For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
georgie48
Don't forget that Decca was in a hurry! The high quality "Liver than you'll ever be" bootleg album was on the market and very popular (and cheap!). My guess is that putting "yaya's" on the market was far more important than making it a perfect album.
Quote
Palace Revolution 2000
It's a live album from 1969. It sounds awesome.
Quote
slewanQuote
georgie48
Don't forget that Decca was in a hurry! The high quality "Liver than you'll ever be" bootleg album was on the market and very popular (and cheap!). My guess is that putting "yaya's" on the market was far more important than making it a perfect album.
well, that might be a reason, but it does not explain why the didn't remix/remaster it for the deluxe version (all other Decca album have been remastered and are sounding brillant)
Quote
georgie48
Sorry, I disagree with you. When Decca/London released Stones CDs for the first time (in the 80s) several of them had a very poor quality, sharp, noisy sound. Luckily, many years later they remade them in SACD quality.
Quote
slewan
Everybody seems to like the Ya-Ya's album but listening to it once again I can't help it: No other Stones album has such a poor muffeld sound. It seems like all treble is cut off. Even the bonus CD from the deluxe edition sounds so much better - thus the reason doesn't seem to be a result of 60s recording technology.
So what's wrong with the sonic quality of the Ya-Ya's album? Why is the sound so poor?
(please note: I'm not talking about the music).
Quote
slewan
my ears a good and I don't see any reason why the usually work very well but not with the YaYa's.
It's the recording that sounds like it has been recorded through a wall while the Stones are playing in another room
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
slewan
my ears a good and I don't see any reason why the usually work very well but not with the YaYa's.
It's the recording that sounds like it has been recorded through a wall while the Stones are playing in another room
The sonical difference with Ya-Yas, compared to a lot of other live albums, is the lack of effects in the mix: A dry drum sound, a guitar sound where you can hear exactly what kind of amp they're using and what kind of room they're playing in.
It sounds like a balanced rehearsal, really. It suits the music tremendously well, imo, but I wouldn't say that the sonical quality is poor. You can hear every instrument clearly, and there is a lot of bottom in the mix. Regarding lack of treble – Keith's guitar surely has a lot of treble when he turns it up. He keeps his volume a bit down while playing rhythm, blocking the treble - but that's nothing new when it comes to Keith.
The songs on the bonus disc (two of them acoustic) sounds different because they're mixed today + some effects are added, I guess. The same songs sound poorer than the tracks on the original album on the DVD. How did they tune up Keith's guitar on Prodigal Son, btw?
Just a few thoughts.
Quote
georgie48Quote
slewanQuote
georgie48
Don't forget that Decca was in a hurry! The high quality "Liver than you'll ever be" bootleg album was on the market and very popular (and cheap!). My guess is that putting "yaya's" on the market was far more important than making it a perfect album.
well, that might be a reason, but it does not explain why the didn't remix/remaster it for the deluxe version (all other Decca album have been remastered and are sounding brillant)
Sorry, I disagree with you. When Decca/London released Stones CDs for the first time (in the 80s) several of them had a very poor quality, sharp, noisy sound. Luckily, many years later they remade them in SACD quality.
Quote
ChrisMahavishnu
...I think what you are probably objecting to is both Mick+Keiths guitars and Bill Wymans bass overlap frequently in the lower mid frequencies, which is likely an accurate representation of what they actually sounded like, unlike more modern live recordings which apply heavy equalization to carve a spot for each instrument...
.
Quote
CaptainchaosQuote
Palace Revolution 2000
It's a live album from 1969. It sounds awesome.
But is it as good as the Brussel's Live album?
and no i dont mean the inferior 'official' Brussels Live Album release
Quote
umakmehrd
Best live album hands down... it made me pants fall down!!
Quote
The SicilianQuote
CaptainchaosQuote
Palace Revolution 2000
It's a live album from 1969. It sounds awesome.
But is it as good as the Brussel's Live album?
and no i dont mean the inferior 'official' Brussels Live Album release
Brussels is overrated with Mick Taylor's rubbish slide guitar sound.