4
4tracker
Guest
See, to me he sounds sterile. What do you like?
As an engineer he's amazing, though.
I always find it hard to believe he engineered Dark Side considering the style and sound of his own records.
Demos vs Studio recordings
- Thread starter Nola
- Start date
See, to me he sounds sterile. What do you like?
As an engineer he's amazing, though.
I always find it hard to believe he engineered Dark Side considering the style and sound of his own records.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
His AP Project albums feature a variety of musicians, and not always the same ones from album to album.
If you like Pink Floyd and that type of stuff, the APP is going to appeal.
Not sure what you've listened of his project albums....?
Armistice
Son of Yoda
I hate to be the one to break the awful news to you, but Neil Young has categorically ruled out doing Powderfinger with Joe Cocker on vocals due to his personal dislike of working with dead people.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
He died from lung cancer on 22 December 2014 in Crawford, Colorado. The two remaining living ex-Beatles, Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, were among those who paid tribute to the singer, while Cocker's agent, Barrie Marshall, said that Cocker was "without doubt the greatest rock/soul singer ever to come out of Britain."
fat_fleet
Swollen Member
People always say that shit when you die. It only lasts until the next rock/soul singer kicks it.
fat_fleet
Swollen Member
I can see the lineage easy... but the tag was just for marketing, and NY, out of the 70s pool that grunge drew from, happened to be the most active and still-vital-at-the-time commodity to hook a marketing slogan to. But there was an album that came out in I think '89 or '90 called The Bridge that was comprised of Neil Young covers by the likes of the Pixies, Mudhoney, Dino Jr, Sonic Youth, Psychic TV etc. which sold well and helped contemporize him.
Wow I'm gonna have to stop liking those bands now. Thanks a lot.
Take your heart pills because I do. Well not so much Mudhoney.
fat_fleet
Swollen Member
Nola
Well-known member
that's awesome greg. i did a dinosaur jr cover and posted in the mix area and everyone said i sound like Cake. i'd like to hear you do one of their covers they're my favorite band
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
There's a rumor that The Ramones were seen at a Neil Young concert once...and that Joey had his albums, and mentioned him as an early influence.
There's a rumor that The Ramones were seen at a Neil Young concert once...and that Joey had his albums, and mentioned him as an early influence.
Joey probably loved Neil Young. Joey liked everything.
4
4tracker
Guest
I think demos capture a moment, and usually a song in its rawest, infantile stages, which can be more moving. A studio polishes that up and turns the infant into an adult, so to say. It's no longer raw and it's all grown up, with a lot of time in between the demo stage to rethink arrangements and just overthink the song. So for that reason, many times demos sound better -- it's simply closer to the moment of inspiration and that shines through.
stringbender05
New member
It depends on how it was recorded. I usually do like demos a lot more than modern professional studio recordings. The reason why is because I can usually tell when they take shortcuts in the studio. In my opinion if the mix is telling a story that sounds beyond the capabilities of the artist it's a deception to the listener. This holds true more to the vocalist than anything else because if you can make a shitty vocalist sound beautiful in a recording it is a shame to the fan who goes to see them perform live.
I play everything but I was a drummer first. Some people might debate me on this but I don't like the amount of trickery that goes into producing a professional rock or heavy metal drum recording. I just want to dial it back 20 or 30 years to when bands miced up the full kit properly and that was enough for an album. Thats what takes a lot of balls, hard work, and sweat. Nowadays they really take shortcuts in the studio and I notice it as a drummer. To somebody who doesn't play drums they might not care but it bothers me when a drum trigger consistently gives the same sound. If the drummer is good enough to throw down in the studio every hit will have an equal amount of power. The trigger doesn't need to save him. And it's not like it is a save anyways because the drums sound too fake and digital. If it is too good to be true it probably is right?
Also for any instrument being played there shouldn't be tricks you can use to fix a mistake. Lay it down like the guys who gave us the classics. They did it right or they didn't use it until it was done perfectly. I heard Randy Rhoads actually doubled his solos in the studio to track guitar. Can you imagine Randy Rhoads doing two separate takes of a solo? That is pure skill right there man.
I play everything but I was a drummer first. Some people might debate me on this but I don't like the amount of trickery that goes into producing a professional rock or heavy metal drum recording. I just want to dial it back 20 or 30 years to when bands miced up the full kit properly and that was enough for an album. Thats what takes a lot of balls, hard work, and sweat. Nowadays they really take shortcuts in the studio and I notice it as a drummer. To somebody who doesn't play drums they might not care but it bothers me when a drum trigger consistently gives the same sound. If the drummer is good enough to throw down in the studio every hit will have an equal amount of power. The trigger doesn't need to save him. And it's not like it is a save anyways because the drums sound too fake and digital. If it is too good to be true it probably is right?
Also for any instrument being played there shouldn't be tricks you can use to fix a mistake. Lay it down like the guys who gave us the classics. They did it right or they didn't use it until it was done perfectly. I heard Randy Rhoads actually doubled his solos in the studio to track guitar. Can you imagine Randy Rhoads doing two separate takes of a solo? That is pure skill right there man.
4
4tracker
Guest
I'd say the end justifies the means. If the final product makes you want to rewind and replay, then something went very right. No matter how it was attained. Not many recordings make people want to do that, and there are a lot of skilled musicians making recordings. So it's not just musicianship. Skill can mean very little and always takes a backseat to the song itself and delivery (i.e. not musicianship, but does it engage). But this is an age old debate on internet forums and not worth arguing over.
Something like Randy Rhoads would fall under the "I'm in awe of what humans can do" category for me, but I wouldn't conclude it's awesome music just because it's difficult.
I don't care for modern studio techniques, in general, but if they produce something that makes me want to listen then I do, and I don't care how it was done.
But the thread is about demos, and I think they are closer to the moment of inspiration, and that's why they're better many times.
Playing a solo twice isn't that big a deal. If you actually write a solo and/or understand what you're doing, it's not that hard to duplicate. I'm sure Randy Rhoads was in this camp. I wouldn't know because anything he played on is cheesy crap metal to me, but I give him the benefit of the doubt. If you're just flailing random notes by the seat of your pants, then yeah, it's probably hard to do. That's not because double tracking a solo is hard, that's because being a hack is hard to do good.
gecko zzed
Grumpy Mod
I go along with this ^^^.
If I'm listening to something I haven't heard before, the unspoken question I ask myself first is "do I like this?" It is not "how was this recorded?"
For some people, the "how" matters. That's fine by me. But I don't particularly care. Music is organised sound. It can be 'organised' by real people playing physical instruments. In this case, we recognise and admire the skills of the musicians (hopefully they are playing skilfully). But playing an instrument is not the only form of musical creativity. Understanding and manipulating sound is another form of creation, and that is also fine by me.
If what I hear resonates with me in some way, then I'm happy.
.
I wonder how many more people would actually care about the "how" if they actually could do the "how". It's easy to rationalize it when you have no choice but to use sims and samples, or when you just suck at recording the real thing, or when you've come in to this hobby with all of these VST shenanigans right at your fingertips. For example, if you've never mic'd a kit or have even so much as whacked a drum with a stick, then drum software probably seems like the coolest thing ever. No skill required! In those instances, sure, you can tell yourself that the end result is all that matters and if it fools a listener, cool. I think that line of thinking is hurting the art of recording music more than it's helping. To me way too many people are "recording" without any of the fundamental skill or knowledge that used to be required to do so. And it shows in how much terrible sounding shit is out there now. Yeah, I think it should be a more exclusive club.