Why is music sounds different between a Live and a Recorded performance?

Question

Whe we hear a song, sound or some other performance Live in a show or something the sound and the Echo is different but when we hear the same song or sound in a recorded manner it sounds different.

Hows that? Please explain in brief!

Answer 1

Ok. Say we are listening to a concert in an auditorium full of people .The first sound to arrive at our ears is the direct sound from the artists on stage.Then a fraction of a second later we hear the reflected sound coming off the walls of the auditorium with more reflections following that creates an echo.This reflected sound then gets mixed with the direct sound which makes the auditorium seem larger than it is. We also hear noises from the audience mixed in.

When a recording is made of the same performance it is vastly different to a live event.Vocals are recorded in a special sound proof booth where the singers have headphones on listening to the musical accompaniment
they are singing to.Other artists are recording their part of the program in special recording studios .After they have all finished everything is put onto digital multi track tape where artificial reverberation and other adjustments are made before the final master is completed.
The final result is something very different to a live performance of the recording.
When the same recording is put onto a Compact Disc and played back in our listening rooms the results are usually very pleasing but cannot match the realism of the live performance. The recording is too sterile.

Neil Diamond's Hot August Night Album was recorded live in an open air auditorium (The Greek Theater) in 1972 and the sound is very realistic because of the natural sounds of the instruments and voices without artificial reverberation in favour of open air acoustics.

The best recordings made in a studio in the 70's were Direct to Disc recordings .A Direct to Disc recording is one where the original performance or "take" is recorded live directly onto the master lacquer(no tape is used) and from the metal master a limited number of "mothers" and "stampers' are made to produce only a limited number of albums .If there is a mistake made by someone during the recording session, it has to be stopped and the musicians have to start all over again to get it right. The final result is a life like recording which approaches a real live event as there is no mixing or manipulation to do.

Answer 2

The recording is done in a sound proof room. No external noise interferes with the song. Whereas in a live performance, hundreds of noises are also recorded along with the performance. The clarity is gone & that is why, recorded songs are better to hear.

Answer 3

Jimi Hendrix explained it this way, if people want to hear the recording they can listen to the record, if they want to hear the song the way it was intended before all the editing they listen to it live. He said live we put much more into the song also there are over dubs in the recording that can't be done live so we give them more live to make up for that.

Answer 4

i might say recorded. If it particularly is a pop singer, i might say recorded, because of the fact they are so edited that they sound lots worse while they are stay. Rock song in many circumstances sounds noticeably good stay, and it particularly is exciting to pass to shows, yet recorded is sweet for any time.

Answer 5

pre recorded sounds better because its a controled environment and is digitaly recorded...everything becomes adjustable...but when your live you cant take out those minor imperfections...

Answer 6

dunno look it up in da interent lol