Why is 24KG produced so badly?
 

If you look at the names associated with the album: Dave Stewart as producer, Chris Lord-Alge mixed it, Ted Jensen mastered it, why on earth does it sound as if they recorded Stevie's voice through rubbish car speakers and passed it off as a finished product?

I love 24KG but I feel if the quality of the vocals had been imrpoved, the whole album would have gone up a level.

I think it's deliberate. It's an album of old songs re-recorded by a seasoned singer, so they tried to give it an oldfashioned feel. Personally I liked it.

I think with the whole production of the album you either love it or hate it. Personally, I don't like it but I can appreciate how people like the rawness of it.

I'm going to have to go back and listen to it again. I thought the production was pretty good. Nothing beats the production on Bella Donna and The Wild Heart. I wonder if Jimmy Iovine would ever produce again for Stevie. She seems to love Dave's approach to things. I think to the point that she doesn't seem to want to commit to doing another Fleetwood Mac album.

I had no clue that it was really an issue. While I didn't love the sound I certainly didn't hate it either. Will haven to relisten.

Finally, somebody else noticed! The music isn't so bad, but the vocals sound so distorted and make the whole album sound like a dodgy stream rip or like it's being played on a worn out cassette. It ruins the songs that I actually do like.

I just think it was a completely lazy rush job of a record with very little real effort put in. I expect most of the recordings were done in single takes and just slapped together.

The production is perfect. It's the sound that made her famous.

It must sound good on a pair of 1970's Kraco, Sparkomatic 6x9's speakers along with a Audiovox AM/FM Cassette and a 40watt Audiovox power booster.LOL........

That setup probably sound better then that cheap crap they have out now.LOL....Speaking of rubbish.

I think Dave wanted to keep a nostalgic sound with the album which it sounds good to me. His work on IYD was crisp as new which it suppose too be.

I honestly like the production and sound of 24k, but there is certainly better stuff out there. I don't find it a problem, but I'm not usually not too critical of things like that unless it really ruins the sound/vibe for me.

i like it
i wish ppl would stop b!tching about it
it was NEW music produced in a handful of weeks
be grateful we got anything.

i personally like Stevie's harsh(er) older voice
i like that most of the songs on 24k sound rough and like there were had she done them on tour. I don't need fancy pants over-produced $ h!t
i like it simple and scaled down
not all the songs are on par with the demos
but they're pretty good.

the "new" stuff is what ruins the album for me.
not Dave. not Stevie. but the actual songs ... yukko :nod:

Thank you for saying this.

Screw you! People are entitled to their opinion and just because someone disagrees with you, doesn't make you or them wrong.

I'm in complete agreement with the OP. It's sloppy, lazy and rushed. So what if it was recorded in two weeks? It should still SOUND good. The vocals are distorted all over the place. It makes it sound like no thought or care really went into it.

I think I like 24KG among the best of all her solo albums, sketchy rushed production bedamned. I really couldn't care less, especially given that much of her solo output has been blighted by crappy production.

It sounds great. Over production has hurt her a lot in the past. This is perfect.

In my opinion, and I respect others too, TISL was produced to perfection, IYD not that good and 2KG isn't good at all. I'm so frustrated after listening to it over and over again as the songs are fantastic and could've been so much better!