Going Raw!

[Frankay]

A live performance isn't supposed to sound like a studio recording. That's why one's a recording and one is live. I'm always amazed by people that complain that a live band sounds nothing like their slick and shiny commercial release. They're not supposed to. That's why they go into a studio and use multitracking and overdubs and stuff like that, as opposed to hanging a mic at the back of an arena during a live rehearsal and pressing record. I'm always suspicious of bands that sound live exactly like they do on a recording. You know backing tracks and trickery are being used. You mentioned some bands recorded guitar sound. It's never gonna sound like that live. Do you go to live shows with your ear pressed against a speaker grill? What a mic hears pressed against the grill for recording purposes and what you hear in the crowd at a club or arena are two totally different things. It seems that what you think is "overproduced" is really just regular produced, and you prefer a minimalist approach to recording. Nothing wrong with that. I like raw stuff too.

I think you've misunderstood part of my point, i understand a band is not going to sound the same live i don't want that. What i mean is musicianship, whereas the RHCP my favourite band for the pure musicianship always put on an amazing live show and its always different i like that. What i don't like is knowing a band can spend days doing millions of takes getting them perfect but then playing live, and sounding absolute crap. As for the band i mentioned i don't like the tight sound its not my thing.
Basically i hate bad musicians ( no offence to anyone at all) but bands who get signed and imo are not great at all.
And then they get so over produced in the studio they sound like the worlds tightest band as said programmes such as BFD EZdrummer being used to replace real musicians. I would much rather a rough and ready recording and keep a feel and groove within the band the shows in the recording.
But yea as you stated last maybe i do think things that are regularly produced are over produced never really thought of it like that. I think less is much better, only with certain production techniques being used to make a recording shine among others.

 

[Greg_L]

I think you've misunderstood part of my point, i understand a band is not going to sound the same live i don't want that. What i mean is musicianship, whereas the RHCP my favourite band for the pure musicianship always put on an amazing live show and its always different i like that. What i don't like is knowing a band can spend days doing millions of takes getting them perfect but then playing live, and sounding absolute crap. .

That's life. Ever heard the Rolling Stones live? Total shit. I get what you're saying though. I solve the problem of being disappointed with a live performance by pretty much only liking bands that simply don't exist anymore.

 

[miroslav]

Ever heard the Rolling Stones live? Total shit.

Ain't that the truth...and yet they could still sell out most any place they choose to play.

There are bands who really prefer to work in the studio, as that is the only place they can bring their music vision to life.
Like how many bands actually are able to sound like their records? Plus, many bands don't like the playing live to much, because they can't sound like the record or becuase they just don't like the live grind....for them it's more about creating new music, not just playing the same stuff from show to show.

It's only the bands who record as if they are playing live...who sound pretty much the same when they play live.
AFA polishing turds...yeah, there are some bands that sound like shit both in the studio and live, but in the studio they just hire a bunch of folks to make them sound really good...but that is what it is, so you have to just pick through the pile and find what you like.

 

[grimtraveller]

I notice that many of the punters that complain about how "music" is 'this' and 'that' nowadays seem to inhabit a rather small musical world, no offense meant. To gauge what happens in the charts as representative of the world of music demonstrates to me a small vision and general unappreciation of a big wide musical world out there.
I also think that live gigs were often about more than just the music. Because it passes you by whereas with a recording, you have that beautiful rewind function that enables examination ~ if that's what you want.
I remember seeing the Stones live. It was a 'great gig' but not from an actual musical viewpoint. I think Mick Jagger was one of the great vocalists but live he was ever so ropey. Even the live Stones' albums are pretty crummy. I always thought Jimmy Page's live guitar sound with Led Zeppelin was really thin. I could never be bothered with them live. But what could one expect when he used to layer sometimes up to 14 guitars on a song ?
Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.....
And returning to the OP, phasing out musicians in some instances was inevitable if the means exist for the possibility. I don't like it but that's got little to do with anything. If 'it' can be done, humans will do 'it', whatever 'it' is. For better or for worse.