live vs. recording

[Alienbob]

so on the songs i've been working on lately, i really like having some harmonized guitars overlaying the chords. For instance i have the guitar playing along with the verse melody. But then one guitar goes up and it becomes a two part harmony, which is something a band with 2 guitarists couldn't pull off live if somebody was still playing the rhythm chords for the song. So i'm just wondering what everybody thinks about making somewhat elaborate recordings that you can't really reproduce live. Is it alright to embelish recorded songs or should you record a song similar to the way you would hear it live?

[Moseph]

You might be surprised how many commercial groups record in such a way that they could not reproduce live without some form of outside assistance.

In fact, a lot of groups will either supplement the band with additional musicians or some form of automated accompaniament for their live show for this very reason.

I see no reason to force the "live aesthetic" onto a recording. I see the two as different creative entities.

[Iceman-rocker]

in metallica's "the Unforgiven" ,
theres a french horn in the beginning.

have u ever seen them with a horn player live?

[deadsea]

hello fellow musicians. i'm a new member and as yet cannot start a new thread. i was wonderin if anyone could help. i'm about to purchase a korg d3200 digital studio. i'm quite a novice at the mo and was wonderin how i can connect more than one set of headphones to the recorder? am i a moron? :confused:

[Hi My Name Is Mark]

deadsea: Yes you're a moron. If you're going to post in somebody's thread asking a question, make it relevant. Go in a thread about recording gear. It's not hard to read three posts above yours and realize you don't want to post your question here.

Alienbob: I say, make the recording as interesting as you possibly can. You want people to keep listening to it and for more people to buy it. If you produce this "we sound like this live" type recording, it won't be as interesting.

I know I'm not the only person who doesn't like to feel like I'm listening to a CD really loud with a group of people on a stage holding instruments. That's why so many bands change their songs, even if it's slight changes, when they play live. If you have two guitarists, one can do the rhythm, and one can do interesting stuff that may be completely different than the recording. As long as it's in the right key and tempo and everything, and you know how to play, it should sound good.

[Blakfeld]

I agree with everyone else, my feelings on the matter are that recorded and live music should be two very different animals. Recording allows you to do so much, add so much, whether it be a harmonizing guitar or that Metallica French Horn, and Live allows you to improvise on whats already there. In my personal opinion, its boring for both you and your fans if they both are identical. If I see a band live, and I could play a CD exactly to them, I'm almost immediately turned off.

[Woundweaver]

On stage, mid song jamming ftw.

I love it when bands do that, chop, change and otherwise mess with their songs, it adds a bit of individuality and more "hey rob, do you remember when we saw them do [insert song name] live? that was f'kin fantastic with the [insert jammingnessy stuff here]"

Edit: Welcome to MX Deadsea, just get yourself a headphone splitter from your local electrics shop.