|
|
Post by The Crimson Rambler on Dec 21, 2016 19:11:32 GMT -5
Well, he wasn't exactly wrong was he? A producer who has produced as many classic albums like him is bound to know a thing or two about great music. He just seems like a desperate scapegoat for the failure of DGSS amongst sections of the hardcore, but when you listen to songs like Kill For A Dream and Wind Up Dream, then you sympathise with him. A producer knows what he's getting into when he's a producing a band, so there's no excuse for dissing the band two years later on social media because he's clearly jealous of what Sitek managed to do with songs more or less of the same average quality, it's just pathetic. Oh, come on! You can't really believe he is jealous.
Yeah I agree with all this, especially 'glitter on a turd' Kill For A Dream (amongst other horrible songs on it). Do people seriously think a few sonic flourishes would save something that is quite obviously beyond redemption? Talk about undermining the importance of songwriting craft if all it took was a few elaborate sounds to make a song good. Again, I've heard a lot of U2 songs in their infancy and they are very poor at that stage but they kept honing it, to the point the songs were completely unrecognisable (some examples from Achtung Baby deluxe). Different Gear is laughable in its cringe worthy immaturity and paunchy pub rock bores - absolutely no fault of the producer. If Iain Duncan Smith had written and recorded a pop album, this is what it would have sounded like. There are countless of average songs / bands then went into studio and got out being listenable or even enjoyable, yet are shit live for instance. IT IS the producer's job to turn shit into gold. that's why producers are hired, otherwise they would not be needed.... when there's shit to produce.But that's not to say songwriting isn't important. It is 80% of the job. Just like a good director can turn a bad script into a good film, a bad director can ruin a good script. A bad producer can ruin a good song, a good producer can save an average song. Except for Lillywhite. Thanx Err, no it isn't. Tell Steve Albini that and see what happens. There are countless of average songs / bands then went into studio and got out being listenable or even enjoyable, yet are shit live for instance. IT IS the producer's job to turn shit into gold. that's why producers are hired, otherwise they would not be needed.... when there's shit to produce. But that's not to say songwriting isn't important. It is 80% of the job. Just like a good director can turn a bad script into a good film, a bad director can ruin a good script. A bad producer can ruin a good song, a good producer can save an average song. Except for Lillywhite. Thanx Kill For A Dream et.al. sound just like that. You can ruin great songs in production, but you can't already ruin songs that will never ever be good. And I can't think of any example where a shit song has ever been made listenable. It just seems like the woeful lack of talent on show on that album means that Lillywhite has to take the brunt from a hardcore section who just cannot accept the true failures responsible for this record. Sheer delusion. At the end of the day though (and outside the cosy world of Beady Eye fanatics), Lillywhite has proven his quality over the years as I have noted (and won shit loads of awards), Beady Eye have not. Lillywhite has lasted over 40 years in the business, Beady Eye barely lasted three. I think we know where the problem lies. Although I agree with many of your points Matt that just isn't true even if we're strictly talking pop songs. That's a claim too far. No it is not - the resulting end product sounds good in any format, and should be able to carry its own weight acoustically. If a standard pop song sounds shit on acoustic, it will forever be a shit song. Kill For A Dream et.al. sound just like that. You can ruin great songs in production, but you can't already ruin songs that will never ever be good. And I can't think of any example where a shit song has ever been made listenable. It just seems like the woeful lack of talent on show on that album means that Lillywhite has to take the brunt from a hardcore section who just cannot accept the true failures responsible for this record. Sheer delusion. At the end of the day though (and outside the cosy world of Beady Eye fanatics), Lillywhite has proven his quality over the years as I have noted (and won shit loads of awards), Beady Eye have not. Lillywhite has lasted over 40 years in the business, Beady Eye barely lasted three. I think we know where the problem lies. Lol i'm not a BDI fanatic, far from it. but let's move on. It's all a matter of opinion. Those guys had a successful career in Oasis, which was way bigger than Lilywhite ever was, there are not talentless people. BDI failed not because of DGSS, but because of many other reasons. Wrong choices were made. Basically, you are implying that the Beatles would have been the same without George Martin, for instance. I disagree. Many many songs are not listenable in acoustic form.Tomorrow Never Knows isn't the best songs ever, if they had left it acoustic, who would remember it ? But in the studio, they managed to make it one of the most memorable song of all time. A Day in The Life was a collage of leftovers. Same goes for Abbey Road, side B. Leftovers. The idea came in a studio, from a producer, or a band member, to use those bits that would otherwise been dumped. A producer is a mentor, and need to show the way for a song to reveal its true potential, which sometimes, is hidden, especially when a band is starting or starting over. And if a song is not good enough, it's his job to refuse to produce it or to do its best to make it listenable.
He didn't do the job, he didn't select the right tunes, didn't put his foot down when needed and instead left. It doesn't matter how many records or awards he's had in the past. Sitek had a batch of tunes, probably rejected some, picked others that weren't the band's first choice and managed to make them listenable although the songwriting is more or less of the same level. No. Some producers may mentor but many, many, many don't and you will find that most rock producers don't contribute musically. The producer does NOT refuse to produce songs when he is being paid to do so. I can't imagine that any producer has not produced songs that they think are shit. Unless the record label is flexing their muscles the vast majority producers will stay impartial and let the band/artist create the music to their vision and not bend it to their will. |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Dec 21, 2016 19:43:23 GMT -5
A producer knows what he's getting into when he's a producing a band, so there's no excuse for dissing the band two years later on social media because he's clearly jealous of what Sitek managed to do with songs more or less of the same average quality, it's just pathetic. Oh, come on! You can't really believe he is jealous.
There are countless of average songs / bands then went into studio and got out being listenable or even enjoyable, yet are shit live for instance. IT IS the producer's job to turn shit into gold. that's why producers are hired, otherwise they would not be needed.... when there's shit to produce.But that's not to say songwriting isn't important. It is 80% of the job. Just like a good director can turn a bad script into a good film, a bad director can ruin a good script. A bad producer can ruin a good song, a good producer can save an average song. Except for Lillywhite. Thanx Err, no it isn't. Tell Steve Albini that and see what happens. No it is not - the resulting end product sounds good in any format, and should be able to carry its own weight acoustically. If a standard pop song sounds shit on acoustic, it will forever be a shit song. Kill For A Dream et.al. sound just like that. You can ruin great songs in production, but you can't already ruin songs that will never ever be good. And I can't think of any example where a shit song has ever been made listenable. It just seems like the woeful lack of talent on show on that album means that Lillywhite has to take the brunt from a hardcore section who just cannot accept the true failures responsible for this record. Sheer delusion. At the end of the day though (and outside the cosy world of Beady Eye fanatics), Lillywhite has proven his quality over the years as I have noted (and won shit loads of awards), Beady Eye have not. Lillywhite has lasted over 40 years in the business, Beady Eye barely lasted three. I think we know where the problem lies. Although I agree with many of your points Matt that just isn't true even if we're strictly talking pop songs. That's a claim too far. Lol i'm not a BDI fanatic, far from it. but let's move on. It's all a matter of opinion. Those guys had a successful career in Oasis, which was way bigger than Lilywhite ever was, there are not talentless people. BDI failed not because of DGSS, but because of many other reasons. Wrong choices were made. Basically, you are implying that the Beatles would have been the same without George Martin, for instance. I disagree. Many many songs are not listenable in acoustic form.Tomorrow Never Knows isn't the best songs ever, if they had left it acoustic, who would remember it ? But in the studio, they managed to make it one of the most memorable song of all time. A Day in The Life was a collage of leftovers. Same goes for Abbey Road, side B. Leftovers. The idea came in a studio, from a producer, or a band member, to use those bits that would otherwise been dumped. A producer is a mentor, and need to show the way for a song to reveal its true potential, which sometimes, is hidden, especially when a band is starting or starting over. And if a song is not good enough, it's his job to refuse to produce it or to do its best to make it listenable.
He didn't do the job, he didn't select the right tunes, didn't put his foot down when needed and instead left. It doesn't matter how many records or awards he's had in the past. Sitek had a batch of tunes, probably rejected some, picked others that weren't the band's first choice and managed to make them listenable although the songwriting is more or less of the same level. No. Some producers may mentor but many, many, many don't and you will find that most rock producers don't contribute musically. The producer does NOT refuse to produce songs when he is being paid to do so. I can't imagine that any producer has not produced songs that they think are shit. Unless the record label is flexing their muscles the vast majority producers will stay impartial and let the band/artist create the music to their vision and not bend it to their will. It's not to say that every pop song sounds brilliant acoustically. I do believe a full band version with some production wizardry to it enhances it, but I've never heard a great pop song that sounds shit when played acoustically. Essentially, the bare bones are still there, and you can hear something good in the vocal melody. The foundations of a great pop song is there in its most primitive performance and from there on it is build into something more majestic. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 21, 2016 20:35:47 GMT -5
hmm dunno because Noel and beady eye was coming off the breakup of oasis so people were interested to see what they would do next, HFB clearly sold more than CY probably just from that aspect, Noel used that momentum to his advantage whereas beady eye squandered it in the long run with such a dull album. Liams name simply being on the album will likely help but hes not got the momentum he wouldve had in 2011 had he done this then, plus the failure of beady eye in the public perspective hasnt helped his cause, the only thing hes got going for him right now is the release of supersonic and general renewed interest in oasis reuniting which will likely translate into some interest in his solo work, how much remains to be seen. I hope Liam can make a real impact though Im expecting more of a modest success from his solo album, I can see it getting higher sales figures than DGSS or BE if done in the right way, which were between 100,000-200,000, think hes got to market it right though, BE had almost a non-existent marketing campaign but I got more faith in warner bros. DGSS - 186,000 BE - 102,000 HFB - 815,000 CY - 279,000 BE actually held quite well tbh, Noels CY took quite a heavy tumble from those figures in comparison to his first but again Id probably put that down to HFB coming off the oasis breakup. The release of NGHFB cycle was probably the best promotion of all the Oasis/NGHFB/BDI albums. A lot of interviews, a b-side, demo's 'leaked', many gigs were broadcasted, live dvd (with almost a documentary called 'How to get to other side of the world'), talk of a new album in the next year.... |
|
|
|
Post by spaneli on Dec 21, 2016 23:58:20 GMT -5
hmm dunno because Noel and beady eye was coming off the breakup of oasis so people were interested to see what they would do next, HFB clearly sold more than CY probably just from that aspect, Noel used that momentum to his advantage whereas beady eye squandered it in the long run with such a dull album. Liams name simply being on the album will likely help but hes not got the momentum he wouldve had in 2011 had he done this then, plus the failure of beady eye in the public perspective hasnt helped his cause, the only thing hes got going for him right now is the release of supersonic and general renewed interest in oasis reuniting which will likely translate into some interest in his solo work, how much remains to be seen. I hope Liam can make a real impact though Im expecting more of a modest success from his solo album, I can see it getting higher sales figures than DGSS or BE if done in the right way, which were between 100,000-200,000, think hes got to market it right though, BE had almost a non-existent marketing campaign but I got more faith in warner bros. DGSS - 186,000 BE - 102,000 HFB - 815,000 CY - 279,000 BE actually held quite well tbh, Noels CY took quite a heavy tumble from those figures in comparison to his first but again Id probably put that down to HFB coming off the oasis breakup. The release of NGHFB cycle was probably the best promotion of all the Oasis/NGHFB/BDI albums. A lot of interviews, a b-side, demo's 'leaked', many gigs were broadcasted, live dvd (with almost a documentary called 'How to get to other side of the world'), talk of a new album in the next year.... Noel understood the importance of the first album. If you hit on your first album, then you have a career and you're taken seriously. If you fail on the first, fewer people will be listening on the second. Beady Eye did a rush job and never recovered. Noel's sales tumbled after the first, but the objective had been achieved by that point. |
|
|
|
Post by Willie T. Soke on Dec 22, 2016 2:16:11 GMT -5
hmm dunno because Noel and beady eye was coming off the breakup of oasis so people were interested to see what they would do next, HFB clearly sold more than CY probably just from that aspect, Noel used that momentum to his advantage whereas beady eye squandered it in the long run with such a dull album. Liams name simply being on the album will likely help but hes not got the momentum he wouldve had in 2011 had he done this then, plus the failure of beady eye in the public perspective hasnt helped his cause, the only thing hes got going for him right now is the release of supersonic and general renewed interest in oasis reuniting which will likely translate into some interest in his solo work, how much remains to be seen. I hope Liam can make a real impact though Im expecting more of a modest success from his solo album, I can see it getting higher sales figures than DGSS or BE if done in the right way, which were between 100,000-200,000, think hes got to market it right though, BE had almost a non-existent marketing campaign but I got more faith in warner bros. DGSS - 186,000 BE - 102,000 HFB - 815,000 CY - 279,000 BE actually held quite well tbh, Noels CY took quite a heavy tumble from those figures in comparison to his first but again Id probably put that down to HFB coming off the oasis breakup. The release of NGHFB cycle was probably the best promotion of all the Oasis/NGHFB/BDI albums. A lot of interviews, a b-side, demo's 'leaked', many gigs were broadcasted, live dvd (with almost a documentary called 'How to get to other side of the world'), talk of a new album in the next year.... Nice thread bump, babe - forgot all about it. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by The Crimson Rambler on Dec 22, 2016 8:17:18 GMT -5
Oh, come on! You can't really believe he is jealous.
Err, no it isn't. Tell Steve Albini that and see what happens. Although I agree with many of your points Matt that just isn't true even if we're strictly talking pop songs. That's a claim too far. No. Some producers may mentor but many, many, many don't and you will find that most rock producers don't contribute musically. The producer does NOT refuse to produce songs when he is being paid to do so. I can't imagine that any producer has not produced songs that they think are shit. Unless the record label is flexing their muscles the vast majority producers will stay impartial and let the band/artist create the music to their vision and not bend it to their will. It's not to say that every pop song sounds brilliant acoustically. I do believe a full band version with some production wizardry to it enhances it, but I've never heard a great pop song that sounds shit when played acoustically. Essentially, the bare bones are still there, and you can hear something good in the vocal melody. The foundations of a great pop song is there in its most primitive performance and from there on it is build into something more majestic. It's certainly something which works better in the context of a pop song for sure... It just depends on what you define as a pop. I just found it a point with too weak a foundation to make bold and definitive claims about, that's all. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 22, 2016 10:15:02 GMT -5
Lennon2217look at this thread, look at all the discussion, swifties follow me... 
|
|
|
|
Post by liamgallagher1992 on Dec 23, 2016 3:48:55 GMT -5
The release of NGHFB cycle was probably the best promotion of all the Oasis/NGHFB/BDI albums. A lot of interviews, a b-side, demo's 'leaked', many gigs were broadcasted, live dvd (with almost a documentary called 'How to get to other side of the world'), talk of a new album in the next year.... Nice thread bump, babe - forgot all about it. Thanks. I think you are a very nice person  |
|
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5
Nov 4, 2024 5:04:30 GMT -5