GG: Gould as Tape Editor??

["John P. Hill" <jphill@frank.mtsu.edu>]

Re:  Gould Sitting In (and Editing!) for Horowitz

This is an intriguing story, but if anything like this ever happened,
I think it's been embellished a bit in the interim.

1.  There is no evidence that Gould actually *performed* any physical
editing work, with the possible exception of messing around with his
own tapes at home.  Kazdin is pretty clear about the fact that *he* did
all of the actual editing work on the projects he produced and engineered
for Gould.   Gould was certainly fluent with the *process* of editing and
was well-versed in the decision-making involved with editing, but
picking up a razor blade and going at a piece of tape is quite a different
thing.  Since there's no evidence that he did this type of work on his
*own* projects, it's doubtful that he would have felt qualified to
jump in and do this on some one else's tapes (much less Horowitz!).

2.  Policies at Columbia Masterworks were quite strict about who could
or could not do technial editing work.  Artists didn't (and for the most
part still don't) do that type of explicitly technical manipulation.

What *might* have happened is that GG could have offered some listening
skills and *coaching* to an editor who was having trouble with making a
particular edit work.  This is much easier nowadays with digital editing,
where potential edits can be rehearsed as many times as needed before
executing them.  Back in the 60's and 70s, it could get hair-raising,
because you had to physically cut (and hence damage) the tape just to
try the edit out.  If an edit didn't work, you often ended up with little
bits of tape around the splicing block that had to be inserted or removed
*very carefully* after each audition by the producer.  And sometimes,
an edit just didn't work and you'd have to either use a different take.
If you didn't *have* another take, that could get very costly if another
session had to be booked to record an insert of the section in question.

3.  The producer(s) of Horowitz' recording would *never* have permitted
this type of thing to happen.  It would have been completely out of the
question.  Second engineers and editors just don't make these kinds of
calls and are removed *very quickly* from a project if they do.

4.  In terms of Gould sitting down casually and performing a suitable
insert for the piece in question...*no way*.  Aside from the absurdity of
having a Gould insert on a Horowitz recording, it's not this simple.  The
sound of any acoustic recording is dependent upon the precise relationship
between the instrument, the room, the microphones used and the entire
chain between the mics and the recorders (not to mention, the person
playing the instrument and the instrument itself). One doesn't just
casually sit down at the piano (when no producers or engineers are around)
and pull that off. It's possible that an editing engineer could throw
together a mic set-up, but rather unlikely.  Insert recording sessions are
planned very carefully so that the exact acoustic environment and sonic
quality can be duplicated as closely as possible compared to the original
session recording.  If *any* of the elements are different, it is unlikely
that the new insert will edit into the existing session tapes.  One would
hear a dramatic change in the recording prespective for the bar or two
that were edited in.  For these reasons, set-ups are not left to chance
or thrown together casually.

However, emergencies do happen and sometimes the "rules" can be stretched
if push comes to shove.  If anyone has more specific details or
documented first-hand accounts regarding this rumored episode, please
share!

jh



On Sun, 22 Jun 1997, jerry and judy wrote:

> In article <33AA796D.1A63@iamerica.net>, Genell Brooks <ghb@iamerica.net>
> wrote:
> 
> 
> Ever hear about Glenn Gould and the Horowitz recording?
> 
> (This was reported in the New Yorker Magazine in the 1960's).
> 
> Glenn Gould walked into a New York recording studio one night to work
> out some technical problems on one of his recordings. A musical editor
> was there working on a Horowitz recording. The editor was at his wits
> end because he couldn't make a certain measure work. Gould walked over
> and took over. Master that he was at technical editing, Gould took out a
> little bit here and there and merged here and there and then was left
> with the piece a little short. He didn't worry about it just said he'd
> fill in the missing music. So Gould sat down at the piano and filled in
> a few bars of music for Horowitz. So on some Horowitz recording (the
> exact one has never been revealed) there is a measure of pure Gould!
> 
> 
>