Do You Know How Much Classical Music Is Edited?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 июл 2024
- When we think of editing in music, we might think of quantizing lining up rhythm in an R&B song or autotune fixing the vocals of a pop singer. Many people don’t realize that editing exists in classical recordings as well. This episode of Sound Field explores the current debate in classical music of how much recordings should be edited.
Nahre Sol interviews a panel of classical musicians about their take on editing. Jon Nakamatsu, Joyce Yang, Tanya Gabrielian, and Corin Lee share their opinions on how much editing is okay and when it goes too far. At the end of the episode Arthur Buckner and Nahre face off in a quiz to see who can tell which instruments are virtual and which are real.
Why Is Für Elise So Famous?
• Why is Beethoven's Für...
00:00 - Editing in Krystian Zimerman Ballade No 1 in G minor, Op 23
01:22 - Why Do Musicians Edit?
02:23 - Recording and Editing History
04:33 - Classical Musician Panel on When Editing Goes Too Far
06:27 - How Classical Editing Differs From Pop Music
08:24 - How Editing Affects Music Listeners
09:04 - How Editing Affects Music Students
10:09 - How Editing Affects Musicians
11:11 - Editing in Classical Music Today and in the Future
12:13 - Real Vs. Virtual Instrument Quiz
15:25 - The Pros and Cons of Editing in Classical Musiic
Please SUBSCRIBE! ►► tinyurl.com/SoundFieldPBS
We like music. You like music. Let’s break it down. Sound Field is a PBS Digital Studios web series produced by Rewire.org. #SoundFieldPBS #Rewire #PBSDigitalStudios van cliburn
![Eminem - The Death of Slim Shady [Graveyard Album Trailer]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vOJD-6vQpXU/mqdefault.jpg)
*TwoSetViolin:* _"Wait, it's all edited?"_
*Audio engineers:* _"Always has been"_
If you didn't notice any edits, that means the audio engineer did their job well and properly. It reminds me of that one Futurama quote, "When you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all."
This episode was very fun to put together! It leaves me to think about so many more things related to this topic… Cheers 🧡
sound field, pls pin the comment
I was reading about this in a book written by former Decca classical engineers, and they were basically like “fix all mistakes including correcting pitch of notes, and remove all noises, including extraneous instrument sounds, of course”. I’m not even sure the musicians are always aware of how many little fixes the engineers do to their recordings. But in classical it has to be done very carefully: it is VERY easy to make something sound obviously unnatural, which is even more unacceptable than a mistake. In pop, often things don’t sound “natural” from the beginning and certainly don’t after all the production processing they go through, so this isn’t much of an issue.
Great to have you back, Nahre!!
Thank you for this Nahre. I was thinking a lot about this topic recently when I recorded a piano piece I wrote. I'm never shy about editing my "pop" music, but I obsessed about getting a note-perfect, complete take of the piano piece, largely due to this notion about recorded classical, and also that I was filming. But it created an incredible amount of anxiety. Even when I got "the" take, I still ended up tweaking things in editing.
Music producers love to talk about how mistakes are cool, and add to the humanity of the record. Sometimes this can be the case, and you can have happy accidents. But I think the best argument for insistence on perfection in the recorded medium is based on repeated listens. In a live performance, a mistake is lost to time, if it's even noticed, and other live performances will not have the exact same mistake. A mistake in a recording can be anticipated after the first listen, making it worse. It also comes off as voluntary to some extent, because there was a choice whether or not to edit it. In live performance, any mistake is involuntary, which changes how it's perceived by the listener.
Obligitory "Glen Gould wan't a normal human" story:
In the 90's I met a recording engineer who worked with Glen back in the days of big reel to reel tapes. He told me that Glen could wind back the reel while listening to the playback and stop on the note he missed for a punch in. A decade and a half on that engineer was still in awe of that ability because he and all his colleagues, who wound back tape for a living, couldn't do that.
You can also hear evidence of this in his electronic pieces, such as “The Idea of North”!
'90s*
I feel like the script is flipped for jazz recordings. A lot of times I'd rather listen to live recordings (especially videos) because of the spontaneity of the performances. Plus watching the players exchange looks and change their playing in real time is magical!
That is an interesting contrast.
I believe this is the case for a lot of classical music listeners as well, as the video said about live being the main venue, i.e. what the music was written for. For me I feel the best experiences come from live performances. But, there's this perfectionist drive as well to make everything not just note perfect but beyond that nail every dynamic, etc. A lot of older recordings have quite some "mistakes" comparatively speaking, but they are nonetheless great recordings. I think and hope that this perfectionist view is shifting towards thinking more about musicality rather than technical perfection these days.
I want to know if Hiromi edits...
yeah, imagine finding out that, oh BTW, all of Coltrane and Bird's improvisations were "edited." :)
Guess I'm old fashioned about classical recordings too, it's about capturing the players (and conductors) performance, not creating one digitally out of bits and pieces.
Not just that but the actual quality of the music too! For some reason the way a lot of modern studios handle jazz recording just seems to squish the life out of it.
I am in shock. I had no idea. I grew up listening to classical music, but I am 76 years old and there was no editing except for takes. I do live improvisational piano, and there is no editing. I just accept the music that comes out. To me, there is a real advantage to relaxing around “mistakes” and focusing on authenticity. Thank you for sharing this information.
By the way, I would love to interview you for my new video blog, The Improvisational Pianist, on my RUclips channel, Beth Green TV. I really want to support classically-trained pianists to just relax and return to the heart -- even if they are playing written music. I've got two blogs up already, and I have an interview scheduled for next week with a teacher. I would love to have you on, too. You are fantastic. I am classically trained, became disabled at 15, couldn't play the piano at all and discovered improvisation at 73 (if I only improvise and don't play for too long a time, playing the piano does not completely cripple me), and I am now performing a weekly livestream with over 10,000 fans on Facebook. Could you please contact me about doing an interview? Your contribution could be SO helpful. I see so many young people dropping out of music altogether. Here's the link to the playlist: ruclips.net/p/PL7Llv6w5efB3EwwlTlRxI0x479v_SRIS-. Please email me at beth@bethgreen.org. In any case, thanks for what you're doing.
The thing is, recordings are played over and over and over by many people, generally way more than a live performance, not to mention a live performance goes past and is gone the moment each note moves to the next. And it may be the only recording of that piece they have ever heard. Do you really want them to be hearing a wrong or out of tune note or some squawk or noise or whatever every time anyone hears it, as their only and repeated experience of that piece of music? It’s not just about the ego of the performers, but wanting to present the composition in its best light and provide listeners with the most transcendent experience achievable.
@@matthewv789 All popular music recording from the 60's contains those things. Only since Glen Gould is classical piano music edited.
It seems like some of the "VST or real?" examples compared high-fidelity VSTs to real instruments that were either unfaithfully recorded or designed to subvert our expectations of what they should sound like. The piano one that both hosts got wrong stuck out the most as an example of this.
Yes, that comparison was intentionally misleading. It's basically a "What I think sounds better" comparison, instead of actually knowing the VST's or how they sound.
The first piano VST was obviously cheap and terrible (a high quality grand piano VST sounds completely indistinguishable), while the real live drums were clearly poorly recorded compared to the clean VST. To me, both of the orchestras sounded fake, and could've easily both been achieved with VST's. The second piano example also both sounded terrible and fake, so it's again intentionally misleading.
@@FreakieFan Yeah exactly! The most interesting thing that they could have compared each VST to is the instrument that it was sampled from/modeled on, or the closest available alternative, provided that the real instrument was recorded in a similar room, with similar mics in similar positions, etc. In fact, I'm surprised that the developers of high-quality VSTs don't use this kind of comparison to demonstrate the authenticity of their products, especially for percussive instruments and plucked instruments.
Most modern VST's are simply recordings of live instruments spliced for every single note with multiple levels of dynamics and different styles of articulation. There's also Pianoteq, which models exactly how a real Steinway Grand piano creates sound, and is so realistic that Steinway officially endorsed them. Given this, it's no surprise that it's hard to tell the difference! Most of the time, they literally are real instruments!
with that logic, a single single sine wave oscillator is a real instrument as it generates its own sound rather than being sampled
a very broad concept.
a lot of things are literally real instruments, but still sound like shit :D
the latter has little to do with the former.
pianoteq wasn't all that until version 4, 3 still had the problem where it either sounds good on the high registers but not on the lower, or the other way around.
but yeah, pure romplers seem to be on their way out a bit and slowly replaced by hybrids that also include acoustic models.
The way I could tell Is if you listen to the direction the sounds are coming from via surround sound headphones you can very easily tell cause the real recordings will sound much less dynamic when it comes to the direction of the sound.
@@artemis3392 This doesn't match the reality of how VSTi's are sampled, usually with MORE mic positions and articulations than live performances. The VSTi has more dynamic options than the average human player. Now, you are correct when you talk about, eg. programmed drums in rock and pop where the producers 127 the hell out of velocities, but if you don't do that, its indistinguishable from real drums...because they ARE real drums. And a much better drumset recorded with much better mics that the vast majority of drummers will ever have access to
@@Tritium21 I think she is trying to say what you said, but didn't say it as well. Because virtual instruments have top notch recording set-ups, the one that surrounds you more is more likely the virtual instrument.
These comments are so nice I feel like I’m reading the notes left in my yearbook 😭😭😭 HAKAS!
Indeed. Not copying and pasting the same dumb memes or the same opinions over and over again. Really a gem in youtube in these turbulent times.
Having edited classical music myself, I can confirm that the pressure for a 'perfect take' can really affect someone's recording session, because of this pressure they end up with more mistakes and are often less happy with results because they 'had to resort to editing'. Back in the day you were only able to interact with the medium of music through going to a concert, once music became a storable medium we started looking at it differently. Most of my recording work is a single night live concert, so I don't get any splicing opportunities, however, mixing is another thing which could be argued to be deceiving. Using close mics oppose to a stereo pair in the audience gives a 'perfect' representation instead of colouration of the room. It can have different effects on different instruments...all depends on the style of piece
Really enjoyed this one, especially the hilarious quote from Schnabel!
Another consideration for why there is a stigma in classical music against editing is rooted in classism. It costs a lot of money and time to work up a piece of music, book a recording session, and get that perfect take. Most folks don’t have the budget or time for all of that even if they are incredibly talented. If they can create an engaging performance but come to it in a way that is more economical more power to them.
While I’d never agree with Gould that the concert is dead his analogy to film production resonates. Film and live theatre aren’t the same even if they come from the same tradition. Why not think about music recordings and performances the same way?
Thank you as always for these great topics y’all explore on SF!
I’m so happy Nahre is back! Great episode, guys!
I'm an audio engineer/audio editor. Let's face it people. I'm also an artist.
Yes you are!
@@SoundFieldPBS O wow you reply to comments! lol.
An audio program advertised on the NYC subway that way. A picture of a mic, and the title, there’s an artist on both ends
You are “fixing” something that is imperfect using a machine, are Monsanto biological engineers artists too? You could make the argument
To clarify, not saying you aren’t. I think all engineering has an element of artistry
this show is so good
I loved finding out how wrong I was during the Real vs Vst test :P Super fun!
That was so fun to edit hahaha
Bruh, getting drums AND piano wrong along with them had me shaking lol
The problem with the 'vst vs real' is it lacks one serious distinction that renders 'real or not' moot. TLDR: The comparisons were against sampled instruments, not synthesized ones. VSTs are simply containers for instruments or effects, which can either be sample based (real) or synthesized (fake). Many vsts contain instruments that use samples ie sampled recordings of piano notes across the keyboard and at different velocities. Other vsts contain instruments and effects that use synthesis ie computer processing of algorithms in real time. Your comparisons were against sampled instruments which means they're both real. The only possible comparison could be the piano but there's really only one vst that synthesizes piano convincingly and that's Pianoteq. To my knowledge no other developer has been able to come close to convincing the most trained ear that it's a real piano. Drums are much easier to tell the difference of but cymbals can be very convincing. I'm certain every comparison was against sampled instruments. I understand for the sake of time and simplicity you decided not to make the distinction but it's extremely misleading. All that could have been said was that they were compared against sampled instruments.
Shmoopy,
It's not misleading because sampled instruments still aren't real.
And even sampled instruments can be identified if you know what to listen for.
The main challenge in producing digital instruments isn't in matching timbre or transients -it's mimicking micro-expressions in the performer's rhythm (which do get distorted in most modern music due to splicing and time-domain edits anyway, so they're not as much of a giveaway anymore), and more importantly: "room sound".
The dispersion patterns of real instruments produce comb filtering and frequency-dependent, phase-shifted decay, which is nearly impossible to replicate.
Recording a truly real-sounding woodwind track, for example, is pretty damn hard because the radiated sound comes from different places from note-to-note. Mic placement alone can cause huge changes, and normally your best bet is to have at least a few mics just picking up the room sound (which can cause its own comb-filtering headache).
It's actually not super hard to pick out once you know it's there.
That said, I think their point still stands, and most people aren't going to be able or willing to tell the difference between quality VSTs and recorded instruments in the the near future, unless they're an experienced recording engineer or a pretentious audiophile.
Also it is probably better to use the term 'virtual instrument' as there are many audio plugin API's like VST, a number of which are popular in different industries, which is why most virtual instruments/effects support multiple plugin API's, and a lot of the time they also work outside of a host/DAW.
VST is a proprietary brand name, and not the essence of what that segment was about.
As an audio software developer the use of that acronym in this context felt quite strange.
The song at 1:19 is “Sideways” by Nahre Sol for anyone wondering
Thank you stranger!
Our wind ensemble in college recorded an album every 2 years. It's definitely highly edited. That's just the process to make a quality recording and eliminate as many mistakes and poor sounds as possible. We would play the entire piece through once beginning to end for a "bed" take and then go back and record smaller sections that the recording producer snd engineer would use later to pick the best sounding clips.
Definitely there's a difference between recording for near perfection and live performance. Jazz is one the few mediums that you will find less of this editing
About Jazz... Hate to tell you, but if it's from a studio then good chance it's been edited. Famously, the song "Brilliant Corners" had to be assembled from many, many takes. "Blue Train" had the piano solo spliced in from another take.
@@adamatari emphasis on the LESS in my post. I know stuff is edited, but in compared to other music, music with improvised soloing tend to be recorded in larger takes, so requiring less overall editing. Sure, I know they might do the solos multiple times and pick the best one. but I was just speaking very generally that "creative improvised music" (aka Jazz) tends to focus less on heavy editing and more on getting the essence of the music by trying to capture bigger takes rather than micromanaging every note
speaking of editing, the editing in this video is spot on!
Hey thanks so much 🙏🏽
I found the background music when people were talking really distracting.
@@paulmdt1 Me too
Frank Zappa often overdubbed guitar, percussion, and other parts to his "live" recordings. This information was in the album liner notes. Editing is an artistic choice. As a fan, I admire FZ's transparency.
Yes full transparency might be the solution.
Zappa was a master in using the studio capabilities in a creative way, he even was honest about the level of accuracy in his recorded orchestral works (LSO album), i love the way he used the studio and early workstations like the synclavier to create electronic music beyond most human/instrument capabilities since the early 80s
Recording technology gives us the ability to create the perfect recording. Zappa was notorious for chasing perfection in everything he did, especially live. Check out his intro to Bebop Tango on Roxy and Elsewhere.
@@aqualili Thanks. I know the tune. I need to listen to it more often!
I doubt artistic altruism is the only factor at play in "editing".
Glenn Gould loving recording is funny since he wouldn't stop singing along with his playing. You can actually hear him on many recordings.
I heard that many musicians complained they could hear the edits in Gould's music where he spliced pieces together. He would ask him to point out where, and they always got it wrong.
@@gabrielsroka In the analogue days, it was painfully evident where the edits were. In the digital remasterings of Gould’s recordings, it is virtually impossible to find most of them.
I think a lot of listeners want to see "magical" virtuosity out of instrumentalists as opposed to pop artists. When they learn that they also make mistakes they feel tricked for some reason. i always disliked this attitude, i have nothing against virtuosos but some artists will cater to this type of listener by focusing more on showboating at the expense of the music theyre playing. To each their own i guess but it still rubs me the wrong way.
You might like a small channel that is trying to fight the supper perfect classical music image, Piano Rogues. :) They show a much more fun side of piano/classical music. Or Daniel Thrasher but he is more silly skits than performance.
Rubs me the wrong way too.
@@Whateverhasbeenmynameforyears Daniel Thrasher isn't really connected to classical music
Lang Lang lol
@@isabelcervantes2945 nah lang lang play pop song and metalica
Happy to see a Sophie track as an example of heavy processed electronic music :')
It's always so funny to me when people outside the industry don't realize how much editing goes into pretty much all records. This is just how music production works. It's not about being authentic (most of the time), it's about the final product being the best it can be. Sometimes that means the tiny mistakes are best to be left in, sometimes fixing them is the right move. It all depends on the specific needs of the project, but neither way is disingenuous. I totally understand why the general public (or even many amateur and some professional musicians) would be confused or concerned about recordings being "faked," but that's just how this works.
If the final cut of the record is like a finished painting, the composer picks the colors, the musician's performance is the paint, the recording program the canvas, and all of the equipment and plugin software are the brushes. There's a few more steps in music making than a painting (most of the time), and typically more people are involved, but as much as the composers and performers are artists, the real masterpiece is crafted by the engineer.
TL;DR: Music is made with magic and sound engineers are wizards.
Great video! My producer and I experienced a lot of this when making our first album. For the second piano real vs virtual clip, my theory is that the first clip was a virtual patch simulating a real one, and the second was a real player playing a digital piano.
Who's gonna talk about music schools and competitions that require that tapes be "unedited" yet only accept recordings that are note perfect? 🤔
I seriously doubt that they expect note perfection. This isn't your lie in April ... They do expect technical capabilities and excellence though.
I can't even compose note perfect
Any time Sound Field uploads my day is made 💕
Of course edits are readily used when making creative content like this. Even Yo-Yo ma does as well. Always think "if the camera changes, theres a edit"
Love the video and the perspectives!
This was a great episode! Thank you, Nahre! Thank you, LA!
I love how well thought out and detailed these videos are. great work!
I consider myself a serious listener and I love recordings, editing doesn't bother me. We just need to remember that a recording and a live performance are different things.
Such a great episode!! Y'all never miss with these 🖤
This series is so well done! Hoping you all get so much more engagement!! 👍 Love the hosts and their unique perspectives! The flow is great.
This is so refreshing! Thank you for this!
These videos are always so interesting. Thank you for the work you do!
The most common way of editing in the classical world has not been mentioned here: First recording a whole piece or mouvement in one go, then pasting in little bits and pieces to erase the mistakes. In this way, the musical flow of the whole piece is preserved despite the use of editing. In our todays perfection-loving music world this seems to be an ok aproach. Of course, if you stick together hundreds of little edits, then the flow is gone...
A word to the quiz at the end: Modern drum VSTs have sounds very accurately recorded in good studio rooms with world class equipment. So speaking of the sound, it is impossible to tell if it is a VST or a "real" drum recording. The only way to tell would be the playing...
Cool channel btw! Greetings from Frankfurt, Germany
Someone should correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that's splicing, which they talked about quite a lot in the video? most of the time editors will start with the cleanest take as a base and then splice in bits and pieces of other takes-- how big those pieces are is largely at the discretion of the editor, but it all falls under the umbrella of splicing.
@@elizar.7037 Yep thats splicing
@@elamorana7400 Yes, that's right! I just wanted to emphasize on the difference between having a natural musical flow with some minor corrections on one hand, and on the other hand sticking large amounts of pieces together, resulting in a perfect but musically inconsistent recording.
You guys really never miss. Every episode is interesting new and fun. Keep it up!
Terrific topic. Great panel and hosts. A treat to have Nahre back. 😎🎶🤔🎵😎
Absolutely love this video. Please make some more on the subject of editing classic music. Also very detailed explanation to why I can't listen to recordings of classical music any longer. Your video literally made my day.
This episode it's amazingly intresting! Thank you 🙏🙏🙏
Thank you for doing this segment highlighting the negative impact editing has on the mental health of classical musicians. It is such an important message that needs to be shouted from the rooftops! Even the greatest musicians make technical mistakes, and that’s ok!
what a fascinating topic! this immediately brings up so many interesting ideas, thank you very much for the fantastic video!
I've made many classical records with thousands of edits. The pressure on musicians to be perfect has made some of my clients neurotic and pressured to compete in the big leagues. As a producer and editor, I have to appease the needs of my clients and digital editing can really make the difference!
Thank you for another lovely episode about music!
Great episode!!! Such an interesting topic!
Amazing episode! Really interesting discussion!
Excellent episode. I never thought about edited classical music.
Now that's a topic completely out of left field (for me at least), but you guys have done it again: I learned something and it was fun to do so! Thanks Nahre and Arthur, and everyone at PBS!
Your topics are always SO interesting!
This is gonna be a super insightful video!
I'm a classically trained violist, a saxophonist and recently taught myself guitar(ish). my musical background makes me want to strive for one take perfectionism which is a fine challenge but I actually really like the art of editing. It is an art form too, separate but not necessarily lesser than playing a song in one take.
Loved iiit!! You guys are killing it
Super interesting vid! I honestly didnt expect classical music to have any edits besides mixing ones
The main difference between the sound construction in popular vs classical music is that in popular music the editing is mostly done in the vertical direction (constructed track by track) while in the classical domain it's more horizontal oriented (take by take)
I've worked as a sound engineer for a company who builded the recorder/edittors that were used for a while by the Emile Berliner Haus (Deutsche Grammophon) and have editted a classical guitar album myself. 300 edits on an album is not uncommon.
What a great episode!
I have seen this video days ago and looked forward to listening, and even at 00:10 I am happy with the subject and the authors. THANKS!
Great and insightful video. Thanks!
fantastic essay & editing
The vst challenge omg!! Loved the episode 💞
I was like "Arthur? Who's Arthur? Ooooohhhh, you mean LA!"
LA = Little Arthur!
Don't mind me... just posting to boots the algorithm. This whole channel is criminally unrated!
We love to see it
great video, loved the real vs vst section, really funny.
Very Informative and explanatory .....Thanks
I loved this episode so much❣️
The fact they showed the MAGIC BENCH as the first clip has me so ready for a good episode.
THEY'RE BACK! And never better, this was so much fun. One thing to add is a lot of popular music "live concert albums" are stitched together from multiple performances or on private sound stages, like what Arthur described for classical recordings. Boingo Alive, Stop Making Sense, probably many more. Even the most experienced bands might never do a flawless live take of a song, so its "true form" is by necessity a pastiche.
THANK YOU FOR KEEPING IT REAL. ALWAYS.
I'm grateful for this discussion. As any musician knows there is so much pressure for perfection. As a singer, we MAY (just from my personal position) be under even more pressure because half the time non-vocalists barely regard and respect you as a musician.To add to that, you listen to these "perfect" recordings of an aria or chanson and it becomes this incomparable standard. It's nice to have somebody lift the veil a little bit.
Thank you for the video, I did not really think about how classical recordings were edited, but it makes sense. I think there obviously should be a balance and it should be tasteful but I think it’s ok. If anything it made me miss going to live concerts more! The only exception would be if I watched a concert on RUclips and it had the word “live” I expect it to not be edited. There needs to be SOME none spliced recordings so we don’t inflate our expectations when we go to an actual concert, but unfortunately there’s no way to tell right now. We need a word like “organic” for recordings
So much fun. Some of the issues with listening to recorded real vs VST instruments is that further effects such as compression can create a lot of distraction (either applied at the time or added afterwards). You weren't really comparing like with like in a recording. Hope that makes you feel a little better :D
These were my thoughts
Artur Schnabel: "recorded music is an evil betrayal of life because the human being the original is forgotten"
Its so weird hearing this as a negative, cause like, music being this almost otherworldly entity made by humans initially but existing on its own eternally is one of the reasons I like music at all.
I especially like video game music BECAUSE of its disconnection to humans. The surrendering of the ego, creating music to serve an atmospheric and emotional function rather than speak to the specific performant skill of the creators is so satisfying to me. Not that I don't then go and appreciate the people behind it, but that further understanding of them is usually irrelevant to my enjoyment of the piece and I think that's amazing. The music becomes an autonomous entity.
would be interesting to hear what Schnabel would have to say about tracker music lmao
that's a great way to put it, I totally agree. I think for schnabel, music was this ephemeral thing, existing only in the performance space and then lost as soon as its played. that is the 'human' quality to it. of course, music can be a ton of different things at once and that's what's so great.
Nowadays everything is based on the great montage. Even I knew much of these informations, this video inspired me to think how composers and performers from the past anticipated the present. Furthermore, this video brings out very important questions as:
Do we need perfect performances at all?
Why we need that perfection?
We are human beings and music is connected with all what we feel. That feeling at that exact moment doesn't need to be manipulated or edited even if it's not perfect.
On the other side, if "concert is dead" , this kind of approach made me think of so many artworks based on mimesis by using sound montage and that it could be even very creative and progressive approach to new artworks.
Thank you for posting this video!
I wish there was an option to edit school exams as well!😅
Insightful episode!!
Great Episode !
This was dope 🙌
Another great video!
This is a great video and conversation about music. I think I'll use this for my students
Tell your students we say hi!
Very interesting, thanks for sharing this.
Whoa this is gold!!! This really hits home - my recordings are unedited as many of them are for piano competitions which don't allow editing. My RUclips recordings are done on a real piano with one camera angle in one take, so no editing or splicing is or can done; and so there are mistakes here and there, blemishes. I start thinking whether I should record on a digital piano to edit out mistakes like many other channels, but feel like if I start, it'll be hard to go back:P There's a healthy balance of musicality and accuracy (does a mistake or two really detract from that performance/recording?). With so many note-perfect edited recordings around, the subconscious expectation for perfectionism, especially in competitions, results in progressively less emphasis on musicality and more on the feat of note-perfect performances. It definitely takes a toll on our mental health with the pressure of note-perfect performances, and I feel this pressure. Currently I try embrace the fact that recordings may not be perfect and try to put more focus on the musicality - preparing beforehand as well as I can, but when it's time to perform or record I try to focus is on what I want to express. It's still a struggle, but it's good to know I'm not alone.
Yeah I totally agree with you and I go about my recording process in a similar way too!!! :) I remembered when I first started tracking vocals I was sooo critical of every little thing cuz esp when mixing its so obvious - but now Ive learnt to let it go - its ok to have a few mistakes here and there if the emotion and what I wanted to convey is present :)
Well said, that’s part of why I like jazz-allows improvisation on a theme with less emphasis on playing the same thing in one way with no deviation-more like what classical music used to be, ironically, from my understanding-I know chopin and liszt improvised a ton.
‘Perfection as a standard’ for performance, recording, and practice seems like a recipe for poor mental health. I understand that some pieces have accepted certain variations - would classical music have evolved differently if composers were expected to create variations, or classical music, musicians, and its audience had embraced a culture improv and expression? This culture of perfection has left us in a sea of burnout - that’s a lot of brainpower and talent lost in the wake of ‘perfection.’
What is crazy is variation and improvisation was more the norm back when the pieces were written.
@Law of Perspective really whats your point?
It seems to me once music and commerce came together, especially in consumer capitalism via recordings, this pathological quest for perfection has no bounds, especially in the digital era.
it also sounds bad. pre WWI recordings are so expressive because they don't play metronomically
@Law of Perspective 100% agree
Incredible content!
Funny topic! 👍🏻
I am in heavy metal and I can say that over here such debate was at it's peak about 20 years ago.... At first, I was against it mainly because back then I used to found myself disappointed at live shows way too often....
But, watch this! After some time the whole community accepted the idea that we have yet another way to experience each song. These is a studio version and there is a live performance. That made live show even more exciting! So, in the end it'a benefit. 🖤🤘❤️🎸😊
When I was 19, I was a member of our university's concert band. This would have been in 1965.
I was amazed during our recording session for the annual LP how many takes were recorded, sometimes, in 4 or 8 bar phrases.
The conductor would tell the sound engineers, "Mark that one as good. Mark that one as a maybe.", etc.
Thanks for the video.
How fo you finance this?! This is insane! You are doing SOO great WORK!
Look at the logo in the top left corner of the screen lmao
The quality of the production seems really high in this video, i love it
I got all but the symbols right on the quiz at the end. Genuinely a pretty fun quasi-ear-quiz.
I loved this episode!! You flunking the discernment tests was funny. But I bet those VSTs weren't free downloads from dodgy websites
Not sure if anyone pointed this out yet, but at 2:54, the piece is Chopin's Op.10 No.1 Etude in C major. There might have been a mix up with Schumann's Op.13 etudes, another famous etude set.
I like to think of editing like use of eraser in pencil drawing. The lines you put down can be changed, they can be improved; Making marks, correcting them, remaking them, it's a modelling process.
The metaphor is not very applicable to live concert, because the moment you make a mark on paper, it remains there to be seen as a record. Even if you do livestream your drawing, the old and new(corrected) pencil make are visible together, unlike with music where a retake breaks the immersion.
What a great video. I had never considered this side of recording - my own experiences with it being extremely limited, it just never occurred to me that anybody would even have an opinion. I have never recorded in a studio - but I have been part of recording sessions for mass-choir performances and a few other such things. "Live recording" in the more accurate sense, I suppose? Things like the state choir (ACDA) performances, and university choir concerts. Nothing was ever said about takes or editing, of course - not to the choir members at least! And I honestly could not tell if any sort of editing had really been done, even to my decades-old cassettes from ACDA, except for the minimal cutting of the applause between pieces.
I can certainly see that the power of editing opens different possibilities, though. And that aspect of "get it note perfect the first time" is SUCH a huge pressure. I doubt I could have articulated it back in my college days, but thinking about the one recital performance I did...yeah. I don't remember, nearly 25 years later, whether I was being recorded for that concert or not. I only remember being so anxious that I was sick halfway through (thankfully, in an intermission, not ON stage, but yikes anyway). Many artists and musicians that I know already struggle with some level of perfectionism, all on their own. To have MORE expectation of an impossible standard loaded onto your shoulders because "it didn't sound like that on the recording" - maaaaaaaan. I can't even imagine the kinds of negative feelings that would cascade, if I was in that position.
This fascinated me, too, because I'm in the midst of plotting out some fiction - one of the characters HAS a recording career, and now I know more of what I ought to look for to research how that affects the musician. I'll be ruminating on the questions you raised here for quite some time!!
Thank you again for such wonderful work!
Thank you so much for this video! I had no idea classical music recordings were edited. I always assumed performers just did multiple takes and went with the best one. I agree that the standard of perfection is really harmful. I'm a piano teacher, and so many of my students have a fear of performing because they're afraid of making mistakes. I try to encourage them by emphasizing that EVERYONE makes mistakes and that it's okay. I hadn't considered how recordings can negatively contribute to that fear. I believe that the most important thing for every musician is to do your best, enjoy your music, and express yourself. Time to go and send this video to my students :)
Wow I always assumed there was no editing in classical music for some reason and this video is a real eye opener. 9:09 good point on mental health well done for bringing that out, and 11:56 that picture of Bach is so funny !!!
So excited to see Nahre back!
interesting topic, thank you!
Awesome video as usual. This one got me thinking quite a bit! Great job! :)
For me, it really depends on the goal of the music itself. If the work is supposed to be a straightforward, performance style recording, then I prefer less editing. I'm a drummer myself, so taking drums as an example, as long as it's not poorly played, I often like to hear drums that aren't perfect. The more the drumming feels like it was fit to a click track, the less human it feels to me. It's those imperfections that give it heart.
However, that's not to say that something feeling less human is always a bad thing. That's when drum machines can be interesting to me. When the piece isn't trying to mimic the performance of a human, but rather is trying to sound inhuman. That's why a lot of electronic, futuristic music doesn't bother me. Because the goal isn't to sound like a person on a stage, it's to be this external disembodied thing. Some electronic artists take this to the extreme, remaining completely anonymous, as part of the illusion.
Basically it all boils down to honesty. Honesty between the listener and the musician, but also honesty between the musician and themselves. Is the artist trying to fake something by editing, or are they trying to make something by editing?
P.S. With regard to live performances, I'm only a mediocre musician myself, so I am almost always impressed at a live performance. I know what they're doing on that stage, even if it they mess up here and there, is very stressful. I don't expect perfection, I just want the artist to succeed in whatever they are trying to bring to life. Sometimes that's using honesty and vulnerability, like in a lot of solo instrument performance in jazz or classical. Sometimes that is something more like a show, such as musical theater, a rock opera or a ritual-esque metal performance. Whatever it is, I try to enjoy it on its own merits, rather than comparing it to some impossible recording standard.
Wait....this is allowed?
THIS IS ALLOWED?
My god....I can feel the weight off my shoulders lifted from this pressure of being flawless during recordings.
Not saying we shouldn't strive to be our best possible self in our element, but the pressure of "having to get it right, or else...." just feels gone now that I've heard these professionals speak to this topic.
Thank you so much for creating this video. You have no idea how much I needed to see and hear this message!
Love this! I also did the VSTi test to professional drummer who couldnt tell my sequenced part was fake :D (after all it was humanized in so many levels, randomization for few precentages in velocity, volume, pitch, eq, time and the actual midi sequencing was already done by imitating how you would play it plus the room reverbs, bleeding etc blabla) You can make all VSTi sound real by making em slightly random in various layers, its interesting.
I think VSTs realistic-ness is felt mostly on performers. MIDI data like velocity can only store from 1-127 different dynamic ranges from pianissimo to fortissimo; compare that to a piano that has an infinite amount of dynamic range. Of course there are ways to enhance virtual performances like reverbs or delays, but ultimately an acoustic instrument has an experience no artist is willing to replace.
I think the new version of Midi is going to have a higher velocity resolution.
Excellent stuff as always guys.
The reality is that production/composition/editing is COMPLETELY different from LIVE performance. They are inherently juxtaposed as a dichotomy.
The BEAUTY is in both being able to produce a composition of quality for crystalization in the annals of time AND being able to replicate it as accurately and emotively as possible in a LIVE setting, where the sound is destiny bound to becoming ether and vanishing. If it's not recorded it will exist purely as a memory for those spectating. The 'edited' version is to serve as a remind for that experience. Live performance is the mastering of both crafts. Without the former the latter would be less effective, and vice versa.
That reality cannot be avoided, and many a great artist have died upon it's hill in martydom to it's Truth.
Love these vids
oh I am SO subscribing to this channel!
Superb, superb topic to delve into. Virtually all music students place their musical heroes at "god-level" in their minds and forget that even the best musicians' recordings are not one takes, but a high-level recording process. Dispelling this false notion is important. Totally supportive of this ✊