The Daves-- Grohl versus Stewart

[Josh2003]

I also think this is a bit of an "apples to oranges" comparison.

Record an album in 3 weeks and it's going to sound like an album that was recorded in 3 weeks.

[Macfanforever]

Originally Posted by Josh2003

I also think this is a bit of an "apples to oranges" comparison.

Record an album in 3 weeks and it's going to sound like an album that was recorded in 3 weeks.

Yea Thats the thing with digital studios with quick non linear editing and other bells and whistles that go with it.

[BlueDenimLamp]

Originally Posted by Josh2003

Record an album in 3 weeks and it's going to sound like an album that was recorded in 3 weeks.

The time it takes to record and mix an album has little to do with quality...Many "classic" records were done quickly...
As an example the first few "Led Zeppelin" records were done start to finish (recorded and mixed ) in days not weeks or months and on what is now considered "obsolete" equipment...

[Macfanforever]

It can be done fast in a analog studio the same time frame if the band and artist pushes along with the producers and no nitpicking and bickering happening.

[michelej1]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

And LB hadn't gone fully over the edge at that point.. that was what? 77? 78?

I think he had a phase where he played down the bass and drums -- and he did it so much that he decided to give us a whole album full of it -- but I don't think that's a constant thing with him at all. Solo or with FM.

Michele

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by BlueDenimLamp

The time it takes to record and mix an album has little to do with quality...Many "classic" records were done quickly...
As an example the first few "Led Zeppelin" records were done start to finish (recorded and mixed ) in days not weeks or months and on what is now considered "obsolete" equipment...

Same with the early Doors albums. However, this is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison. The Doors & Led Zeppelin had basically been performing & honing those songs onstage for years before they were laid down in the studio. They took into account audience reaction, fleshed out what did & did not work, etc. Keep in mind at the time these were unknown bands- to get any sort of audience reaction, they really had to blow it out of the water with their song performances. So when those bands walked into their respective studios to record their early albums, they already had those songs down to a science. Not to mention those early Doors & Zeppelin albums were pretty much all recorded live with all musicians present, with very little or no overdubs. It's no wonder they could bang those albums out so quickly.

As we all know, Stevie's talent is much more raw- her creations require lots of outside help, polishing, substantial editing, and overdubs to get right. Stevie doesn't play any finished instruments, and 40+ years into her career she's just now starting to dabble in producing her own songs in a secondary way. Combine this with the fact that Stevie doesn't hone new songs on the road before recording them, and you can see why her process needs a bit more breathing room to grow her new works. Not to mention Zeppelin & the Doors were Blues & even Jazz based, and to paraphrase Richard Dashut- those are forms of music that are much more of the heart & the moment. Pop music is much more forcefully & deliberately created.

I'm not saying 24k was an artistic failure by any means. The individual songs are surprisingly good for the most part. This is exactly the type of album I've wanted Stevie/the Mac to make for many years. It's just missing something, though. And I can't quite pinpoint it. I can't say it's the mishmash of musical styles, because In Your Dreams was even more jagged than 24k, yet I still consider IYD to be one of her best albums. Perhaps it's additional refinement & editing. I don't know.

[secret love]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

I've been listening to 24karat Gold a lot lately, and I kinda forgot about You Can't Fix This. Then it came up in the shuffle on my iTunes today. I was really taken aback by the difference in the quality of the sound of compared to any of the tracks on 24k. Night and day to my ears. None of the digital muckery on 24k can hold a candle to that analog sound on YCFT. Her vocals are really warm, there's none of that "spitty" or slurry distortion that riddles her vocals on 24k, and the vocal edits are not glaringly obvious like on 24k. The bass is warm and fat... I could go on but you get my point.

The song itself goes on waaay too long, but then so do nearly all the songs on 24k.

I think Grohl really channeled the vibe of old-school Stevie, down to the reverb on her vocals (though far, far, far less than say Bella Donna, etc). But Dave Stewart uses none and that, combined with the flat sound of the compressed digital files really doesn't do her justice. (And that weird digital 'bass' sound on the beginning of Belle Fleur that makes me think of that "Oh yeah" song in Ferris Bueller's Day Off...don't get me started.)

Does anyone else feel this way?

I'm kind of glad there isn't any reverberation effect used on Stevie's vocals on 24 KG. I was listening to my 10-song shortened version of Tusk the other day. The reverberating vocals were driving me crazy! I thought there was something wrong with the CD. I didn't know that it was done intentionally. It makes her voice sound unnatural.

I don't really like Belle Fleur: the music is too repetitive. It's an improvement on the demo because it uses more than one instrument. Listening to the demo drives me crazy. The same three piano chords repeated for 4.5 minutes argh! See if you can endure it:

[bombaysaffires]

Stevie's demos tend to reveal in a very stark way her musical limitations and lack of skill as a player.

What they generally (tho not always) reveal are how amazing her vocals can be. That very often is the real allure of the demos. You can hear her voice sounding more natural, more engaged with the material and uncluttered by lots of production.

On the finished versions of many songs her vocals just seem over-rehearsed or like she's sung the song sooo many times already they're a bit rote. Her unrehearsed vocals on her songs when they are new are often so compelling in a way that gets lost once producers get involved.

No one will ever call her and ask her to play piano for them.

[secret love]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

Stevie's demos tend to reveal in a very stark way her musical limitations and lack of skill as a player.

What they generally (tho not always) reveal are how amazing her vocals can be. That very often is the real allure of the demos. You can hear her voice sounding more natural, more engaged with the material and uncluttered by lots of production.

On the finished versions of many songs her vocals just seem over-rehearsed or like she's sung the song sooo many times already they're a bit rote. Her unrehearsed vocals on her songs when they are new are often so compelling in a way that gets lost once producers get involved.

No one will ever call her and ask her to play piano for them.

I'd say you're right on that point, that's what happens in studio with Fleetwood Mac. I always remember some lines from Destiny Rules doco from John saying he wishes he could contribute more to the band, but that he can't because he's not songwriter. He goes on to talk about Lindsey and Stevie listening to 200 replays of the same songs. He says if he had to do that would bore him to tears. (Or something like that)

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by secret love

I'd say you're right on that point, that's what happens in studio with Fleetwood Mac. I always remember some lines from Destiny Rules doco from John saying he wishes he could contribute more to the band, but that he can't because he's not songwriter. He goes on to talk about Lindsey and Stevie listening to 200 replays of the same songs. He says if he had to do that would bore him to tears. (Or something like that)

I think Stevie bears some responsibility for this too. She's enamored with layering umpteen harmonies of herself over her lead vocal to where it all starts to sound hazy. Bad singers rely on lots of overdubs because they hide all the imperfections in this hazy, gauzy fog of sound. Good singers, which Stevie is, don't need that and should use it sparingly. Again, over-produced, but in this case most likely due to ego.

[DauphineMarie]

What I really miss about songs is that really soft, warm sound. If you listen to Storms (for example) you can hear the subtlety of each instrument and Stevie's voice, and how crisp, but soft it is. I feel like 24KG sounds jagged almost, in a rough way, like a cassette. I don't think it's the quality, because poor quality is like listening to songs from the 60's (mostly due to poor equipment). But even RAL and OSOTM have that softer, smoother quality to it. IYD and 24KG lack that sense of depth and warmth. But maybe it's just me.

[KarmaContestant]

To me, the production on You Can't Fix This is very crisp and sounds fantastic. But I just don't like the song overall. I find it lyrically sloppy and too repetitive. So...I'd pick Stewart to be The Dave.

I think 24 Karat Gold sounds great, and I don't hear the slurring or speech impediments that others have talked about. Except in Belle Fluer...where I could totally swear that she's singing "a voice wings" instead of "a voice rings". But - I chalk that up to various factors - age, and the fact that Stevie admitted she didn't take this album seriously at the start because it was just to fulfill a contractual obligation, and that it was recorded in weeks instead of months (and for Stevie, yes, I do believe this has a major effect on the final product), and was not subject to the constant tuning and retuning and 49 vocal takes for each verse to get it just right. It's more live and real and raw, and imperfect, but I love that about it the most.

Also, In Your Dreams is a flawless jewel in Stevie's crown, and that is where Stewart's impact on Stevie really shines.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by KarmaContestant

To me, the production on You Can't Fix This is very crisp and sounds fantastic. But I just don't like the song overall. I find it lyrically sloppy and too repetitive. So...I'd pick Stewart to be The Dave.

Originally Posted by KarmaContestant

I think 24 Karat Gold sounds great, and I don't hear the slurring or speech impediments that others have talked about. Except in Belle Fluer...where I could totally swear that she's singing "a voice wings" instead of "a voice rings". But - I chalk that up to various factors - age, and the fact that Stevie admitted she didn't take this album seriously at the start because it was just to fulfill a contractual obligation, and that it was recorded in weeks instead of months (and for Stevie, yes, I do believe this has a major effect on the final product), and was not subject to the constant tuning and retuning and 49 vocal takes for each verse to get it just right. It's more live and real and raw, and imperfect, but I love that about it the most.

Also, In Your Dreams is a flawless jewel in Stevie's crown, and that is where Stewart's impact on Stevie really shines.

ah, but the things you criticize about YCFT (all of which I agree with, btw) are STEVIE's fault, not either Dave's fault. What Dave G *is* responsible for is that fantastic, crisp sound that you say you like. So I'd say that means you *do* like DG's production…. the fact that he made her mediocre song sound so good sonically is a testament to him and proves my point

[KarmaContestant]

Originally Posted by bombaysaffires

[B]


ah, but the things you criticize about YCFT (all of which I agree with, btw) are STEVIE's fault, not either Dave's fault. What Dave G *is* responsible for is that fantastic, crisp sound that you say you like. So I'd say that means you *do* like DG's production…. the fact that he made her mediocre song sound so good sonically is a testament to him and proves my point

I'd disagree somewhat, and say Dave G. should have edited her, if he is indeed the Producer of You Can't Fix This. The job of a producer is to guide the artist into making good decisions - something we know she detests, but evidently her and Dave S. have a rapport that enables him do that in a way that doesn't feel like criticism to Stevie.

Maybe Dave G. was too in awe of Stevie to tell her she needed to polish up the lyrics a bit.

[bombaysaffires]

Originally Posted by KarmaContestant

I'd disagree somewhat, and say Dave G. should have edited her, if he is indeed the Producer of You Can't Fix This. The job of a producer is to guide the artist into making good decisions - something we know she detests, but evidently her and Dave S. have a rapport that enables him do that in a way that doesn't feel like criticism to Stevie.

Maybe Dave G. was too in awe of Stevie to tell her she needed to polish up the lyrics a bit.

Agree, but just I don't think he was gonna put that much effort fighting her for just one song. I bet she'd get all pissed off and then where would he be…..

The only one who's been able (or was) to improve/cut her lyrics has been Lindsey, and look how that's gone….

Seems like Jimmy probably was able to have some sway there too, but that was when she was doing her first album and terrified it would not do well and so she was willing to listen to his advice. Seems like as her solo success grew so did her ego and her belief that every little word she writes is perfection. She loves Dave S. because he apparently says nothing whatsoever about her lyrics or changing them. He feeds the 'perfection' myth.

Not sure anyone can work with her on this at this point in her career. She's a legend, you know. (And I'm a huge fan).