Live vs. recorded

Some on this thread have said that many jazz recordings are done in group sessions and live audience performance. This is true and I believe it is because much of jazz is by nature improvised. Superb improvisers like Parker, Gillespe, and Monk have to lead groups of musicians that are equally adept at making the music work 'in real time'. It would be almost impossible to improvise in the vacuum of an overdub (Charles Mingus did overdub his bass line on "Bud Powell Live at Massy Hall" with disastrous results).

As for recorded live performances losing their novelty I do disagree. You can't recreate performances and groups of performers from recordings like Newport Jazz Fest 19xx and others. On those cuts it might have been the only time or one of a few times those cats ever played together. They are historically novel. Even if I have memorized the performance it is still thrilling in the context of the whole and I listen as often as the perfomance occurs to me.

As far as listening in a live venue. I guess if someone really liked Beethoven's 9th and experienced it dozens of times by dozens of symphony orchestras it would make each experience novel but I would rather spread my available music dollars around to include other performances. I do not say this with a strident voice JMHO.

Niacin,

Last count was app. 5,500 CDs and +/- 1,200 LPs.
The other four slots in the car get rotated every week or so, but I tend to be a tad obsessive about Buckingham.

Marty

Marty - you don't say !!!!!

I prefer live recordings. It shows the real talents of the performer(s) mistakes and all.
Take Taylor Swift. Sorry, she is not my cup of tea, but when she performed with Def Leppard with all of her off key singing and screaming it actually became one of my favorites.
Through the years I have recorded many live TV/Cable/Sat broadcasts onto DVD's and then to CD's and I quite enjoy them.
I agree though that many live recordings have sound quality problems and many were not recorded well.
But, there are some that really stand out.

It seems to me that studio recordings often suffer from being over-produced. On the other hand, live recordings often suffer from being under-produced. In light of that, my personal preference is for a studio recording that could be mistaken for a live recording or a live recording that could be mistaken for a studio recording.

IMO, live recordings sound best when they emulate studio recordings, i.e., when they pay attention to microphone placement, track cleanliness, and mixing precision. Conversely, studio recordings sound best when they emulate live recordings, i.e., when they pay attention to acoustical setting, performer interaction, and a feeling of improvisation.

The best live recordings give you the feeling that the musical event you are hearing is happening now, and will never happen again. The best studio recordings give you the feeling that you have the perfect seat for the musical event. To have both feelings at the same time is a special experience. Hence, I like studio recordings that sound live or live recordings that sound “studio.”

Bryon