Cast Recordings Live vs. In Studio

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 6:44pm

Why did Brooklyn record live, but not in the studio? Is it because the show isn't doing as well as others on Broadway now, and it's cheaper to do live recordings?

P.S. The "Brooklyn Live!" thing reminds me of the "Chicago Live!" thing that is on tour.

[OrdinaryJukebox1]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 7:36pm

I don't know about the financial end of it, but I'm glad "Brooklyn" made their album live. It adds something, in my opinion. I'd rather listen to the actors sing in the moment, on the stage, while in character. Rather than on Monday afternoon, while they're off from the theater, going into a booth, and singing their songs. I'm not saying there isn't any passion behind a studio recording, I just prefer live! Just me!

-Vinny

[VeuveClicquot]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 9:03pm

It's my understanding that they recorded BROOKLYN in a recording studio, but with an invited audience to engender a "live" feeling for the cast album, to allow the cast to maintain their characters even though they were in the confines of a recording studio.

I find the whole process fascinating. There is something about a live recording that gives you a great sense of what the show was like (MOBY DICK, for example). It's also very interesting to me that they recorded the original cast of NINE in a rather "live" manner. Although they didn't have an audience, they sang the whole show from start to finish as opposed to laying down individual tracks. In that case, I think it made a huge difference, as the actors were able to preserve their performances, as opposed to trying to recreate moments one at a time. Updated On: 12/17/04 at 09:03 PM

[Tiny-Toon]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 9:07pm

As i said before -
Brooklyn was recorded live because many parts in the show are in front of an audience (like the carnegie hall and madison square garden scenes). It had to be in front of an audience. Also, it's a great marketing.

ADDED: Oh, and it's definitely NOT cheaper making a live studio recording then a normal cast recording.

Updated On: 12/17/04 at 09:07 PM

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 12/17/04 at 9:58pm

It seems the actual recording of 'Brooklyn' was like any other studio recording, they just had an audience there to give it that different vibe. The mechanics of it are studio recording standard operating procedure, though.

[Tiny-Toon]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 1:35am

yeah.. exact same thing just with fans

[bjivie2]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 11:25pm

I'm assuming that what they meant by "Live" was that they did each song as one take. Otherwise that's not live. And that's what I think is the most impressive thinga bout live theatre, is that everyone has to do things live and perfect every time, not like Britney Spears who can sing flat and they'll just use computers to bring her up to pitch.

[jacobtsf]

Posted: 12/18/04 at 11:33pm

The problem with "Live" recordings is that you can't go back to edit mistakes. The CD is NOT supposed to be the show, but it IS supposed to represent the show in the best light possible.

And about the monday off-comment- I have both been an actor and recorded music for the past five years and let me tell you that recording is a lot harder than it seems. So many things go wrong all the time and you can end up spending 3 hours recording 1 song(and your voice gets VERY tired)

[JMVR]

Posted: 12/19/04 at 1:23am

THe London Cast of The Woman in White recorded the CD live on the stage and just rerecorded a few numbers or scenes that were not that clear on the live recording because of applause interruptions, noise onstage or such things. I thinks this is a fair enough solution b/c you get a live recording with very high quality anyway. I think they also removed the applause from the CD but I honestly have not had time to really listen.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 12/19/04 at 1:27am

I have the cast recording from The Wizard of oz in Concert and I honestly enjoy it more than I would have if it had been recorded ina studio, though the audience should be SHOT for clapping along in some places the way that they do.

[Sally]

Posted: 12/20/04 at 1:54am

<< THe London Cast of The Woman in White recorded the CD live on the stage and just rerecorded a few numbers or scenes that were not that clear on the live recording because of applause interruptions, noise onstage or such things. I thinks this is a fair enough solution b/c you get a live recording with very high quality anyway. I think they also removed the applause from the CD but I honestly have not had time to really listen. >>

Yes, they removed the applause from all of the numbers except a repeat of Michael Crawford's "You Can Get Away With Anything," at the very end of the second CD. It's complete with applause, laughter, and some stage noise.

[bjivie2]

Posted: 12/20/04 at 5:26am

Is The Woman In White any good? I just know that Michael Crawford is in a fat suit. It already sounds better than Dance of the Vampires...

[rockfenris2005]

Posted: 12/20/04 at 8:16am

Yes, my beautiful BroadwayGuy loves his Oz! You are a very cultured boy :)))))

[JohnPopa]

Posted: 12/20/04 at 8:45am

I'm willing to bet the "Brooklyn" producers still went back and fixed bits of the recording.

There have been maybe one or two live records EVER that haven't had bits re-recorded and tweaked in post-production. Even 'King David' was heavily edited and re-recorded (as well as the 'Dreamgirls' concert,) even though the recording is still 'live.'