Jump to content

"Analogue sound" on new album


Gedneil Alpeart

Recommended Posts

QUOTE (mars_volta @ Apr 9 2007, 09:53 PM)
pro tools is NOT the antichrist like some mike make it seem. sure analog tape may have a 'different' sound to it. but have you worked in a studio? worked with tape? the machines? editing? lol its no wonder pro tools and the like are usually the standard in the studio now. there is no reason a session done on pro tools needs to sound 'digital'. ironically, most of rushs clean thin digital sound (PW, RTB, HYF, Presto)  was done on all analog equipment.

9 times out of 10 nowdays the mastering is what causes the most unrest.

I was just going to post the same thing in regards to the huge ProTools misconception.....Good Post!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lunkhead @ Apr 10 2007, 04:00 PM)
One tends to wonder why Rush can't seem to get the production quite "right" on some of their albums (compared to status quo of great sounding albums). I can see when you're mixing and mastering you can get tunnel-vision and not see the forest for The Trees, but for example with Vapor Trails, you would think they'd cross-check it with the production of great sounding albums of the day for reference. To me, they haven't really had a great sounding album since MP:

sound quality:
MP--perfect
Signals--similar but without the guts
GuP--a little thin
Power Windows--very thin
Hold Your Fire--bright but full
RtB--too bright
Presto--way too thin and bright
Counterparts--a little dull on the high end
T4E--a little thick in the middle but not bad
VT--too thick and way hot
SnA--a little "toppy"? we'll see...

Im Glad my ears are f****d they all sound great to me

 

Different ears hear differnt things (sic)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (lunkhead @ Apr 10 2007, 11:00 AM)
One tends to wonder why Rush can't seem to get the production quite "right" on some of their albums (compared to status quo of great sounding albums). I can see when you're mixing and mastering you can get tunnel-vision and not see the forest for The Trees, but for example with Vapor Trails, you would think they'd cross-check it with the production of great sounding albums of the day for reference. To me, they haven't really had a great sounding album since MP:

sound quality:
MP--perfect
Signals--similar but without the guts
GuP--a little thin
Power Windows--very thin
Hold Your Fire--bright but full
RtB--too bright
Presto--way too thin and bright
Counterparts--a little dull on the high end
T4E--a little thick in the middle but not bad
VT--too thick and way hot
SnA--a little "toppy"? we'll see...

Power Windows sounds amazing to me, probably their best produced album to my ears. Presto and VT are the only ones I would call bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (mars_volta @ Apr 9 2007, 08:53 PM)
pro tools is NOT the antichrist like some mike make it seem. sure analog tape may have a 'different' sound to it. but have you worked in a studio? worked with tape? the machines? editing? lol its no wonder pro tools and the like are usually the standard in the studio now. there is no reason a session done on pro tools needs to sound 'digital'. ironically, most of rushs clean thin digital sound (PW, RTB, HYF, Presto) was done on all analog equipment.

9 times out of 10 nowdays the mastering is what causes the most unrest.

True, the mastering on VT is a perfect example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (-D-RocK- @ Apr 9 2007, 10:02 AM)
QUOTE (anchorman @ Apr 9 2007, 10:40 AM)
You are most likely in a younger age bracket.

I wish. Been a fan for almost 30 years.

 

Anyway, perhaps I can't tell the difference because I've only ever worked with digital recording gear. But like I said, I'm sure this record is going to sound amazing and will tear our socks off.

laugh.gif trink38.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...