What are your favorite reference CD's and WHY??

  • Thread starter Thread starter zip
  • Start date Start date
for the record ,,,,,judging by the results of my latest recording endeavors .........I might as well be using Robert Johnson discs for references...



-nave
 
Robert Johnson was the inventor of the blues....at least as much as anyone could invent such a thing.......obviously blues wasn't really invented but it kinda evolved............Nevertheless, Robert Johnson was the one of the first people to record music, (or at least the blues) it was in the early 1900's.......Needless to say his recordings are thin and have more snap, crackle and pop then those guys on the cereal box :D


Actually my recordings aren't that bad,......but I'm taking a well needed break from recording in favor of just playing my instruments............I started to take the recording thing pretty seriously and it got to my head after awhile I guess.....And I think I developed a "brain cloud" in terms of recording....But I'll be back with it again when I'm ready....

-nave
 
Re: Wha??????

OMG dude are you insane?
Listen to The Great Debate... That whole damn song is a Tool rip-off. The rhythms, the drums.. LaBrie is even trying to sound like Maynard.. running his voice through those filters... even the lyrics hint at it.. "Life to save life.."- DT
"Life feeds on life feeds on life.. "-Tool

There is another song that I didn't even bother listening all the way through.. It starts out with acoustic guitar, shakers and kick drum... Listen to Solsbury Hill by Peter Gabriel.... Rip-OFF!!

These are the only ones I can remember because I couldn't get through the whole album(s).

I agree with you.. Metallica sucks. But ripping off a band that sucks is even worse.

DT just doesn't have it anymore.



zip said:
"The new album is the next best sounding album after that even though it totally sucks.. They are total rip-off artists now.. They steal musical ideas and then wank off all over them.. yuk.. "

6 degrees sucks??

Rip off artists??

I think YOU smoke too much dope... ;)

One could argue that The Glass Prison is modelled after Metallica - but Mike Portnoy ADMITS this influence.

I've seen Metallica and Dream Theater in concert. Metallica is a complete JOKE compaired to DT. The M boys are hardly even musicians - they are circus clowns...

This of course is my opinion.....

But then again I'm a prog snob... LOL

Getting back to the subject again...the new DT CD has some very creative mixing elements - especially in the Glass Prison...
Click to expand...
 
OK - but....

I hear other influences as well...

(BTW- I haven't heard the Tool CD)

...Genesis
...Rush (in The Great Debate)

So I don't get your point. In almost all bands' work in the 90's foward I can hear influences from the past (and present). I guess in the end, whether or not a band uses these references doesn't bother me.

The fact I enjoy their music and it makes me THINK and JOURNEY to another place is all that matters...

There are few bands anymore that take me there...

I do respect your opinion however.

peace d00d...

zip >>
 
Zip, EVERYTHING is built on the past

If you really don't know who Robert Johnson is, then get thee to a music store or library post-haste! EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING, that is based on modern rock, which is based on rock-n-roll, which is based on THE BLUES, has ben influeced by Robert Johnson. And not that RJ was the first one to ever play the blues, but he was the first one to be recorded and relatively widely distributed, thus influencing a country that for the most part had never heard the blues before.

Seriously, it should be required listening for all musicians.

And I don't mean to come off sounding like I'm giving you a lecture, I just think it's important to know some of where we come from. What you've said is the equivalent of an African-American not having heard of Martin Luther King Jr. Yeah, it's that big a deal.

Actually, listening to RJ is good lesson in engineering/production, too. Because even though the recording quality sucks, the emotion of the music still comes through loud & clear. And that is supposed to be the whole point.

END OF RANT - sorry

BTW, I don't care if it is "80's-sounding", I love the sound of IGY ( except I don't particularly care for the synth part).

WYWH - an all-time fave- I mean just the sound of him takin' a drag off the cigarette, you can even hear that it's a filter, for god's sake.

AJA - another fave

Two Against Nature - it's no AJA

And I'll vote for damn near anything Alan Parsons has ever done. I know it sounds unnatural, but I love that sound!

And Zip, did you go to the Mardi Gras Parade in Covington? It makes you wonder why they bother. I did have a good time listening to Robin Lacy & DeZydeco at the Tower at Jillian's though. Nobody let's les bon temps roulez like Robin & Joanie!
 
OK, i haven't read the last thirty posts, so I'm not responding to any of that tomfoolery. I'm just going to list my reference CDs.

1. Belle and Sebastian If You're Feeling Sinister
2. Neutral Milk Hotel In the Aeroplane Over the Sea
3. Built To Spill Ancient Melodies of the Future
4. Revolver
5. Pet Sounds
6. The Aislers Set The Last Match

These records have a nice balance of frequencies, do not assault me ears with the nutty, nutty high end of today's radio hits, and those few times when the instruments on these records don't sound natural, at least they are stylized in a way that I personally enjoy. Also, they were all recorded to analog tape, which gives me hope.

Plus, they're just great records. If I have to compare my mixes to something, I'd like to compare them to something that I enjoy listening to. I know you all have probably heard 4 and 5. I would challenge you to at least give the rest of them a chance.
 
"Zip, EVERYTHING is built on the past "

I do believe that is my point I made to timothydog...

Strangely enough - being a life-long musician - I don't often listen to the really old stuff...apart from the occassional classical piece. I'll go the the library and get some RJ stuff. I'm certain I've heard it before but...:)

And no - I didn't go to the Cov martigras... I was working. :(
 
I agree that music is built from the past.
But there is a fine line between being inspired by someone and flat out ripping them off.

Maybe you can't see it because you aren't a big Tool fan or don't know how Solsbury Hill goes.. but DT are about as close as you can get without calling it plagiarism on their new album.
 
Last edited:
My favorite ref. cd's

1.)Stevie Wonder-"Songs in the Key of Life"
2.)"The Best Of Barry White's Love Unlimited Orchestra"
3.)"AJA"-Steely Dan
4.)Van Morrison-"Back on Top"

Have a great day everyone!
 
A lot of AJA's here...

...and don't ya know it's like the only SD CD I DON'T have.

Well - back to the music store eh?
 
zip man hi

you should check out robert johnson the library will surely have.......Even though it's the same damn chord progressions and melodies for every song he ever wrote and you surely aren't going to be inspired to create new music by listening to it.......It's cool nevertheless..........you'll enjoy it's novelty....Kinda ironic that something that old can be novel but every now and then I listen to stuff like that and even after all this time it still retains something............ I'm glad you asked who he was enjoy it :)

The following is directed at no one inparticular and doesn't really have anything to do with references.......just take that as a warning ....I kind of like talking to myself :)

I personally think that it's good to know the roots of music ...........However, If you want to be original and create something new sounding that has never been done before your best bet is to let go of your roots and forget get about tradition and the past.........That's the hardest thing to do.......Truth is, as far as being original, you'd probably be better off if you never heard any of the music from the past.....Traditions are nothing more than biases that hold artists back! anyone who was ever truely inventive didn't give a damn about the past...In fact most of the greatest inventive people who ever lived usually despised the past....be they scientists, artists, musicians, or inventors.........The only reason why it's good to know what the past is about is so you don't wind up repeating it and thinking that your doing something new when your really not.............

Ofcourse that's just my opinion , I could be wrong :)

-nave
 
Hi!

I'd definately vote for the earlier U2 stuff, mixed/produced by Eno/Laois/Lillywhite. The sound quality isn't that great because it was all recorded analog, but I'm telling you, these 3 guys together means MAGIC...

I think it's great that when you listen to music more often with a "producers" kind of view you can really notice progress in your listening skills. When I hear a song on the radio, even when it's music I really hate I can say "I hate the song but it's well produced", or vice versa.

Dirk Demon
 
The sound quality isn't that great because it was all recorded analog,
Click to expand...
U2 was probably recording to a beautifully maintained Studer 2" 24 track. Do you really think that that's a liability? Do you really think that Pro Tools or Radar or whatever-in-the-hell high end digital system is going to be better than a Studer?

WRONG!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

(I realize that this whole digital/analog debate is highly suggestive. Our friend dirk doesn't seem to, though)
 
Originally posted by cominginsecond Do you really think that Pro Tools or Radar or whatever-in-the-hell high end digital system is going to be better than a Studer?
Click to expand...
It has the potential to be A LOT higher, depending on converters used. At 24/96 or higher-res, it can certainly give high-end analog a run for its money.

But regardless, at THAT level of the playing field, it's not a question of which is better (analog or digital) - but simply which format gives the sonic characteristics the engineer is looking for.

Bruce
 
But regardless, at THAT level of the playing field, it's not a question of which is better (analog or digital) - but simply which format gives the sonic characteristics the engineer is looking for.
Click to expand...
Exactly, and dirk seemed to be operating under the assumption that digital is always better than analog. And dirk, don't backtrack and say that that's not what you said. It can't get any more straightforward than "The sound quality isn't that great because it was all recorded analog":p

Here's my (very unoriginal) take on the analog/digital thing. A good enough digital system will reproduce exactly what you put in it. A good enough analog system can improve whatever you put in it, if you consider the sound of high end analog an improvement, which, for most styles of rock music, it is.
 
On the other side of the spectrum from dirk, I've seen people on the Harmony Central message board imply that cassette four track is better than a Delta sound card simply because it's analog and the Delta is digital. That's even sillier than implying that digital is always better than analog. Just listen to something recorded on a cassette four-track, and then listen to something recorded with an Audiophile into Cubase. There's no comparison. (Although I'm not trying to diss you four-track cassette users out there.)
 
Re: Re: Wha??????

timothydog said:
OMG dude are you insane?
Listen to The Great Debate... That whole damn song is a Tool rip-off. The rhythms, the drums.. LaBrie is even trying to sound like Maynard.. running his voice through those filters... even the lyrics hint at it.. "Life to save life.."- DT
"Life feeds on life feeds on life.. "-Tool


DT just doesn't have it anymore.
Click to expand...

TD....


which tool song/CD???

I would like to draw my own conclusions...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top