
NL5
Unpossible!
SouthSIDE Glen said:4) Why was your critiqe of ez_willis' offerings OK when it was ez_willis you were critiquing, but when it was Wallace you were critiquing, you suddenly think you were made to look the fool? Why should who did it or where it was done make any difference whatsoever?
It shouldn't. Yet it obviously does. And not just to Brief, but to the vast majority of people here. That's a problem.
Good point. I didn't listen to the clips, but I will say, even the great Andy Wallace is not perfect. I am a big fan of most of his technique, but some of what he does makes me say WTF?
My two cents on the MP3 debate - I think a lot of people hide behind "the mp3 conversion ruined my mix" - guess what, It doesn't ruin Andy Wallace's mixes. Now, they are not as good as a 16/44 wav, but a 320 (or heck a 192) mp3 is not destroying the mix either. Furthermore, if you are to the point that the worst thing that happens to your mix is the MP3 conversion, well, you should have at least some gold records on the wall..........

edit - I just listened to one of the tracks. I didn't realize it was soundclick - they use 128 mp3's I believe, which is starting to hammer the sound a bit. However, they sound like pro mixes (although I may be biased since I knew they were a head of time). I def don't think it's Andy's best work, but at the same time, the band has way more to do with the sound. No slight on EZ, they sound great, but they aren't Nirvana, or Rage, or......
One last thing - the one biggest thing I don't like about Andy's mixes are the cymbals - he sometimes gives them that "trashy" sorta sound. But that's just a preference thing. I like a Massenburg or Schmitt cymbal sound. Andy kills on the rest of the drums though!
Last edited: