Re: [ARSCLIST] Ethics. was Record Business vs. Music Business: The Shakeout Continues.

[Rod Stephens <savecal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Karl Miller wrote:

> Steven Smolian <smolians@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:    ***When a performer has a bad day in the concert hall and he recorded without being aware that it is a "recording session." A radio broadcast was made with the expectation that it would vanish at the end of the broadcast. The  idea of recording from the audience, out of balance, etc., was clearly so illegal that many never considered it at all. Until the miniatrre tape recorder, that is.
>  
Or, as I had my brother do in the '60s, make an off the air reel to reel 
stereo recording @15 IPS of Sir William Walton conducting his own 
"Gloria" in Royce Hall at UCLA with the Roger Wagner Chorale and members 
of the L.A. Philharmonic.   The broadcast was over the private Crawfords 
of Beverly Hills station KCBH-FM.   It was/is a very exciting performance!!

(snip)

>  As for such practices causing performers to tighten up...I tend to think that it is the commercial recording, and attempts to measure up to that artificial standard, that causes a musician to be less likely to take chances during a performance. I believe it is the "note perfect" recordings that leave us with a recorded legacy that does not reflect the real world of performance. I am reminded of an article Leinsdorf wrote where he expressed his desire to make his live performances available as he felt they had more life to them, warts and all.
>  
Walton was a wonderful composer, but on this occasion, there were a few 
miscues, but those were minor bumps in the road compared to the overall 
rewards.

And, I was in there with the singers, so my POV and assessment may be 
biased.

Rod Stephens