scannest wrote:Remastering is fine, if done right. Remixing is usually a mistake. Re-recording is always a mistake. It's no longer the same record.
Dinko wrote:Sure. I think it's the bass that makes the re-mastered songs sound less (for lack of a better word) compact. I don't know shit, but maybe Peter and Dave should have redone some vocals. Like (totally random pick) that dude from Samiam did, for that record that got re-mastered by some dude. That went as well as it could for a record on which the dude that had played bass finally could switch to the guitar (thus being allowed to write (inferior) songs). There might be more to it. I'll keep you posted.
scannest wrote:
And Sam calling me an idiot while agreeing with the majority of what I said is either a pretty clever bit of trolling, or he is really just a jackass.
FormerLurker wrote:scannest wrote:
And Sam calling me an idiot while agreeing with the majority of what I said is either a pretty clever bit of trolling, or he is really just a jackass.
scannest wrote:I see the appeal of re-mixing when it is a record you are already very familiar with. It's a way to shed new light on something overly familiar. My problem with remixing is when the new mix effectively becomes "the record" for many people. Some kids will never know that Han shot first, and that's a bummer.
xxxMidgexxx wrote:But perhaps I just love drone stuff in general.
version sound wrote:I don't know of a single remix that improved the original.
SamDBL wrote:version sound wrote:I don't know of a single remix that improved the original.
Yeah, but you have horrible taste. Tethered to nostalgia and delusions of street cred.
soulforce wrote:Now, about remixing albums...
As 99.9999% of you, I'm sure, my experience with remixed hardcore/punk comes from that horrid high-pitched remix of Bad Brains' "Rock for Light" which we all hate (and probably Dr. Know does too).
JGJR wrote:Shades Apart's first 2 albums (well s/t Lp and Dude Danger 12" EP) on one CD has a similar thing happening where the s/t sounds OK and Dude Danger is barely audible and you have to crank up the volume really high just to hear it and there are few dynamics.
Knutsen wrote:Black Flag pretty much had a top notch hardcore punk production for the era, the scene, the audience and the situation. i cannot remember zines, magazines or fans complaining about the "turd" production of the record, because it hit like a bomb, was right on the zeitgeist and the feelings of estranged youth everywhere. It was massive and DBL can only wish to sell that many records with their top protools gofundme production today.
My 2 cents.
PS: Acknowledge that your ears got spoiled during the last 30 years of the technical development of audio productions.
SamDBL wrote:Knutsen wrote:Black Flag pretty much had a top notch hardcore punk production for the era, the scene, the audience and the situation. i cannot remember zines, magazines or fans complaining about the "turd" production of the record, because it hit like a bomb, was right on the zeitgeist and the feelings of estranged youth everywhere. It was massive and DBL can only wish to sell that many records with their top protools gofundme production today.
My 2 cents.
PS: Acknowledge that your ears got spoiled during the last 30 years of the technical development of audio productions.
Man, you are duuuuuuumb.
The record, sonically, sounded like absolute shit even compared to Bad Brains, Minor Threat, or even the Germs. Actually, even the BF eps before the full-length album sound light years better. Damaged was a success despite the horrible sound because the band out shined it's horrible production, like a lot of the bands of the era. Having a shitty sounding record was par for the course, since there wasn't enough money or experience to get more than that. If a band had a good sounding record, it was an exception to the rule. That being said, Damaged sounds like utter shit. It did then, and it does now. Because you are too dim-witted to view the album objectively has no bearing on that fact.
PS: No shit, you stupid fucking moron. As such, I think it'd be very interesting to hear those last 30 years of technical development of audio production applied to great records of the past. If I could hear the recordings of Robert Johnson or the Carter Family in pristine, crystal clear, up-to-date audio quality, I'd love to. Meanwhile, purist dipshits such as yourself would be whining about preferring records to sound like shit because the good ol days, and stuff.
jaybird wrote: I tend to think their later records sound a lot weirder overall - either really muddy and lo-fi like My War, or really isolated and sterile and echo-ey like In My Head.
xxxMidgexxx wrote:But perhaps I just love drone stuff in general.
Neal wrote:dude danger actually has too many dynamics. it's not compressed at all to match the volume of the 1st album.
xxxMidgexxx wrote:But perhaps I just love drone stuff in general.
jaybird wrote:SamDBL wrote:Knutsen wrote:Black Flag pretty much had a top notch hardcore punk production for the era, the scene, the audience and the situation. i cannot remember zines, magazines or fans complaining about the "turd" production of the record, because it hit like a bomb, was right on the zeitgeist and the feelings of estranged youth everywhere. It was massive and DBL can only wish to sell that many records with their top protools gofundme production today.
My 2 cents.
PS: Acknowledge that your ears got spoiled during the last 30 years of the technical development of audio productions.
Man, you are duuuuuuumb.
The record, sonically, sounded like absolute shit even compared to Bad Brains, Minor Threat, or even the Germs. Actually, even the BF eps before the full-length album sound light years better. Damaged was a success despite the horrible sound because the band out shined it's horrible production, like a lot of the bands of the era. Having a shitty sounding record was par for the course, since there wasn't enough money or experience to get more than that. If a band had a good sounding record, it was an exception to the rule. That being said, Damaged sounds like utter shit. It did then, and it does now. Because you are too dim-witted to view the album objectively has no bearing on that fact.
PS: No shit, you stupid fucking moron. As such, I think it'd be very interesting to hear those last 30 years of technical development of audio production applied to great records of the past. If I could hear the recordings of Robert Johnson or the Carter Family in pristine, crystal clear, up-to-date audio quality, I'd love to. Meanwhile, purist dipshits such as yourself would be whining about preferring records to sound like shit because the good ol days, and stuff.
Which Black Flag records are we talking about that supposedly sound so shitty, Damaged? My biggest complaint with that record is that it's mastered way too quiet compared to other records from the time... but as far as how it was actually recorded and mixed, I think it's okay. Like, when I listen to it on headphones, I have no problem picking out the different instruments and who's doing what, and everything sounds pretty good to my ears as far as tones and such. Maybe the vocals sit too high in the mix... I don't know, that just seems like a subjective taste thing. I tend to think their later records sound a lot weirder overall - either really muddy and lo-fi like My War, or really isolated and sterile and echo-ey like In My Head.
SamDBL wrote:jaybird wrote:SamDBL wrote:Knutsen wrote:Black Flag pretty much had a top notch hardcore punk production for the era, the scene, the audience and the situation. i cannot remember zines, magazines or fans complaining about the "turd" production of the record, because it hit like a bomb, was right on the zeitgeist and the feelings of estranged youth everywhere. It was massive and DBL can only wish to sell that many records with their top protools gofundme production today.
My 2 cents.
PS: Acknowledge that your ears got spoiled during the last 30 years of the technical development of audio productions.
Man, you are duuuuuuumb.
The record, sonically, sounded like absolute shit even compared to Bad Brains, Minor Threat, or even the Germs. Actually, even the BF eps before the full-length album sound light years better. Damaged was a success despite the horrible sound because the band out shined it's horrible production, like a lot of the bands of the era. Having a shitty sounding record was par for the course, since there wasn't enough money or experience to get more than that. If a band had a good sounding record, it was an exception to the rule. That being said, Damaged sounds like utter shit. It did then, and it does now. Because you are too dim-witted to view the album objectively has no bearing on that fact.
PS: No shit, you stupid fucking moron. As such, I think it'd be very interesting to hear those last 30 years of technical development of audio production applied to great records of the past. If I could hear the recordings of Robert Johnson or the Carter Family in pristine, crystal clear, up-to-date audio quality, I'd love to. Meanwhile, purist dipshits such as yourself would be whining about preferring records to sound like shit because the good ol days, and stuff.
Which Black Flag records are we talking about that supposedly sound so shitty, Damaged? My biggest complaint with that record is that it's mastered way too quiet compared to other records from the time... but as far as how it was actually recorded and mixed, I think it's okay. Like, when I listen to it on headphones, I have no problem picking out the different instruments and who's doing what, and everything sounds pretty good to my ears as far as tones and such. Maybe the vocals sit too high in the mix... I don't know, that just seems like a subjective taste thing. I tend to think their later records sound a lot weirder overall - either really muddy and lo-fi like My War, or really isolated and sterile and echo-ey like In My Head.
I think damaged sounds horrible. It's not really a level thing. Maybe more of an eq of the instruments, individually. And the mix of the drums sounds super bad to me. Cymbals are reall washy, hardly any kick drum, snare is anemic. The whole thing just lacks punch. Bass sounds like a third guitar. To hear how good the band could sound, just compare the Ep version of nervous breakdown to the album version. In fact, al of the other versions sound better than the re recorded versions. To me, this album is a prime candidate for something's like a remix. Because it's historically important. And the songs and special place it holds with people are way out of sync with how bad the mix is. In other words, maybe a band like verbal abuse, who''s records also sound really bad... it just doesn't matter as much. The first black flag album should almost be in the library of congress, or something. If it could sound better, it should. And again, I think plenty of records coming out at the same time sounded so much better. Minor threat, for instance. I feel like that dude spot shouldn't have been let near so many recordings. He just didn't know what the hell he was doing.
The later black flag stuff sounds odd.. but I still think they sound way better (and more suitable to the music) than damaged. I mean, my war sounds kind of weird. But the tones of the instruments make more sense to me. Especially with how weird the band was at the time.
But really it just comes down to me wishing DBLs gofundme pro tools album did better.
SamDBL wrote:Knutsen wrote:Black Flag pretty much had a top notch hardcore punk production for the era, the scene, the audience and the situation. i cannot remember zines, magazines or fans complaining about the "turd" production of the record, because it hit like a bomb, was right on the zeitgeist and the feelings of estranged youth everywhere. It was massive and DBL can only wish to sell that many records with their top protools gofundme production today.
My 2 cents.
PS: Acknowledge that your ears got spoiled during the last 30 years of the technical development of audio productions.
Man, you are duuuuuuumb.
The record, sonically, sounded like absolute shit even compared to Bad Brains, Minor Threat, or even the Germs. Actually, even the BF eps before the full-length album sound light years better. Damaged was a success despite the horrible sound because the band out shined it's horrible production, like a lot of the bands of the era. Having a shitty sounding record was par for the course, since there wasn't enough money or experience to get more than that. If a band had a good sounding record, it was an exception to the rule. That being said, Damaged sounds like utter shit. It did then, and it does now. Because you are too dim-witted to view the album objectively has no bearing on that fact.
PS: No shit, you stupid fucking moron. As such, I think it'd be very interesting to hear those last 30 years of technical development of audio production applied to great records of the past. If I could hear the recordings of Robert Johnson or the Carter Family in pristine, crystal clear, up-to-date audio quality, I'd love to. Meanwhile, purist dipshits such as yourself would be whining about preferring records to sound like shit because the good ol days, and stuff.
SamDBL wrote:So you're in your 50s? Oh my fucking God.
Knutsen wrote:Yep, kiddo. How old are you?
Knutsen wrote:I found this. It reflects my opinion pretty much.
http://louderthanwar.com/black-flag-damaged-re-evaluated-30-years-on/
QUOTE:
Dukowski’s bass is one of the great sounds, clanking and heavy and played with a Marine like intensity, every song he is in there battering away against Greg Ginn’s insanely brilliant guitar.
If there was one person who really defines Black Flag though, it’s not Dukowski and his free jazz bass violence, or even the tattooed danger of the in your face Rollins. It’s guitarist Greg Ginn- who is one of the most innovative rock guitar players ever. When he peals out a solo it makes virtually no sense at all- they seem to melt from his hands, the notes pound like they are going backwards or zig zagging in strange directions before melting back into the intense wall of sound sludge of his rhythm playing- it’s an amazing sound. This electric carnage is added to by the claustrophobic sound of the album that sounds like it was recorded in small padded room. The non production adds to the album’s brilliance- a big sound would have wrecked this, its that almost demo sound that just increases the sludge and the intensity, the creepy crawly power that makes this album stand the test of time.
PS: We need your vitriol at ALLCENTRAL. Are you still afraid of Wong?
Knutsen wrote:I found this. It reflects my opinion pretty much.
http://louderthanwar.com/black-flag-damaged-re-evaluated-30-years-on/
QUOTE:
Dukowski’s bass is one of the great sounds, clanking and heavy and played with a Marine like intensity, every song he is in there battering away against Greg Ginn’s insanely brilliant guitar.
If there was one person who really defines Black Flag though, it’s not Dukowski and his free jazz bass violence, or even the tattooed danger of the in your face Rollins. It’s guitarist Greg Ginn- who is one of the most innovative rock guitar players ever. When he peals out a solo it makes virtually no sense at all- they seem to melt from his hands, the notes pound like they are going backwards or zig zagging in strange directions before melting back into the intense wall of sound sludge of his rhythm playing- it’s an amazing sound. This electric carnage is added to by the claustrophobic sound of the album that sounds like it was recorded in small padded room. The non production adds to the album’s brilliance- a big sound would have wrecked this, its that almost demo sound that just increases the sludge and the intensity, the creepy crawly power that makes this album stand the test of time.
PS: We need your vitriol at ALLCENTRAL. Are you still afraid of Wong?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 46 guests