The Onset of Technology

[ShlappinDahBass]

[losingit2k]

[pedro2112]

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 13 2012, 12:22 PM)

and the bottom end is really heavy...to the point that it was shaking my whole house!!!

Today was the first time I could play CA on the "system" I've got down in the cave. There is definitely some serious Taurus Bass Pedal action going on at certain parts. Felt like the New Madrid fault was releasing some kinetic energy!

 

The wierd thing is, the bass pedal parts came at really odd parts of songs.

 

 

 

[KenJennings]

I can't help but feel like the mix- along with the musicianship and composition of this album, are perfect.

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 12:43 AM)

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 13 2012, 12:22 PM) and the bottom end is really heavy...to the point that it was shaking my whole house!!! Today was the first time I could play CA on the "system" I've got down in the cave. There is definitely some serious Taurus Bass Pedal action going on at certain parts. Felt like the New Madrid fault was releasing some kinetic energy!   The wierd thing is, the bass pedal parts came at really odd parts of songs. "The New Madrid Fault line, line" really cracked me up!

[Todem]

Edited June 14, 2012 by Todem

[losingit2k]

[Gemari77]

From my point of view... One of my atttractions to Rush was that they were always on the cutting edge of everything in regards to music technology and production.

 

They were VERY high tech in the 80's and 90's, and if I recall correctly, they were one of the first Rock bands to embrace digital technology and recording.

 

There was a time, that when Rush put out a record...even though you might not like the musical direction, you knew you were going to get something that was at least of the highest sound quality available. Very, very high standards and I loved that about them.

 

Could be that they are still that way... but what's modern and cutting edge is how this CD is mixed and mastered. I wouldn't know, because i don't buy or listen to enough new Rock/Metal to know what the current trends are production wise.

 

I do know that the last few Hard Rock/Metal records I purchased (Dream Theater, Arch/Matheos, Anthrax) were more pleasing to my ears sonically than Clockwork Angels.

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (Gemari77 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:10 AM)

From my point of view... One of my atttractions to Rush was that they were always on the cutting edge of everything in regards to music technology and production. They were VERY high tech in the 80's and 90's, and if I recall correctly, they were one of the first Rock bands to embrace digital technology and recording. There was a time, that when Rush put out a record...even though you might not like the musical direction, you knew you were going to get something that was at least of the highest sound quality available. Very, very high standards and I loved that about them. Could be that they are still that way... but what's modern and cutting edge is how this CD is mixed and mastered. I wouldn't know, because i don't buy or listen to enough new Rock/Metal to know what the current trends are production wise. I do know that the last few Hard Rock/Metal records I purchased (Dream Theater, Arch/Matheos, Anthrax) were more pleasing to my ears sonically than Clockwork Angels.

I agree, the new Dream Theater did sound better than Clockwork Angels. But lets be fair, It has much more keybaords and no string section. I actually feel Clockwork Angels would have sounded less bassy without that big reverb on Neil's kick and those Taurus Pedals that come out of no where?

 

I don't get those at all! But then again, I only heard them through a really strong, low end heavy sound system. They sound fine everywhere else.

 

 

 

[trenken]

Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact.

 

And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area.

 

VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality.

[EmotionDetector]

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM)

Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality.

You're right about that.

 

VT was the main reason all this came to light. VT showed you how bad an album can sound, and how an album of songs could be ruined simply by the sound. There are many people on here that have stated they don't listen to VT simply because of the sound.

 

Before listening to VT, I never really paid attention to the sound, or didn't notice it on albums (not just Rush...every artist).

 

Since that time...I notice it on every album. The first time I listened to Death Magnetic from Metallica, I noticed the shitty sound immediately. The songs were great, but the sound was unappealing.

 

When I heard S&A for the first time, I recall listening to the 'sound' of the record, and I was pleased at the vast improvement over VT. Loved the mix.

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Jun 14 2012, 09:25 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. You're right about that.   VT was the main reason all this came to light. VT showed you how bad an album can sound, and how an album of songs could be ruined simply by the sound. There are many people on here that have stated they don't listen to VT simply because of the sound.   Before listening to VT, I never really paid attention to the sound, or didn't notice it on albums (not just Rush...every artist).   Since that time...I notice it on every album. The first time I listened to Death Magnetic from Metallica, I noticed the shitty sound immediately. The songs were great, but the sound was unappealing.   When I heard S&A for the first time, I recall listening to the 'sound' of the record, and I was pleased at the vast improvement over VT. Loved the mix.   That's the answer: Compare everything to VT!

[trenken]

QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Jun 14 2012, 09:25 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. You're right about that.   VT was the main reason all this came to light. VT showed you how bad an album can sound, and how an album of songs could be ruined simply by the sound. There are many people on here that have stated they don't listen to VT simply because of the sound.   Before listening to VT, I never really paid attention to the sound, or didn't notice it on albums (not just Rush...every artist).   Since that time...I notice it on every album. The first time I listened to Death Magnetic from Metallica, I noticed the shitty sound immediately. The songs were great, but the sound was unappealing.   When I heard S&A for the first time, I recall listening to the 'sound' of the record, and I was pleased at the vast improvement over VT. Loved the mix. I know exactly what you're talking about. With Death Magentic they said they tried to make it the loudest sounding studio album possible, but they pushed it too far and you can hear some weird distortion going on at times.   With Clockwork, it doesnt sound BAD, not VT bad, but I definitely have heard much better sounding albums recently.   Well before VT, the only things I ever really noticed was how Presto and RTB lacked some punch. They sounded empty, but they were really going for more of a light/soft rock sound with those 2 albums, so I think it was intentional.   Here they're trying to write an album with a hard edge, but the drums lack punch? And the guitars sound like a muddy mess? If that was intentional, time to find another producer for the next album.

[Godeater2112]

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM)

Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. ... it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality.

Come on man!

 

Anyway this is not a sad day for anyone except those obsessively captivated to analyzing the "sound quality" and fretting about it.

 

Not a sad day for me at all, I'm in love with this album, sound quality and all and I probably can't say I've enjoyed a new release so much since I became a fan around Hold your Fire time.

 

[Rushman14]

QUOTE (pedro2112 @ Jun 13 2012, 10:43 PM)

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 13 2012, 12:22 PM) and the bottom end is really heavy...to the point that it was shaking my whole house!!! Today was the first time I could play CA on the "system" I've got down in the cave. There is definitely some serious Taurus Bass Pedal action going on at certain parts. Felt like the New Madrid fault was releasing some kinetic energy!   The wierd thing is, the bass pedal parts came at really odd parts of songs. yeah the bottom end of those taurus pedals are little over the top. i have a good, but not great car stereo and the speakers aren't handling it very well.

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (Godeater2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:31 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM) Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. ... it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Come on man!   Anyway this is not a sad day for anyone except those obsessively captivated to analyzing the "sound quality" and fretting about it.   Not a sad day for me at all, I'm in love with this album, sound quality and all and I probably can't say I've enjoyed a new release so much since I became a fan around Hold your Fire time.   I love it too man!! Lets go watch double rainbows together.

[GeddyLeeRoth]

This is an album that sounds incredible on my home stereo, but gets blurred in my truck (which isn't always the case). There is a lot of texturing with many of the instruments offering a thick sound. I love this album. I give the production an 8 out of 10 and the material is even better.

[Godeater2112]

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 14 2012, 10:34 AM)

I love it too man!! Lets go watch double rainbows together.

 

I almost lost my mind at work yesterday watching the DOUBLE RAINBOWS GUY for the first time.

[trenken]

QUOTE (Godeater2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:37 AM)

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 14 2012, 10:34 AM) I love it too man!!    Lets go watch double rainbows together.   I almost lost my mind at work yesterday watching the DOUBLE RAINBOWS GUY for the first time. Well I hope youve heard the double rainbow song. I was singing this for like 3 days after hearing it.

[Rushman14]

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 14 2012, 07:34 AM)

QUOTE (Godeater2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:31 AM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 10:19 AM) Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. ... it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Come on man!   Anyway this is not a sad day for anyone except those obsessively captivated to analyzing the "sound quality" and fretting about it.   Not a sad day for me at all, I'm in love with this album, sound quality and all and I probably can't say I've enjoyed a new release so much since I became a fan around Hold your Fire time.   I love it too man!! Lets go watch double rainbows together.   oh please lets the mods change your member title to "double rainbow guy".   That would rule!

[snowdog2112]

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 08:19 AM)

Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality.

Seriously?! It was never an issue? Signals and ESL were so bad and muffled and dead-sounding I thought there was something wrong with my cassettes back in the 80s when I first bought them. And even though they don't bother me too much most people constantly rag on how bad Presto and RTB sound. The first Rush album sounds like it was recorded on some Fisher-Price console. Many people think GUP is horrible-sounding, too because it's so cold and brittle.

 

 

I grew up with 70s and 80s rock so the louder mastering style still bothers me too but this issue has nothing to do with anyone doing a "bad" job, most people simply think this is the way rock is supposed to sound. Every band forum I go to for older bands with older fans has the same ongoing problem. And everybody thinks their band just didn't do a good job.

 

I think what's happening is you've got a group of old fans for all these classic bands who quit listening to new rock at least 20 years ago except for the specific bands they follow and so they keep comparing their newer albums to the old albums instead of comparing them to what everyone else has sounded like for 20 freaking years now.

 

So when I go to the Van Halen forum I see:

 

ADKoT Production - Brickwalled Dynamics

http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/adkot-prod...led-t54364.html

 

 

And if I go to Chickenfoot's forum I see:

 

Chickenfoot Albums and Brickwalled Production

http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=1508400

 

 

And if I go to ZZ Top's forum I see:

 

Good songs but that is the most horrible brickwalling I have heard in ages.

 

 

And on and on and on for every old band. This has nothing to do with Rush or people screwing up, music has changed over 20 years and many fans just are either in denial or oblivious. Again, I'm not saying we should pretend to like it, I wish stuff still sounded like the 70s and 80s too but it's just a different world. I'm 44 and my youngest sister is only 27 and some of her friends that I know are even in their early 20s and they only listen to music through their ipods or phones or whatever or maybe computer speakers. None of them own stereos. The younger guys in her group think older music sounds wimpy. So that's all there is to it. It's changed and it's not going back. I'm just amazed that for every single release for every one of these older bands for 20 years there's been the same shock that "things don't sound like they used to". Bunch of shut-ins.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rushman14]

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 07:43 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 08:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Seriously?! It was never an issue? Signals and ESL were so bad and muffled and dead-sounding I thought there was something wrong with my cassettes back in the 80s when I first bought them. And even though they don't bother me too much most people constantly rag on how bad Presto and RTB sound. The first Rush album sounds like it was recorded on some Fisher-Price console. Many people think GUP is horrible-sounding, too because it's so cold and brittle.     I grew up with 70s and 80s rock so the louder mastering style still bothers me too but this issue has nothing to do with anyone doing a "bad" job, most people simply think this is the way rock is supposed to sound. Every band forum I go to for older bands with older fans has the same ongoing problem. And everybody thinks their band just didn't do a good job.   I think what's happening is you've got a group of old fans for all these classic bands who quit listening to new rock at least 20 years ago except for the specific bands they follow and so they keep comparing their newer albums to the old albums instead of comparing them to what everyone else has sounded like for 20 freaking years now.   So when I go to the Van Halen forum I see:   ADKoT Production - Brickwalled Dynamics http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/adkot-prod...led-t54364.html     And if I go to Chickenfoot's forum I see:   Chickenfoot Albums and Brickwalled Production http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=1508400     And if I go to ZZ Top's forum I see:   Good songs but that is the most horrible brickwalling I have heard in ages.     And on and on and on for every old band. This has nothing to do with Rush or people screwing up, music has changed over 20 years and many fans just are either in denial or oblivious. Again, I'm not saying we should pretend to like it, I wish stuff still sounded like the 70s and 80s too but it's just a different world. I'm 44 and my youngest sister is only 27 and some of her friends that I know are even in their early 20s and they only listen to music through their ipods or phones or whatever or maybe computer speakers. None of them own stereos. The younger guys in her group think older music sounds wimpy. So that's all there is to it. It's changed and it's not going back. I'm just amazed that for every single release for every one of these older bands for 20 years there's been the same shock that "things don't sound like they used to". Bunch of shut-ins. I really dont think thats the case. I listen to alot of current rock. I personally think the first mix of Caravan was perfection. I think this album is a step backward in overall production.

Edited June 14, 2012 by Rushman14

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:46 AM)

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 07:43 AM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 08:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Seriously?! It was never an issue? Signals and ESL were so bad and muffled and dead-sounding I thought there was something wrong with my cassettes back in the 80s when I first bought them. And even though they don't bother me too much most people constantly rag on how bad Presto and RTB sound. The first Rush album sounds like it was recorded on some Fisher-Price console. Many people think GUP is horrible-sounding, too because it's so cold and brittle.     I grew up with 70s and 80s rock so the louder mastering style still bothers me too but this issue has nothing to do with anyone doing a "bad" job, most people simply think this is the way rock is supposed to sound. Every band forum I go to for older bands with older fans has the same ongoing problem. And everybody thinks their band just didn't do a good job.   I think what's happening is you've got a group of old fans for all these classic bands who quit listening to new rock at least 20 years ago except for the specific bands they follow and so they keep comparing their newer albums to the old albums instead of comparing them to what everyone else has sounded like for 20 freaking years now.   So when I go to the Van Halen forum I see:   ADKoT Production - Brickwalled Dynamics http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/adkot-prod...led-t54364.html     And if I go to Chickenfoot's forum I see:   Chickenfoot Albums and Brickwalled Production http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=1508400     And if I go to ZZ Top's forum I see:   Good songs but that is the most horrible brickwalling I have heard in ages.     And on and on and on for every old band. This has nothing to do with Rush or people screwing up, music has changed over 20 years and many fans just are either in denial or oblivious. Again, I'm not saying we should pretend to like it, I wish stuff still sounded like the 70s and 80s too but it's just a different world. I'm 44 and my youngest sister is only 27 and some of her friends that I know are even in their early 20s and they only listen to music through their ipods or phones or whatever or maybe computer speakers. None of them own stereos. The younger guys in her group think older music sounds wimpy. So that's all there is to it. It's changed and it's not going back. I'm just amazed that for every single release for every one of these older bands for 20 years there's been the same shock that "things don't sound like they used to". Bunch of shut-ins. I really dont think thats the case. I listen to alot of current rock. I personally think the first mix of Caravan was perfection. I think this album is a step backward in overall production.   Who mastered the single of Caravan and BU2B? Was it someone other than CA?

[marblesmike]

QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 14 2012, 10:46 AM)

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 07:43 AM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 08:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Seriously?! It was never an issue? Signals and ESL were so bad and muffled and dead-sounding I thought there was something wrong with my cassettes back in the 80s when I first bought them. And even though they don't bother me too much most people constantly rag on how bad Presto and RTB sound. The first Rush album sounds like it was recorded on some Fisher-Price console. Many people think GUP is horrible-sounding, too because it's so cold and brittle.     I grew up with 70s and 80s rock so the louder mastering style still bothers me too but this issue has nothing to do with anyone doing a "bad" job, most people simply think this is the way rock is supposed to sound. Every band forum I go to for older bands with older fans has the same ongoing problem. And everybody thinks their band just didn't do a good job.   I think what's happening is you've got a group of old fans for all these classic bands who quit listening to new rock at least 20 years ago except for the specific bands they follow and so they keep comparing their newer albums to the old albums instead of comparing them to what everyone else has sounded like for 20 freaking years now.   So when I go to the Van Halen forum I see:   ADKoT Production - Brickwalled Dynamics http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/adkot-prod...led-t54364.html     And if I go to Chickenfoot's forum I see:   Chickenfoot Albums and Brickwalled Production http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=1508400     And if I go to ZZ Top's forum I see:   Good songs but that is the most horrible brickwalling I have heard in ages.     And on and on and on for every old band. This has nothing to do with Rush or people screwing up, music has changed over 20 years and many fans just are either in denial or oblivious. Again, I'm not saying we should pretend to like it, I wish stuff still sounded like the 70s and 80s too but it's just a different world. I'm 44 and my youngest sister is only 27 and some of her friends that I know are even in their early 20s and they only listen to music through their ipods or phones or whatever or maybe computer speakers. None of them own stereos. The younger guys in her group think older music sounds wimpy. So that's all there is to it. It's changed and it's not going back. I'm just amazed that for every single release for every one of these older bands for 20 years there's been the same shock that "things don't sound like they used to". Bunch of shut-ins. I really dont think thats the case. I listen to alot of current rock. I personally think the first mix of Caravan was perfection. I think this album is a step backward in overall production.   I'm in my mid-20s, and listen to plenty of classic rock and modern rock (amongst other genres).   There are still contemporary acts that mix/master their albums well, so it isn't just a dated-factor.

[Rushman14]

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 14 2012, 09:38 AM)

QUOTE (Rushman14 @ Jun 14 2012, 09:46 AM) QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Jun 14 2012, 07:43 AM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 14 2012, 08:19 AM) Lol best album since the early 80s. Gotta love when people pass their opinion off as fact. And sound quality has ALWAYS been important. Problem is before VT, none of the albums had any particular sound problems, so there was nothing to discuss in that area. VT obviously was a disaster that could not be ignored, and this album has a bit of a cloudy or hazy sound to it, like it wasnt mastered well. The drums really lack punch, and the guitars dont sound very crisp to me. You cant blame that on technology or anything else other than it just wasnt mixed or mastered well. That's just reality. Seriously?! It was never an issue? Signals and ESL were so bad and muffled and dead-sounding I thought there was something wrong with my cassettes back in the 80s when I first bought them. And even though they don't bother me too much most people constantly rag on how bad Presto and RTB sound. The first Rush album sounds like it was recorded on some Fisher-Price console. Many people think GUP is horrible-sounding, too because it's so cold and brittle.     I grew up with 70s and 80s rock so the louder mastering style still bothers me too but this issue has nothing to do with anyone doing a "bad" job, most people simply think this is the way rock is supposed to sound. Every band forum I go to for older bands with older fans has the same ongoing problem. And everybody thinks their band just didn't do a good job.   I think what's happening is you've got a group of old fans for all these classic bands who quit listening to new rock at least 20 years ago except for the specific bands they follow and so they keep comparing their newer albums to the old albums instead of comparing them to what everyone else has sounded like for 20 freaking years now.   So when I go to the Van Halen forum I see:   ADKoT Production - Brickwalled Dynamics http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/adkot-prod...led-t54364.html     And if I go to Chickenfoot's forum I see:   Chickenfoot Albums and Brickwalled Production http://www.vhlinks.com/vbforums/showthread.php?p=1508400     And if I go to ZZ Top's forum I see:   Good songs but that is the most horrible brickwalling I have heard in ages.     And on and on and on for every old band. This has nothing to do with Rush or people screwing up, music has changed over 20 years and many fans just are either in denial or oblivious. Again, I'm not saying we should pretend to like it, I wish stuff still sounded like the 70s and 80s too but it's just a different world. I'm 44 and my youngest sister is only 27 and some of her friends that I know are even in their early 20s and they only listen to music through their ipods or phones or whatever or maybe computer speakers. None of them own stereos. The younger guys in her group think older music sounds wimpy. So that's all there is to it. It's changed and it's not going back. I'm just amazed that for every single release for every one of these older bands for 20 years there's been the same shock that "things don't sound like they used to". Bunch of shut-ins. I really dont think thats the case. I listen to alot of current rock. I personally think the first mix of Caravan was perfection. I think this album is a step backward in overall production.   Who mastered the single of Caravan and BU2B? Was it someone other than CA?   For me its not just the mastering, but the mix. Chycki mixed the original Carvan and BU2B. Sonically they sound really good to me. Nick remixed them, as well as all of CA. So I believe the issues I'm having are with the actual mixes, not neccessarily the mastering. Chycki also mixed S&A, which I have no problems with production wise.   anyway, I'm rockin CA on headphones at work right now and it sounds really good

Edited June 14, 2012 by Rushman14