Richard Chycki says he's currently mixing a DT live album **DO NOT POST LINKS**

[cramx3]

I've always liked Umphrey's McGee's model and a lot of jam bands. They record the audio every night and are available for purchase. No clue why more bands don't do that. Can it be really that expensive to do? $10 for MP3 $12.95 for Lossless, $20 for Lossless and $20 for a CD copy

Red Hot Chili Peppers do that as well.  I still think it's a bit expensive for a band like DT to do.

[The Presence of Frenemies]

I really feel like the best way out of the issues we're discussing with the Budokan show is the Metallica model. Set up a few cameras every show, record them all and put them out on YouTube. That way, anytime you have a good night, it's there.

That would be the best model, by far. Only problem is, DT doesn't have the money Metallica does. Doing something like what you're talk about would be cost prohibitive for them ever night of a tour, even if on a smaller scale.

If you don't mind my asking, what aspects of that model are so costly?

[Setlist Scotty]

If you don't mind my asking, what aspects of that model are so costly?

I think it would be renting or owning several video cameras, even if they are set up on tripods and don't need operators. Then you'd also need at least a few actual camera men to be moving around in the pit in front of the stage and on stage. You need at least one crewman to set up and maintain those cameras. You'll need all the addition equipment for recording all that video and audio, as well as needing huge amounts of storage space (assuming all the cameras are HD, or at this point, 4K). You'll need extra space to transport the cameras and equipment, and possibly the camera men, if they are touring with the band. If the camera men are just local guys, extra time would be needed to educate them properly on what they are expected to do for the show, etc.

Now, I haven't a clue as to what the cost would be, since I'm not in the industry, but I'm pretty sure that it ain't chump change. Actually, I'll check with BobS who is in the industry and could give us a ballpark figure...

[KevShmev]

By and large, I agree with Kattoelox.  A live album should be, well, live, mistakes and all, otherwise why not just record new versions in the studio and dub in some crowd noise?  I realize that almost all bands do a fair amount of editing to their live albums, but it it definitely hard to think of it as really live when there is a ton of tweaking done after the fact.

[TAC]

One of the issues these days is the prevalence of bootlegs. Breaking The Fourth Wall sounds so fake compared to the boot.

Some of the legendary Live albums literally have live in the studio full band versions of songs with dubbed in crowd noise (KISS Alive II, UFO's Strangers In The Night, Thin Lizzy's Live And Dangerous), and others (KISS Alive and Unleashed In the East) are basically rerecorded.



Genrally fixes are OK, and frankly, expected. But LIve albums should basically be just that, Live. The worst thing a band can do is lose trust from their fanbase.

[gzarruk]

By and large, I agree with Kattoelox.  A live album should be, well, live, mistakes and all, otherwise why not just record new versions in the studio and dub in some crowd noise?  I realize that almost all bands do a fair amount of editing to their live albums, but it it definitely hard to think of it as really live when there is a ton of tweaking done after the fact.

I recall Michael Sweet of Stryper commented on this a couple years ago when they released a live album. He said he sang the wrong lyrics on one song but kept it that way because he was promising a live album and that's what people were going to get. That's the way to go, if you ask me.

[Mladen]

As much as I theoretically prefer the live videos to have no editing or correcting, it turns me off when someone's live video shows up and it's flawed, so much so that I sometimes pass on purchasing it or watching the whole thing. Maybe some perfecting is in order, but to rerecord or auto-tune big chunks of shows kind of loses me. On the other hand, I definitely respect the bands wanting to present us a quality release, so it's difficult.

[Peter Mc]

Leaving in little mistakes is fine but I don't want something that doesn't sound good. I never listen to OIALT or CIM live albums purely because the vocals are unlistenable for me (and I am a fan of JLB as my posting history will show). Warts and all live albums are all well and good but most important to me is that it's something that I actually enjoy listening to and not wincing at mistakes and bum notes. I believe JLB actually re-recorded his vocals for the live album at the Marquee but it still sounds like a live album and I enjoy listening to it.

[mikeyd23]

If you don't mind my asking, what aspects of that model are so costly?

I think it would be renting or owning several video cameras, even if they are set up on tripods and don't need operators. Then you'd also need at least a few actual camera men to be moving around in the pit in front of the stage and on stage. You need at least one crewman to set up and maintain those cameras. You'll need all the addition equipment for recording all that video and audio, as well as needing huge amounts of storage space (assuming all the cameras are HD, or at this point, 4K). You'll need extra space to transport the cameras and equipment, and possibly the camera men, if they are touring with the band. If the camera men are just local guys, extra time would be needed to educate them properly on what they are expected to do for the show, etc.

Now, I haven't a clue as to what the cost would be, since I'm not in the industry, but I'm pretty sure that it ain't chump change. Actually, I'll check with BobS who is in the industry and could give us a ballpark figure...

I think the extra cost would depend on the tour. On some tours, they have a video screen as part of the tour production, and therefore travel with cameras that are set up on the guys already. For example, on the DT12 tour, they had the one large video screen as part of the backdrop. If memory serves correctly, they had one or two stationary cameras set up pointing at MM, and one camera in front of JP, JM, and JR. I believe they also had a camera set up by the sound/lighting board for shots of the stage and James in particular. So in that instance, they were already traveling with pretty much all the cameras they would need to do a bare minimum video editing job. So if they added in a couple external hard drives to store that info, they'd have everything they needed (we know they are recording all the audio channels every night any way).

So really, the only real "extra" expense would be a person's time to edit the video and give the audio tracks a decent EQ, mix, etc... But if they were decent quality, and they were posting those to YouTube on a consistent basis during a tour, they'd probably make that money back and then some by monetizing those vids.

[bobs23]

If you don't mind my asking, what aspects of that model are so costly?

I think it would be renting or owning several video cameras, even if they are set up on tripods and don't need operators. Then you'd also need at least a few actual camera men to be moving around in the pit in front of the stage and on stage. You need at least one crewman to set up and maintain those cameras. You'll need all the addition equipment for recording all that video and audio, as well as needing huge amounts of storage space (assuming all the cameras are HD, or at this point, 4K). You'll need extra space to transport the cameras and equipment, and possibly the camera men, if they are touring with the band. If the camera men are just local guys, extra time would be needed to educate them properly on what they are expected to do for the show, etc.

Now, I haven't a clue as to what the cost would be, since I'm not in the industry, but I'm pretty sure that it ain't chump change. Actually, I'll check with BobS who is in the industry and could give us a ballpark figure...

To do this would be a pretty big undertaking. In basic terms, it would be like shooting a DVD every night. I have worked with some bands that do stadium tours and feed screens so the crowd in the back can see whats going on. This requires a video crew that mostly work for union wage. To take that feed and make it available for viewing later you need a recording system to take that feed and encode it for distribution. On top of that the audio will need some form of mastering as coming right off the sound board is not usable for distribution. Ideally it requires a separate stage feed that allows a mix for distribution. Then you have to have access to an internet connection to upload it in a timely fashion every day.
Even if you used gopro type cameras that are stationary for iso shots and a wide camera at FOH with just a person to do the live edit would get boring after a while cutting to the exact same shot all show. Lastly, in the case of present day Dream Theater this would make zero sense to do as  the band has stated that they prefer a show presented in a most consistent level of quality night to night. Offering a download of every show essentially would be the same performance on every copy other than the change of venue.

[rumborak]

I think the fact that James' rough nights are really rough these days would prevent them from doing this "instant gig" type of recording. There's been increasing amounts of overdubs on DT live releases over the years, and I think the reason why this Japanese video is so rough is because they couldn't overdub.

[cramx3]

I think the fact that James' rough nights are really rough these days would prevent them from doing this "instant gig" type of recording. There's been increasing amounts of overdubs on DT live releases over the years, and I think the reason why this Japanese video is so rough is because they couldn't overdub.

True.  He will get non stop criticism which they don't need and if they aren't changing things up night to night, there's not much reason to make every show available.

[noxon]

DT already records everything on stage in protools every night. As seen on the video we got from the band interviewing the FoH guy.

[The Presence of Frenemies]

I think the fact that James' rough nights are really rough these days would prevent them from doing this "instant gig" type of recording. There's been increasing amounts of overdubs on DT live releases over the years, and I think the reason why this Japanese video is so rough is because they couldn't overdub.

Then record them all but release the ones where everything went well. It's not like James never sounds good. A lot of the last leg of the IWB tour with the reworked melodies, he was pretty solid, for instance. If they even were to release the best 20% of the shows, monetized on YT, I think it would work well, or at least better than picking a show for pro release and then hoping everyone is good that night. At least aside from the cost, which does seem to present some complications based on what people have said above.

[rumborak]

I have actually wondered in the past whether James somehow went into some local studio on tour to overdub some of the passages for live DVDs. It only now occurred to me that since they play all shows with click, they can really just easily splice a performance from a good day into the DVD, with no work necessary.

[The Presence of Frenemies]

I have actually wondered in the past whether James somehow went into some local studio on tour to overdub some of the passages for live DVDs. It only now occurred to me that since they play all shows with click, they can really just easily splice a performance from a good day into the DVD, with no work necessary.

Would have to match up with the phrasing he had in the show though, at least for the parts where he's visible. Else it's just cringe material.

[rumborak]

No problem whatsoever, happened with BTFW. The initial trailer had them focus on JP during his solo but it then became apparent they had overdubbed the solo. So, the official release simply showed someone else during that moment.

[The Presence of Frenemies]

Sure, but for certain passages it's natural to focus on the singer, so it would be a pretty big limitation if everything was way off. And I've seen multiple DVDs where it's really sloppily edited in a way that makes the vocal overdubs obvious.

[ErHaO]

I am personally in favour of ironing away the most glaring mistakes in live releases, as long as the release overall is representative of the general performance. Makes for a much better listening experience. However, if there were so many mistakes that it had to be rerecorded alltogether on many or even most parts, then maybe it is better to withhold release.

On the other hand, I am pretty sure some of the most legendary live albums were ssignificantly overdubbed. And I enjoy more "raw" studio versions because I feel very often a certain energy is lost when processed in the studios.

[ReaperKK]

As much as I theoretically prefer the live videos to have no editing or correcting, it turns me off when someone's live video shows up and it's flawed, so much so that I sometimes pass on purchasing it or watching the whole thing. Maybe some perfecting is in order, but to rerecord or auto-tune big chunks of shows kind of loses me. On the other hand, I definitely respect the bands wanting to present us a quality release, so it's difficult.

I like a few mistakes in my live releases but sometimes things have to be edited. Case in point check out that legendary PULSE Comfortably Numb solo that was show live on PPV. They cut a minute and a half out on the final film because David Gilmour screwed up so bad.

[Ben_Jamin]

The only way I see the show being released is through Ytsejam, or better yet an x-mas gift release.

I wonder, since they released Arriving Somewhere...on cd now, does it include the Trains incident where Steven breaks his guitar string. Its like Alice in Chains unplugged when Layne fucks up the lyrics and has to stop the song.

[Peter Mc]

As much as I theoretically prefer the live videos to have no editing or correcting, it turns me off when someone's live video shows up and it's flawed, so much so that I sometimes pass on purchasing it or watching the whole thing. Maybe some perfecting is in order, but to rerecord or auto-tune big chunks of shows kind of loses me. On the other hand, I definitely respect the bands wanting to present us a quality release, so it's difficult.

I like a few mistakes in my live releases but sometimes things have to be edited. Case in point check out that legendary PULSE Comfortably Numb solo that was show live on PPV. They cut a minute and a half out on the final film because David Gilmour screwed up so bad.

Wasn't aware of this, that solo on the Pulse cd is the single greatest guitar solo of all time for me.

[rumborak]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

[Stewie]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

It only quit working during Under a Glass Moon, in the section leading up to the solo. Maddi swapped guitars with him just in time for the solo. It was definitely a close call, but they did a great job of editing the DVD to where you never even know it happened.

[noxon]

Pretty sure Jay Baskin was the guitar tech for Score  (and Jake Bowen (Periphery and JPs nephew) was the keyboard tech)

[sfam2112]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

You might be thinking of the keyboard rig going down at the beginning of the first Budokan show.

[ReaperKK]

As much as I theoretically prefer the live videos to have no editing or correcting, it turns me off when someone's live video shows up and it's flawed, so much so that I sometimes pass on purchasing it or watching the whole thing. Maybe some perfecting is in order, but to rerecord or auto-tune big chunks of shows kind of loses me. On the other hand, I definitely respect the bands wanting to present us a quality release, so it's difficult.

I like a few mistakes in my live releases but sometimes things have to be edited. Case in point check out that legendary PULSE Comfortably Numb solo that was show live on PPV. They cut a minute and a half out on the final film because David Gilmour screwed up so bad.

Wasn't aware of this, that solo on the Pulse cd is the single greatest guitar solo of all time for me.

The version on the cd is taken from another Earls Court show but the DVD version is edited. If you're ever board watch the whole Pulse concert on PPV, there is a great side-by-side on youtube. You can see the different camera angles and the mix is different (the guitars are much hotter in the mix)

[Stewie]

Pretty sure Jay Baskin was the guitar tech for Score  (and Jake Bowen (Periphery and JPs nephew) was the keyboard tech)

Regardless of who the tech was, the rest of my post is accurate, as far as I know...

[MirrorMask]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

You might be thinking of the keyboard rig going down at the beginning of the first Budokan show.

The guitar however didn't work for 30 seconds in Under a Glass Moon

[sfam2112]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

You might be thinking of the keyboard rig going down at the beginning of the first Budokan show.

The guitar however didn't work for 30 seconds in Under a Glass Moon

Correct. During Score.

[Chino]

The guitar at the beginning of Score was not working, so they had to overdub that. That never bothered me, it made total sense.

You might be thinking of the keyboard rig going down at the beginning of the first Budokan show.

The guitar however didn't work for 30 seconds in Under a Glass Moon

Correct. During Score.

I was about 12 feet away from Petrucci at the show and somehow didn't notice the guitar go out.

[bosk1]

I have already asked that people not share or link to any postings of this show.  As the rule clearly state:

2a. Sharing, requests for sharing, offers to share, or discussion of illegally obtaining pirated material is strictly prohibited. This includes, but is not limited to, warez, direct links, asking for links/files, and hinting at resources for finding the material.

This applies to ANY site that may have it.  Offending posts have been deleted, but this is the last time I will warn on the subject.  Further violations will result in being banned from the forum.

[metrojam]

In my opinion, the only things that should ever be edited on a live album are technical gremlins, i.e. mics giving up or guitarists breaking a string and having to "manage" for the rest of the song with what they have left or when certain instruments are too far down in the mix. Bad vocals and instrumental mess ups should be left in, as a "live album" is meant to be a record of what actually happened at the gig, not what happens in a studio a few weeks/months later.
If the vocals are that bad that they have to seriously edited and auto tuned, then the vocalist needs to either get better or leave, the same goes for any musician who messes up his playing, practice, get better or let someone else do it who CAN play live!.
If groups (and I know several do) feel that their live albums should be basically re-recorded in a studio, then they should at least be honest about it and state that on the back cover with all the credits, thanks etc.

[Orbert]

Different people want different things from a live album.  I personally prefer absolutely no overdubs or edits at all.  I want a document of the event exactly as it happened.  I wasn't there, and listening to the live album is the next best thing.

Some people feel that a live album should represent the "ideal" performance.  Every note, sung or played, should be perfect.  Edit together the best performances from different nights, and overdub the rest.  Basically a studio-perfect album but processed to simulate a live recording.  The justification is that (a) some fans want this idealized performance and (b) some bands want to present this idealized performance.

Most people are somewhere in between, but honestly, that still baffles me.  If it's edited at all, it's not live.

[Cool Chris]

If the vocals are that bad that they have to seriously edited and auto tuned, then the vocalist needs to either get better or leave....

I would agree with this, with the addition of the option of 1) Performing songs that are within the vocalists current capabilities and/or 2) Revising any vocal lines to suit the vocalist's current abilities. Some people will balk at this but I have no problem with it. While a vocalist can in some ways indeed get better, Father Time is undefeated when it comes to diminishing physical capabilities.