[Slowhand] Re: 2006 World Tour Video

[sam mangano]

the last few shows i have attended, i have asked bob collins for a set list. 
he usually gladly obliges me, pulling one from the stack held down by that 
night's CD recording jewel box case. i always jokingly ask for the case as 
well, and he always politely declines my request......

out
sambo8
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Almighty Geetarz" <almighty_geetarz at yahoo.com>
To: <slowhand at planet-torque.com>
Sent: Sunday, November 12, 2006 8:25 PM
Subject: [Slowhand] Re: 2006 World Tour Video



> "All the gigs are being taped, but don't think its for public distribution 

> release.

> I asked in Uncasville and was told, "We always tape".  I found that 

> interesting. "

>

> ---------

>

> Perhaps the best analogy might be that for instance were you in a band, 

> you might record your rehearsals, but you'd certainly use more care if you 

> were planning on releasing what you had recorded.

>

> With audio, a pure 2-channel board recording can be released, but then 

> again if they're shooting for "official" release quality usually a lot 

> more work is done, i.e. instead of running 2-channel they will go 

> multitrack so that more detailed mixing/editing are possible.  A stock 

> straight-to-board recording is a beautiful thing to some of us but would 

> tend to put off many buyers who are used to a more conventional "live" 

> mix.

>

> Of course the shows have always been recorded - thanks to a sound engineer 

> on the '74 tour we have many nice soundboards, and by the '80s they were 

> using cassette racks and then of course on to DAT recorders.   Back when 

> RF was managing EC I saw him walk back and personally take care of the 

> tapes at show's end. (Of course I asked "where's my copy???" and just 

> received a thin-lipped smile). Not sure what is being used now but many 

> bands have moved away from removable media since ... well, it's removable 

> ... and gone to dedicated hard drive recorders, which have the added bonus 

> that (1) it's difficult for a crew member to smuggle out an entire PC and 

> (2) even if the recorders do escape the venue, quite often the contents of 

> the drives are encrypted for that very reason.  Can't find it at present 

> but there was an interesting article a couple years back about the rise of 

> encrypted recording technology and how most large touring bands had gone 

> in that direction for obvious reasons.

>

> With video things get even more complicated, the simple 2 or 3 cam setup 

> used to simply provide footage for the live projection screens isn't up to 

> the production/quality standards one would expect from an "official" 

> release.  Add in the complications of recording and mixing audience 

> audio/video for surround mixes which are pretty much "required" for major 

> label release and it's a much more involved undertaking than the raw 

> audio/video recorded at each performance.  The cameras/equipment used 

> aren't in the same league as would be used in today's market for potential 

> release.

>

> I can't think of a worthwhile analogy in the EC world but anyone familiar 

> with The Who would instantly be familiar with the DVDs of the various 

> shows from the 2000 tour, which were taken simply from the projection 

> screen cams, versus the "Live at the Albert Hall" footage which was 

> professionally shot and intended for DVD release ... two very different 

> recording approaches.

>

> Of course it would certainly be welcome if EC took a tip from his old 

> friend Pete Townshend and simply released the audio/video from each show, 

> with profits going to the Crossroads Center (or the Buy Eric a new Ferrari 

> 599GTB fund). Sign me up!

>

> Cheers,

> AG

>

>

>