Should cast recordings be done live?

[jennafan]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 2:12am

I know this has probably been discussed before, but I feel like starting a thread on this topic since I can't find an old one.

Theatre is all about singing live and having that real feel of emotion, which I think is lacking in (some) cast recordings. We know that the performers are usually in a booth and have a different emotion in a studio than they do on stage.

I personally think it would be great to see more cast recordings recorded live. The new 2009 London Oliver production was recorded live and it's quite good. I can deal with the applause.

I've just found that a lot of cast recording lack something, and I think the emotion and the feel of playing off the other people in the show.

[sking]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 2:29am

Billy Elliot absolutely should be recorded live...the OCR really does lack emotion for the most part(Letter not included).

[Rudy2]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 2:35am

Brooklyn the Musical was recorded live and it's excellent.

[roseaddams]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 2:36am

As left-field as the example is, the RENT German cast recording was done live and it's incredible.

[phantom39]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 5:25am

Brooklyn's OBCR was not done live at the theater... They just had invited audience at the recording session.

And yes, more shows should do this! There are so many cast recordings that lack the energy...

[Mark_E]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 6:02am

Hmmm I agree that live recordings are sometimes better, but alot of theatres don't have the right equipment to do this i don't think?

[ray-andallthatjazz86]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 7:09am

Some shows really do benefit better from this than others. I feel some of this season's shows like WEST SIDE STORY, SHREK, STORY OF MY LIFE, etc lend themselves better to studio recordings. The most obvious choice for a live recording this season is HAIR, and after listening to the wonderful recording, I still feel it lacks a lot of the energy that just comes from performing the show live (and I don't mean for this recording specifically, I never liked HAIR on recording--except for a few songs--until I saw the show live and finally "got" it).
There are some where I don't think it makes much difference, the PASSION London recording was recorded from a concert version that reunited the principals. I don't see much of a difference in terms of how the overall recording comes across (I suspect Maria Friedman's Fosca would have been as misconceived on a studio as it was on stage).

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 9:14am

Cast Recordings are usually the only way of remember a production. I think it's better to have every night crystal clear and perfect since that;s the only me and millions of other people can go back and relive a show. That's just my opinion.

[husk_charmer]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 10:00am

Ray-
I agree. HAiR *really* needed to be recorded live. I think it's one of those things that depends on the show, some can benefit, others don't, it all just depends.

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 10:05am

It depends on the show. For Brooklyn, it was appropriate, but for a show like West Side Story or Shrek I think those are better recorded in studio.

[KirbyCat]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 10:07am

I still think the Spamalot shoulda been recorded live. Their cast recording is just so energy-less without the audiences, and their gags that are missing from the songs just make it even less funnier!

[RippedMan]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 10:52am

I guess it would have been a pain with all the applause and stuff, but I think that adds to the recording, but whatever. At least it was recorded.

[kate86]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 2:29pm

YES!

the german 'mamma mia' was recorded live and it is amazing.

[philly03]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 3:21pm

While it does capture more a sense of the performance, I don't like the applause and sometimes there is room to cut stuff (but I suppose a Highlights-edition could be called in order for).

Andrew Lloyd Webber's Woman in White did this back in 2004 with the OLC. It was great - but a lot of it seemed to be over/re-recorded anyway. They covered up the applause/noises/etc. and it does sound wonderful, so I question how much of it is directly live!

[Pgenre]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 4:25pm

At the dress rehearsal for FOLLIES IN CONCERT the audience was not allowed to applaud to allow for pefect takes (masters) for the producers to reference if there was a problem recording on the night of the event.

The performers proceeded to perform show-stopper after show-stopper to a rapt audience filled with many cult fans of the show who were literally bursting at the seams, it seemed.

Elaine Stritch then proceeded to sing "Broadway Baby" for the first time in her classic, deadpan manner... to complete silence (as was expected). She then said probably the funniest thing I've heard from her, and that's saying a lot, but I can't re-post it here cuz it's too dirty (there's no cussin' here, right?).

But, YES they should be (usually) recorded live, but studio clean-up should be allowed too.

A Good Nightmare Comes So Rarely,
P genre

[me2]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 5:01pm

I prefer in the studio. I think BROOKLYN is fine and everything, but the applause and such feels forced. I like to get lost in the story, characters, and music, and the applause takes away from that. Plus, there was one note on the disc that would have turned out listenable in the studio--the one Paradice hits on bleeeeee-eee-eee-eeee-ed.
Broadway Mouth: And the Award for Most Amazing Person in New York Goes to . . .

[ThankstoPhantom]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 6:23pm

A few German-language musicals have recorded their shows live. The applause is never annoying because they keep it at a lower level than the actual audio of the show.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 6:56pm

I prefer in the studio. I think BROOKLYN is fine and everything, but the applause and such feels forced. I like to get lost in the story, characters, and music, and the applause takes away from that.

How do you get lost in the story, music and characters in a live performance then with all the applause taking away from that?

[HVicQ]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 11:23pm

I think that's absoloutely on the money. Some shows are perfectly studio-suited, but a rock show (i.e. rock of ages, brooklyn, hair) might benefit from the audience.

[PiraguaGuy2]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 11:24pm

I can't believe nobody mentioned the spectacular "Passing Strange" recording, which was live and captured the spirit and energy of the show better than any recording years before it.

[AndAllThatJazz22]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 11:30pm

I loved the way 'Keys' turned out. Stew has such a coolio, unique voice... and Daniel has a more R&B voice... the company has ALL different styles of singing and when they're combined, it's stunning.

[Gobstopper]

Posted: 5/30/09 at 11:37pm

I honestly don't think it would make that much of a difference. Most live albums have SO many studio retouches that it is hardly "live" by the time it is in your hot little hands.

Though not a cast recording, "KISS Alive!" is arguably one of the most iconic live albums ever, and a LOT of it was rerecorded in the studio.

I think more of a difference is made when the actors who are singing a song together actually get to record together instead of at seperate times.

[scott68]

Posted: 5/31/09 at 12:02am

Both of the examples I wanted to give have already been given, but I'll add my voice to the fray. Passing Strange really couldn't have been done anything but live. The show couldn't even translate in their actual performance at the Tonys (a misguided song choice, I personally think), but the live cast recording really captures the electric feeling that seeing the show was. Alternately, Hair really should have done a live recording. I think they did an admirable job of trying to translate the live experience to the recording, but it just can't capture the feeling of actually being in the theater.

In general, I actually think that most cast recordings should be done in the studio, and the clarity afforded by that approach is fantastic. But there are certain shows that are just such theatrical experiences that they can't be captured in a studio recording, and I think that more shows should definitely consider live recordings.

[Byron Abens]

Posted: 5/31/09 at 2:23am

I almost want to say that the audience noises heard in the live cast recordings are pumped up a bit. I would assume that the live recordings are done by essentially recording what is going through the sound board, and by extension what you are then hearing coming through the speakers, and I certainly don't ever recall hearing the applause from a number being picked up by the mics and then echoed back through the speakers.

I'm just going by the logic suggested by (admittedly more limited than other areas) knowledge of sound systems.

[CATSNYrevival]

Posted: 5/31/09 at 2:42am

Applause is definitly loud enough to be picked up by the mics and recycled though the sound system. Though a good sound designer is able to minimize any distortion that may be caused. It also explains why you're able to hear applause on sound board recordings -- it's being picked up by the mics on stage.