JK and crew didn't work hard. I've seen him live a gazillion times and his live shows did not/do not sound like what I saw on that "performance". If what you're saying is the case and I assume it is 'cause I have no reason to doubt that you were there, his perfectionism in this case, in my opinion, did him in. Particularly after all what he was saying about "vibe" this and that, I wanted to hear that live, raw, VIBE. Not sloppy and slapdash - because as I've said I have seen them live numerous times and I know JK does not get down like that - but looser, free-er and LIVE SOUNDING.
This brings to bear another question for moi; if it's technically live, but so produced and cleaned up that it doesn't sound live anymore does that still count? Different people want different things, so speaking for myself - no it doesn't. I don't want to hear a recreation of the single in a live performance, I, personally, want to hear an INTERPRETATION. And by that I don't mean a jazz reinvention of a song, I just mean...the uncut funk (to quote George Clinton). I mean, the human voice just does NOT sound that clean and perfect live. I'm not a producer so I can't speak to that, but I am a singer. It's the intonnations, vibratos, warbles, lumps and bumps of a live voice (and live playing) that give a performance - in my opinion - depth and character. And regardless of what did or did not happen at the time of that taping, in the final result you could not hear any of that and hence the performance was lacking for me. That was - and is - the point of my initial post. Jamiroquai was live - fine. Didn't sound that way.RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Aug 31 2007 at 4:59pm by They are a tight band , thats what JK says he likes,things snappy and he is demanding of his musicians to supply that. If you listen to Dr John /ray lamontagne/Amos Lee /Wynton Marsalis you can see that they have a different focus. Thats the beauty of music, and its the central theme of the show that artists can express themselves and focus on what is important to them. Best peter Van hooke
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Sep 13 2007 at 6:18am by DallasReason2,
I think I am understanding Peter's explanation but, likewise, your disappointment makes sense, too, as does your perception of the "enhanced" performances.
From my perspective, it seems that the main point of letting the viewer into Abbey Road, so to speak, is not for the purpose of experiencing every little nuance and every off-note and chord dissonance. If this were the case, we, the audience, would be better served going to see the bands LIVE all the way.
Since they are there for the purpose of recording as opposed to entertaining, we are seeing, ostensibly, the finished product, the point of which is to get the song done perfectly - or as near perfectly as humanly possible.
Since it IS a t.v. show, I suppose it is necessary to supplement certain aspects of the recording effort.
As for Jimiroquoi, I thought he was live. Perhaps some of the background music was superimposed onto the live performance, but by the looks of it JayKay was sweating and dripping when the recording ended. You could see the back of his neck and hair were soaked. I doubt he got that worked up from just lip syncing and swaying with the music.
Not to be critical or sarcastic, but I was simply enjoying being a fly on the wall. Maybe the lesson here is that if you want to see LIVE don't go to a recording studio --- unless it is the very first time that the band has ever recorded the songs that are going to be played in that session. Of course, there are ALWAYS exceptions to both theories.
I thought James Morrison, JayKay and, of course, Craig David were superb - all of them.RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Oct 3 2007 at 5:46pm by It is normal these days to play live with sequencing, sampled instruments and sampled vocals. Should they have been included in the program?
There was a day when punching-in on a track in the studio was thought to be unforgivable, and now some people digitally pull apart and manipulate music tracks by the fraction of a second. Ever watch a live show and hear live backup vocalists or live keyboard players when the record doesn't contain them? I know I have and I don't have a problem with it personally. If it is a sample or additional live musicians (seen or unseen) the Artist has used whatever is in the arsenal to create the music/show.
As technology advances the lines blur. Capturing a performance is a profound thing. Like anything else worth doing in life it is difficult to do, and easy for others to pick apart. The Artists chose to present their music in a certain way, and by allowing freedom the Producers captured the best performance that could be captured at that time.
Love the show
-
RE: Live? not at all...what a rip. Posted on Feb 14 2008 at 2:32pm by Jamiroquai not live!!!!!!!! As a U.S. musician/producer it's a shame people don't realize how hard it is to put on a live show. If you really watch and listen and know someones music you can tell the nuances that are live. Such as when he says California sunset the album version says California suntan. Watch the string players. Watch the drummer the grooves change up from the studio cuts. As a drummer myself I pay attention to things like that. So many of the new bands eat the mic live but in the studio it's just the opposite you need the space between the windscreen ,mic and vocalist. Some musican's who are trained or have worked in studios know little tricks. Sometimes they are recorded tracks that backup some bands but most of it is live . Brittney Spears most are backing tracks. Those are the shows you watch where the drummer hit's the cymbal and he's still playing a hi hat groove. Or sometimes you see backup vocals and no one else has mic's. I totally agree with Abbey Road studio's that they put a great effort and so do the bands that perform there. Live from Abbey road series is a great and intimate place to see live music at it's best in a world class studio. Some bands aren't well known while others are. In my case I found out about The Feeling from there. Great band who know how to write great songs the way they should be. Great hooks and WOW people are really harmonizing again. When I'm in London I Will definitely go to the studio to get whatever ideas I can steal for my own studio. Keep up the great work ABBEY ROAD STUDIOS.
Mike
-
-
-