@aerozol @reosarevok @IvanDobsky @Sophist @eloise_freya
A recent edit rose some questions about what qualifies as a “live” broadcast release. Current guidelines suggest that anything recorded in from of a “studio audience” does not qualify as “live” unless it is unedited. This would include live sitcoms, but also panel shows like Just A Minute, Infinite Monkey Cage, or I’m Sorry I Haven’t a Clue which are recorded in front of a studio audience and edit down from multiple takes.
I think this guideline is worth changing for two reasons, one practical and one having to do with artistic intent.
First of all, the audience sounds in these types of recordings tend to be very prominent by design. Anyone who hears the recording will immediately assume it to be a “live” recording unless otherwise indicated. This means there will be continual confusion about why one recording with audience noise is live while another is not. Without additional information, there is no way to practically distinguish between an edited and unedited live performance.
Second of all, studio audiences are not “fake.” The purpose of a studio audience is to approximate the experience of a live show for the listener. In other words, the artistic intention is that these are “live” releases. They are in nearly every aspect, from sound quality to writing to performance, very different from recordings done without an audience. That difference is worth communicating to the user. I know when I am browsing releases that this is an important distinguishing factor.
Keep in mind, I don’t think this should apply to fake live releases with canned laughter, but I think those are relatively rare. I don’t know of any off hand.
1 Like
For reference, it seems that this is where it was discussed when the guidelines were updated: Broadcast Guidelines - #6 by IvanDobsky
A short discussion, and it seems to only have had feedback from myself, @IvanDobsky and @reosarevok (and reo/the style lead was open to changing it in future/did not firmly advocate for one or the other).
Personally, I disagree that having a studio audience makes a release live in the sense that I expect, which is… a (usually public) single performance that is performed and recorded.
I’ve never come across this confusion - a professional BBC studio production is not live (as I expect it), whereas a BBC release called “Joe’s Jokes Live at Bob’s Amphitheatre” will be.
On the other hand, if it doesn’t explicitly say “filmed in front of a studio audience” I don’t know how the editor would know if the studio audience was edited in later (e.g. canned laughter, or recorded over) - and I think the distinction would be pointless anyway.
I’m fine for the guideline to be changed if there’s consensus, but my interpretation/expectation of ‘live’ is that it’s a (within reason) 1 take performance in front of a crowd. e.g. If a band records an album in the same way as always/a studio album, but with a crowd in the recording booth, I don’t consider it live 
2 Likes
I think it’s fairly common to have some editing on live albums. for example, Five Iron Frenzy’s first live album was recorded over 11 different shows, and they used the best version of each of the tracks (even included some outtakes and mess ups as a hidden track)
even going back to Johnny Cash’s famous live recording of Folsom Prison Blues, it was edited in post production. at least the cheer after the line, “I shot a man in Reno just to watch him die” wasn’t in the raw recording
all that to say, I don’t think editing from several takes should make these releases not live. I also think a studio audience should count as live, but to be fair, I don’t do much editing in this area
1 Like
The term “shows” here already makes it really different to a studio album though, right? The types of BBC productions we are talking about here were never “shows”.
shows as in concerts, it’s a music album. as said, I don’t really work in audio dramas and spoken word releases (especially not live ones), so I don’t have any examples from that realm
Yeah, I guess my point is that editing together different actually live shows is a bit different to making a studio recording/album - but with an audience.
A bit complicated, I know 
2 Likes
I think the issue is that by the logic of the current guidelines if a sitcom in front of a studio audience is recorded in a single take (for example, broadcast live) it is considered “live”, but if that same sitcom in the same studio with the same audience has a single edit, it’s no longer considered “live”. As a listener, both of those recordings will sound exactly the same.
To me, the important distinguishing factor here is the presence of the audience. Fawlty Towers is very different from The Office. One is designed from the ground up to be performed in front of a live audience, the other is not. When cataloging releases, the presence of an audience is a pretty good indicator of what to expect from that type of release. Whereas the presence of editing doesn’t really indicate much if both recordings will sound exactly the same to me.
BTW, it’s worth mentioning here that studio audience aren’t just like a handful of crew people standing around applauding. They can be huge and easily eclipse the size of an audience at a smaller venue. I mean, BBC Radio Theatre is a venue in it’s on right. It’s not like these are insignificant crowds.
Don’t let the pedants take over. 
I believe the main idea was that some shows are created from literally lots of stop \ start \ change set. Retake that joke. Roll back, try another take. Keep chopping around until we hit perfection.
Other shows are handled all in one go. Mistakes kept in. Maybe the odd edit for time.
How an editor tells these apart, it is hard to say. I’m a fan of 1950s\60s comedy. This is easy to fit into that “One take” type idea. Even if they did stop and start a few times, the idea is you get what you heard the first time.
Later shows became more edited. More produced. That is when the terms of “in front of a live audience” was being used and not always saying it was a “live show”.
I don’t have an answer, as can be seen in that other thread, but do think that MusicBrainz should stick to the same kind of standards the outside world does. It is why I like reading a fan site.
A guideline cannot set a black line as to what is “right” or “wrong”, all it does is help put some focus on that grey line where the difference blur.
2 Likes
When I see the “live” marker I expect something quite different to a BBC studio production - I expect a soundboard or audience recording from a “show”, a live to radio performance, so on. Adding studio recordings waters down that distinction, for me.
I probably wouldn’t always consider it “live” just because they got it in one take (just like I wouldn’t with a 1-take studio music album). If we stick with studio audience recordings as ‘not live’ this guideline could probably be reworded.
