| March 23rd, 2005 04:53 PM |
|
|
| maumau |
this was posted by stonesdoug
"The band is trying something completely new for this album. They are going to try to do the whole album without entering a recording studio, all digital!!!---ah the wonders of computers.
Look for a couple of hard rockers, some blues and at least one reggae song on the album.
Keith and Mick have been working closer together than they have in over 25 years."
sounds greeat  |
| March 23rd, 2005 04:55 PM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
Possible name of the album : Error 404  |
| March 23rd, 2005 05:01 PM |
|
|
| maumau |
lol!
setlist opener: flight 505... |
| March 23rd, 2005 05:07 PM |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
maumau wrote:
this was posted by stonesdoug
"Look for a couple of hard rockers, some blues and at least one reggae song on the album.
Keith and Mick have been working closer together than they have in over 25 years."
sounds greeat
See there folks! That's what I'm talking about. I tried to tell everyone here that I had a good feeling about this,but nooooooo many here tried to kill my good feeling. Well,let's have a look atcha' now! It's going to be a very good if not great album! Word to your grandpappy!
Riffhard |
| March 23rd, 2005 05:12 PM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
Word to your grandpappy!
Riffhard
Pappy say hi to Riffhard ! |
| March 23rd, 2005 05:22 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
I'm real happy |
| March 23rd, 2005 05:27 PM |
|
|
| voodoopug |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I'm real happy
why must the fagotty sidekick statement remain? |
| March 23rd, 2005 07:29 PM |
|
|
| glencar |
This does indeed sound like good news! |
| March 23rd, 2005 07:48 PM |
|
|
| Bob Tamp |
I also think it will be good. However, I wish they would record in analog. Analog just has a rougher sound. They recorded Steel Wheels digitally I think.
Anyway, looking forward to a great fucking album. |
| March 23rd, 2005 08:43 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
Bridges and Goddess were digital recordings too. |
| March 23rd, 2005 09:19 PM |
|
|
| Madafaka |
quote:
Jumacfly wrote:
Possible name of the album : Error 404
Excellent my friend!  |
| March 23rd, 2005 11:44 PM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
Interesting. Good News, I suppose. Not that I disagree or think anyone is mis-informed at all but may I add it is possible that there is a general misconception concerning the recording process at Micks.
Alot of folks, as I seen on Shadoobie think that just because this album is being recorded at Mick's and not at a major studio that it has to be all digital and involve a computer.
This is entirely not so: Mick may have an analog or digital tape recorder of high quality at his place or he could have one brought in. However, it does seem very likely that they will do the album all at Micks. Or for the recording part of it. A computer may very well be being used for editing or effects but that does not by any means ensure that it is an all digital recording process going on.
The Mixing will probably be taken somewhere where there is alot more out-board gear. But who knows. Mick may have enough right there or they surely could have whatever they want brought in.
Ian
[Edited by IanBillen] |
| March 24th, 2005 12:58 AM |
|
|
| ResidentMule |
I'm impartial at best about this news. I really don't think I've ever been able to say somebody's been better off making a record digitally instead of analog. as long as whatshisface mixing it isn't a complete ass-hat I'm not particularly afraid. hopefully this album doesn't sound fake |
| March 24th, 2005 02:42 AM |
|
|
| maumau |
"Alot of folks, as I seen on Shadoobie think that just because this album is being recorded at Mick's and not at a major studio that it has to be all digital and involve a computer."
a lot of folks on shidoobee think that just because Stonesdoug posted the above as coming from an inner source of info...so the point is not, i think, speculating on what kind of tech is at mick's but simply if that is a reliable source
if that is so
to me the good news is not that they're making it digital instead of analog but that the way that they the glimmer twins are making it, by going in november 2004 and again in that place, sounds to me quite different and promising. It seems that this time the songs were crafted together at an early stage of the process and not "mick singing keith tunes, keith riffing mick's".
This piece of news seems to confirm this as IORR cover photo. That photo of the november sessions, but maybe i'am overspeculating, tells me not of musicians adding overdubs or refining completed tracks, but two guys reharsing at a very basic stage
if you see that is a very analog equipment: piano and acoustic guitar with microphones plugged in. If there's a digital recording system at the other head of that microphone...what is the difference?
the only difference that i can see is that those guys seem to like that place and decided to stay there instead of moving into a bigger studio. So, you have keith that likes to be at mick's place...isn't that a good news? i think so, i think that this, maybe, implies good vibes, implies that they are both very in that creative process
and that it has been so for a while by now
obviously what is going to come out of it we don't know (someone says that mick did goddess there and that is surely not a great outcome) but what if we were told: "well mick's in barbados adding vocals to keith's songs that he recorded in NY, then they're sending the tapes to london to Ronnie for the overdubs, in a month they're gonna meet in paris for three days to mix the album..."
i think that is different
who knows what is going to be...it certainly depends on so many factors that at this stage and with these info we cannot tell....but that is different and to me it is more promising... |
| March 24th, 2005 04:20 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
This piece of news seems to confirm this as IORR cover photo. That photo of the november sessions, but maybe i'am overspeculating, tells me not of musicians adding overdubs or refining completed tracks, but two guys reharsing at a very basic stage
____________________________________________________________________
I don't want to be the pecemist here but:
To me it really doesn't look like that photo is taken at the present. It doesn't really look like present day Mick and Keith but looks like it is from the 90's. I wish it was. Looks very grungy and bare bones. I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
Ian
Ian |
| March 24th, 2005 04:32 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
I can confirm that THAT photo, taken by Kevin Mazur, comes from November 2004.
I have the magazine and its credited as such. |
| March 24th, 2005 04:59 AM |
|
|
| IanBillen |
quote:
Gazza wrote:
I can confirm that THAT photo, taken by Kevin Mazur, comes from November 2004.
I have the magazine and its credited as such.
GREAT!!! I was wrong in my judgment.
Now that place looks like a place the Stones will be the Stones and write like the Stones used to.
Forget Barbadoes. That seems like a vaca spot for the rich and famous more than a place to start writing tracks for a new Stones album.
Now I am psyched!
Ian |
| March 24th, 2005 07:35 AM |
|
|
| J.J.Flash |
DESPITE MY PLATONICAL LOVE FOR THIS MAN, KEITH RICHARDS, WHY THE FUCK HE ALLOWS THIS KIND OF CRAP?!?!?!? KEITH, YOU BELONG TO THE ANALOG GENERATION! FORGET COMPUTERS, THEY HAVE TO MANY SLAVES WORKING FOR THEM, LIKE ME......MUSIC NEEDS NO FUCKIN' DIGITAL DEVICE.....FOR FUCKIN' SAKES MAN, DAMNED WAS THE FUCKIN' GEEK WHO INVENTED THAT LITTLE OPTICAL STORAGE DEVICE, LOUSY CD, THE LACK OF RAWNESS.....THE LACK OF THAT GLOOMY DEMONIAC BASS.........THROW AWAY YOUR CD'S FOLKS.....THANK YOU JESUS, I'M NOW ABLE TO LISTEN TO MY LP'S AS I PROUDLY FIXED THE TURNTABLE......... |
| March 24th, 2005 08:08 AM |
|
|
| scratched |
Digital recording has moved on immensely since the days of Steel Wheels, and even Bridges to Babylon. It is quite easy now with the right equipment to get a digital recording that is just as warm and 'analogue-y' sounding to most people as any real analogue recording. The Stones may be recording digitally using ProTools or something similar, but still will probably be using 'old-skool' equipment such as valve mics, analogue desks and analogue outboard equipment etc. |
| March 24th, 2005 08:16 AM |
|
|
| T&A |
it's news - but, at the risk of being a wet blanket - why "good" news? The quality of the album will be judged when it's heard. It could still be a piece of crap. |
| March 24th, 2005 08:17 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
scratched wrote:
Digital recording has moved on immensely since the days of Steel Wheels, and even Bridges to Babylon. It is quite easy now with the right equipment to get a digital recording that is just as warm and 'analogue-y' sounding to most people as any real analogue recording. The Stones may be recording digitally using ProTools or something similar, but still will probably be using 'old-skool' equipment such as valve mics, analogue desks and analogue outboard equipment etc.
why use protools when your drummer is called Charlie Watts ?? |
| March 24th, 2005 08:19 AM |
|
|
| maumau |
thanks scratched, i completely agree with you
this computer or digital phobia is like superstition
analog = real, digital = fake...
analog = warm, digital = cold...
analog = natural, digital = artificial...
bullshit
just take Beck (not Jeff) and there you have country-funky-groovy-electronic-digital friendly music
new technology is not mean, it is just a mean
most important thing is how you use it (just like anything else)
i can number dozens of fake, cold and artificial records of the "analog era" |
| March 24th, 2005 08:26 AM |
|
|
| maumau |
T&A, yes you are
ohhh what a gem of truth! thank you! Never thought about it yet: first I'll hear it then i'll know it and judge it
oh thanks for enlightening me
so
let's all here talk about weather or our favourite sports and come back to the stones in summer
okay? |
| March 24th, 2005 08:32 AM |
|
|
| J.J.Flash |
For goodness sake! How can a producer work with the idea of splitting a band's job. Just do what Deep Purple did with the last album "Bananas", just do what Alice Cooper did with his brilliant, "The Eyes of Alice Cooper". Record the whole stuff in the studio LIVE, the whole bunch of bastards together.
Hey Don Was....LOCK 'EM UP IN A STUDIO TOGETHER!
Superstition my ass..... nothing can beat analog.......ask ANY Rock'n'Roll "holy" name, the likes of Ian Gillan. Ask ANY Rock'n'Roll addicted with more than 40 years. |
| March 24th, 2005 08:35 AM |
|
|
| J.J.Flash |
quote:
maumau wrote:
[...]
i can number dozens of fake, cold and artificial records of the "analog era"
And couldn't agree more with you maumau. There have been released too many fake stuff in the 70's, even GYYO.......But I'm not talking about the evil of overdubs.....I am just complaining about the idea of using drums loops, recording separated guitars........
IMHFO, a Rock'n'Roll band should be recorded in a studio, LIVE. |
| March 24th, 2005 08:40 AM |
|
|
| Snappy McJack |
I just hope they don't go too far with this digital recording and make songs that won't transfer too well to a live setting.
|
| March 24th, 2005 08:43 AM |
|
|
| maumau |
"Superstition my ass..... nothing can beat analog.......ask ANY Rock'n'Roll "holy" name, the likes of Ian Gillan. Ask ANY Rock'n'Roll addicted with more than 40 years."
well sure i dont want to argue, since the point is hoping for a good stones record, but it is you that talk about "holy" names of rock and roll... as if i should read the gospel of "how to be straight in making a record" directly from Ian Gillian's lips (bleeah!)
the fact that you pointed out "with more than 40 years" tells the whole story to me.
beside that i can't see how a digital recording equipment would prevent a band from jamming live in the studio |
| March 24th, 2005 08:43 AM |
|
|
| Jumacfly |
quote:
Snappy McJack wrote:
I just hope they don't go too far with this digital recording and make songs that won't transfer too well to a live setting.
on keyboards , Windows XP!! |
| March 24th, 2005 08:59 AM |
|
|
| J.J.Flash |
quote:
maumau wrote:
"Superstition my ass..... nothing can beat analog.......ask ANY Rock'n'Roll "holy" name, the likes of Ian Gillan. Ask ANY Rock'n'Roll addicted with more than 40 years."
well sure i dont want to argue, since the point is hoping for a good stones record, but it is you that talk about "holy" names of rock and roll... as if i should read the gospel of "how to be straight in making a record" directly from Ian Gillian's lips (bleeah!)
the fact that you pointed out "with more than 40 years" tells the whole story to me.
beside that i can't see how a digital recording equipment would prevent a band from jamming live in the studio
No, I ain't no middle aged by now. I'm just 23, believe me. I just think we are living in a rotten generation, sadly enough, I am part of this generation.
And Deep Purple was and still is one of the greatest Rock'n'Roll bands of the history of mankind.
As I said, I agree with you maumau that there were lots of crap, fake stuff when it comes to recording in the late 60's and 70's. We had disgusting overdubs on Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out.......In fact, I don't care about overdubs (as long as they stay slightly enough to not be noticed as on crap version of Rocks Off of Live Lics). I just can't stand splitting a band's work, using drums loops and so forth.
Like you said, let's anxiously wait and see (listen)
Rock On! |
| March 24th, 2005 09:27 AM |
|
|
| maumau |
"I just hope they don't go too far with this digital recording and make songs that won't transfer too well to a live setting"
i think this is another point completely and i agree with that
sometimes there is a naivety in the approach to a new technology so that one thinks "if i can, i have to"
the result can be something worn out by overproduction
i agree with you JJF i like the rawness of the stones
i am just saying that you can have something raw even with a digital recording approach and production
you could have tracks cut live in the place and then different textures of instruments to pile up dirt on them and not to clean them
loops are not clean, loops can be very dirty
i would like to stress again Beck as an example. He is basically a country musician, but he also love funk very much, and in many ways his approach to music is punk.
He makes massive use of loops, his approach is electric/electronic in playing and digital in editing and producing his own music
the result is often a steaming love machine, and his live act is absolutely awesome, his music, though made according to a digital approach, is meant to be played on stage |
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]