A Mark In Time

Start Here => Technical Help => Topic started by: Jules on November 16, 2009, 06:53:54 PM

Title: Recordings
Post by: Jules on November 16, 2009, 06:53:54 PM
Hello

Does any of you know about IEM recordings,  or know any kind of live recording forums with information about it?

Please send me a PM  :)
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Hoops McCann on November 16, 2009, 10:31:58 PM
Personally, I don't think this topic should be here, but as jbaent asked for info via PM, this will be left as is.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Jules on November 17, 2009, 05:46:12 PM
Thanks Dan  :)

Now waiting for some information, thanks!  :D
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: localhero1986 on November 17, 2009, 08:40:08 PM
IEM recordings SUCK.

Reason #1: It is a monitor mix and no representation of the actual music. The worst mix you can have actually.

Reason #2: A certain person in London made an IEM recording back in 2008. Guy was busy solving the problem. Therefore there was no time left to organize a M&G. It was also the last opportunity for a M&G for me (and a friend of mine). So this idiot SCREWED my M&G in Cologne (yes, thank you!). >:( >:(

So, I just say it once: don't break in for IEM recordings as the recording itself is useless, you disturb the band AND your fellow fans!!!
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on November 17, 2009, 09:13:59 PM
Ouch. That whole situation was a nightmare.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Pottel on November 17, 2009, 09:25:47 PM
yup, right on localhero!
no one can seriously prefer an IEM rec. to a genuine soundboard, or top quality rec. like the ones martina or george wang makes them, or a certain young fella in the NYC area :-)
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Love Expresso on November 18, 2009, 07:41:01 AM
Yes. But when we all had the chance to get the IEM from Boothbay, nobody complained about its quality...

LE
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: rudiger on November 18, 2009, 09:23:18 AM
IEM recordings have not the best mix, but they are better than nothing or than many audience recordings. Of course soundboard would be the best. Said that, we know the band is annoyed by this kind of recordings, so I would not encourage anybody to make one. But, without hypocrisy, if I know that an IEM recording exists I'd like to have it ;D (without to make publicity on a public forum)
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: JeroenvG on November 18, 2009, 10:01:05 AM
IEM recording is the worst recording. I have 1 IEM recording from the last U2 tour and you can hear a computer voice counting down from 10 to 1. And thru the whole song that computer voice is saying when to start a song and when the bass comes in etc etc.

I prefer audience recording to feel the concert atmosphere.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on November 18, 2009, 10:43:11 AM
IEM recording is the worst recording. I have 1 IEM recording from the last U2 tour and you can hear a computer voice counting down from 10 to 1. And thru the whole song that computer voice is saying when to start a song and when the bass comes in etc etc.

I prefer audience recording to feel the concert atmosphere.

That's very interesting. Shows that a U2 show is hardly "live" at all, just pre-programmed for them to play along with and fit in with light shows etc. With MK there is scope for improvisation and change, even if it doesn't happen very often.

Also, as far as I am aware, nobody knows for sure if Boothbay was IEM.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: dmg on November 18, 2009, 11:06:00 AM
Wonder what a Britney Spears IEM recording sounds like!! ;D
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Simon on November 18, 2009, 12:03:52 PM
IEM recording is the worst recording. I have 1 IEM recording from the last U2 tour and you can hear a computer voice counting down from 10 to 1. And thru the whole song that computer voice is saying when to start a song and when the bass comes in etc etc.

I prefer audience recording to feel the concert atmosphere.

That's very interesting. Shows that a U2 show is hardly "live" at all, just pre-programmed for them to play along with and fit in with light shows etc. With MK there is scope for improvisation and change, even if it doesn't happen very often.

Also, as far as I am aware, nobody knows for sure if Boothbay was IEM.

Bono showing his age and the fact his memory isn't as good as it was maybe;-)
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on November 18, 2009, 12:31:46 PM
IEM is not good or bad it is what the sound engineer mix in it.

To date the best available 2001 recording is IEM sourced.

To date nothing from 2008 is available in sbd quality

And how an IEM stealth can disturb things? Let me explain this please.
















Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on November 18, 2009, 12:42:21 PM
The IEM recordings of TLWNF and SoS that were released before it all went tits up sounded pretty good to my ears.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: Pottel on November 18, 2009, 01:25:53 PM
britney,...a bit like the album i guess  ;D ;D
as dusty said, no one really knew for sure as to whether or not it was IEM.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: koobaa on November 18, 2009, 03:21:47 PM
Since Guy started describing what IEM are in his Tour Diaries, I always wondered what kind of sound / mix it is that they hear, so it was VERY interesting to listen to such a recording and I enjoyed it a lot. The 2001 LA show is one of my favorites, and it sounds pretty good to me, actually better than some of SDB recordings from that tour. I treat this recording as a curiosity but I understand the band's view too.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: JeroenvG on November 18, 2009, 03:51:26 PM
IEM recording is the worst recording. I have 1 IEM recording from the last U2 tour and you can hear a computer voice counting down from 10 to 1. And thru the whole song that computer voice is saying when to start a song and when the bass comes in etc etc.

I prefer audience recording to feel the concert atmosphere.

That's very interesting. Shows that a U2 show is hardly "live" at all, just pre-programmed for them to play along with and fit in with light shows etc. With MK there is scope for improvisation and change, even if it doesn't happen very often.

Also, as far as I am aware, nobody knows for sure if Boothbay was IEM.

If anyone is interested in how it sounds. I think it is terrible, it is Mono and during the whole song you can hear some sort of shaking instrument to give the tempo for Adam. This IEM is from the bassplayer and it is not made by me.

http://rapidshare.com/files/308785272/03-Breathe.flac.html
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: rudiger on November 18, 2009, 03:55:15 PM
The 2001 LA show is one of my favorites, and it sounds pretty good to me....

very nice recording indeed  ;)
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: localhero1986 on November 18, 2009, 05:29:14 PM
If anyone is interested in how it sounds. I think it is terrible, it is Mono and during the whole song you can hear some sort of shaking instrument to give the tempo for Adam. This IEM is from the bassplayer and it is not made by me.

http://rapidshare.com/files/308785272/03-Breathe.flac.html

Just like I thought, it IS indeed terrible... :-\
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: JeroenvG on November 18, 2009, 06:28:39 PM
If anyone is interested in how it sounds. I think it is terrible, it is Mono and during the whole song you can hear some sort of shaking instrument to give the tempo for Adam. This IEM is from the bassplayer and it is not made by me.

http://rapidshare.com/files/308785272/03-Breathe.flac.html

Just like I thought, it IS indeed terrible... :-\

Yes you are right. If you listen to the same recording from audience it sounds much better.
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: IrisRose on November 19, 2009, 04:47:56 AM
"Tits up"?      Suppose that's like "belly up." ;D
I was just going to post that this was the first I'd heard that Boothbay was iem.    But it's the first time I've heard "tits up."     Regional?   Is there an alternate gender version?
Title: Re: Wireless Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on November 19, 2009, 08:44:49 AM
Well, sort of. When something has gone wrong, it has gone "tits up". Sligtly different, butwhen you make a mistake you could call it a "cock up" or a "balls up". But you wouldn't say that it's "gone cock up", you would say "That was a cock up."

With me?  :)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: holaknopfler on November 19, 2009, 08:21:30 PM
I think if the recording is good or not has something to do with the way it`s recorded for instance the LA 2001 recording sounds great, I have several U2 IEM`S and a lot of them sound crap.
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 11, 2010, 06:32:31 PM
Nice editing of the subject, by the way.

Most of my curiosity regarding about this kind of recording has more to do with the fact that to record the whole show with an IEM recorder you should know the frequency of the actual IEM you want to record, or at least to know one of the frequencies being used, and that means you have to scan before the show beguins...

How that is done by those who record the shows in that way?

With the Knopfler RAH shows it
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Simon on January 11, 2010, 11:57:43 PM
I am perplexed as to why it is thought that the IEM recordings are made wirelessly. It is quite simple to take a line out from the soundboard of the actual IEM mix and record it that way (if you are friends with the engineer that is!).

IEM mixes are purely for each individual band member and are not made for recording. They act as prompts, keep time and also allow the musicians to hear how they sound. There is no need for them to be of a high enough quality to enable recording so when people say they sound terrible - that is actually how they were probably meant to sound and therefore to the on-stage musician they actually sound good!  :)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: localhero1986 on January 12, 2010, 12:00:36 AM
I am perplexed as to why it is thought that the IEM recordings are made wirelessly. It is quite simple to take a line out from the soundboard of the actual IEM mix and record it that way (if you are friends with the engineer that is!).

I can't imagine most of the fans are friends with the sound engineer... Therefore, the only possibility for IEM recordings is wireless...

*I still hate the idiot who broke in in London few years ago* >:(
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Hoops McCann on January 12, 2010, 02:14:35 AM
I presume you are still looking for answers via PM jbaent, as you originally said you were...as the people with the information you are fishing for would never post it here on the open forum.
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 12, 2010, 02:50:48 PM
I presume you are still looking for answers via PM jbaent, as you originally said you were...as the people with the information you are fishing for would never post it here on the open forum.

Dan, You are always so sharp  ;)

However, what
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Hoops McCann on January 12, 2010, 04:49:39 PM
>> I
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Simon on January 12, 2010, 07:18:32 PM
If no one has friends on the mixing desk where does one think all the soundboard recordings come from? An IEM feed from the soundboard is no different to taking a live mix feed from it too. That's all i was getting at.

Every bootleg that came via a soundboard in the history of music came via an unscrupulous sound technician :)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on January 12, 2010, 09:25:18 PM
Every bootleg that came via a soundboard in the history of music came via an unscrupulous sound technician :)

Sorry Simon, but you're talking out of your arse on this one, plenty/most come from radio/TV broadcasts. :)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 13, 2010, 12:18:25 AM
You are also forgetting that posting the kind of information that you are looking for on the forum or even starting threads like this is very much detrimental to those that go out there and make these kind of recordings so that you can enjoy them. Pretty sure we had a close call back in 2008. But that's a whole other issue that you're not really going to understand...

I
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 13, 2010, 12:23:36 AM
Every bootleg that came via a soundboard in the history of music came via an unscrupulous sound technician :)

Sorry Simon, but you're talking out of your arse on this one, plenty/most come from radio/TV broadcasts. :)

Actually the 98% cames from Radio or Tv broadcast, as Dusty said, just a very few comes from "other" sources, like Leeds 78, Newcastle 89, Earl Courts 92, On every planet, Los Angeles 2001 or Boothbay...
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Pottel on January 13, 2010, 12:57:32 AM
swan hunter...
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Hoops McCann on January 13, 2010, 01:54:20 AM
You are also forgetting that posting the kind of information that you are looking for on the forum or even starting threads like this is very much detrimental to those that go out there and make these kind of recordings so that you can enjoy them. Pretty sure we had a close call back in 2008. But that's a whole other issue that you're not really going to understand...

I
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Simon on January 13, 2010, 03:04:00 PM
Every bootleg that came via a soundboard in the history of music came via an unscrupulous sound technician :)

Sorry Simon, but you're talking out of your arse on this one, plenty/most come from radio/TV broadcasts. :)

Nope Dusty I am afraid you are though.

Do you know how many gigs take place in every club, pub, city hall, arena, stadium every minute of every day on every Continent throughout the world? Multiply that by the last 50 years and it is one helluva lot. And you are saying that from all those gigs that the resultant bootlegs came from radio/tv broadcasts? Where did these broadcasting companies suddenly get this mass of wealth and resources to go round doing that sort of thing?

Sorry but the majority of the classic boots of the 60s and 70s were from soundboard engineers. Fans used to ask if they could plug in their tape decks to an output from the mixing desk as there are plenty spare and no one complained. Many times the engineers themselves recorded the shows for their own 'profit'.

Broadcasts are a recent thing and I mean full blown top-end stereo broadcasts (of full length concerts if lucky).
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on January 13, 2010, 03:39:19 PM
Well we can agree to disagree if you like but if go onto any of the bootleg trading sites like Dime/Traders Den etc, the vast majority of soundboard recordings will have come from broadcast sources.

You initially said "every bootleg in history" came via the soundboard, now you're just talking about the 60s and 70s? Even then, I would say most bootlegs are audience recordings anyway, so no need for TV companies to stretch their resources. :)

Of course some came from engineers, hell, in some cases the band even made outputs from the soundboard available willingly. Sadly MK isn't so enlightened. :(
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 13, 2010, 04:01:33 PM
swan hunter...

I made a mistake with Newcastle 89, as it was Newcastle 93 (Swan Hunter)

Until now Newcastle 89 is a not very good audience recording  :(
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on January 13, 2010, 04:17:39 PM
If no one has friends on the mixing desk where does one think all the soundboard recordings come from? An IEM feed from the soundboard is no different to taking a live mix feed from it too. That's all i was getting at.

Every bootleg that came via a soundboard in the history of music came via an unscrupulous sound technician :)

Sometime these are private tape made at the artist request (or record company) for various reason. Then the tape is circulating and someone in the chain let it leak. Among well known "leaker" we can include no other else than John Lennon and The Rolling Stones...

BTW does someone own the complete proshot of the second 2002 summer "Mark and Friends" residency at the Bush?

















(not a real enquiry... just kiddin')

Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Simon on January 13, 2010, 04:43:14 PM
My initial post related to soundboard bootlegs - nothing to do with broadcasts which are processed for radio/tv anyway and therefore not what the audience actually hears. The point I was trying to make was that the sound engineer was and is in sole control of his/her mixing desk and that what they choose to plug into or out of it is down to them.

I have never met a soundboard engineer who hasn't been asked for a live feed from his desk. If the request is a positive one then the taper is a lucky person and gets on with their business of making bootlegs.

I am aware that groups make their own recordings but am also aware that a lot of engineers make their own too! Somewhere down the line, an unscrupulous person (be it Jagger or Lennon, but more likely someone to do with sound i.e engineers/techs etc) 'releases' a recording from a soundboard.

There is no other way that a pure soundboard recording - recorded live at the venue through the actual mixing desk - can make it's way into the public domain without some unscrupulous person being involved, somewhere. Because boots as we all know are 'unofficial' recordings and thee release is therefore not official.
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on January 13, 2010, 05:02:15 PM
Well Simon in bootleg circles a "soundboard" recording is a recording that came from the soundboard, whether it came directly from the soundboard in the manner you describe or whether a broadcaster got a soundboard feed. So typically a recording is soundboard (SBD) or audience (AUD). :)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 13, 2010, 05:19:34 PM
And I doubt a lot than a IEM recording comes from the desk, as Dusty said, SBD comes from the desk, IEM comes from the signal transmited from the monitor mixes to the In Ear Monitors that any musician has.

Also there several pro-shot dvds that comes from a satellite interfered signal from the concerts to certains cinemas that broadcasted live concerts, I remember one by Genesis when they did their last reunion tour. IEM recordings must be the same thing, someone catch the signal transmitted, not plugged in the desk.
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on January 13, 2010, 06:11:33 PM

There is no other way that a pure soundboard recording - recorded live at the venue through the actual mixing desk - can make it's way into the public domain without some unscrupulous person being involved, somewhere. Because boots as we all know are 'unofficial' recordings and thee release is therefore not official.

If we exclude IEM and ALD this is almost true. But there is another exception. Bill Graham did have a CCTV in his venues and did capture many show that way.

Then there are stories that some engineer did privatly play some tape to a famous bootleger* and these were then dubbed without his known (the turntable audio out being discretely double wired with one going to the basement where a tape recorder was running). That how a bunch of bootlegs saw the see of light, to start with the infamous Bob Dylan's "Royal Albert Hall"  in the late 60's early 70's.

* : TMOQ / TAKRL
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 13, 2010, 06:34:45 PM


* : TMOQ / TAKRL

WTF?

 ???
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on January 13, 2010, 06:46:01 PM
"Tu aimes mon cul"  :o


"The Trade Mark of Quality Story" (http://www.rollingstonesnet.com/TMoQ.htm)



Wikipedia TAKRL (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Kornyfone_Record_Label)


Time to learn about the bootlegging history....
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Simon on January 14, 2010, 12:47:01 AM
Well Simon in bootleg circles a "soundboard" recording is a recording that came from the soundboard, whether it came directly from the soundboard in the manner you describe or whether a broadcaster got a soundboard feed. So typically a recording is soundboard (SBD) or audience (AUD). :)

In  bootleg circles there are actually three types of boot:

Soundboard (SBD)
Audience (AUD
Broadcast (FM)

Which takes me back to my original argument re unscrupulous engineers ;)
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: IrisRose on January 14, 2010, 04:53:14 AM
We just need to let sleeping dogs lie.   That's a way to say  "we need to let this go"   No one here is going to post an answer to how IEMs are made.   The topic is uncomfortable for most of the members.   It's useless knowledge anyway, for it's been said several times by Dan and others:  it's illegal.    
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on January 14, 2010, 08:46:13 AM
Well Simon in bootleg circles a "soundboard" recording is a recording that came from the soundboard, whether it came directly from the soundboard in the manner you describe or whether a broadcaster got a soundboard feed. So typically a recording is soundboard (SBD) or audience (AUD). :)

In  bootleg circles there are actually three types of boot:

Soundboard (SBD)
Audience (AUD
Broadcast (FM)

Which takes me back to my original argument re unscrupulous engineers ;)

Maybe in your day...
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on January 14, 2010, 11:58:52 AM
Without unscrupulous  engineer we could not enjoy some of the best live moment by DS.

I mean Cuyahoga Falls, OH - August 5, 1985


Without unscrupulous  engineer we could not enjoy some of the best live moment by MK.

I mean Greek Theater - Los Angeles May 5, 2001   



Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: dustyvalentino on January 14, 2010, 12:13:08 PM
Without unscrupulous  engineer we could not enjoy some of the best live moment by MK.

I mean Greek Theater - Los Angeles May 5, 2001   





That was IEM wasn't it?
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Hoops McCann on January 14, 2010, 03:14:27 PM
Without unscrupulous  engineer we could not enjoy some of the best live moment by DS.
I mean Cuyahoga Falls, OH - August 5, 1985

Back when I used to trade DS/MK recordings, I met up with someone that knew a bit more about this recording. He claimed that a soundboard feed from the soundboard was fed into the medical offices at the Blossom Music Center which were apparently off site from the main stage. It was more or less an "in house PA". So someone from the medical offices put a cassette recorder into that feed. This makes sense as there are several other soundboard recordings from the mid 80s into the early 90s from Blossom Music Center and they all have the same type of sound quality. Eric Clapton 6/22/85 and Sting 9/10/85 are good examples. The guy also gave me his (3rd?) gen copy on original Maxell Type II tapes from the 80s of the show so that seemed to corroborate his story a bit.
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: Jules on January 14, 2010, 04:38:30 PM
Very interesting story Dan
Title: Re: Recordings
Post by: ds1984 on January 14, 2010, 06:13:17 PM
We may assume that somebody own a master tape with the full show uncut on it.