Re: Fw: Acid Thrash and LAL bitching

["Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>]

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Luke Pacholski" <LukPac@lukpac.org>
> To: "Jon Rhein" <rhein@betterthanlife.com>
> Cc: <rwhitefang@aol.com>
> Sent: Monday, October 08, 2001 11:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: Acid Thrash and LAL bitching

> > >Why is it so important for so many (or is it so few?) folks to piss all
> over what is released?
> >
> > How does "because it sounds bad" work for you?

Doesn't work at all - 'cause it doesn't sound bad.  Your "descriptions"
make it sound like my copy of WHO'S NEXT from West Germany's
Platinum label.  Now *that's* bad!

> > So, by that logic, you'd be *more* than happy to listen to Leeds via
> > a poor sounding mono audience recording, correct? 

Exactly!  Your analogy works fine.  An underwater recording would be 
swell, too.

> > Here's a question for you - is there *any* logic behind making
> > something not sound as good as possible? "This album *can* sound
> > really good, but since it's The Who I think I'll make it sound like
> > crap, just because I can."

Yes!  A conspiracy!  Of course.  I see it now.  Pete does it all on purpose.
Jon Astley is Lee Harvey Oswald.  And Pete is.........LBJ?  No wait.......
Pete is.......Castro?

> > If a recording actually hurts my ears (and
> > I've heard some that do), I may not play it at all, even though the
> > music itself might be very good. 

I'll tell you something that's hurting *my* ears.....

> > The fact is, good mixing/mastering let's you get to the music.

Yeah, that's why no one likes those old songs from the 50's & 60's.

> > Bad mixing/mastering creates a wall between you and the music. Not
> > *impossible* to scale or break down, but there nevertheless.

And bad tact creates a wall between you & the artist you criticize.

> > When I play the LALC bootleg, I can sit back, relax, and enjoy the
> > MUSIC. When I play the LAL DE, the mixing and mastering is a constant
> > interference to the music itself.

Odd that only a tiny percentage of people are experiencing this "interference."
But....you guys are the experts.  Please tell us again what's wrong with our
hearing.  Tell us what we *should* be hearing.  Tell us what our reaction should
be.  Tell us how we should feel towards Pete.  Save us, oh Lord.  Save us!

> > No, it isn't wrong. It's correct. Pete said that LAL DE was the "best
> > that [he] could do" and that the bootleggers had more resources than
> > he did. Well, listening to previous releases of Leeds clearly show
> > that the DE was *not* the best he could do, 

Are you stomping your feet & crying?

> > It's also pretty absurd to say that bootleggers would have more
> > financial resources than Pete.

You should have offered him LUKE AT LEEDS!

> > Besides, that's not what this is about. Having Jon Astley *ruin* the
> > sound of the DE doesn't suddenly make it "art". The "art" was
> > recorded on Valentines day 1970. The DE is an attempt to mangle that
> > art.

Yes!  I see it now!  Jon Astley is like......the CIA?

> > Pete *is* a liar. Why can't you accept that? Because he's a "star"?
> > Because you somehow look up to him? 

Yes.  Right again.  We accept everything he does with gratitude.  IRON
MAN was a bit difficult, but hey, it's Pete!

> > and take another listen to "However Much I Booze" sometime...

That's off of A QUICK ONE, right?  Speak, Lord!  Speak!

> > To get back to the original point - say you wanted to see the Mona
> > Lisa. When you got there, you noticed that somebody had splattered
> > mud on it in an attempt to "improve it". What would your thoughts be
> > then? Would *that* be "ok"?

How about this:  What if there really wasn't any mud on the painting at all,
& only a few loonies claimed to be able to see it.

> > How about this - you have your favorite movie on VHS, and it looks
> > pretty good. You get the DVD because it has extra footage and you
> > expect the quality to be improved. When you watch the DVD, though,
> > you notice the colors are washed out, there's little contrast, and
> > the print is riddled with dirt and scratches. Would *that* be "ok"?

How about this:  You're an obsessed fan & you really get off knowing that
your criticisms are reaching your idol.  You can't play guitar better than he can.
You can't sing better than he can.  You can't write songs better than he can.
But by some God-given gift, you can *hear* better than he can.  Then you go 
really bonkers & start doing your own remasters.  How's LUKE ARE YOU 
coming along?    


- SCHRADE in Akron