I postulate:
the latest Foos and the latest Stones are intentionally pop productions
(both, btw, great in cans)
pop production
-
Nick Sevilla
- on a wing and a prayer
- Posts: 5574
- Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2008 1:34 pm
- Location: Lake Arrowhead California USA
- Contact:
Re: pop production
Well, they are pop rock now... and have been for a long time.
Howling at the neighbors. Hoping they have more mic cables.
-
drumsound
- zen recordist
- Posts: 7490
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2004 10:30 pm
- Location: Bloomington IL
- Contact:
Re: pop production
The Stones (esp Mick as I've heard tell) have always kind of chased the pop sound to remain 'relevant.' Miss You, Undercover of the Nigh etc show this. The first single on the new record sounds like a continuation of that. Someone on the purple site called it the AI Stones and I think that's perfect.
I honestly haven't heard the new Foo Fighters.
I honestly haven't heard the new Foo Fighters.
Re: pop production
Agreed.
The Foos record, in particular, shows signs IMO of looping, cut and paste editing, and intentionally sectional use of sounds and instruments and arrangement in general.
As an example, it could be a Taylor Swift or Miley Cyrus record, except with Grohl's voice and heavy guitars. And Josh Freese is a great drummer, but little swing and no funk, kinda like Matt Sorum.
And while you can't hear the edits, the segues are often pretty drastic.
Totally worthy to hear it in headphones, and the pop stuff is even more obvious - Grohl's occasional, painful screamo vocals (which I dislike) kinda underline my point.
And yeah, the Stones defined pop, continue to do so, but listening to the excellent new record, I feel the performances are what make it good, not the pop arrangements/production.
As an aside, interesting to note who plays what bass, also ... Ol' motor-mouth is in fine form, also.
The Foos record, in particular, shows signs IMO of looping, cut and paste editing, and intentionally sectional use of sounds and instruments and arrangement in general.
As an example, it could be a Taylor Swift or Miley Cyrus record, except with Grohl's voice and heavy guitars. And Josh Freese is a great drummer, but little swing and no funk, kinda like Matt Sorum.
And while you can't hear the edits, the segues are often pretty drastic.
Totally worthy to hear it in headphones, and the pop stuff is even more obvious - Grohl's occasional, painful screamo vocals (which I dislike) kinda underline my point.
And yeah, the Stones defined pop, continue to do so, but listening to the excellent new record, I feel the performances are what make it good, not the pop arrangements/production.
As an aside, interesting to note who plays what bass, also ... Ol' motor-mouth is in fine form, also.
-
Scodiddly
- genitals didn't survive the freeze
- Posts: 3986
- Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2003 6:38 am
- Location: Mundelein, IL, USA
- Contact:
Re: pop production
Guess I'll have to check out that Stones record... wasn't ever really a Foo fan.
The pop/disco thing about the Stones is kind of interesting, though - "Miss You" was supposed to be a sop to Mick who really wanted to go disco. But it's got such an interesting vibe, and that bass line...
The pop/disco thing about the Stones is kind of interesting, though - "Miss You" was supposed to be a sop to Mick who really wanted to go disco. But it's got such an interesting vibe, and that bass line...
-
digitaldrummer
- cryogenically thawing
- Posts: 3528
- Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2005 9:51 pm
- Location: Austin, Texas
- Contact:
Re: pop production
definitely one of the greatest bass lines ever!
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 173 guests