[Dixielandjazz] Fixing recordings

[Robert S. Ringwald]

Steve Barbone wrote regarding editing of recordings:

(snip)
> Case in point is the Mosaic reissue of Eddie Condon works. The mistakes
> are
> there, some glaring, depending upon who the listener is. On "That's A
> Plenty", Bob Wilber misplays a four bar break at the end . . . reed
> squeaks
> and all. It is during the band round robin of 4 bar ending breaks. As a
> reed
> player, I heard it immediately. However, many, if not most listeners don't
> hear it as a mistake. At most they may wonder why the clarinet took 2
> ending
> 4 bar breaks. And why did the original cut and the Mosaic reissue leave in
> that first break when it could have been easily removed leaving only the
> second.
(snip)


Steve, just because the Wilber 4-bar break was left in does not mean that he
nor Condon wanted it left in.

Maybe they did -- Maybe they didn't.

Maybe Condon pointed at Wilber to play another one because he intended to 
cut out the first one?

Perhaps Condon was not in on the
mastering. . . we don't know.

Often after a recording session the artist is left out of the post
production process.  Sometimes it is at his request.  Sometimes he is busy
or traveling.  Sometimes the producer does not want him there.  Sometimes
the producer has different ideas than the artist.  And yes, sometimes the
producer knows nothing about music.
Thus, while you like to hear mistakes,
often the artist would rather that you don't.

 And, as kash says, a mistake in a live concert is easily overlooked.  But
in
a recording, it is there forever...


 Steve goes on to say:

 (snip)
> To Bob and Kash, they want precision. Perhaps they
> prefer heavily arranged music also.
(snip)

Steve, I wonder where that comment comes from?  What would give you the idea
that we both prefer heavily arranged music?

Why, since we have both stated that we would rather make our work as good as 
possible, would you assume that we both like heavily arranged music?  Quite 
a leap there, I'd say.

I can't speak for Kash.  However, none of my recordings are heavily
arranged, except for two which were not my band and which I got paid for.

As far as listening, I personally like arranged and jam situations both, as
long as they are quality.  And I don't want to hear clams.  I got enough of 
those myself...


Steve goes on to say:

(snip)
 One wrong note in a Basie/Sinatra recording
> isn't going to bother me one bit.
(snip)

Personally the one note would bother me greatly if heard over and over, as a 
good recording would be.  It
would spoil a otherwise great recording.

Of course this is merely personal  preference.  By no means am I trying
to tell anyone else what to like or dislike.

However, as far as my recordings go, if a guy makes a clam on one take and
plays it perfect on another, why not use the perfect one?  Makes sense to
me.  Why should I palm off in inferior product on the general public?  Big
business is already doing that to extreme and successfully I might say.  But
that does not mean that I have to lower myself to their standards.


Steve continues by perhaps taking an Artie Shaw comment out of context:

(snip)
As Artie Shaw once opined, if you don't
> make a mistake or two in a jazz performance, you are not trying hard
> enough.
(snip)

Did he say anything about making a mistake on a recording?  How many
mistakes have you heard on Shaw's recordings?  For that matter, how many
have you heard on Goodman's, Miller's, Dorsey's, etc?

Goodman sure never felt that way.  The guys who worked with him said he
rehearsed the band until it played with perfection.

How many mistakes have you ever heard on their air checks?

What did Buddy Rich think about performances that were not up to his
standards?

How many symphony performances have you heard, either on recordings or live,
with clams?  Should we present our music on recordings in a lesser light 
than the examples stated above?


Steve continues:

(snip)
> IMO, fixing records will become more and more invasive as technology
> improves to the point that the synthesizers will take over the music with
> "perfect" computer recordings that sound better than music played by real
> musicians with instruments, in both fidelity and freedom from errors.
(snip)

This technology is already available and is being used today.  However, that
does not mean that we, as Jazz musicians, have to use it to that extreme.


Steve asks:

(snip)
> Why
> then would anyone want to listen to musicians and live music?
(snip)

Obviously a rhetorical question.

--Bob Ringwald