Solo recordings
Posted: Thu Dec 07, 2023 5:57 pm
First of all, I have NOT - just now - listened to some solo recording of a tuba. I'm sure I haven't listened to one in months. If I listen to anything on Facebook or YouTube, I listen to it for about ten seconds and then scroll, so I'm not talking about you or some well-known tuba player nor any specific player. Further, I'm talking about instrumentalists in general, and not so much about tuba players.
I would just like to point out that when we listen to 50 or 60-year-old recordings that are extraordinarily fine/inspiring, we need to remember that there were either zero or less than a handful of splices, if not direct to disc recorded. There was no Auto-Tune, there was no click track, and there was no digitization which could allow for all sorts of repairs and cloaking of flaws in playing.
I've been involved in playing in orchestras behind extremely famous solo musicians for commercially issued recordings, and I will tell you that digital splices/punches - or whatever you want to call them - were in the hundreds for each movement of each piece.
There's (now) an art to recording, but there's a particular art to playing straight through performances that are executed well enough to sound flawless to others - and even to be phrased so well throughout as to actually inspire other musicians.
OK... I haven't mentioned any individual instrumentalists in this post (because I really don't want this post to be about any individual instrumentalists), but I'm sure some people would love to see me list one (and - fwiw - I haven't listened to any of this musicians recordings in years) - so I will: Dennis Brain.
As a post script, something else occurs to me about making solo recordings with endless digital splices:
The more a recording artist phrases while they play - in other words: plays musically and with expression, the more difficult it makes it to be able to splice flawed playing out of recordings, because phrasing can vary from one take to the next, and might not line up. This may (??) be why recordings are always technically perfect these days, but - seemingly - very few of them inspire.
I would just like to point out that when we listen to 50 or 60-year-old recordings that are extraordinarily fine/inspiring, we need to remember that there were either zero or less than a handful of splices, if not direct to disc recorded. There was no Auto-Tune, there was no click track, and there was no digitization which could allow for all sorts of repairs and cloaking of flaws in playing.
I've been involved in playing in orchestras behind extremely famous solo musicians for commercially issued recordings, and I will tell you that digital splices/punches - or whatever you want to call them - were in the hundreds for each movement of each piece.
There's (now) an art to recording, but there's a particular art to playing straight through performances that are executed well enough to sound flawless to others - and even to be phrased so well throughout as to actually inspire other musicians.
OK... I haven't mentioned any individual instrumentalists in this post (because I really don't want this post to be about any individual instrumentalists), but I'm sure some people would love to see me list one (and - fwiw - I haven't listened to any of this musicians recordings in years) - so I will: Dennis Brain.
As a post script, something else occurs to me about making solo recordings with endless digital splices:
The more a recording artist phrases while they play - in other words: plays musically and with expression, the more difficult it makes it to be able to splice flawed playing out of recordings, because phrasing can vary from one take to the next, and might not line up. This may (??) be why recordings are always technically perfect these days, but - seemingly - very few of them inspire.