So many reasons to release Bad Tour '89 L.A concert on DVD.

I either want Kansas City (which is rumored to have all the songs fully sung live from firsthand accounts), or MSG (which has every song live except MITM).

As for the Victory Tour, the Dallas concert would be best. Eddie was there!

Some songs are actually missing out on a lot of improved MJ-moves.. think of all the gliding during "Shake your body down to the ground".. they should, however, include special performances with people like Eddie van Halen.
 
Oh boy, another of those "we need Bad Tour 88" on DVD threads. Think I started one or two of those back in the day myself ...
Indeed these concerts should have been out in the market first as vhs and then on dvd for 20 years now. But, they aren't. You must remember that even the Yokohama 87 releases out there are low-quality, unofficial bootlegs. The best quality of that concert has been released by a fan on another forum, which is not around anymore, 3 or so years back.
And this is what keeps me wondering. Any sh*t performance by any generic, replacable artist is out there, but not what arguably is the best concert tour by the best live-performer ever.
I remember Michael saying (was it in Moonwalk?) the he didn't want his concerts available on video, because this takes away from the magic of the live shows.
Anyway, I do still hope that somewhere in some archive this gems are sitting and waiting to be released. But, my hope has been dwindling for some time now ...
For me, the Bad Tour was Michael at his absolute peak. He was so much above anyone else in the business back then, I'm sure it's hard for anyone who wasn't around then to actually realise. It was unreal. Never seen anything even remotely coming close (including, I'm afraid, his later live performances). His sheer presence and command of the stage. Absulutely mind-blowing.
Ah well, I'm rambling ...
 
To be honest, I getting so desperate that any concert will do for a DVD release (except HBO Dangerous Tour coz we already have it)!!!!
 
Some songs are actually missing out on a lot of improved MJ-moves.. think of all the gliding during "Shake your body down to the ground".. they should, however, include special performances with people like Eddie van Halen.

I think id prefer Los Angeles as it was the last Jacksons show. Until...2001.

Plus, the show had evolved quite a bit at that point.
 
Listend to audio of the LA 89 show & it sounds pretty amazing.Wembley would always be my 1st choice but I'd love LA 89 equally now given that it sounds like it was an incredible show & Birchey says MJ had this footage.The songs such as WBSS,APOM are performed VERY fast but I'm guessing thats because it was the last night of the tour & MJ wanted to kill it & he did.Great energy & storming show.White shirt for MITM.

I wonden't be bothered about a 87 leg of Bad Tour show getting released.It's already available in boot & in quite good quality.The 87 leg is pretty much the Victory Tour set list with Thriller added,& we also need a pro Victory Tour blu-ray/dvd.
 
Good behind the scene article about audio recording a music concerts. It has answered so many of questions about the whole process. Hope you enjoy reading.

On the Bleeding Edge

There are some things in the music business that never change. For instance, record labels will always want to repackage a band's old material. History has shown that "Greatest Hits" packages are an easy (and cheap) way to do this. After all, the biggest expense of a new release -- studio time -- is minimal for a re-package. Ditto for the concept of a live recording. The band is performing anyway, and by the time they've played their 25th show, they're pretty well rehearsed, so the label decides it's time to record a concert for release on CD in stereo and on DVD in 5.1 -- and that's where life on the road gets complicated.
For starters, we'll assume (uh-oh) that the band you're working with is competent enough to actually play a show that's worthy of release. Eventually, some genius at their label will figure that -- since they're on tour and you're a capable engineer -- you can easily handle a multitrack recording while mixing the show in front of 10,000 people. In the rain. Since you're going to have a tough time getting the label to foot the bill for a remote truck (or even an assistant engineer), you'd better be prepared with some ideas for how to go about making a release-worthy recording while still attending to your other menial duties, such as mixing the show.

The good news is that a lot of engineers have made master-quality recordings of live shows using simple recording setups. The simplest setup is the "board tape," but the chances of a board tape being master quality are slim. There's just too much noise coming off the average stage to allow your board mix to be an accurate representation of what you hear in the room. In other words, the guitar player is usually so *^&% loud that you don't need a lot of him in your mix because you can hear the amp, even when it's not in the PA system very much. When you play back the board tape, there's no guitar because you didn't need to raise up his fader very much. (Foghat engineer Carl Davino is the master of the board tape. Maybe we can get him to share his technique some time.)

That brings us to live recording possibility number two: a live-to-two-track recording mixed by another person in a room isolated from the stage and PA, where they can actually mix the band during the show and make aesthetic judgments on level and EQ without interference from a crappy sounding room, a band that's 115 dB on stage and a PA that's 120 at FOH. How many angels can you fit on the head of a pin?

Here is how it really is going to happen: you are going to need some sort of assistant engineer, even if that person is just an extra pair of hands. You are also going to need a means of splitting signals from the stage, preferably right off the microphone (i.e. pre-FOH and -monitor consoles and processing). If you are using a console that has a direct out on each channel, you're ahead of the game: take the direct out from each channel into a channel on a multitrack tape machine or hard disk recorder. Make absolutely certain that the direct out is pre-fader. You don't want your fader moves during the show to be recorded (you'll remix at a later time). Pre-EQ is probably also a good idea, so that you can EQ the tracks ex post facto. With a FOH console that has direct outs on each channel, you could probably get something like an Alesis ADAT HD24 or Mackie HDR24/96 hard disk recorder, a wiring harness, a bunch of hard drives (with a cushy case to hold them), and be on your way.

Next up on the food chain is using a transformer-isolated, three-way split, which provides FOH, monitor and recording systems with their own feeds. Now you will need mic preamps along with your recorder, which means you can rack up some serious pre's and create a better product. If you're on a tight budget, you could get a couple of MOTU Travelers, a Mac iBook and some Glyph drives, and carry the whole system in a small rack. (Make sure that the drives are at least 7,200 RPM.) Or you could rack up three or four TRUE Precision8 mic pre's (eight channels each) along with an HDR. In any case, the idea is to get clean signal on disk and mix later. You're probably not going to be able to monitor with any sort of isolation anyway because the PA is in your face. What you are concerned with is setting a good record level and then pretty much babysitting the meters for the duration of the show. A simple sound check will give you all the information you need, though I'd suggest setting record levels conservatively since band members always take it up a notch come show time.

Those of you lucky enough to be mixing on a Digidesign VENUE every night have a special advantage when it comes to recording: Digidesign's TDM Record option links the VENUE's digital engine directly to a Pro Tools|HD system via DigiLink connectors on the FOH rack, no additional I/O necessary, thank you very much.

Whatever medium you decide to record, be sure to record at a sample rate of 44.1 kHz. Sixteen-bit is sufficient since CD audio is 44.1/16-bit anyway and the soundtrack on most DVD's is the same. Mastering engineer Roger Lian at Masterdisk NYC tells me that what you do NOT want is to force a sample rate conversion at a later date by recording at 48-, 88.2- or 96 kHz. Roger tells me that sample rate conversion is about the worst thing you can do to an audio file.

There's always a small percentage of the population that doesn't trust computers and will want hardware recorders on the road. I can understand that, having experienced problems with laptop recording on the road. Lucky for me these were only reference recordings. For those so inclined, I refer you to eBay, where you can get Tascam DA88s for a song. These machines have proven reliable, and at this point they are cheap enough that you can get a spare without breaking the bank. Thirty-two tracks for under a grand? I wouldn't be surprised, and you can transfer to Pro Tools when you get home. One important note about the remix: plan on separate sessions for the stereo mix and the 5.1 surround mix. Automatic "folddown" from 5.1 to stereo really doesn't work very well.

Steve La Cerra is the tour manager and Front of House engineer for Blue Oyster Cult. He can be reached via email at Woody@fohonline.com.
 
Back
Top