Llisten to "No Expectations" which is the 2nd cut on Beggars Banquet.
Tell me he is not sitting on your lap. That was 1968. Get back to me
after you hear that.


uh, yes, obviously not being born yesterday I know that cut. It as well as many
other stones vocals have the voice loud in the mix. However, by standard of the
day the vocals are not particulrly loud on Stones records. Many of the rock
things the stones did work all the better because the vocal sits in the mix
back like one of the other instruments. You hear this on some Zep cuts as well
as early AC/DC records. You'd probably never be allowed today to let a vocal
get back in there for effect. Instead, someone would complain that it wasn't
loud enough.

That's the essence of my gripe about modern mixing. Many beatles and stones
records, just to site popular bands as examples, have tracks where the drums
are very low and it's an artistic decision. No drummer or A&R person was
running into the booth complaining about the snare sound most likely. I feel
too much emphasis is placed on the sound of the individual instrument in a mix
these days rather than using each thing musically as part of an artistic
approach to a whole song.

As for my stones homework, I'll gladly listen to anything up through "Some
Girls" but I refuse to take instruction from anyone who thinks "Voodoo Lounge"
was a well produced record.

The new Jane's Addiction record is
heavily compressed, but it still has a great dynamic.

Dynamic or dynamics?

It is called,
talent. You can't hide it or destroy it with knobs.

I wish they had tried harder.




P h i l i p

______________________________

"I'm too ****ing busy and vice-versa"

- Dorothy Parker