hmm, I don't know about changing tuning to suit the recording. Maybe in wierd circumstances.
It's always been the other way around for me. Change the recording equipment, style, or environment, but the leave the music to the musicians.

That leads to an interesting notion:  whether a recording should be something unique from a live performance, or simply a documentation of exactly what the musician(s) sound like in live performance...personally, I go back and forth on that one, depending upon what kind of music is being recorded...but that's another discussion for another time, I guess.

That tangent notwithstanding, I've got a question for Mr_A (and other studio vet's here) about the concept of a drummer changing sound, setup, etc., to accommodate the wishes/suggestions of the engineer and/or producer.  Lurking in the rec.audio.pro newsgroup, I hear complaints from engineers about drummers not knowing how to tune their instrument, not being willing to adapt their instrument's sound to the studio, not being willing to move the components of their drum set around to accommodate the engineer's mic' techniques...

Question:  are other instrumentalists required to make drastic changes in their sound and instrument setup, the same way drummers are?  The one thing that really raises an eyebrow for me is rearranging the positioning of drums and cymbals - I understand that it's done to get some separation in the mic's between the cymbals and the toms, but the drummer in me (who hasn't had to deal with it firsthand, FWIW) hears that and it just makes my skin crawl.  That's when I'd start to feel resentment towards the engineer or producer - I've spent years figuring out the most comfortable setup for myself, and now I've got to raise my ride cymbal up by a foot because the engineer likes to set his mic's "just so"?  

DISCLAIMER:  I don't have the kind of studio background to comment on this from personal experience - the few studio projects I've done, I've been on vibes, marimba, or pan, and they've been projects where the engineer has been focused on capturing the sound of the players without making such alterations.  I'm just curious to hear from those of us here at the Cafe who do have that kind of experience, to hear if it's just drummers who are being singled out, or if the bassists, guitarists, keyboardists (etc.) of the world are also subject to this sort of situation.

I tend to be of the ilk that you can do more in the studio, so why not take advantage of that.  

As for the orginal question, I think that if you get the best sound you can out of your kit, it will generally work live and in the studio.   Will it sound the same in every situation?  No.  But the whole "good for studio" vs "good for live" thing really doesnt make any sense to me.   Just seems like marketing.   Because as Kieth was saying, "good for studio" just means something that can get you the sound you want, which could be ANYTHING really.   Since you could well want to change things around often.  

So the only justification I can see for differentiating, is that "live" stuff is designed for more volume and projection.   But again, in some cases, that may be perfect in the studio.  

And of course this is talking about acoustic drum gear.   There can be more differences in things like mic's, mixers, and amps etc.

Well, I posted a response that was well thought out a insightful, and then the server went down and it was lost.  I'll repost it again sometime.

Oh yeah I forgot....
As for other instruments being under such scrutiny.....the answer is yes and no.
In modern popular music there are few acoustic instruments with so many disparate elements and of such complexity as the drum kit. Not only that, but it's usually the first building block, the backbone of the track and often the loudest thing in the final mix bar the vocals.
I like the fact so much responsibility is laid at our door.
Things like bass and acoustic piano are pretty easy to record. Of course vocals are subject to microscopic inspection by most producers and engineers.
Having said all that, I think the closest comparison to drums in 'rock' is the guitar.
Guitarists are usually required to turn up with a selection of guitars and amps. As with drummers, there is often the pressure to own some of the 'industry standard' gear and expensive vintage guitars and amps are just as coveted as vintage drums.
Like drummers, many guitarists develop a professional sound with experience.
I've seen producers reject both session and band guitarists because they didn't have that sound, whether it was down to poor equipment or they just didn't have it in their fingers.

These are two different applications--Recording is capturing a desired drum sound, while live is sound reinforcement. As an example let's say go into a recording studio and make adjustments in your kit (as well as using different recording techniques) to achive a certain desired kit sound. Now you have the sound you want and you record your music. This is basically the sound you capture based on how it sounds in the control room of a studio. Later you go to a live venue and you want your drums to sound similar to your recordings. This is all relative to the sound of the band, size of the room and the sound reinforcement system. Maybe some of the adjustments needed are similar to what you did in the studio, maybe they are different. The adjustments needed to achieve this will vary from the studio because even though you may be trying to create the same kind of sound you are now trying to project this over a band in a room that has a very different sound ambience than a recording studio control room. It may very well be that your goal is to have a similar drum sound but now what you are trying to do is project a sound rather than capture it. Due to this difference the things needed to get the desired result may be different due to these differences.

I hope this helps.

Ever heard of the phrase 'you'll never work in this town'?
What you are saying is so inflexible.
Recording is a team effort.
For example, many times I've been asked if I could move my hi-hat 1/2" to the left so they can squeeze the snare mic in.
In any case, if you could deal with a few more variables you'd be a much better drummer.
Read the 'vented bass drum' thread for more opinions on this subject.
 

My apologies too, for my part in the derailing...  

I can certainly understand the justification (and reasonability) of slight adjustments, like the 1/2" hi-hat relocation Chrisso mentioned as an example.  It's the more drastic adjustments I've heard of, that caught my attention in various discussions with drummers and engineers.

Here's one about another instrument:
Didjeridu
I've come up against some amazing preconceptions along my path. How many "good" didjeridu players have you ever heard - really? If it's more than one, then you must live in Australia!
Anyway, just imagine playing an instrument like that and really trying to make good music with other musicians. Most didjeridu enthusiasts I've seen just make it go wa wa wa wa in a dull monotonous tone.
First, just to be considered a musician with a hollow log that usually sounds like a big fart is a real hurdle to jump. Then, trying to get it mic'd the way I like it is near impossible in a band-smokey bar-stage scenario. Nobody really knows how it "should sound" since even us didjeridu players probably won't agree.
So, over the years, I've honed a schpeel that I would give to the sound engineer that pretty much went like this - "The didjeridu puts out a wall of sound, and you can chose to get most of the bass or most of the treble. Most people chose the bass because that's what they tend to hear when it's being played,, but I want the treble eq'd up high, and bass rolled off. Then, I would explain that if they didn't do that, it would muddy up the sound of the stage and interfere with the drums and the stage's natural bass reflex,, then you'll turn me down so much that I have no reason to be here in the first place."
After a while I was able to get Most everyone I ever encountered to get it right. But, I always to this day have to give the same speech.
At least with drums, they pretty much know what they're up against.

In the studio, it has been completely opposite.
As Mr. A pointed out it's about collaboration, and that's how it has always been.
I've collaborated on probably 15 different CD projects now as a didjeridu musician, the one before the last was my own with all original material. That one was really cool, because the engineer had become a friend after a few other previous projects for his CDs. He was ALL about getting the sound that I wanted. Boy did I feel special! Everything we did, including the drums were recorded how he suggested - but it was asked and demonstrated with great sound and not forced. He was very creative with finding mic placement based on the actual acoustic sound. He'd put his ear right up to it and listen from every angle! My personal experience is that when you're paying the guy to engineer your stuff, he/she is ALL EARS.

Me too.
Having said that, I've done a couple of sessions where one song required tom fills but another didn't. Unfortunately there hasn't been sufficient time to breakdown the un-needed toms and mics.
My usual tom sound (take note.....'usual'!  ) is a medium tuning, completely open, with quite a lot of sustain. They tend to resonate slightly in sympathy with the kick and snare. Therefore, on a song I'm not using them on, it's a drag to hear the toms rumbling along with the rest of the kit.
Well I don't think we digressed too much. I think we all covered the original topic and then some.
Actually, when talking about the differences between recording and live, the can of worms called 'endorsments' came to mind.
Obviously playing live is a 100% endorsment scenario....although I have heard of the odd drummer using Paiste cymbals with a Zildjian logo painted on, or vise versa.
In recording (as discussed before) you tend to use whatever it takes to get the job done.
I thought the drums I endorsed were the best you could buy, so I had no problem recording them. But of course I always carried an arsenal of alternative snares by a mixed bag of manufacturers (as do most pro's).
I know some drummers who endorse 'x' drums, but only ever use a vintage Ludwig or Gretsch kit in the studio. Some of these decisions are down to personal taste, financial kick backs, or just plain reliability (as James pointed out).
At the moment my youngest kit is 10 years old. I have three kits and I wouldn't hesitate to record either one.
If I was hired for a major tour however, I would seek out a drum company to support me. I would want a brand new kit with the possibility of spares availability no matter where I was in the World.
Have we covered everything now?