I like the soundproduction on Hackney.Watt and his team should remix IORR

Quote
Elmo Lewis
I know absolutely nothing of the technical aspects, I just know the album sounds muffled (for lack of a better word). Maybe dull.

In an interview when the album was first released, Keith made a comment about "F**kin' Dolby's!" so I'm assuming he was aware of the issue.

Mick said in a recent interview that the production on Wild Horses made it sound like they through blankets on it.I don’t know what he meant by that .It sounds pretty great to me

Quote
Spud
We all have different tastes and values when it comes to sound quality...and, obviously, different playback systems...

But some folks I think equate "good" sound with a big impressive "in yer face" and overtly HiFi presentation ...which isn't always what you want from a recording.

True. What you said earlier is very much the way I feel about Hackney Diamonds. While I like it a lot, I don't really feel the need to hear it again. It holds no secrets.
Re the IORr album, and sound issues, it seems that it is only a few songs that are the main offenders. IMO 'If you cant rock me', and 'Luxury' are mixed and mastered badly. Right behind "Dance Little Sister' and "Aint too proud to beg' don't really sound all that bad. It's more like they over played them, and ended up with a sterile, sanitized take.
As I write this I'm thinking that in mid 70's it was the fast rockers that suffered. One could say that 'Crazy Mama' is pretty lead footed.

I swear it was in this thread, but now I can’t find it when talking about the run of big albums. Somebody mentioned that only the Beatles possibly came closest to what the stones pulled off, and I don’t necessarily agree that the Beatles were able to do that. Rubber Soul is a classic, phenomenal album. They dip down with Revolver, which I know many people hold as their best album, but for me I ’s a big dud. Sergeant Peppers is a decent enough album. I don’t think it’s on par with the Stones big 4. The White Album is as bloated an album as anything ever made and could’ve been an incredible long EP or a very short LP. There’s so much crap on that album interspersed with some true gems. And then you go to Let It Be and Abbey Road and they were at the pinnacle at almost the same time that the Stones were really, and I don’t think that string of albums is anywhere near as consistent as what the Stones did. If anyone comes close, I would say it would probably be Skynyrd’s five

Quote
Taylor1
I like the soundproduction on Hackney.Watt and his team should remix IORR

But I like it!

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Spud
We all have different tastes and values when it comes to sound quality...and, obviously, different playback systems...

But some folks I think equate "good" sound with a big impressive "in yer face" and overtly HiFi presentation ...which isn't always what you want from a recording.

True. What you said earlier is very much the way I feel about Hackney Diamonds. While I like it a lot, I don't really feel the need to hear it again. It holds no secrets.
Re the IORr album, and sound issues, it seems that it is only a few songs that are the main offenders. IMO 'If you cant rock me', and 'Luxury' are mixed and mastered badly. Right behind "Dance Little Sister' and "Aint too proud to beg' don't really sound all that bad. It's more like they over played them, and ended up with a sterile, sanitized take.
As I write this I'm thinking that in mid 70's it was the fast rockers that suffered. One could say that 'Crazy Mama' is pretty lead footed.

I was referring to B&B at the time.

An album that most folks think sounds great...and it does in many ways...

..but it's too transparent ...not enough layers to peel off and decipher over time. When you've played it...you've heard it all.

Does that make any sense ?

Quote
Spud

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
Spud
We all have different tastes and values when it comes to sound quality...and, obviously, different playback systems...

But some folks I think equate "good" sound with a big impressive "in yer face" and overtly HiFi presentation ...which isn't always what you want from a recording.

True. What you said earlier is very much the way I feel about Hackney Diamonds. While I like it a lot, I don't really feel the need to hear it again. It holds no secrets.
Re the IORr album, and sound issues, it seems that it is only a few songs that are the main offenders. IMO 'If you cant rock me', and 'Luxury' are mixed and mastered badly. Right behind "Dance Little Sister' and "Aint too proud to beg' don't really sound all that bad. It's more like they over played them, and ended up with a sterile, sanitized take.
As I write this I'm thinking that in mid 70's it was the fast rockers that suffered. One could say that 'Crazy Mama' is pretty lead footed.

I was referring to B&B at the time.

An album that most folks think sounds great...and it does in many ways...

..but it's too transparent ...not enough layers to peel off and decipher over time. When you've played it...you've heard it all.

Does that make any sense ?

Yes, mAkes total sense. And that is the way I understood it: that you were referring to B&B. The way you feel about B&B, is how I feel about HD, LOL.
It's a very good point you make.

I was pleasantly surprised by the sound of HD .

In the context of today's typically over loud and over compressed offerings..it sounds pretty good.