[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: rough and raw sound



I did sort of like the more polished sound they got by the end of the tour.  
I'm not as particular about the recording quality as some fans, and I 
thought the MG was about as good as a studio recording--really well 
done--and suitable to put on a studio cd release.

Regarding Jeff's suggestion about the live recording sessions, I notice 
Springsteen isn't even going to worry with studio recording this time out.  
He's releasing the new material he played on the tour for his next cd.  
Seems like the technology for recording live has improved to the point that 
this certainly is a way to capture raw sound, but studio recording still 
offers some advantages in what a musician can do, as well.  Maybe a 
combination of the two is a good way to go?  Pete already tried this out 
with the Gateway Remix, and I thought the results were good.


keets


>The thing i liked about the 2 house of blues concerts last fall and the 2 
>empire shows and the BTTB cd that was culled from these shows is that is 
>sounded very rough and raw. It was almost like they did not rehearse..on 
>the second night of the empire shows when they played the real me, roger 
>said they did not rehearse the real me...that is the way the album should 
>sound i agree...totally raw and just like go in the studio and jam and go 
>nuts on the songs...the fall 1999 shows were my favorite since the boys 
>reunited in las vegas in 1999 throughout the whole tour.
>
>scott p. not scott s.
>WE'RE HOME-roger before can't explain at the empire, 12.22.1999
>

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com