The K M Links Game - November 2024 Week...
Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
No best answer has yet been selected by potterfan3. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.I agree with robbo82 ~ in most cases I have seen a band live quite often a song of theirs I don't like very much sounds much better live! don't know if it just a 'caught up in the moment' thing, but I do think it's nice to hear the song in the way the band played it in the studio..before all the tweaking ;o)
My exception to the rule is Madonna (sorry to any Madge fans!) I have seen her live 3 times now & each time was awful. You can really tell how much tweaking is done to her voice in the recording process ~ she is flat as a pancake, & that is before she has even started dancing & wearing herself out!
Sorry to be a pain, I have to come back here. Studio recordings are where the artist can really get stuck in to a song, putting on as many overdubs as they like. Think of Queen and all Freddie's choirs. Live, they sounded completely different but the focus was on the energy. There are still some dodgy moments where notes were missed etc but I'd still love to have been there.
Album recordings have to stand up to many repeated listenings. If there are any notes or moments that the artist isn't happy with, they need to fix it or that moment will come back to haunt them forever.
There's nothing wrong with studio wizardry, used in the right way. It should be used to get what's in the artist's head onto a recording. The frustration is often the other way round - the recording is what the artist thinks the song should sound like. If they want to record it live, straight to tape, as it were, they can.
The only problems come if the artist doesn't have strong ideas about what they want the song to sound like and the producer gets trigger-happy with effects.
There, I'll shut up now.