What are you listening to?

The original Den of Iniquity
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

You didn't press my buttons I just come across as an aggressive cunt because I'm common. But I agree with you tbf that the first 3/4 records are similar in sound. It took 20 odd years for technology to progress enough for them to achieve the 'massive' sound they always wanted. Take Revelations, they wanted that to sound as big and loud and metal as the records did in 2000s. But they were working with spindly analogue tech, which IMO sounds a lot better. You probably think the same too as a fan of post punk. I love it me. I'd take it every day over digital stuff.

But even then I'd argue those first 3/4 records are as varied as The Fall's entire back catalogue. Listen to the drum patterns for one, there's lots of different feels that you just don't get with The Fall. You can hear the tribal ness they were trying to get going. I'd just much rather work within KJs framework than The Falls.
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 4243
Joined: 2 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

7 months ago

not sure I see that analogue tech was "spindly". They've spent fucking years trying to make digital tech sound analogue. I'd say that the problem they had throughout the 80s was the same as anyone else had: a sudden desire to make everything sound really clean and "perfect" (because, well, this was the digital age!) when, in the end, it was the limitations of analogue technology that lent music the sound that people are going out their way to try and find again.

regarding the tribal drumming. that's easily the thing that makes (well, made... since I think it's less fresh now than it would have been in 1980) them stand out for me. I recall you saying several pages back on this thread (fuck knows where or when) that you looked for lots of polyrhythmic drumming in music (as a drummer yourself) and I remember thinking at the time that this didn't really square with your love of Killing Joke. They are monorhythmic almost to the point of banality. Again, this isn't a negative criticism - I think that's the whole point and probably the best thing about their early stuff.
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

Fub, imagine Sunn doing their bone rattling reverb on a 60s rock n roll analogue set up. It'd sound like someone shaking a biscuit tin. It would lose all its power.

For me analogue is good for 99% of contemporary tunes, but some things, no.

Yeah, well KJ have some great rhythms. But more often than not they have a jobbing drummer, and often (like on Democracy) they play a beat with a nice pattern and feel, but just repeated (Medicine Wheel, Aeon), whereas We Have Joy is a really good song to get stuck in to, as is Wardance, Death and Ressurection. Some nice fills and variation. Generally you need to be more involved in the creative process in order to contribute more creatively. And if you get a new drummer for every album cycle it's not really possible. But then live you can throw all different sorts of things in to make it more interesting and creative, and you see that with KJ not The Fall, because a controlling cunt like Mark E Smith will walk off stage.
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

Yeah, definitely agree about the push to make music sound perfect in the 80s. It's a load of shit. It sounds inhuman and boring. What is art without soul. Only the untalented uncreative bourgeoise are interested in that stuff. I need feeling and soul, poor people are full of it, it's why we're the driving force behind contemporary music. Everything that's new and good we came up with, like grime.
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

From twitter

‘the Fall’s contract to appear on Later with Jools Holland included a clause stipulating that under no circumstances was Holland to play “boogie-woogie piano anywhere near the Fall”’

:)) I hope that's true
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 4243
Joined: 2 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

7 months ago

To be fair, that's a stipulation that should be carried over to anywhere in the world along with a ban on his smug, hit-me face.

Re: Sunn O))... didn't they specifically name themselves after the 60s amp manufacturer due to how loud they are?!
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

That's deceiving because we're not on about 60s amps, we're on about 60s studios. The amps have always been loud, 60s rock n roll innit. But to capture Sunn at their bone rattling best you need a modern studio. That's what it's good for. A 60s analogue set up wouldn't get near it. Just the mics alone can't pick up half the depth of sound they can these days, from as many directions, and that's what Sunn need.

That is as good as recorded music can be, which compared to live is total and complete shite because tech can't capture the human experience because all tech is shite, factually

I'm not attacking analogue tech, Fub. No need to be defensive. Like I said I much prefer it to modern studio for most things.

I don't mind a bit of boogie woogie. The Fall could do with a bit on their tunes. Why not.
User avatar
FuB
Legend
Posts: 4243
Joined: 2 years ago
Location: Littlewoods Data Entry Department

7 months ago

I've no issues with boogie woogie either. it's the combination of that and Jools Holland that bothers me.

I'm still not convinced by your argument re analogue set ups. I appreciate you're not saying they are shit but i'm not really sure where your distinction is. Even in a DAW you're still relying on analogue equipment to get the signal in in the first place and the technology there hasn't really changed THAT much... and by that I mean quite a lot of the chain prior to it hitting the ADCs.

I'm also completely lost with what you mean by mics nowadays being better. Talking drums, i'd always use my sm57 for a snare, and that's far from unusual in the recording industry. I've got a couple of R0de condensers that I would hang over the top as a half-arsed stereo pair but I would swap them for a u87 in a heartbeat. just fucking one of them... I ain't greedy. they are 50s technology and the absolute de facto standard that everything's measured on... and, obviously, like any real high end condenser, you've got an omni pattern available - so "from as many directions" is taken care of.

the only part of the modern digital setup - other than the inbound preamps probably being a bit better and quieter - that gives a bit of an advantage is the recording medium itself. 50s, 60s, 70s stuff was stuck with tape but it ain't anywhere near as bad as you might think and you're only limited by the size of the tape and therefore the manufacturing processes and literal size of the equipment. streaming bits onto a disk is clearly easier and less hassle but you've then got the limitations of your ADCs and the inevitable quantisation effects.

then, of course, you've got your DAW-based digital domain effects, etc. I'll give you reverb on that score because digital reverbs are a lot more versatile, unless you actually want a proper analogue spring reverb effect whereupon i'd prefer the real thing, really. that said, there's obviously advantages of noise floor in the digital domain but there's definitely been quite a trend for years now to break out the outboard signal processors instead, including reverbs, so you're at the mercy of your signal chain as far as noise is concerned.

loud... I don't think it's correct to suggest that stuff can be louder now with digital equipment. 0dB is still 0dB. What we have seen is a massive trend of mastering stuff to have as much perceived loudness as possible and ever more so than the last big thing (the so-called "loudness wars")... but this is more about crushing dynamic range than actually being "louder". There's definitely an emphasis on this in modern recording but you could maybe argue that the 60s and 70s engineers were going all out to get as much dynamic range as possible and could have compressed the fuck out stuff just as much as we do now. I mean, your basic compressor isn't any different now than it was 50 years ago, even in the digital domain.

To clarify, this isn't me getting all defensive - I've got nowt to defend here. I'd say that we both prefer earlier recordings (before the digital revolution and subsequent loudness wars) because there's actually some dynamic range there. at least, even now - and regardless of how it's recorded and processed - a snare drum doesn't sound like the 80s twig snapping anymore.
I may be able to fix a forum but I can't fix a fuckwit
User avatar
Sid
Legend
Posts: 20114
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

Frigging hell Fub, you've gone all Zebs. I'll have to reply to that tomorrow. And tbh I'm looking forward to it. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one that prefers talking about music and politics rather than United? We should all just fuck United off and talk about this stuff, it's more interesting, fact.
User avatar
Lazarus
Legend
Posts: 13007
Joined: 5 years ago

7 months ago

Holy fuck Fub how'd you afford all that gear??? Getting good gear and a good sound and somebody who knows what the fuck they're doing is a pain in the hole. Never mind getting six fuckers who play to practice or agree on fuck all.

Nothing beats analogue btw imho. My Martin D-28 thru a Fender Twin Reverb Delux is one of the best sounds in the world, after the guitar on it's own... or a Tele....
"Respect! Respect! Respect Maan! Respect! Respect!........." [-X
Post Reply