General > General Music Discussion
I find it near impossible to get into music before the 90s.
Ħ:
There are so many wonderful talented musicians that have shaped modern music into what it is today. The birth of rock and roll. The birth of hard rock. The birth of heavy metal. I have heard so many great things about artists from The Beatles to Led Zeppelin to Rush.
Naturally, I let my piqued curiousity get the better of me, and I broke down and started listening to all these different bands that have influenced my favorite modern bands.
But one thing bores me to death and kills my interest: sound quality.
Before the 90s, I notice that the sound quality is really quite muddy. I believe it's the same reason WDADU doesn't get many fans. I do not understand the engineering behind it at all, so forgive my pedestrian observations. All the sounds are really not crisp when compared to modern music. The vocals always sound like someone is speaking through a telephone. The guitar just sounds dirty.
The balance between the left and right channel is all wrong for me--clearly the engineers did not have headphones in mind. Sure, the mixes sound just fine when blasted through a car stereo, but once I pop headphones in, the balance is just awkward--loud electric guitar isolated in the left channel, and vocals in the right.
Now, I went to the Roger Waters concert this year. It was really special. For those who were there, you will remember that Run Like Hell is extremely loud. But the simple crispness of live quality made the song sound so smooth, defined, and....metal, for lack of a better word. We listened to the album on the way home from the concert, and when Run Like Hell came on, I noticed a kind of fuzz or "radio quality" that really diminished the song for me.
I really would like to get into these monumental bands like Zeppelin and the Beatles...it is just so hard because of the quality. I am sure they are/were quite skilled live but for some reason I can't dig the shoddy radio sound quality...
It's gotten to the point where I consider cover versions even better than the original. For example, compare DT's Queen medley on the second disk of BCASL, timestamp 1:10-3:10. The sound is just so much more full than the original.
I really wish I was born in the 50s or 60s so I would be able to appreciate this without being spoiled by the quality of modern music. Anyone else got this problem?
Marvellous G:
Can't say I do at all. Admittedly, most of my top 10 bands are from the last 20 or so years, but a lot of my favourite individual songs date back to the 1800s, so I dunno if that's just me. And sound quality doesn't really bother me in most genres, as I got into music through Green Day and crappy pop songs it feels more like a treat when something sounds really good than a standard.
ZBomber:
The warmth of music from the 70s is much better than the cold digital production today, imo.
Marvellous G:
--- Quote from: ZBomber on January 08, 2011, 03:48:54 PM ---The warmth of music from the 70s is much better than the cold digital production today, imo.
--- End quote ---
Also this. I'm not even a huge Fleetwood Mac fan and Rumours is easily the best produced album I've ever heard.
Gadough:
I'm just going to say this without reading your post, based on the thread title:
Are you Sonata?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version