# Un-polished Studio Takes



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Like Gould, there is very little studio magic done to the work to make it sound better, it's very human. What other studio classical composers are like this?


Thanks.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Captainnumber36 said:


> Like Gould, there is very little studio magic done to the work to make it sound better, it's very human. What other studio classical composers are like this?
> Thanks.


I'm not sure what you're referring to. However, Gould was a big proponent of using whatever was available in the studio to get his best performance, whether that was multiple takes, splicing in the best parts of a performance or whatever. One of the reasons he gave for quitting public performances was that he believed a better performance resulted in the recording studio than on the public stage.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I'm not against multiple takes or splicing, it's just that the parts that are kept aren't edited or have a ton of re-verb on them.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I guess, "passionate studio performances".


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

You mean ultra-dry sound with the mike (almost) in the piano? 
As mentioned, Gould did a lot of editing but also preferred the dry sound without much space around it. I don't know about edits, but there are few recordings with Gulda from the 1970s that were done by label usually focussing on Jazz that have a similarly dry sound, e.g. his Bach WTC and Beethoven Diabelli variations. (I don't like that sound very much...)

For very dry and direct chamber music recordings, look no further than Juilliard Qt. on CBS/Sony from the 1960s and 70s.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

edited and deleted.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

Grieskeg doing Debussy is another example.


----------



## BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist (Jan 13, 2019)

Schnabel playing Beethoven?


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Jascha Heifetz was notorious for doing hundreds of takes during studio recordings, so much did he want to control every minute detail of his interpretation of a piece. This is discussed in David Byrne's _How Music Works_ and also by Yehudi Menuhin in his autobiography:

_"With a Heifetz performance, you could be sure that everything, down to the smallest inflection, was calculated, controlled and willed. He strove for a control so complete that each performance would be identical - a valid, admirable approach, but not mine."_

Like Menuhin, Nigel Kennedy also preferred to publish recordings with minimal intervention. He criticised the widespread practice of issuing recordings labelled as live when they where really live recordings retouched later in the studio. That's why you still hear so-called live recordings without any hint of an audience being present. I'm not an expert, but I've had some recordings by fine musicians that where supposedly live but sounded like they had less spontaneity than studio recordings. Its as if they're scared of being blamed for imperfections. However, if the intervention is to a level where the playing is perfect, doesn't it beat the purpose of it being live in the first place?

In popular music, the old school approach of music in the rough came back a few decades ago, a famous example being the MTV _Unplugged_ series.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Later. Gould recordings were not 'dry' as were a few of the earlier ones:






The above is labeled HQ, but that doesn't mean that reverb or ambience was added. Below is a segment which is not HQ:


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

BrahmsWasAGreatMelodist said:


> Schnabel playing Beethoven?


This is great!

I guess it's music that isn't recorded with a click track, and is raw.


----------



## Captainnumber36 (Jan 19, 2017)

I enjoy Gould's Mozart a lot! 

I suppose I'm looking for piano specifically as well. Any other recommendations?


----------

