| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Bedbug
> Teenager of the Year <
3155 Posts |
 Posted - 08/17/2016 : 08:07:59
|
But to be obnoxious and answer my own original question: "No, Talent would not make me into a rabid Pixies fan if I heard it then or now. It's good stuff, but nothing like when my friend put Surfer into the tape deck in 1990. I didn't understand what I was hearing. When Something Against You came on I thought there was something wrong with my radio.
And btw some of my favorite stuff of his is post-Pixies (TOTY, fast man, John Frum to name a few). |
 |
|
|
natenate101
= Cult of Ray =
USA
892 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 08:53:27
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bedbug
But to be obnoxious and answer my own original question: "No, Talent would not make me into a rabid Pixies fan if I heard it then or now. It's good stuff, but nothing like when my friend put Surfer into the tape deck in 1990. I didn't understand what I was hearing. When Something Against You came on I thought there was something wrong with my radio.
And btw some of my favorite stuff of his is post-Pixies (TOTY, fast man, John Frum to name a few).
I'm with you on the first paragraph. These songs aren't nearly as oddly beautiful as the early stuff. But they have their own charms which is cool. We all just have to try and avoid comparing it, though it's obviously very difficult. |
|
|
|
hammerhands
* Dog in the Sand *
Canada
1594 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 09:04:14
|
"When Something Against You came on I thought there was something wrong with my radio."
-Bedbug
I thought there was something wrong with them.
I'm not sure what got me to put the tape in a second time,
a vague notion that I missed something or glimpsing a freak show. |
Edited by - hammerhands on 08/17/2016 09:05:13 |
|
|
|
yarbles
= Cult of Ray =
USA
635 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 09:08:45
|
| I'm not comparing the new stuff to their older stuff at all. Basically, I honestly feel like I'm living in an alternate reality whenever something new comes from this band, as I thought I'd never again hear new music after Trompe. I'm literally just so grateful they're back and making the music they want to make, and I'm even more grateful that the music is still good. Yes, this music is good. Not comparing it to anything else because why should we? |
|
|
|
wilson
- FB Fan -
61 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 10:10:26
|
| i liked talent. uh oh. |
|
|
|
jake3
- FB Fan -
United Kingdom
248 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 11:06:08
|
| Sounds like a neat album track but it doesn't jump out to me as something I'd have chosen over Classic Masher, Baal's Back or Head Carrier as the next single. The verses are pretty cool, the chorus less so. |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 11:10:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by wilson
i liked talent. uh oh.
Better than the other songs on the album ?
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 11:12:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bedbug
And btw some of my favorite stuff of his is post-Pixies (TOTY, fast man, John Frum to name a few).
+1 for John Frum, great song. And well-produced........
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
sdon
= Cult of Ray =
France
786 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 11:51:05
|
As for now, my ranking of songs is as follows:
Classic Masher
Baal's Back
Head Carrier
Um Chagga Lagga
Talent
Incredible how different those five songs are
Songwriting-wise, based on those five songs, I would rate HC slightly below IC for the moment
--
"Aristophanes! (gong sounds)" |
Edited by - sdon on 08/17/2016 11:53:40 |
|
|
|
yarbles
= Cult of Ray =
USA
635 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 12:00:21
|
| Interesting to see the difference of opinions. I love Talent. and so far I'm liking everything from HC more than the songs from IC. |
|
|
|
natenate101
= Cult of Ray =
USA
892 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 12:11:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by yarbles
Interesting to see the difference of opinions. I love Talent. and so far I'm liking everything from HC more than the songs from IC.
Same here. Just the energy of the tracks alone sounds more appealing to me. Can't wait for the album. |
|
|
|
johnnyribcage
* Dog in the Sand *
USA
1301 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 14:37:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by wilson
i liked talent. uh oh.
I really enjoy Talent. And UCL. Someone else posted that the variety sounds promising - that's what I'd like to hear too. Might have been the same poster said something along the lines of just wanting to see Charles just keep doing his thing and leave it to the others to "pixie it up." I think that's a fine idea! Really excited for the new album, and I hope they can resist the urge to slowly trickle most of it out leading up to the release date - nothing like hearing it all in one go the first time!
My density has popped me to you. |
|
|
|
Ecto
- FB Fan -
USA
31 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 15:03:40
|
I really like IC. Yeah the production isn't what I'd of picked but the song writing is there. I think I usually skip the same three songs on IC.
UCL is great but maybe I like it more than Talent cuz I've had so much more time with it. UCL seems like a song only BF could write where Talent feels like someone else could of wrote this tune. I like it, I love the Jack Palance reference and it's a fun little song but could of been a b side for me. |
|
|
|
Skatealex1
* Dog in the Sand *
1670 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 20:16:29
|
| I get that Talent may not have the depth of older Pixies songs and the chorus isn't the best but I like that it sounds like a short and catchy song, which a lot of Pixies songs used to be like. It does sound a bit more like Frank Black to me but I could see it going well in the context of the album. One thing I can say with some of Frank's work like Teenager of the Year, some of the songs sound better in the context of the album it's on. It will be out soon enough anyway. |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/17/2016 : 22:34:54
|
My top 5 so far:
Carrier
Baals
Chagga
Talent
Masher
HC & Baals sounds really wild. But I was kind of expecting something better for Masher. Have to wait to hear th album version to have a better idea. It's good, but I felt this song had a greater potential.
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
OLDMANOTY
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
469 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 02:45:03
|
Re the over-compression issue. I'm no muso or technically minded about this stuff but even I can tell that the 2 new tracks suffer a little because of it. My question is, given it's a practice that appears to be 100% reviled by everyone - why do producers/engineers or whoever sanctions it still go ahead and do it anyway? Do they just enjoy pissing everyone off? I know about the 'loudness wars' thing but I've also heard the argument that it makes music sound 'better on the radio'. But how does that apply to Pixies? They're not exactly on heavy rotation are they. Also isn't music uploaded to youtube etc automatically compressed by default anyway? I just don't get it.
Anyway, despite all that I like talent a lot. It sounds a bit more COR era Frank Black than Pixies to me though. |
Edited by - OLDMANOTY on 08/18/2016 03:17:09 |
|
|
|
thesilenceofthelens
- FB Fan -
United Kingdom
4 Posts |
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 04:57:43
|
@OLDMANOTY
I think it's just fashionable to do it. And most artists don't care. They do their thing live onstage, and for the albums they just trust the engineers.
I remember when the Pixies were in RAK Studios in early 2016, someone noticed a photo of the Neve console they were recording with, hoping for a great sound that this gear is famous for. For my part, I immediately noticed the Pro Tools monitor and knew what it probably meant. Plugins. Compression. Limiting. etc...
I don't blame Pro Tools, it's great for recording and saves time and money. But it looks so easy to achieve a supposedly "great" sound just by clicking a few buttons that most high-profile contemporary rock albums have now the same processed/compressed/limited sound that I (personaly) hate. Listen to any recent Foo Fighters record, same insanely compressed, unbearable sound.
No nostalgy here, but I re-listened to Surfer Rosa the other day, and it sounds so hi-def comparing to IC and HC. You can hear little noises, you can discover new details every time you listen to a song, you can ENJOY listening to those songs ! No headache, nothing... You will NEVER have this expercience with Indie Cindy and probably Head Carrier. Ever.
I'm sure many modern Pixies tracks would be much more appreciated if the production wasn't so formatted. Maybe one day we will hear a different mix and can finally enjoy those. (I'm dreaming)
___
"Service Unavailable" |
Edited by - picpic on 08/18/2016 04:58:35 |
|
|
|
thesilenceofthelens
- FB Fan -
United Kingdom
4 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 05:00:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by picpic
@OLDMANOTY
I think it's just fashionable to do it. And most artists don't care. They do their thing live onstage, and for the albums they just trust the engineers.
I remember when the Pixies were in RAK Studios in early 2016, someone noticed a photo of the Neve console they were recording with, hoping for a great sound that this gear is famous for. For my part, I immediately noticed the Pro Tools monitor and knew what it probably meant. Plugins. Compression. Limiting. etc...
I don't blame Pro Tools, it's great for recording and saves time and money. But it looks so easy to achieve a supposedly "great" sound just by clicking a few buttons that most high-profile contemporary rock albums have now the same processed/compressed/limited sound that I (personaly) hate. Listen to any recent Foo Fighters record, same insanely compressed, unbearable sound.
No nostalgy here, but I re-listened to Surfer Rosa the other day, and it sounds so hi-def comparing to IC and HC. You can hear little noises, you can discover new details every time you listen to a song, you can ENJOY listening to those songs ! No headache, nothing... You will NEVER have this expercience with Indie Cindy and probably Head Carrier. Ever.
I'm sure many modern Pixies tracks would be much more appreciated if the production wasn't so formatted. Maybe one day we will hear a different mix and can finally enjoy those. (I'm dreaming)
That's my dream - to one day hear all their "comback" songs recorded as well (sound-wise) as Surfer/Doolittle, but with their modern twist.
We can dream, right? |
|
|
|
OLDMANOTY
= Cult of Ray =
United Kingdom
469 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 07:13:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by picpic
@OLDMANOTY
I think it's just fashionable to do it. And most artists don't care. They do their thing live onstage, and for the albums they just trust the engineers.
I remember when the Pixies were in RAK Studios in early 2016, someone noticed a photo of the Neve console they were recording with, hoping for a great sound that this gear is famous for. For my part, I immediately noticed the Pro Tools monitor and knew what it probably meant. Plugins. Compression. Limiting. etc...
I don't blame Pro Tools, it's great for recording and saves time and money. But it looks so easy to achieve a supposedly "great" sound just by clicking a few buttons that most high-profile contemporary rock albums have now the same processed/compressed/limited sound that I (personaly) hate. Listen to any recent Foo Fighters record, same insanely compressed, unbearable sound.
No nostalgy here, but I re-listened to Surfer Rosa the other day, and it sounds so hi-def comparing to IC and HC. You can hear little noises, you can discover new details every time you listen to a song, you can ENJOY listening to those songs ! No headache, nothing... You will NEVER have this expercience with Indie Cindy and probably Head Carrier. Ever.
I'm sure many modern Pixies tracks would be much more appreciated if the production wasn't so formatted. Maybe one day we will hear a different mix and can finally enjoy those. (I'm dreaming)
___
"Service Unavailable"
Thanks a lot for that, I understand a bit more now. It's such a shame though, your description of listening to Surfer Rosa in comparison to the new stuff made me sad. It's so blindingly obvious how much better it could sound. 'Most artists don't care' - I'd have thought Pixies would be an exception to this, or maybe they just don't notice. Baffling to me, anyway.
It's funny, while listening to Talent I noticed Women of War was a suggested video. Hadn't heard it for ages so clicked. Here we have a song that was recorded quickly with no frills, no discernible over-compression, just bashed out really. Although I really like Talent & UCL, WOW just sounds better to me, more thrilling, more Pixies. I'd have lapped up a full album of songs recorded like that. |
|
|
|
natenate101
= Cult of Ray =
USA
892 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 07:27:12
|
What are everyone's thoughts on the songwriting for this album thus far? I feel like Classic Masher and UCL surprisingly are the best written tracks out of the batch. They seem to have more depth in terms of imagery than the others. HC and Talent seem overly simple although I like them both, the former because of how much it sounds like Old Pixies to me and the later because of how energetic it is musically.
There doesn't seem to be much dynamism within the songs with regards to changing of tempos or vocal stylings. Wonder in BF is in "Keep It Simple Stupid" mode?
It's always catchy but I was hoping for some more obscure subjects and lyrics. |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 09:21:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by OLDMANOTY
Thanks a lot for that, I understand a bit more now. It's such a shame though, your description of listening to Surfer Rosa in comparison to the new stuff made me sad. It's so blindingly obvious how much better it could sound. 'Most artists don't care' - I'd have thought Pixies would be an exception to this, or maybe they just don't notice. Baffling to me, anyway.
I think they're musicians, they're songwriters, not engineeers. So, yes, they probably don't care.
Anyway, I force myself to stop complaining. I'm feeling like an old chap complaining about modern technologies. After all, maybe young people actually like that kind of processed sound. Maybe they're right. Maybe I'm just an old grumpy asshole.
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
peter radiator
= Cult of Ray =
USA
653 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 11:27:49
|
Some points to consider:
At the time the Pixies made their first two records, they were essentially young kids in their first "real" band.
They had no recording budgets to speak of, and were utilizing producers who themselves were relatively idiosyncratic, beholden to no one and (seemingly) fairly unconcerned with the notion of what might make a record sound "radio-friendly" - even as far as non-commercial college radio went.
The bandmembers (and their producers and engineers) were clearly more concerned with simply getting good performances down on tape that reflected the sound they heard in their minds as related to an idealized version of their live stage sound in the small clubs they frequented.
They had nothing to lose other than a few bucks, and could never have conceived in their wildest dreams that those frenzied, quickly-made recordings would one day be obsessed over by the likes of us, or remastered and released as highly coveted "audiophile" vinyl pressings.
Fast forward to the current day: the band is revered by many worldwide as pioneers of a certain sound and aesthetic, and the members have that mantle thrown around their necks ad nauseam by critics and fans alike. They all (in varying degrees) likely expend no small amount of energy in grappling with those pressures, not to mention with their own personal desires and wishes for how they'd like their new albums and singles to sound - desires and wishes which are informed by 30 years of growth as musicians, as well as the almost complete transmogrification of the music biz (in terms of how music is reproduced and digested), which their cult success and influence wound up having quite a bit to do with, tangentially speaking.
Back when those early records were made (and even the later ones made by Pixies v1.0), essentially, no one was listening or gave a shit.
Now, TONS of people are listening, and many of the ones who are quickest to act like they give a shit and make noise about it, might not even consider themselves fans of the band.
How twisted is that?
The way the record biz is these days, probably 85% of the people buying or stealing music (but certainly listening to it) don't know and can't tell the difference between brickwalled crap and nuanced, airy and dynamically vibrant mastering.
Similarly, maybe 75% of the gear out there which people are using currently around the world to "listen" to music is sonically atrocious.
The result is that engineers and producers and musicians who want their music to be heard by the majority of listeners are forced to take into consideration the overwhelming likelihood that the digital format used, and/or the final output mechanism employed by the largest segment of their potential listener base will both render most if not all of the finer points of any careful production techniques essentially useless or impossible to discern.
So, folks in such positions (including the musicians themselves) can either "play to the room" and create the best records they know how which still sound like records which are made in the present day we live in (and thus will hopefully be given at least a shot by 85% of the total populace which may come in contact with them), OR they can insist on being retro recording technique fetishists who insist on only using vintage gear and finely honed or antiquated methods of production which guarantee audiophile-esque results for the nitpicky that still care (otherwise known as "a guy with some ears"), but will generally sound bizarrely quiet and underwhelming when situated in a modern-day playlist next to the heinously harsh and over-compressed tracks being put out by 95% of their peers.
Given those dispiriting options, I am slightly saddened, but not especially surprised that the Pixies chose the former approach over the latter.
I also don't fault them too awfully much for it, as, at the end of the day, they want to be seen as viable artists making new and contemporary music alongside a fresh batch of peers - most of whom were not even BORN when FBF and Co.'s first records were initially released.
My feeling is that despite the trappings of modern, over-compressed, ear and frontal lobe-fatiguing mastering, both Indie Cindy and now Head Carrier sound a hell of a lot like "Pixies records," whatever that may mean.
Do they sound like the earliest ones? Not really.
But then again, Bossanova and Trompe didn't sound much of anything like Surfer Rosa or Come on Pilgrim!
They did not even sound much at all like Doolittle, which came just a year or two before.
So, this kind of thing has been going on since the band was barely out of their collective diapers.
IC and HC sound - at times - like different bits and pieces of the production and playing styles of all the prior Pixies albums have been thrown into a blender and whipped into an odd puree - which is much like what I would assume to be the result of a band reuniting to make new, forward-looking music while simultaneously being both proud of their previous legacy as well as extremely cognizant of the fervor with which their hardcore fans revere the style and approach of those early records.
The band told us a great deal about itself on IC, whether or not some of us were willing to truly listen and grok the messages they were sending out.
Now, with what little bits we have heard of HC, I feel the band is telling us even more about themselves - not only by what they are singing and how they are playing, but by what they are doing production and arrangement-wise, and what they are NOT doing.
FBF is still composing musical and lyrical riddles and puzzles for those whose eyes and ears are open. Some of these riddles and puzzles are less oblique than he has often employed in the past, to the point of hiding in plain sight. All these songs (and their implications and references) are thankfully open to an almost limitless amount of interpretation, as it should be.
I eagerly await my copy of the whole new album so I can see if my own (admittedly self-absorbed) pet theories about the composition and structure of the disc are either supported or quashed by its totality.
~ L.F.
--
"Real music is out there and real people are making it." ~ Webb Wilder |
|
|
|
wilson
- FB Fan -
61 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 12:51:42
|
IMO, talent is the track on the record that has the most classic 'pixies-isms' with joey's verse bends and chugs, chorus slides and that banging solo. for those of you that didn't enjoy this or UCL, i don't think this record is for you. it's an extension of IC but less self aware; in itself, an extension to the poppier side of FB's solo offerings.
by the way, CM is going to be the single that promotes the record when it drops. sorry for the alternating info, things changed recently .. i guess the good thing is that there are a bunch of tracks that could be deemed worthy as singles! |
|
|
|
Arm Arm Arm
* Dog in the Sand *
1037 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 15:26:30
|
Nicely said Peter Radiator.
Maybe one day it'll change and the loudness will stop.
Anyone else waiting to till the album comes out to hear the new songs? |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/18/2016 : 22:52:56
|
@PeterRadiator: I understand your point, but you don't have to "insist on being retro recording technique fetishists who insist on only using vintage gear and finely honed or antiquated methods of production " to make good sounding records. No need to suscribe to audiophile myths -the public don't ask for it anyway-.
You can totally make good sounding records that are fully digitally processed from the instrument to the final mix. It's just the way the records are made that's getting worse and worse. I think it's just a matter of fashion. It's fashionable to make brickwalled records nowadays. And I don't think artists care that much about that.
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
Discoking
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1120 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 00:19:02
|
doesn't a record get brickwalled at the very end, during the mastering?
if i understand it correctly, this has nothing to do with the way things were recorded, or if they used protools or not.
we just have to hope one day a premaster will become available. these things sometimes do.
fingers crossed that there are some cd-rs with the premaster floating around, and one day one of them will find its way out.
 it's educational |
|
|
|
Discoking
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1120 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 00:20:48
|
to be honest, though, i don't really mind that much.
my ears are shit anyway, so if it isn't too extreme, it doesn't bother me.
it's educational |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 00:42:13
|
Don't laugh, it's probably the same for rock musicians. Their ears are generally pretty damaged, so they probably don't care about sound quality anymore either.
For the brickwalling, you can actually use compressors at every step of the recording process. So the drum track might be compressed as hell way before the final mastering for example. In this case, there's no hope to hear a "proper"-sounding version of those albums ever.
___
"Service Unavailable" |
Edited by - picpic on 08/19/2016 00:44:04 |
|
|
|
Stevio10
* Dog in the Sand *
United Kingdom
1122 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 02:18:24
|
I would like to think BF and the band care about sound quality. He has produced plenty albums himself from Johnny Palonski, Cult of Ray, Reid Paley, Pete Yorn, Art Brut and not forgetting maintaining the mobile recording studio with the Catholics.
I guess with the Pixies they are happy - or atleast trust the producers and engineers enough - to record and produce the band through the producers vision.
That must be tough to do given their status and legacy - but maybe they don't have the time - or simply they trust management - to micro manage every facet of their career at this stage?
I quite like the sound on the new songs even if it's difficult to hear everything that's going on.
My personal taste for sound is somewhere between Surfer Rosa and Indie Cindy. Surfer is a bit whispery for my tastes but IC is a bit too shiny. Something like Bossanova is the happy medium for me.
Most of my favourite albums of late are from the 80s so I think there is something about modern recording techniques that lose some charm and character. Fire of Love by the Gun Club or Surprise Surprise Surprise by Miracle Legion just wouldn't be possible today, same as Surfer Rosa. |
|
|
|
picpic
* Dog in the Sand *
Belgium
1874 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 02:38:31
|
If Surfer sounds a bit thin for your taste, you can just raise the volume or tweak your bass control. Personaly I like to do this myself, I don't like when some engineer is boosting the whole damn thing in the studio for me (along with the fact that this is a destructive operation).
___
"Service Unavailable" |
|
|
|
Sprite
* Dog in the Sand *
1335 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 02:48:42
|
Am digging this Talent song big time, gets better after each listen. Prefer it to UCL which I also like a lot. In particular
1. That roar at the start is pure Pixies, first time I've really heard it in a new tune (maybe a bit in Women of War)
2. Love the way the rhythm guitar comes in on verse 2 and the double chorus afterwards
3. Paz vocal sound different to UCL, Wilson mentioned somewhere it sounds a bit country in places, am getting that here
4. Whole song reminds me a bit of a cross between d=rxt and Ludwigshafen. Bass is bit There goes my gun and at the end I get the bridge of Black Letter Days. These are good things
Wilson you said the album is generally mid-tempo but UCL and Talent are pretty bouncy. Have we heard all the fast ones now?
Arm Arm Arm, have you not listened to UCL/Talent or just the new 'live' tracks (Baals, Masher, Head Carrier)? I'm not watching the live clips despite the temptation.
Am feeling very positive about this album now. Some of the fat on IC has been cut back just right. |
|
|
|
trevgreg
- FB Fan -
45 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 03:12:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sprite
2. Love the way the rhythm guitar comes in on verse 2 and the double chorus afterwards
...
Am feeling very positive about this album now. Some of the fat on IC has been cut back just right.
Agreed on both counts. Just heard it a few times over the past day or two and I've enjoyed it. Nothing wrong with having an upbeat/pop-leaning number or three on the album, and this seems to do the job well.
Paz's vocals, the guitar, and overall production make me look forward to the other tracks too. |
|
|
|
peter radiator
= Cult of Ray =
USA
653 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 04:46:03
|
@picpic,
You are absolutely right about my remarks on the whole "retro recording technique fetishism" thing. I was being overly hyperbolic. Just got caught up in the moment...
Consider it the message board equivalent of too much compression on my signal. :)
It just seems these days that - in the "modern rock" world at least, the artists who are routinely making sonic decisions to limit brickwalling and leave in plenty of air and dynamics can generally be counted on to also stylistically lean toward a more vintage or regressive general concept.
That's how much of an outlier position such a methodology toward making a natural sounding album has become.
The overcompression thing has even bled over (see what I did there?) Into live concert sound as well, to more closely mimic the recorded product. It's a bummer.
~ L.F.
--
"Real music is out there and real people are making it." ~ Webb Wilder |
|
|
|
Arm Arm Arm
* Dog in the Sand *
1037 Posts |
Posted - 08/19/2016 : 06:33:21
|
Hey Sprite,
I heard a snippet of Chugga Lugga way back when it was first being performed, and since then I'm avoiding the new music to listen to the record completely fresh.
cheers |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
Head Carrier
