Live vs. recorded

I'm with Shadorne - maybe because our musical taste overlaps a fair bit. My favorite rock/pop/funk musicians are types that meticulously craft their songs, but manage to add that rock n' roll edge that suggests that it might all fall apart at any moment (think Richard Thompson to Lindsey Buckingham to Kid Creole). That tension is a real trick to pull off and the studio records only hint at the potential of a live performance where (for one thing) solos are extended and song structures break down.

These bands tend to emphasize the potential for chaos when playing live (relative to their studio recordings). For me, the trade-off in SQ is a small price to pay. But I do agree, the SQ is almost always a bummer.

Marty

Earlier, I posted that I prefer live recordings, but this thread got me thinking about a specific situation.

For the last couple of years I've had the same two CDs in the #3 and #4 slots of my car's CD changer:

#3 holds Lindsey Buckingham's "Out of The Cradle"
#4 holds Buckingham "Live at The Coach House", a bootleg recording of the tour he did in support of "Cradle".
The song lists aren't identical, but there's a lot of overlap.

First off, Cradle is just about my all-time favorite record and, typical of Buckingham (a Brian Wilson disciple), it's a monster studio production - immaculate in every detail - although I'm sure it's overproduced for some tastes.

The live record features mediocre sound quality. Some of the brilliant song craft on "Cradle" is jettisoned in favor of pure R'n'R energy. I've heard these variations a million times over the last 2 years and the energy is still compelling.

If I had to pick one, I'd have a hard time, but I'd pick "Cradle" - so I guess there really is no easy answer. At their best, both types of record have their charms.

Marty

Niacin,

Last count was app. 5,500 CDs and +/- 1,200 LPs.
The other four slots in the car get rotated every week or so, but I tend to be a tad obsessive about Buckingham.

Marty

A lot of jazz is recorded that way, too.