New producers wrecking old songs/albums.

T_Kauff

T_Kauff

Member
Venting - Being an old guy now, I guess it's my turn to say, "wow" when I watch interviews on the new self-proclaimed generation of producers/mixers that feel entitled to assault and make the old (70's-80's) songs/albums, "better" with the latest technology. I feel forced to say... "they" have destroyed their genre and now tuning on mine as a result of having more technology than sense. as a fan of what I feel entitled to classify as, the greatest generation/genre of music, my inner 16-year-old self-can't help but say, "leave us alone" I suppose that would be difficult to hear from someone who listens with earbuds/laptop/stream and doesn't know any other way. it's not enough that, "their" generation of music is unlistenable and poorly (dare I say engineered in a bedroom) and recorded with few, if any musicians involved. ok, I'm going to my room now. --- what say ye'?
 
I’m an old guy, too, and overall I agree. Especially “mashups”. A friend of mine makes the argument that remixed “upgraded” songs are good because they’ll reach a new generation, and then those young listeners will seek out the originals. I don’t buy that at all.

I didn’t need new versions to discover the wealth of “old” stuff out there. Not just songs, but artists and whole genres. The older I get, the wider are my musical boundaries.

But then, I’ve been a musician all my life. Maybe we’re totally different than non-musicians. And everything I just said is wrong.

Going back to my room now.
 
My teenagers have been delving into my 60s/70s/80s record collection lately. Every evening they put one on the turntable and sit on the living room floor reading the liner notes, lyrics, and looking at the artwork. The first night I saw them doing this, I stopped in my tracks and said, "This is the day I've been waiting for since becoming a mom!" LOL! Did my heart proud. Perhaps there's hope for the next generation.
 
They should put Vapes in their phones and suck on them.. whilst they listen to new old music. Yeah! There is hope for the next generation..Although it's Schoolies here at the moment and all I can see is them drinking , eating junk food and smoking . just like my generation..
 
Last edited:
I have no issue with newer music. In fact, I think it's the best it's been in a long time.

Personally, it sucks that no song or album is ever "finished" now. Multitracks gone? We can digitally separate it now. Bleh.



Dan
 
as an official old man., I will also yell at this cloud:

I am definitely the guy who likes it to sound the way it did the first time I heard it. So anyhting that alters an older piece of music is painful to me.

Remasters; reboots; remixes; reissues; mashups; stealing old riffs to make new....no originality....

and I agree, there isa also a LOT of great new original music, you just have to dig real deep for it

and don't get me started on movies....there has not been an original movie since 1995...but I am not a movie guy, so I don't know about the depth and breadth of that idiom. I just feel liek I see commercials for the same 4 loud explosion/car crash/superhero/over CGI'ed movie every month
 
simpson abe GIF
 
T_Kauff said:
Venting - Being an old guy now, I guess it's my turn to say, "wow" when I watch interviews on the new self-proclaimed generation of producers/mixers that feel entitled to assault and make the old (70's-80's) songs/albums, "better" with the latest technology. I feel forced to say... "they" have destroyed their genre and now tuning on mine as a result of having more technology than sense. as a fan of what I feel entitled to classify as, the greatest generation/genre of music, my inner 16-year-old self-can't help but say, "leave us alone" I suppose that would be difficult to hear from someone who listens with earbuds/laptop/stream and doesn't know any other way. it's not enough that, "their" generation of music is unlistenable and poorly (dare I say engineered in a bedroom) and recorded with few, if any musicians involved. ok, I'm going to my room now. --- what say ye'?
Click to expand...
I probably have many varied opinions on this depending on, more specifically you are talking about. I mean, there's a lot going on - so maybe more specifics or examples that have led to ""they" have destroyed their genre and (are now) turning on mine....". I'm just really not sure what you are referring to... besides not likely modern (I assume) pop music.
 
dcrigger said:
I probably have many varied opinions on this depending on, more specifically you are talking about. I mean, there's a lot going on - so maybe more specifics or examples that have led to ""they" have destroyed their genre and (are now) turning on mine....". I'm just really not sure what you are referring to... besides not likely modern (I assume) pop music.
Click to expand...
It started out awhile back with a video I saw. there was a younger, "producer" reaching out to, "remix" Aja (steely Dan) his explained reason was that "we can do it so much better now" especially with the new ATMOS spatial systems. my first thought was...make your own music bra. And spatialize it all you want. another was the seemingly constant remixing/mastering of Dark side of the moon....my thoughts? again, go write your own music and mix it how you want. the most recent was, another self-entitled, "producer." who has peeked with his own productions (his words) was asking/wanting to produce the next Metallica album because, he felt his style would help revitalize and revolutionize the band into the coming decade. (God bless him) to me, this often reach for changing historically magnificent albums and songs is fair proof for consideration that, the modern "producer." has hit the wall...and is now relying on technology to push them forward. for my old soul, the best music has already been made by humans...for humans. although, I'm waiting to hear about some young inventor that has trained A.I. to listen, enjoy and even purchase music.

.MOM....Meatloaf! .....#@%$&$!!!!
 
I'm (generally) a fan of remasters and remixes, especially multi-channel surround. I say (generally) because the excessive use of compressing is still going on though I feel that tide is turning a bit in the stuff I'm interested in.

But overall I enjoy hearing a new take on a mix, or efforts to clean/clear up a less than great recording. I don't see any harm in adding new options or new technology to old music. If I don't care for the end product it won't prevent me from listening to whatever version I think is the best, but having additional versions out there does me absolutely no harm.
 
T_Kauff said:
It started out awhile back with a video I saw. there was a younger, "producer" reaching out to, "remix" Aja (steely Dan) his explained reason was that "we can do it so much better now" especially with the new ATMOS spatial systems. my first thought was...make your own music bra. And spatialize it all you want. another was the seemingly constant remixing/mastering of Dark side of the moon....my thoughts? again, go write your own music and mix it how you want. the most recent was, another self-entitled, "producer." who has peeked with his own productions (his words) was asking/wanting to produce the next Metallica album because, he felt his style would help revitalize and revolutionize the band into the coming decade. (God bless him) to me, this often reach for changing historically magnificent albums and songs is fair proof for consideration that, the modern "producer." has hit the wall...and is now relying on technology to push them forward. for my old soul, the best music has already been made by humans...for humans. although, I'm waiting to hear about some young inventor that has trained A.I. to listen, enjoy and even purchase music.

.MOM....Meatloaf! .....#@%$&$!!!!
Click to expand...
Thanks for your reply - and, of course, I'm sorry you're feeling the way you are. Can't say I share much of that. I mean, there's plenty to be despondent about regarding the current state of the music business - primarily concern over how redirecting the lion's share of money generated by said music business away from artists is likely to have dire consequences up and down the food chain.

Of your examples, did the Aja or Metallica things end up happening - or are we just talking about irritating blowhards (who ended up not actually doing anything)? As for remasters of Dark Side of the Moon - hasn't the lion's share of all of that been generated by the band itself. With some folks touting the remastering and others seeing it as just a way to generate new purchases.

As for re-mixes, those fall into two camps - the only I've seen using DSOTM would be dance/remixes... which I get, some folks dig and others don't. But it is also a pretty niche market. Rarely if ever having any effect on the original musics legacy. They're club mixes for dance halls - and that's about it.

As for the other kinds of remixes - the ones that actually remix the album in its original form but with better sonics - I'm sure, they can be hit and miss. But the ones I've sought out - which granted, were ones that were highly touted - have been pretty stunning. Most notably the early King Crimson remixes done by Steven Wilson - where by going back to the original 8 track source tapes, he was able to - for the very first time - properly mix those albums without having to rely on 2nd generation submixes.

(To explain, those early albums would've had basic instrumental tracks recording on an 8 track tape - drums, bass, rhythm guitar, piano (no vocals, no solos, or lead parts). Those tracks would them be mixed down to two tracks of another 8 track tape. Meaning all the decisions regarding their balance and eq, etc. had to be made without actually half of the music. Just committing to their best guess. Then all of the lead parts would recorded onto that 2nd tape. And then at mix down, to find the drums are too soft or the bass is too loud, just had to be lived with - because that submix is what went onto the final mix. Plus going through an extra generation meant all of those original instruments suffered sonically - particularly the drums... with so much of the crispness of the transients just being rolled off... making the drums both dull and puffy sounding.)

So Wilson's remixes, by taking both of those original master tapes and painstakingly lining them up in the computer - allows what was certainly originally desired - but impossible at the time to be obtained - to finally be captured to tape. They are really great IMO. As have been Giles Martin's remixes of the Beatles material - very enjoyable - to my ears, sounding the way I remembered them sounding (as opposed to the oftentimes way less than ideal reality).

Then there's folks taking old songs and making new versions - something I always support - as long as the new artist puts something of themselves into the new version. For me - the personalized they make it the better. I love new versions of great songs. Could care less about slapping a new vocal on what is otherwise - a record copy.

So again - sorry you're feeling the way you are - but for me, no... I'm not hearing anyone wreaking old songs or albums. First, how can they wreck them - the originals are still with us. And second, though I might not dig everything everyone does - I can certainly appreciate the effort required to produce anything. (I write as I am struggling to get the third installment of my "Hendrix: Re-Imagined" odd meter, jazz series completed.) :cool:
 
The lack of creativity is shocking, in regard to the modern generation... and their hypothetical, technical possibilities. I wonder what Back In Black would have sounded like, if they had all this technology back then...to make it, "better"?

...Now where's my skateboard? ... I gotta' go get some more pop rocks.
 
criz p. critter said:
I’m an old guy, too, and overall I agree. Especially “mashups”. A friend of mine makes the argument that remixed “upgraded” songs are good because they’ll reach a new generation, and then those young listeners will seek out the originals. I don’t buy that at all.
Click to expand...

I think at their worst, decent mashups are entertaining. At their best, they can be remarkable, illuminating, comparing and contrasting facets, drawing throughlines you (generic "you," not necessarily you in particular) might never have thought of.

criz p. critter said:
I didn’t need new versions to discover the wealth of “old” stuff out there. Not just songs, but artists and whole genres.
Click to expand...

You didn't. Maybe others did. Would I really have ever discovered Robert Johnson without Cream and the Rolling Stones and even Lynyrd Skynyrd? I like to think so, but I very much doubt it. And if I hadn't, would I ever have discovered Son House? Or Skip James or Sonny Boy?

T_Kauff said:
another was the seemingly constant remixing/mastering of Dark side of the moon....my thoughts? again, go write your own music and mix it how you want
Click to expand...

I mean, I assume (and I could be entirely wrong, as I so often am) you're not talking about the most recent version of Dark Side of the Moon, which is an entirely new version by...Roger Waters.

dcrigger said:
As for re-mixes, those fall into two camps - the only I've seen using DSOTM would be dance/remixes... which I get, some folks dig and others don't. But it is also a pretty niche market. Rarely if ever having any effect on the original musics legacy. They're club mixes for dance halls - and that's about it.
Click to expand...

I agree. But I guess I also don't see that as being substantively all that different than when Rita Coolidge released a disco version of Jackie Wilson's "Higher and Higher," featuring the killer band of Lee Sklar, Mike Baird, Dean Parks and oh yes Booker T. Jones.

Which introduced that great song to a new generation. And didn't keep me, at least, from falling deeply in love with the Jackie Wilson original (featuring the Funk Brothers!) when I heard it years later.

I guess if people are dancing--and it's a good thing when they are--why not have them dance to stuff you like, even if in what you would consider a bowdlerized form? It's like when people think an artist sold out by having a hit. There's always going to be music played in drug stores, so why not have some of that music be by artists you like? Why not celebrate when those artists you like hit the jackpot?

I suspect I'm the biggest Springsteen fan on here. And the Manfred Mann cover of "Blinded by the Light" is kind of an abomination, seven minutes plus of pure aural fondant, all empty calories, sound and fury signifying nothing in that the cover strips the original not only of its original meaning, but all meaning (since, honestly, there wasn't all that much depth to the thing in the first place). And I adore it. It's delightful. It's fun. It's catchy and engaging and funny. And it introduced the song and the artist to an entirely new audience (and brought the then-struggling songwriter a pretty decent chunk of cash, I believe). Two thumbs way up.

dcrigger said:
Most notably the early King Crimson remixes done by Steven Wilson - where by going back to the original 8 track source tapes, he was able to - for the very first time - properly mix those albums without having to rely on 2nd generation submixes.
Click to expand...

Couldn't agree more! His Yes remixes were absolutely revelatory. He took albums I've heard literally hundreds of times and made them better. Not really different, just...better. As you said, he had the ability, thanks to modern tech and his own expertise and experience, to get closer to what the band had wanted originally and all along but didn't have the tech to accomplish. I mean...anyone who knows anything about King Crimson knows how insanely difficult it is to please Robert Fripp. And Wilson's remixes did! GOD, I wish Genesis would let him remix their stuff.

T_Kauff said:
The lack of creativity is shocking, in regard to the modern generation... and their hypothetical, technical possibilities. I wonder what Back In Black would have sounded like, if they had all this technology back then...to make it, "better"?
Click to expand...

I'm with you. I cannot BELIEVE how often Angus Young used the pentatonic, just regurgitating note patterns used by others before him! The lack of creativity is shocking! :)

I mean...do you think there was any tech in 1980 of which "Mutt" Lange didn't avail himself?
 
JimmyM said:
If the younger generation isn’t pissing the old folks off, they’re not doing their jobs.
Click to expand...
I read a lot of comments like "it's nothing new" and "it's always been this way". And there's some truth to that, but some things have changed recently. There have been some shifts, or realignments. For one thing, mine is the first generation who's music is too loud, hard and heavy, and aggressive for their kids, or grandkids!

There's something to that. And it's new.
 
T_Kauff said:
The lack of creativity is shocking, in regard to the modern generation... and their hypothetical, technical possibilities. I wonder what Back In Black would have sounded like, if they had all this technology back then...to make it, "better"?

...Now where's my skateboard? ... I gotta' go get some more pop rocks.
Click to expand...
Mutt Lange would add white noise samples to snare drums. Not so much with AC/DC but with Def Leppard and Shania Twain for sure. And BIB was recorded with the best stuff available at the time.

Not saying you have to like newer stuff, but do we want to take it to the extreme and go back to wax cylinders and one track just to satisfy the purists?
 
bud7h4 said:
I read a lot of comments like "it's nothing new" and "it's always been this way". And there's some truth to that, but some things have changed recently. There have been some shifts, or realignments. For one thing, mine is the first generation who's music is too loud, hard and heavy, and aggressive for their kids, or grandkids!

There's something to that. And it's new.
Click to expand...
I’ve noticed that, too. Fine by me.
 
theres some modern music i like, but nothing in the pop charts rap/urban/grime charts, and most modern chart dance music is just boring and unimaganative.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top