Quote
keefriff99

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
GasLightStreet
Usual bunk. SOME GIRLS sounds better than THE WORST ROLLING STONES ALBUM EVER. "Bright, crisp and clear" does not always mean good or great - and in this case, the worst ever, it would've been much better if it had the haze of their 1970s LPs.

What are you talking about? I never said anything about Some Girls, which has a great sound.

I simply said that Dirty Work has "fairly good" production. Hardly a ringing endorsement, but in no way do I think it's terrible.

You said "Dirty Work indeed has fairly good production" and that it's ""Bright, crisp and clear". It's cookie cutter production. A 10 year old could've "produced" that excuse of a turd.

And - just to be clear - as you can see, I did not say you slagged SOME GIRLS. I said SG sounds better than DW - and that's saying something considering how bad SG sounds.

You're quoting my words back to me like you think I'm contradicting myself. I posted exactly what I meant and I stand by it. Just because DW is a bad album doesn't mean I can't rate the production as being decent, especially given the circumstances under which it was recorded.

It's still below par by Stones standards, but the engineering is the least of its problems.

So now the conventional "wisdom" around here is that SOME GIRLS, of all albums, has a shitty sound? Where the @#$%& did that come from?

Because SOME GIRLS sounds terrible. It's thin, very trebly. It's very thin. It's crisp. Too crisp. If it had a bit more bottom end to it, like ER and TY does, it would be a lot better.

Aside from Harlem Shuffle, for some reason, DIRTY WORK sounds like one giant Casio keyboard session. It's horrendous.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
keefriff99

Quote
GasLightStreet
Usual bunk. SOME GIRLS sounds better than THE WORST ROLLING STONES ALBUM EVER. "Bright, crisp and clear" does not always mean good or great - and in this case, the worst ever, it would've been much better if it had the haze of their 1970s LPs.

What are you talking about? I never said anything about Some Girls, which has a great sound.

I simply said that Dirty Work has "fairly good" production. Hardly a ringing endorsement, but in no way do I think it's terrible.

You said "Dirty Work indeed has fairly good production" and that it's ""Bright, crisp and clear". It's cookie cutter production. A 10 year old could've "produced" that excuse of a turd.

And - just to be clear - as you can see, I did not say you slagged SOME GIRLS. I said SG sounds better than DW - and that's saying something considering how bad SG sounds.

You're quoting my words back to me like you think I'm contradicting myself. I posted exactly what I meant and I stand by it. Just because DW is a bad album doesn't mean I can't rate the production as being decent, especially given the circumstances under which it was recorded.

It's still below par by Stones standards, but the engineering is the least of its problems.

So now the conventional "wisdom" around here is that SOME GIRLS, of all albums, has a shitty sound? Where the @#$%& did that come from?

Because SOME GIRLS sounds terrible. It's thin, very trebly. It's very thin. It's crisp. Too crisp. If it had a bit more bottom end to it, like ER and TY does, it would be a lot better.

Aside from Harlem Shuffle, for some reason, DIRTY WORK sounds like one giant Casio keyboard session. It's horrendous.

Interesting...I don't hear that at all. I think Some Girls sounds fantastic, just a notch below TY. I agree that the bottom end is less prominent, but that alone isn't enough to ruin it for me.

As far as DW, I'm not a big Harlem Shuffle fan, but it's got the best sound on the album.

One Hit, Fight, Dirty Work and Had It With You also *sound* good, in addition to being solid rockers on an otherwise dumpster fire of an album.

It's not easy to separate production from song quality. For instance, Rush released the album Vapor Trails in 2002, and while it was very good, it was ripped apart by fans for being brick walled to the hilt, so much so that the band commissioned a remix in 2013 that many felt rectified the issue. That's a rare step for a band to take, but the Rush guys are perfectionists.

I'd love to see ABB get the same treatment, but the Stones couldn't care less about things like that, so it'll never happen.

Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

And no bass!

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

Too each his own. To me, is sounds whimpy...

I only wish A Bigger Bang sounded as good -- or as bad -- as Some Girls, that way I could tell if there was any music to that album.

Some say GHS and IORR sound bad. I'll take 70s production to 80s -- at least I can listen to those albums.

Dirty Work isn't really so bad -- actually some good songs/tracks there. The trouble with 80s production is that unfortunately cocaine had seeped into the control room.

Just imagine if Aftermath had been recorded in the 80s -- not even the two or three keepers from that album would have stood a chance.

For those who think Steel Wheels sounds bad, as I do, they should hear the outtakes, Training Wheels, there are a couple of comps that have the sessions and monitor mixes -- even Mick's Demotions sounds good.

The point is, when the boys are in the same room together and jamming away, they create the same "vibe" they do live.

That having been typed, perhaps the best "sounding" album is their first, Rolling Stones No. 1 or Hitmakers or whatever -- because it best captures their live club sound at the time, the "vibe" that got all those people lining up outside the clubs to see them in the early days, to create the legend we still talk about.

Ultimately, the "best" Stones sound, is their live sound. Have they ever really been a "studio" band? Imagine all those albums without tours. can you?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

bAnother cool hesdphone song...

Quote
Thommie

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

And no bass!

Don't forget the sax

Quote
Blueranger

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

Too each his own. To me, is sounds whimpy...

The song, or the actual sounds?

In no way does that mesa boogie-sound come across as wimpy. It's sheer power to my ears. There are sequences in that tune where Keith and Charlie sounds like an interlocked machine.

The song is nothing but good fun, not to be taken too seriously, but the recording is excellent. It points back to the good times of rock'n'roll, as well as being somewhat an odd novelty in the 80s.

Loved it as a B-side on the single, too.

But I can understand that a lot of folks don't like the tune. The lyrics are awful and it does indeed lack bass in the soundscape.

Yet it's different.

Quote
stonehearted
I only wish A Bigger Bang sounded as good -- or as bad -- as Some Girls, that way I could tell if there was any music to that album.

Some say GHS and IORR sound bad. I'll take 70s production to 80s -- at least I can listen to those albums.

Dirty Work isn't really so bad -- actually some good songs/tracks there. The trouble with 80s production is that unfortunately cocaine had seeped into the control room.

Just imagine if Aftermath had been recorded in the 80s -- not even the two or three keepers from that album would have stood a chance.

For those who think Steel Wheels sounds bad, as I do, they should hear the outtakes, Training Wheels, there are a couple of comps that have the sessions and monitor mixes -- even Mick's Demotions sounds good.

The point is, when the boys are in the same room together and jamming away, they create the same "vibe" they do live.

That having been typed, perhaps the best "sounding" album is their first, Rolling Stones No. 1 or Hitmakers or whatever -- because it best captures their live club sound at the time, the "vibe" that got all those people lining up outside the clubs to see them in the early days, to create the legend we still talk about.

Ultimately, the "best" Stones sound, is their live sound. Have they ever really been a "studio" band? Imagine all those albums without tours. can you?

Skip the rockers, and ABB sounds quite fine.

Biggest Mistake, This Place Is Empty, Laugh, I Nearly Died, Let Me Down Slow. They all sound good.

The problem starts when they are making noise. Everything hit the wall at the same time.

Some Girls? Miss You, Beast Of Burden, Before They Make Me Run, Shattered, Far Away Eyes. They all sound excellent to my ears. However, the vinyl version always sounded superior to that of the cd-version to me.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Thommie

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

And no bass!

Don't forget the sax

Oh no, I'm not. But to me it's notable that bass isn't present in a song like that, ain't it? But it works fine!

I have the MFSL-Lp of Some Girls and it sounds marvelous.
ABB doesn´t sound too good, but as Dandelion said, only the rockers are the problem soundwise. Sweet Neo Con btw sounds very good. I also like the sound of Bridges To Babylon, TY, ER, Black And Blue.

Imo, none of their albums sound really bad, not even GHS. Most 70s rock albums sound somewhat muffled, I think it´s the sound they aimed for.

Quote
Thommie

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Thommie

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Had it With You has the best sound on DW, imo. THAT guitar with THOSE drums! Love it! Tight and dirty.

And no bass!

Don't forget the sax

Oh no, I'm not. But to me it's notable that bass isn't present in a song like that, ain't it? But it works fine!

Very noticeable indeed, and that's exactly what leaves room for Keith's guitar. We hear it in a different way. It suits THIS song, imo.

I understand if someone finds Some Girls sounding bad. It has a lot of edgy high mids which can sound really nasty if you turn it up on bad speakers.
But for me that edgy, agressive sound is exactly what I love about Some Girls!
Always thought that it fits perfectly to the punk-rock-like style many of the songs have (just like the rough Exile-sound fits to those songs)
It sounds wild indeed and was the sound of the Stones' comeback after a few mediocre albums after exile. On my speakers, when turned up loud, Some Girls sounds almost like a live-PA sound.

Here's a very interesting article about the recording techniques of Some Girls

[www.soundonsound.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-06-08 13:46 by StonedRambler.

SG is even more trebly on cd (I have both the EMI and Virgin-cds). The vinyl has rounder sound, not so sharp on drums and guitars - without losing the punchy mix.

I think SG sounds great. Respectable might be a little over the top when it comes to trebly guitars, but, well... Love it anyway

Best: Bridges To Babylon
Worst: Between The Buttons

2 1 2 0

Quote
StonedRambler
I understand if someone finds Some Girls sounding bad. It has a lot of edgy high mids which can sound really nasty if you turn it up on bad speakers.
But for me that edgy, agressive sound is exactly what I love about Some Girls!
Always thought that it fits perfectly to the punk-rock-like style many of the songs have (just like the rough Exile-sound fits to those songs)
It sounds wild indeed and was the sound of the Stones' comeback after a few mediocre albums after exile. On my speakers, when turned up loud, Some Girls sounds almost like a live-PA sound.

Here's a very interesting article about the recording techniques of Some Girls

[www.soundonsound.com]

Great reading, thank you...

I vote for "Main Offender" as the best engineered Stones related album.

A little bit above "Black and Blue" even though it is not a Stones album.

Beggars' Banquet was also engineered extremely well if you ask me ..... although it is only evident in SOME of its releases.

Quote
Winning Ugly VXII
I vote for "Main Offender" as the best engineered Stones related album.

A little bit above "Black and Blue" even though it is not a Stones album.

Beggars' Banquet was also engineered extremely well if you ask me ..... although it is only evident in SOME of its releases.

Agreed, and it sounds different from all other Stones-albums as well.

Best: Let it Bleed
Worst: Steel Wheels

Quote
BowieStone
Best: Let it Bleed
Worst: Steel Wheels

Funny I just wanted to post the same albums


Best: Let it Bleed
Worst: Steel Wheels

__________________________

Quote
DandelionPowderman
SG is even more trebly on cd (I have both the EMI and Virgin-cds). The vinyl has rounder sound, not so sharp on drums and guitars - without losing the punchy mix.

I think SG sounds great. Respectable might be a little over the top when it comes to trebly guitars, but, well... Love it anyway

The lack of bottom end on SG was never apparent to me, but I just listened to a couple of SG and TY tracks back to back, and TY indeed has much more prominent bass.

That's hardly enough reason to call SG's sound "terrible", but whatever floats your boat.

Perhaps a "hidden secret" that was already referenced is that when they cut ALL albums to vinyl they had to reduce the bass because bass takes up too much vinyl real estate. So arguably nearly everything from the vinyl era is not what the artist intended us to hear. They wanted their studio monitor sound to make it to the record and it almost always had to be thinned out. That's why 12" disco singles sound so great, no more real estate problems.

What am I looking for? A nice combination of warmth, dynamics, punchiness (when called for) and clarity.

Anyway, look at the sound of Honky Tonk Woman, it's awesome. Perhaps they did not have to make any vinyl compromises for that magical single.

Sticky Fingers and Beggars Banquet have awesome sound, with Sticky Fingers having the perfect "modern sound."

As we all know, EOMS has some endearing muddiness to it, "sonic gumbo."

When GHS came out I was shocked at the thinness of it all. Like already stated, it was probably the biggest casualty of the scooping out of the low end. It also has an unpleasant muddiness. On the other hand, Angie is recording and engineering perfection.

IORR was an attempt to compensate for the thinness of GHS and they did reasonably well at times, and of course the song IORR is in a band-aid and mud class all by itself which is very decadent and endearing.

Black and Blue is indeed great and clean and clear.

Some Girls has its own unique twang and charm which is appropriate to the album and the era. It was a "new sound."

Steel Wheels is like scratching your bare teeth across a chalky blackboard. It's the start of cold digital and brickwalling.

Voodoo Lounge is a slight improvement on Steel Wheels.

Bridges manages to restore some warmth to a harsh digital world.

My best overall is Sticky Fingers and my worst is the bottom-of-the-bag of GHS and Steel Wheels.

Beggars Banquet wins for that warm analog sound and is quite clear for the songs that show off some clarity.

Regarding the above post, vinyl can only grab 90% of the bass, before it starts to distort.

But the reason Some Girls sounds so trebly is because of Mick Jagger. Just as Keith was the driving force of Exile, Mick was the musical director of Some Girls. He was following the punk rock model.

The main thing about punk rock bands of the time was their trebly guitar attack -- there wasn't much bottom at all, in fact those punk rock bands could have cared less.

If you Google the term "seventies punk rock bands bass guitarists", you come up with absolutely nothing...

except: [www.ranker.com]

where only 4 well-known bass players from punk bands come up in the top 50 rock bass player lists of the seventies.

That's the secret to the "treble" sound of Some Girls.

<Steel Wheels is like scratching your bare teeth across a chalky blackboard. It's the start of cold digital and brickwalling.>

That's just not true. I mean, it's true that the digitalisation was beginning to make its mark by this album already. However, when listening to tracks like Terrifying, Blinded By Love, Almost Hear You Sigh, Continental Drift and Slipping Away, I hear great-sounding / engineered tracks, albeit some of them are produced questionably.

Bridges is, together with ABB, the most cold-sounding album they ever released, imo. And it's the rockers that suffer most (just like on SW, VL and AB.

Totally agree with this:

<Beggars Banquet wins for that warm analog sound and is quite clear for the songs that show off some clarity>

About vinyl: Yes, it will always be light on bass, but will also capture room sounds - so it's not math aka that simple.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-06-09 11:07 by DandelionPowderman.

You cannot really compare the albums.....first the sound systems were so different from the 60ies and nowaddays and second the most people only compare cd´s ....for example when you listen to the vinyl editon Emotional Rescue album....the vinyl sounds very good and the CD sounds bad....and for excample the old Exile Vinyl sounds so fab.....i prefer the vinyl edtions from the past....

For me the best sound has the Tattoo You Album....

The worst i cannot say....

Best Let It Bleed

Worst Emotional Rescue or Some Girls

I'm ready to take my lumps here.

Exile was a mess which is why it's so great!

Dark, muddy, with Mick and Keith sounding like one harmonious voice.

Keith's singing on that LP was spectacular.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
That's just not true. I mean, it's true that the digitalisation was beginning to make its mark by this album already. However, when listening to tracks like Terrifying, Blinded By Love, Almost Hear You Sigh, Continental Drift and Slipping Away, I hear great-sounding / engineered tracks, albeit some of them are produced questionably.

Agreed, listening to the "new" Rolling Stones (1989 to present) to me their most enjoyable stuff is the soft rock and the ballads. They do sound very well recorded and produced. A lot of the acoustic guitar work is very nice, clean and precisely recorded. A playlist of just the soft stuff and the ballads is quite enjoyable.

I can't say much about ABB though because I never really listened to it. And of course I join the SOL haters group.

I think the boys got bored with rock and roll or rock songs over the past three decades. They could never beat their earlier rock material anyway. So the essence of the latter-day Rolling Stones is all in the mellow stuff and that includes Keith's contributions. That's perfectly fine with me.