Writings of David Amos   David Amos    List of honorees         Louis Rose Society         Jewishsightseeing home

We Record...We Edit

By David Amos, San Diego Jewish Times, September 9, 2005

As you may well know, I am deeply involved in conducting orchestras in commercial recordings of lesser known and new music. While I strongly believe that there is nothing better than hearing music in a live performance, for a multitude of reasons, we have different standards of what we may accept in a concert hall or on a compact disc. 

A live concert implies many conditions that we take for granted. We dress up, take our narrow seats, accept as best as possible the acoustics given to us at the specific event, and enjoy. The emotions of the moment even neutralize some faults in the music, which are unavoidable in a live performance, such as wrong notes, occasional bad intonation, audience coughs, and other extraneous noises. We tolerate conditions that are far less than ideal; after all, it is a live concert, with a renowned orchestra, soloist and/or conductor.

But in commercial recordings, we are conditioned not to overlook many of the factors mentioned above. After all, recordings are supposed to be nothing less than perfect. And, that is the way it should be.

But, the creative process in recording sessions is quite different from what you hear in a concert, and even in the final version of a recorded performance. In recording sessions, the procedure is not as simple as "rehearse the music, record it, and move on." Many times, small fractions of the music are recorded over and over again, until perfection is achieved. And then, through the miracle of editing, which has evolved into digital wizardy in the last decade, the results are impeccable. Most of the time, you can not possibly tell where the edit points are. One second of recorded music can be projected on a screen and divided into 30 segments! 

But, if you have been involved in recordings as I have, and even if you have not, but know the music intimately well, a few wrinkles reveal themselves. It is amusing to hear, and fun to catch.

I have heard recordings by world famous performers and labels where through editing mistakes, whole bars have been omitted. Just last week, I heard on a radio a work where in three spots, instead of four quick notes in succession, we heard only two or three. Again, mistakes in editing. 

At times recording flaws cannot be avoided, simply because time ran out during the recording sessions, and there was no additional budget for the orchestra to take more time to correct sloppy passages. Close or distant microphone placement can be a factor in hiding many sins, making less than great orchestra sound quite acceptable.

There are some recordings that are proudly labeled "Life Performance." This may be true, but what is not announced that at times, the same performers gather at the concert hall the next morning, with no audience and the same microphone setup from the previous night's concert and "patch up" the spots that needed correction. They do a few "takes" of any rough spots, and, voila! a perfect recording of a "live concert." I have no objections to these hybrids, but they do slightly stretch the truth in advertising.

There is a curious recording of the great Concerto for Orchestra by Bela Bartok. The first movement is magnificent; the second, very good; the third shows strained sounds and less than perfect ensemble; the fourth is messy and unfocused, and the last is downright sloppy. What happened? Improper pacing of the recording sessions, and insufficient material on tape to do the necessary corrections during editing.

Listen to the recordings of Herbert Von Karajan. His early ones were the paragon of transparency and precision. The recordings of his last few years were generally imprecise, loose, and at times bordering on lack of interest.

Some of the world class orchestras are a joy to rehearse and record. The musicians are alert and give the most of themselves, which is usually a lot, and precision is achieved fairly quickly. At the other end, there are some bargain-counter European orchestras that are far less efficient, but with sufficient recording and rehearsal time (which is usually allotted), very nice results can be achieved.

Editing war stories are many; they could fill a whole book. I also have a few choice stories from my own experiences. Here is a classic, a wonderful story about editing that I heard many years ago, and was confirmed to me as true by London musicians.

In the 1950s or '60s, a famous conductor and pianist were recording the First Piano Concerto by Brahms with a London orchestra. Things were not going well at the sessions. The pianist was playing more wrong notes than right notes. Everyone involved had to endure the grueling task of recording practically every phrase of this magnificent concerto over, until there was a "take" that was acceptable and lent itself to editing. This time, money for the extra session was not an issue.

After the sessions, producers and engineers took months to painstakingly and heroically go through the tapes second by second, doing miracles in the editing room. Thousands of hours were devoted, but the final result was such a magnificent performance that it is still regarded today as a classic.

Fast forward to the listening room, a few months later. Seated were the pianist, conductor, and all the exhausted engineering crew, listening to the absolutely perfect recording of the Brahms' Concerto. The conductor turned toward the pianist and told him, "Don't you wish you played like that?"