Do you have a favorite song album that has a bad mix?

[Muddslide]

Man, almost forgot THE classic punk rock example of this: Iggy & The Stooges "Raw Power."

Not really a bad mix as there was nothing to mix. For some reason, Iggy commandeered the master tapes and mixed all the tracks down to two--his vocals on one track, all the instruments onto another.

Then he handed it off to Bowie to "produce" it. Well, not much you can do to mix two tracks.

Still love the album, and it sounds great for what it is, but it would be nice to be able to hear the rhythm section better.

Decades later, Iggy remixed the album himself. It sounds a bit different, but not really better. I still prefer the original Bowie mix of it because it's what I grew up with.

I feel similarly about the annversary mix of Tull's Aqualung. Sounds great, but my ears are used to the original production. Truth be told, I really only listen to the first three Jethro Tull albums. After that their albums get spotty to me, though they have great songs peppered throughout their discography.

[saxonblue]

I have Stiff Little Fingers' "Ïnflammable Material" from the very early 80s, the recording is as rough as guts but suits the mood, love it!

In the same vein is Aussie band The Saints "Eternally Yours" from the late 70s. It is great!

[Muddslide]

Originally Posted by saxonblue

I have Stiff Little Fingers' "Ïnflammable Material" from the very early 80s, the recording is as rough as guts but suits the mood, love it!

In the same vein is Aussie band The Saints "Eternally Yours" from the late 70s. It is great!

Great bands, both. Love 'em! So underrated.

[bedu]

The original mix of Rush Vapour Trails was abysmal. Apparently it even caused Geddy Lee to experience a bout of depression because he thought he his mix had "tainted" the return of Neil after his 5 year escape to deal with the death of both his wife and daughter.

Thankfully they went back and remixed and remastered the album. It is so much better now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bedu]

Originally Posted by Muddslide

Man, almost forgot THE classic punk rock example of this: Iggy & The Stooges "Raw Power."



Not really a bad mix as there was nothing to mix. For some reason, Iggy commandeered the master tapes and mixed all the tracks down to two--his vocals on one track, all the instruments onto another.



Then he handed it off to Bowie to "produce" it. Well, not much you can do to mix two tracks.



Still love the album, and it sounds great for what it is, but it would be nice to be able to hear the rhythm section better.



Decades later, Iggy remixed the album himself. It sounds a bit different, but not really better. I still prefer the original Bowie mix of it because it's what I grew up with.



I feel similarly about the annversary mix of Tull's Aqualung. Sounds great, but my ears are used to the original production. Truth be told, I really only listen to the first three Jethro Tull albums. After that their albums get spotty to me, though they have great songs peppered throughout their discography.

+1 I love the album Raw Power but there has never been a decent mix of that album. From what I have heard there is so much clipping and distortion on the master tapes that it will never sound better. It does live up to its title though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Muddslide]

Originally Posted by bedu

The original mix of Rush Vapour Trails was abysmal. Apparently it even caused Geddy Lee to experience a bout of depression because he thought he his mix had "tainted" the return of Neil after his 5 year escape to deal with the death of both his wife and daughter.

Thankfully they went back and remixed and remastered the album. It is so much better now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I believe that album is frequently cited as an early instance of engineers producing with an eye to high digital volume. I've seen graphics of the sound profile of the album and it lacks dynamics completely in an attempt, I guess, to just make it uniformly loud through and through.

Really makes me long for the days of analog warmth and nuanced production where producers weren't always aiming to bash the listener over the head or Pro Tool everything to be as fake and perfect as possible. Seems like so much music is like that anymore.

A good example of fairly recent production done right, IMO, is The Black Keys' "Brothers" album. I don't know if it was digitally recorded or not. It's not that I am so cazy about the band or that album; I just think it was well-produced. Warm, and it at once sounds modern but also like it could have dropped 40 years ago. Lots of dynamics and subtle touches of organ swells, backing vox, etc., without sounding busy or overly polished. They left some soul in there.

[dirkronk]

I'll show my geezer credentials and harken back farther into the days of LP...

The worst example of bad "mix" I personally experienced (by buying the album) was the original stereo release of The Mamas & The Papas "If You Can Believe Your Eyes and Ears." It was supposed to be girls on one mike (that's how we spelled "mic" in those days) and boys on the other. Instead, the producer left out the channel with the "papas" altogether on the biggest number...the one I bought the album to get...California Dreaming. I'm serious. A friend's mono version was perfect, but the stereo (which back then, you paid $1 or $2 more for) was flawed in the worst possible way. It was like one of those "sing along" or "play along" albums where they drop the vocals or instrument line for YOU to fill in as it plays. I was not amused.

Of course, in the hi-fi world, the superiority of mono mixes (up until the later '60s anyway) for rock and jazz LPs is well known. The mono mix of each song is what would be played on AM radio, which was vitally important to record sales back then, so that's where the most attention was spent...both by audio engineers and the band members, as well. The stereo was left to be tossed together later, often with band members letting the engineer do it unsupervised, and in some cases things got pretty sloppy.

Thus, if you want the best sounding mix on vinyl of, say, Jefferson Airplane's Surrealistic Pillow, go with the mono...NOT the stereo. Ditto almost all of the early Beatles (pre-Rubber Soul), Rolling Stones and other major artist albums of that era.

Same goes for many recordings in the jazz sphere. Famed recording engineer Rudy van Gelder was a master in the mono realm, but his first efforts in stereo were r-e-a-l-l-y terrible; I've heard mono recordings he did that had such presence and dimensionality, you'd swear they were demonstration-stereo...yet the actual stereo version (and no, I'm not talking "electronic" or "dual mono" stereo) of the same recording sounded like mush.

FWIW.

Dirk

[Scott O]

Originally Posted by Brucebubs

The original 'Tommy' by The Who has a strange sound quality.

I thought Tommy was well done. In my opinion, The Who had some albums that were mixed really well in the middle of their career: Tommy, Live at Leeds, Who's Next, and Quadrophenia. Everything before that sounds to me like it was recorded in someone's leaky basement, especially when you compare to other music at the time. I've never understood what people heard in, "The Who Sell Out'. I wonder what those early albums would've sounded like if George Martin had a crack at them.

[KevWind]

Absolutely love this song and the album but IMO it is fraught with problematic mixing choices.... particularly the acoustic guitars and the bass..... I believe it has now been remastered

[Johnny.guitar]

Originally Posted by KevWind

Absolutely love this song and the album but IMO it is fraught with problematic mixing choices.... particularly the acoustic guitars and the bass..... I believe it has now been remastered

I like that.
Never heard of him before.
Thanks



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brucebubs]

Originally Posted by Scott O

I thought Tommy was well done. In my opinion, The Who had some albums that were mixed really well in the middle of their career: Tommy, Live at Leeds, Who's Next, and Quadrophenia. Everything before that sounds to me like it was recorded in someone's leaky basement, especially when you compare to other music at the time. I've never understood what people heard in, "The Who Sell Out'. I wonder what those early albums would've sounded like if George Martin had a crack at them.

I find the original Tommy recording a little ethereal which really suits Townshends acoustic guitar work, kinda adds a spooky feel to his wonderful intro to Pinball Wizard but the album sounds almost sterile and lacks some of the energy and power that The Who achieved in their live performances.
I don't dislike it, I grew up with it and love it.

As a Who fan I enjoy 'The Who Sell Out' the album is worth it just for the sheer brooding menace of 'I Can See For Miles'.

[mtcross]

Several of the blues albums I own are either poorly recorded or poorly mixed or both. But they are still worth listening to. The best of all of these is Hound Dog Taylor's- Beware Of The Dog.

Great music that would be even better if you could hear the rest of it....

[YamaYairi]

Originally Posted by saxonblue

Never really thought about it before but you're dead right, it has a sort of muffled, flat tone for the most part but going along with Jeff's take too in that it adds to the charm.

Been listening to the album for about 45 years now and wouldn't really want it any other way. Sort of tone evocative of how sound would carry on a cold, foggy English morning.

Doesn't sound like that on my stereo at all, but maybe it's because I have the Mobile Fidelity pressing. I believe they remastered those.

[FrankHudson]

Originally Posted by Muddslide

I love most all kinds of music...at least some things from most every genre, era, and points on the globe.

But I was a punk rock kid in the late 70s-mid 80s.

Husker Du, a band from Minnesota's Twin Cities, was a fave. Their last really great album was 1985's New Day Rising and the mix is a muddy, muffled mess. It's a drag because there are some killer, poweful songs on it. It just sounds like lukewarm oatmeal as far as the production and engineering, which is a shame.

The final Black Flag album In My Head, also from 1985, suffers similar horrid production. The bass is inaudible, guitars sound like wet noodles, and even the vinyl sounds like it has layers of cassette tape hiss on it.

A amen from me on "New Day Rising"

[slewis]

I instantly thought of one of Journey's first two albums, I think -- the one with "Lights" on it -- that has some of the worst drum recording on it I've ever heard. All the drums are muddled and muddy and sound like they had a wet blanket over them when they were recorded. Everything else sounded pretty good. I just could not picture them all in the sound booth saying "YEAH! That's the drum sound we're looking for!!!"