CD's/Albums of studio or live performaces?

[Hardbopjazz]

When listening to music, I find my live CD's to be more enjoyable then most of my studio recordings. There is something special of hearing it done live, which you can't always get in a studio.

[Hardbopjazz]

I just found an out of print CD of the 1982 Aurex Jazz Festival in Japan.

(East World Jazz [J] EWJ 80238)

This Cd's kicks ass. The artists are:

Clark Terry (tp, flh, vo)

J.J. Johnson, Kai Winding

Dexter Gordon (ts)

Tommy Flanagan (p)

Kenny Burrell (g)

Richard Davis (b)

Roy Haynes (d)

Has anyone here heard this recording?

[jazzbo]

I have many favorites in both camps. I wouldn't say that I enjoy one more than the other. . . . They are different experiences, often with different intent from the performers. . . .

[relyles]

If the performance is good, I don't have a preference whether it is a studio or live recording.

[jazzbo]

And if it's bad. . .I want to hear it anyway. (Right Mr. Cuscuna?)

[John Tapscott]

Voted for studio, but a tough call. Years ago I would definitely have said "live." But over the years I've come to see that the studio is where most jazz masterpieces come from, not all mind you, but a quick tabulation will reveal, I think, that it's true. Live recordings not only capture musicians at their best, but also at their most grandstanding (think JATP). For sure, you often lose a bit of intensity in the studio, and gain a bit of polish. But that may not be a bad thing for a permanent record of a musician's work. The studio seems to be the place where the creation of new music and the most thoughtful statements take place; again not always, but often true. "Live" recordings are often a rehash of the musicians day by day repetoire.

The opportunity for studio "fixes", the opportunity to record new music, the generally more reliable sound quality, and the more concise solos, make the studio albums slightly preferable in my view. And it depends on the musicians, too. I generally prefer Bill Evans' live recordings to his studio dates; whereas I generally prefer 'Trane's studio dates to his live dates. But note the key word "generally". In any case, I would have both live and studio dates in my desert island collection.

[Cali]

Hard to choose. On one hand you have superior acoustics in studio (generally). On the other hand "live" recordings cannot be matched for capturing the interaction and inspiration between musicians and audience, at least in the case of jazz.

Coltrane is a classic example. The spirit in the Village Vanguard and Birdland sessions could never have been captured in a studio IMO.

[Jazz Kat]

Studio. I think most live preformances are spun off of what came about in the studio. Live preformances are cool, and like a bonus for me, but I couldn't live off live cd's. I could live off studio cuts.

[Aggie87]

Studio. I think most live preformances are spun off of what came about in the studio. Live preformances are cool, and like a bonus for me, but I couldn't live off live cd's. I could live off studio cuts.

I have to disagree with your general comment about live music spinning off of studio music. That may be the case for some artists, but I can think of any number of musicians in the jazz arena (and out of it) who's live music - and recordings of that music - transcend their studio work.

I agree with relyles comments above. There are good studio recordings, and there are good live recordings. I'm glad to have both, and don't see a need to pick one over the other, or even compare them.

Edited April 8, 2005 by Aggie87

[Sundog]

This one is a bit of an oddity, it was done "live" with a crowd in the studio. The results speak for themselves.

I have know real preference. However, albums that are "constructed" in the studio sometimes leave me a bit cold. I'm talking about multiple overdubs and other studio trickery. There are exceptions of course, but generally speaking I'm not really into it.

[md655321]

Obviously there is something special live that just can not be captured in the studio, but the sheer voume of studio albums over quality live albums effects this poll. Plus, the clarity of presentation for studio work is also important. Especially when we get new compositions. Live 60s Miles is undoubtedly phenomenal, but its also nice to hear the studio stuff, and the newness of it.

Live Trane is amazing as well, but there is something about the directness and clarity of the studio albums that makes for and easier listen and makes it a bit more accessible. The live recordings are for when you get past the studio ones. The live stuff is better, but the studio is still neccessary.

Sorta like Godfather Two compared to the first.

[Popper Lou]

In the studio, you can always do another take to get it right. When it's live, you just have that once chance. That's makes me enjoy live music more.

[A Lark Ascending]

In general I prefer studio recordings.

Live recordings are not the same as being at a live performance; and I suspect alot of the excitement of a live performance comes not just from the musical quality but the sense of occasion.

But there are times when things I've heard done live on the radio sound overcooked in a studio recording.

Fortunately we don't have to choose. We get plenty of both.

[Jazz Kat]

exactly

[mikeweil]

Studio recordings with a live approach, I'd say.

I tend to dislike over-produced studio LPs, except when the results are stunning.

Live recordings often have great exitement, but lesser sound quality.

I have favourites in both camps.

[Guest akanalog]

i like to get familiar with an artist via studio work but then feel like hearing live stuff is an integral part of getting the full picture of an artist generally.

one thing is that i am often disappointed by the commercial live albums i find. a lot of times i guess they are cobbled together from different shows or not sequenced true to the actual performance. but i am surprised how many OJC live performances of artists i like i have found that didn't live up to my expectations. maybe my expectations are too high?

i love a lot of the material i find on easytree though. there is something about the live performance-it shows me these were and are real actual people playing real instruments and doing something interestng and impressive. it might be because i am relatively young-these live performances-radio broadcasts and etc are snapshots of moments in time i missed.

like i can hear larry coryell albums, but then yesterday i heard a live radio broadcast frm 1975-heard an MC introduce the band-heard applause-heard how the band worked out material live-it really added to my overall larry coryell experience to experience him in this way.

[wolff]

Ella live vs. Ella studio. No contest...live, baby!! There's just somthing more intimate and real about a live recording that I feel and experience. Trouble is finding them.

Otis Redding live is another one. Unbelievable.