Do you agree or disagree with Celibidache about live music vs. recorded music?

Almost all of my exposure to classical music has been through recordings so I have no basis for comparison. I have certainly been able to respond powerfully to it and feel that it would be very limiting if people felt they could only experience music through live performance. I have been to many rock and folk concerts and reveled in the energy I find there. ( You don’t want to see me at a Springsteen concert!) But there again, I always listen to music while I am cooking – rock, folk or classical – and savor the experience each time.

All recorded music is worth it, just because music should be able to be enjoyed by all and at any time, not just those who can afford seats to an event.

And also, you may have been lucky. Musicians have off nights, audiences can be poor. It would be a shame to have a less-than-stellar live experience due to anything from a bad audience to a poor venue.

“Not worth making” goes too far, and it smacks of elitism. Live music is always better, but recorded music made music of all kinds accessible to the masses. This is particularly true of classical music. Many people could never afford to see live concerts, certainly not with any frequency, but they can afford a few CDs or downloads.

Recorded music also gives you the ability to listen to virtually whatever you want, whenever you want. It may not be the same experience, but maybe you just want to pop in the CD and have a listen in the middle of the night, or on headphones while you are working. Is that to be eliminated just because it offends the artistic sensibilities of a few people?

And finally, recorded music creates new audiences for live music. Maybe you can afford to go to a concert, but you aren’t sure whether it is worth the money until you hear a recording of the artist first to convince you to spend the money.

Recorded music is definitely worth it.

I wrote too long an answer and @poofandmook beat me to my first point, and said it better and more succinctly

@janbb I feel certain that this experience is not limited to classical music. I also would not give up recordings since I can’t carry the band or orchestra in my pocket, but it made me appreciate the communal experience that the live experience has.

Then I would say the expereince is different but not necessarily better. There is the energy generated by a good live concert and the energy generated (or mood soothed) by listening in my kitchen. And I would certainly agree with those above who say that it is elitest to say that music can be best appreciated in a live setting.

Depends on the sound system, condition, quality of the recording and how your room is set up.

@janbb and @ChazMaz One way I experienced the difference was a sense of actually feeling the vibrations from the instruments and the sound in my body, which does not seem possible from a recording. Another thing I experienced was what I think of as “the group energy of communal experience,” which I think introduces an additional emotional dynamic.

Oh definitely. Not disagreeing that live can be an overpowering experience for the reasons you state, just that there is value to both. Sometimes filet mignon at a Michelin three star restaurant is what thrills you; sometimes it’s a burger off the grill in your own back yard.

Seems to be a somewhat narrow-minded assertion, as some brilliant compositions and composers in the 20th and 21st century have created meaningful and transformative works, that existed outside of the popular notion of “classical music;” in electro-acoustic music, for example, source material that is recorded, then reproduced, modified, and/or synthesized, can create entire worlds of musical expression. Not all music is intended for large concert halls, either.

@sndfreQ Yes, it was his personal idiosyncrasy. In the wake of his death, his wife and children have had to release recordings of his performances in order to avoid pirated ones in wide distribution.

I remember the first time I heard Steely Dan live. It was ghastley! There whole schtick involved studio production and manipulation. (I have since heard they have improved their live performances.)

To me, the possibilities for a whole new kind of music through technology is vary valuable. (That said, I could do without everything autotune nowadays!)

Pete Seegar said the same thing about 20 years ago.
Personally, I love recorded music, so that I can enjoy so many artists that are gone, or not making music anymore, like Billy Holiday, the Beatles, and, yes, Pete Seegar.

As a musician, as well as a fan, I would tend to agree that a live performance is much better than a recording, but I do not feel it to the extreme of Celibidache. The recording process can seem sterile and leave the artist starving for the inspiration and interaction of a live recording. On the other hand, I have experienced some live performances of otherwise great artists which were uninspired and disappointing.

In all fairness, though, a recording session, while artistically satisfying, can also be technically brilliant, a way for the artist to tweak a performance and turn it into something that can not be duplicated in a live performance.