Editing in Classical Music

[bitflipper]

It's been a bit of a dirty secret that some editing techniques that are standard practice with pop music are also used with "pure" genres such as classical, jazz and folk. Sure, engineers working in those genres will usually strive for transparency, but then pitch correction in pop music was once meant to be unnoticeable too. They got over that self-imposed restriction pretty fast.

At present, classical music production sticks to a light touch and subtle digital manipulation, but they've only recently become comfortable with admitting they do it at all. It makes sense to apply some amount of dynamic range reduction, given that people are far more likely to listen in the car while sitting in traffic, or on ear buds on a plane or train. Noise reduction seems reasonable, too. But I have to wonder if there hasn't also been some discrete enhancements using EQ and reverb.

This video mostly addresses editing, as opposed to processing (we can still draw a distinction between those things, for now). Mostly they talk about comping, but also mention the ability to do polyphonic pitch and timing corrections using Melodyne.

There is a segment in the middle that CW users might find interesting, where the hosts attempt to discern between real instruments and virtual instruments. Spoiler: the drummer guessed wrong on the drums and the pianist guessed wrong on the piano.

 

[Notes_Norton]

I hate auto-tune. I know singers who work hard to sing on pitch (like myself) and I also hear people intentionally singing out of tune a bit for expression.  Listen to Otis Redding's  "I've been loving you too long". When he sings the line "You walked out" he hits the word out a bit flat and slowly brings it up to pitch. This puts the pain in the phrase, and auto-tune would have sterilized it.

For classical music I don't mind EQ, some compression because the present recording techniques can't reproduce the dynamic range of a good symphony, and other soundscape effects. If you make mistakes, do another take, but prepare your material first.

I want to listen to a performance. But then I listen mostly to symphonies that can't be played the same way twice.

But then, I listen as a musician, not as the general public.

Pop music is a different situation. Much of the pop music I listen to could not have been made without extensive editing. In that case to me it just matters if I like it or not.

Notes

[henkejs]

The real instrument vs. vsti quiz brought home to me that it wasn't so much about which sounded more realistic as it was about which sounded "better" or more appealing.  In real life there are huge differences even among real instruments depending on the instruments used and the techniques/equipment by which they were recorded. A given recording may simply sound better to our ears. Now virtual instruments add another set of aesthetic choices. Regardless of how it was created, which sound do you like best.

[jackson white]

On 7/1/2021 at 11:12 AM, bitflipper said:

a bit of a dirty secret

??  maybe so for "classical", but always thought it's been fairly well known for jazz releases including some classics.  (i.e https://jazztimes.com/features/profiles/miles-davis-and-the-making-of-bitches-brew-sorcerers-brew/3/ )

Producers/tape engineers were earning their money on those sides.

...

3 hours ago, henkejs said:

there are huge differences even among real instruments

a point for Dirk Ulrich / Plugin Alliance to consider as they run out of vintage gear to emulate.

perhaps a TMT version of an orchestra? 

[bitflipper]

4 hours ago, henkejs said:

The real instrument vs. vsti quiz brought home to me that it wasn't so much about which sounded more realistic as it was about which sounded "better" or more appealing.  In real life there are huge differences even among real instruments depending on the instruments used and the techniques/equipment by which they were recorded. A given recording may simply sound better to our ears. Now virtual instruments add another set of aesthetic choices. Regardless of how it was created, which sound do you like best.

Exactly what went through my mind as I listened to it. What is a piano supposed to sound like, when no two sound alike to begin with? 

I have a real piano, a nice one. But I don't record it. It simply doesn't sound as good as some of my sampled pianos.

[Notes_Norton]

Perhaps I'm weird, but to me, there is an obsession about perfection in today's recording efforts. I understand that, because that mistake on the record lives forever. On the other hand, too much perfection can be very boring.

Everyone's tastes are personal, and mine are just mine. In the end, if you like the recording, it's good for you, and that's all that counts.

I have different preferences for different kinds of music. I think a symphony and a jazz recording should be done in one take, with nobody adding parts later on, no overdubbing, and no editing that affects the performance.

For everything else --- it depends.

Insights and incites by Notes

[mettelus]

On 7/2/2021 at 4:32 PM, bitflipper said:

I have a real piano, a nice one. But I don't record it. It simply doesn't sound as good as some of my sampled pianos.

That is the kicker in most cases. A real instrument requires proper environment, mics, yada, yada to even record properly (step 1), and that is only part of the effort to get a good song. VSTis are light-years from where they started and folks have gone to excruciating lengths to get them accurate.

From a user's perspective, the value of VSTis over the real instrument is often overwhelmingly one-sided (cost, quality, maintenance, time, etc.).

[Notes_Norton]

I took a drive yesterday to run some long overdue errands, and as I often do, I took my digital Walkman with over 10,000 songs on it.

I run it in the 'random' mode. To my delight, the Beatles' "Abbey Road Medley" came on. It is heavily edited from snippets of other recordings, with overdubs and ear candy added, and impossible for a 4 piece group to play live. And IMO it's one of the best things they ever recorded.

I don't have VSTs, but I have a rack full of synth modules.

IMO a digital piano does not replace an acoustic piano. They are two different but very similar instruments, each with their strengths and weaknesses. The digi-piano doesn't replace, it adds to the things a piano player can do.

Sax is my primary instrument. There are times when I play synthesized sax with my wind controller and physical modeling synth module. Why? For the same reason why a pianist might decide to play Rhodes on a particular song, because it fits.

The synth sax will do things my physical sax will not, and vice versa. So it's not either-or for me, it's both.

I play guitar, and in my duo I'll play some solos with my wind synth. Why? Guitar is my 7th and newest instrument, and there are things I can do on the synth that I'm just not a good enough guitarist (yet) to do.

As long as the music comes out good, it is good.

But I still prefer symphonies and jazz recorded in one take.

Insights and incites by Notes