turns out he WANTED the album to have that sixties/record feel to it and you KNOW he's a perfectionist... so, no more whining about the sound... just enjoy the music

http://zwan.infopop.cc/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=2606028202&f=5596007902&m=1446031912

wow. It's amazing how one person can just end a "debate" like that. It seems many have been spoiled by the "perfectionist" mentality put forth by the digital age.

Please paste the text for those of us who have no intention of registering there.

"Hello from The Zwan!!!

We are playing for the first time in Tokyo, and as always, have been given a very warm reception by our great Japanese audience. Everyone in Zwan is doing well, and we look forward to getting to play the Mary Star album for everyone and anyone. Recently, some concerns have come to light regarding the 'sound' of the album, and there seems to be confusion about whether or not there is a problem, which is understandable in the warm 'digital' age. So from my mouth to your ear, here's the deal: We set out to make the loudest fucking rock and roll album that was humanly possible. No detail was too small, and by that I mean that everything, and I mean everything on the album is distorted by yours truly. I became obsessed by the sound of the great mono albums of the sixties, whether it be Dusty Springfield, The Walker Brothers, The Stones, The Who, The Kinks, etc. and their compressed excitement. so if our album is blowing up your speakers or making your dog cry, I can't say I'm sorry, but I do apologize for any worries this may have caused. Mary Star of the Sea uses everything but the kitchen sink in the analog or digital domain to push the sound of Zwan past the blur into something that feels fresh and exciting, and most importantly, LOUD at any volume.
So crank it up, and sit back and enjoy what it sounds like for us on stage in the overdriven glory.

We love you!!!

....BC"

crap i gave in and registered before I got to the end of the thread. oh well. Thanks for posting. Haha poor Billy explaining himself again.

Originally posted by Sacred Age Of Innocence
"Hello from The Zwan!!!

We are playing for the first time in Tokyo, and as always, have been given a very warm reception by our great Japanese audience. Everyone in Zwan is doing well, and we look forward to getting to play the Mary Star album for everyone and anyone. Recently, some concerns have come to light regarding the 'sound' of the album, and there seems to be confusion about whether or not there is a problem, which is understandable in the warm 'digital' age. So from my mouth to your ear, here's the deal: We set out to make the loudest fucking rock and roll album that was humanly possible. No detail was too small, and by that I mean that everything, and I mean everything on the album is distorted by yours truly. I became obsessed by the sound of the great mono albums of the sixties, whether it be Dusty Springfield, The Walker Brothers, The Stones, The Who, The Kinks, etc. and their compressed excitement. so if our album is blowing up your speakers or making your dog cry, I can't say I'm sorry, but I do apologize for any worries this may have caused. Mary Star of the Sea uses everything but the kitchen sink in the analog or digital domain to push the sound of Zwan past the blur into something that feels fresh and exciting, and most importantly, LOUD at any volume.
So crank it up, and sit back and enjoy what it sounds like for us on stage in the overdriven glory.

We love you!!!

....BC"

Cool, thanks. People will still complain, but I'm not one of them.

It's so not the same thing. Even if it is intentional.

every post after what billy posted.....


"GOD I LOVE YOU, YOU ARE JESUS"

"i <3 YOU, EVERYTHING YOU DO IS PERFECT~!!!!!"

"BILLY CAN I BLOW YOU!!





blah blah blah

stick your cool edit up your asses u anal fucks.

billy always finds ways to alienate ALL of his fans. and that's not necessarily a bad thing.

consider it a message.

What is more pathetic is the fact we have big babies like Dead & Starsed spamming the board with the rest of their hub trolls.

I knew that he had to have done it on purpose. There was just no way that it could have been an accident. I'm not complaining though, I really don't mind it.

I have never been more happy to be disassociated with this "community" than I am right now.

Congratulations to all of you jackasses who yanked your pants down in front of the world to show off the size of your dicks. Worked out pretty good for you, huh?

It's funny, I'm reading the chat on the hub right now, and you jokers *still* don't get it:

BILLY CORGAN AND ZWAN ARE PROFESSIONALS WHO GET PAID TO DO WHAT THEY DO AND YOU ARE JUST A BUNCH OF INTERNET JERKOFFS POSTING FROM YOUR PARENTS' BASEMENT.

- dave

dave, i thought more of you

as for other things: i don't have the album, can't ( and didn'T) comment on that one. i do have a radio promo sitting at home though, so i can comment on that. i don't know why the band would like it to sound clipped (not distortet, btw, it is clipped) but i guess there is nothing i can do about it, since it was intended to sound like that. i can only hope for the vinyl's to sound another way, so i don't have to cringe everytime the clipping starts.

as for yet other things: threads like this, but more the one on the z-board make me think, what would a band like more, fans that cannot see the bands as persons, humans, who can make errors and are far from perfect (this would be the "I LOVE EVERYTHING YOU DO BILLY; AND YOU CAN'T GO WRONG WIH ANYTHING" - group), or the ones, which confront the group with constructive criticism about things. sure, for record sales the first group would be better, but if i'D be in a band, i'd rather see the 2nd one.

aas for yet another thing: the hub doesn't really have anything to do with this stuff. take mayfair as an example, i don't think he ever was there, and he was one of the "main offenders".

i wait for my album/single and for the vinyl, i wonder how they will sound like

none of my kinks, stones or who albums/cds have annoying buzzes at high volumes.

Originally posted by failure
none of my kinks, stones or who albums/cds have annoying buzzes at high volumes.

Erm, part of the problem here is a Lack of a Frame of Reference.

Your excellent CD version of Let It Bleed gives you perfect digital quality when you crank your stereo up on 'Gimme Shelter'. But the song does not sound the same way it did when I slapped the vinyl on my turntable when I was 15.

My stereo was shitty and my speakers wheezed and screeched when I turned it up loud enough to make the needle jump, but when Keith's guitar ripped through the speakers, it was the Voice Of God.

It seems to me that Billy is attempting to approximate an analog aesthetic through digital channels. He's forcing you to hear the album the way you would have heard it in 1974 and is deliberately fucking with your expectations of digital perfection in the CD age.

- dave

What is sad is some of these fools in the hub actually think they can write a letter & somehow have it lead to a one on one discussion about the sound & a possible remaster. Some of these idiots need to get a life.

Originally posted by Sacred Age Of Innocence
What is sad is some of these fools in the hub actually think they can write a letter & somehow have it lead to a one on one discussion about the sound & a possible remaster. Some of these idiots need to get a life.
yeah exatcly! no one should be able to question anything! abolish consumer rights!

Originally posted by killer_tomato

yeah exatcly! no one should be able to question anything! abolish consumer rights!

You are fucking stupid, Billy meant the album to sound the ways it does, it's his decision of his art, he's not oppressing your freedom. Don't buy the fucking cd if you have a problem with it, shithead

maybe i'm totally wrong, but it doesn't seem like billy is really fucked off with the fans for pointing out what they thought was an error, he's just addressing the issue by saying that he intentionally meant it. perhaps it went a bit too far with talk of remastering, because that is sort of saying billy doesn't know what he's doing, but i think he appreciaites that the fans have some sort of musical knowledge, because even if it was intentional, there was a case to be made for the 'distortion'.

BTW, i didn't really notice any sort of distortion while listening to the cd, to be honest.

Originally posted by mono


You are fucking stupid, Billy meant the album to sound the ways it does, it's his decision of his art, he's not oppressing your freedom. Don't buy the fucking cd if you have a problem with it, shithead

woohoo smartyboy, get a sarcasm detector. i was making fun of the guy that was outraged that people who noticed clipped samples wanted to know why they were clipped.

Originally posted by Billy Corgan
Mary Star of the Sea uses everything but the kitchen sink in the analog or digital domain to push the sound of Zwan past the blur into something that feels fresh and exciting, and most importantly, LOUD at any volume.

woohoo billy, did you know that on most cd-players there's a little switch to change the volume, and that this doesn't make you lose audio quality (up to the point where your speakers can't take it of course)?

whatever Billy says, Mary Star of The Sea still sounds like crap. nice excuse there mr. corgan

*goes to sell Zwan cd, and plays Adore*

Originally posted by liquid slide
maybe i'm totally wrong, but it doesn't seem like billy is really fucked off with the fans for pointing out what they thought was an error, he's just addressing the issue by saying that he intentionally meant it. perhaps it went a bit too far with talk of remastering, because that is sort of saying billy doesn't know what he's doing, but i think he appreciaites that the fans have some sort of musical knowledge, because even if it was intentional, there was a case to be made for the 'distortion'.

I think he became angry when he became aware of the possibility of people delaying buying the album because of this. That is why he bothered to post personally instead of relaying this information via one of the admins.
And the way in which people were complaining at the z-board wasn't exactly optimal.

I've heard analog distortion. I've also heard Mary Star Of The Sea. I did not hear both of these at the same time. The question is not if i got it, it's if I really gave a shit. There was always the highly likeable possibility that it was intentional, that doesn't mean people aren't allowed to notice things. All the "it's defective!" aside, the distortion was so minor it seemed to me like maybe the sort of thing that could go through, and if it was, it would have been nice to get a comment on it, which we now have. It's horribly easy to remain mute on a topic and come in later when the hand is over and tell the people who lost they should have bluffed. The band's intentions are admirable and I like it, but it doesn't really sound like he's saying it should. Artistic intentions or whatever the hell have you, digital over-driven noises are completely different from analog distortion. I'm gonna go listen to Raw Power... or even Here's To The Atom Bomb.
Some things just don't work out like they're supposed to.
http://www.my-mistake.net/infinitepics/vidstills/end016.jpg

i think it sounds fine, it's not perfect, but not unlistenable, you guys are a bunch of pussies

What a loser. He has just lost what it takes to record a good quality album. Why would we wanna crank it up if it is gonna sound possible? Even if he does want it this way. Oh well. What do I care. I did not, and do not plan on buying the album.

Originally posted by teh_B0lly


so if our album is blowing up your speakers or making your dog cry, I can't say I'm sorry

hahahaha. Quote of the Day right there.

Yeah. I finally got enough time to write that.

Originally posted by Hyperbole
that being said, I'll add my opinion: Dave dear, you may be old, but you're not the only one here who has listened to a turntable. My records don't sound like this at all. pops & hisses: yes. annoying clips that sound like mistakes: no.


Of course, I understand that other folks use turntables too! What I was trying to say is that the turntables you and I use now are leaps and bounds ahead of the turntable I used when I was 15. The kind of audio quality available to someone now at a budget level far supasses what was available to me back then. As a result, people listening to music now have different audio expectations than someone who grew up 20, 30, 40 years ago. You and I wouldn't hear the same things if we sat side by side listening to Gimmie Shelter, because for me, no matter how crystal clear the output now, I still hear it the way I did back then-- distorted, trebly, overdriven. That's how I expect to hear it.


It's ironic that I only notice these so-called-intentionally-old-school noises on my up-to-date discman and ear buds. :D

Yeah, this is what I was getting at-- it seems that Billy is trying to get your digital equipment to sound like a 70s turntable. It's an interesting idea, but I have to say it also fails on a lot of levels, because the "target market" doesn't have the frame of reference to understand the intent. It sounds wrong to them because everything they've ever heard has been presented in a digital space.

- Dave

Originally posted by Kumar Littlejeans
I've heard analog distortion. I've also heard Mary Star Of The Sea. I did not hear both of these at the same time.

I'd submit that it's impossible to do what you're expecting. You cannot reproduce analog distortion accurately via digital means.

This is how it worked: you put an album on and you listened to it at a reasonable level and it sounded fine. When you turned it up, you forced your equipment to give you the same sound, only louder, except that the equipment was never meant to perform in that manner. As a result, the signal got distorted as it passed through the reciever and also as it passed through your crappy speakers. What you were hearing was not just the music, but your equipment's best interpretation of how it was supposed to sound. It distorted on a bell curve-- the more you turned the voulme up, the worse it sounded.

You can't duplicate this in a digital space. In order for the music to distort at high volume, it will also have to contain the same distortion at a low volume, since modern equipment does not process signals on a bell curve. The music would have to sound rough at low levels in order to sound rough at higher levels, and that isn't the intended effect.

- Dave

Originally posted by Pmack


Erm, part of the problem here is a Lack of a Frame of Reference.

Your excellent CD version of Let It Bleed gives you perfect digital quality when you crank your stereo up on 'Gimme Shelter'. But the song does not sound the same way it did when I slapped the vinyl on my turntable when I was 15.

My stereo was shitty and my speakers wheezed and screeched when I turned it up loud enough to make the needle jump, but when Keith's guitar ripped through the speakers, it was the Voice Of God.

It seems to me that Billy is attempting to approximate an analog aesthetic through digital channels. He's forcing you to hear the album the way you would have heard it in 1974 and is deliberately fucking with your expectations of digital perfection in the CD age.

- dave oh you silly -- i only own the london years singles collection on cd. all of the rolling stones ALBUM albums i have are on second-hand vinyl :) so i know the exact experience you're talking about. regardless though, if he wanted that effect, he should have just recorded with analog equipment, instead of producing a questionable digital effect. i believe the white stripes are doing something along these lines with their new album.

Dude, I can't wait to hear it.

C'mon Amazon, deliver it already!


On a not-so-related-note, my Pearl Jam Xmas Vinyl arrived on Saturday. It's fantastic. Best one yet?

Obviously it's best for everyone involved to realize this was all just confused dissent that can be attributed to the inavailability of a vinyl pressing. That we would then play on our collective $50 stereos we got at Ames.

Originally posted by failure
oh you silly -- i only own the london years singles collection on cd. all of the rolling stones ALBUM albums i have are on second-hand vinyl :) so i know the exact experience you're talking about. regardless though, if he wanted that effect, he should have just recorded with analog equipment, instead of producing a questionable digital effect. i believe the white stripes are doing something along these lines with their new album.

Old vinyl and old players are sure nice.

I am only semi-disappointed in the fact that this was meant to be done, because it gives me less of a "value" reason to go get the CD. Usually I buy the CD version of an album, even if i have the mp3s, for clarity reasons, which is usually noticeable on the cymbals of drums. But in this case, buying the CD won't really give me a leg up on the sound quality......nevertheless i did end up buying the CD, but wish i would of got more "bang for my buck". DVD is awesome, buy linear notes nothing special.....

It's interesting to think though, even if it were a defect...as a band, would you rather play "dumb" since first week of sales is important.....or admidt there is a problem and perhaps taking the spotlight away from a new cd being release?....not saying that Billy is lying to us, but I could see enough reason to. Just my opinion though...

Originally posted by Pmack


He's forcing you to hear the album the way you would have heard it in 1974 and is deliberately fucking with your expectations of digital perfection in the CD age.

- dave

You're a fool. Have you heard any albums from 1974? If anyone still had that scratchy, crappy drum sound and stringy guitars it was because they were stupid. Hell, by 1970 people were making albums with better sonic quailty than they do now. Music has regressed. Listen to Electric Lady Land, Who's Next, Paranoid...

Billy compares the sound to early Who. This is ridiculous. On an album like The Who Sings My Generation, everything sounded scratchy and raw. The only thing that can compare on MSOTS are the drums. They sound like ass. The guitar sounds nothing alike. The Who had stringy, thin guitar. MSOTS has about 50 overdubs per song. An album that CAN compare sonically would be something by the White Stripes. They sound like ass, probably even worse than early Who because the dumb fuck plays with his guitar out of tune and the drummer sucks ass.

There is no point in making an album that sounds old like that. As soon as the means to make better sounding albums came around, the bands used them. Jimi Hendrix and The Who are perfect examples. Regardless, Billy certainly failed if he was trying to go for the all out early-to-mid 60s sound.

you people AMAZE me!! here (http://zwan.infopop.cc/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=2606028202&f=9116028202&m=4416054912)... just posted by the someone at the z-board and i think it's put perfectly, maybe this answer will stop the whining for good... many of us seem to forget that along with being a perfectionist, he is also an artist and one of the best at that.

Hey Zwan fans,

some of you are probably wondering why Billy's
post was closed so early and archived. I'll answer
that for you.

A few posts were made that in a collective group's
opinion were mean spirited and unnecessary. A few
of these people were warned, others were
temporarily banned so they would stop spamming the
same deleted message over and over again.

Nobody can force you to like the artist's intentions/liberties ...but the explanation has been
said. it was done on purpose, the CD is not "flawed".
everything was done with the best intention by a/the
credible source. Picasso could paint perfect landscapes but he choose childish
scribbles to express himself and was a genius for it...
remember, flaming lips made an album that you needed to put in 4 CD's
in different players and play them all at the same time to listen to it properly..
artistic expression can't be limited by whatever the current technology demands.
Billy said he wanted it that way and you know he had an endless recording budget
and Bjorn could have fixed anything

the discussion about the audio quality is over- for more reasons that you can all imagine.

you know, many of you are approaching the anal retentiveness of Rush fans...get a hold yourself people. :p

sounds like a pathetic excuse engineered to cover up a bad mastering job

for fucks sakes ... they pushed the dynamic range past 0 dbFS in some sort of attempt to re-create the firewood crackle of old vinyl. Instead the album will just be full of ugly sounding digital errors, fantastic!

what a big load of shite - I can't even be bothered getting into the guts of why this is a completely fucked up idea ... it's blatantly obvious(without even having to listen to the album) to anyone with a vague understanding of digital audio how fundamentally mistaken this idea is.

someone needs to swallow their pride and send off for re-mastering

Originally posted by tomthum81
you people AMAZE me!! here (http://zwan.infopop.cc/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=2606028202&f=9116028202&m=4416054912)he is also an artist and one of the best at that.


comparing billy, especially with his new "i play music cuz i wanna have fun and make loads of dough" attitude to picasso is just so incredibly stupid.

Originally posted by Pmack


BILLY CORGAN AND ZWAN ARE PROFESSIONALS WHO GET PAID TO DO WHAT THEY DO AND YOU ARE JUST A BUNCH OF INTERNET JERKOFFS POSTING FROM YOUR PARENTS' BASEMENT.


hey now. i live in the attic.
(i have no idea which hub conversation you speak of. i idle 90% of the time)

Originally posted by ZackZ

You're a fool. Have you heard any albums from 1974? If anyone still had that scratchy, crappy drum sound and stringy guitars it was because they were stupid. Hell, by 1970 people were making albums with better sonic quailty than they do now.

Listen, I know there's not a big call for reading comprehension at Buzzy's Roast Beef since they have all those pictures on the register buttons now, but try and understand what I wrote before shooting your mouth off.

Billy is not trying to record an album the way they were recorded in 1974, and he's not trying to make an album that sounds like it was recorded in 1974. He's made a thoroughly modern album that was unmistakeably recorded in the now.

It appears to me that he is trying something much more clever and subtle. He is trying to emulate the listening experience of 1974 by forcing your digital geegaws to behave like a 1970s hi-fi.

This is entirely different than recording with analog equipment or mastering your disk so it sounds like a 60s album like RHCP did. This is trying to replicate not the methods but the aesthetic of the period.

Billy has a history of this kind of experimentation: releasing a mono mix of Adore in 1998 and releasing Machina II specifically on vinyl only because the sound of the vinyl was part of the album.

- Dave

Originally posted by Pmack


Listen, I know there's not a big call for reading comprehension at Buzzy's Roast Beef since they have all those pictures on the register buttons now, but try and understand what I wrote before shooting your mouth off.

Billy is not trying to record an album the way they were recorded in 1974, and he's not trying to make an album that sounds like it was recorded in 1974. He's made a thoroughly modern album that was unmistakeably recorded in the now.

It appears to me that he is trying something much more clever and subtle. He is trying to emulate the listening experience of 1974 by forcing your digital geegaws to behave like a 1970s hi-fi.

This is entirely different than recording with analog equipment or mastering your disk so it sounds like a 60s album like RHCP did. This is trying to replicate not the methods but the aesthetic of the period.

Billy has a history of this kind of experimentation: releasing a mono mix of Adore in 1998 and releasing Machina II specifically on vinyl only because the sound of the vinyl was part of the album.

- Dave

Amen.

Originally posted by Pmack


Listen, I know there's not a big call for reading comprehension at Buzzy's Roast Beef since they have all those pictures on the register buttons now, but try and understand what I wrote before shooting your mouth off.

Billy is not trying to record an album the way they were recorded in 1974, and he's not trying to make an album that sounds like it was recorded in 1974. He's made a thoroughly modern album that was unmistakeably recorded in the now.

It appears to me that he is trying something much more clever and subtle. He is trying to emulate the listening experience of 1974 by forcing your digital geegaws to behave like a 1970s hi-fi.

This is entirely different than recording with analog equipment or mastering your disk so it sounds like a 60s album like RHCP did. This is trying to replicate not the methods but the aesthetic of the period.

Billy has a history of this kind of experimentation: releasing a mono mix of Adore in 1998 and releasing Machina II specifically on vinyl only because the sound of the vinyl was part of the album.

- Dave dave, stop being a bitch. whatever billy's production intentions were, they were executed terribly. no one will ever be able to recreate the vinyl experience on cd, no matter what gimmicks are pulled in the studio. MSOTS is a failed attempt at that. aesthetics or not, the white stripes are going about it the correct way and billy is not.

and also, don't assume that everyone is a slave to the cd. just because no shelter rocked you on vinyl doesn't mean that the same experience isn't being shared every day by people younger than you.

jesus.

Four words:

The Stooges - Raw Power

I went to IHOP with a bunch of friends once. Me and this other guy both ordered the chicken fingers. When we were done eating, I went to the bathroom, peed, came back to the table and put on this show of looking quesy. I told him I just threw up and thought the chicken fingers were bad. He got up and actually went to the bathroom and threw up.

Originally posted by Pmack


Listen, I know there's not a big call for reading comprehension at Buzzy's Roast Beef since they have all those pictures on the register buttons now, but try and understand what I wrote before shooting your mouth off.

Billy is not trying to record an album the way they were recorded in 1974, and he's not trying to make an album that sounds like it was recorded in 1974. He's made a thoroughly modern album that was unmistakeably recorded in the now.

It appears to me that he is trying something much more clever and subtle. He is trying to emulate the listening experience of 1974 by forcing your digital geegaws to behave like a 1970s hi-fi.

This is entirely different than recording with analog equipment or mastering your disk so it sounds like a 60s album like RHCP did. This is trying to replicate not the methods but the aesthetic of the period.

Billy has a history of this kind of experimentation: releasing a mono mix of Adore in 1998 and releasing Machina II specifically on vinyl only because the sound of the vinyl was part of the album.

- Dave

I still have no idea where you are getting this "1974" reference from. Let's see, popular albums from 1974: Bad Company, Lynyrd Skynyrd's Second Helping, BTO's Not Fragile, Chicago VII, 461 Ocean Boulevard, The Eagle's On the Border, Cheech and Chong's Wedding Album .....

How does MSOTS relate to any of these albums in any way?

Originally posted by sarmatianus
Four words:

The Stooges - Raw Power

Hah hah! I just cracked that CD out. The liner notes are the best:

"They printed it unbelievably hot at my behest and then toward the end of the day the mastering guy got cold feet and said 'No, we can't do this!' and I said 'Just shut up and do it aaaaarggh!' ... They heard it and it just freaked them out, it sounded like the speakers were gonna explode, bleeding and melting and distortion."

RAW POWER IS A DEFECTIVE PRODUCT

We need to contact Columbia about this and see about getting a remaster done. Below is a screen capture of a few seconds of Death Trip. You can clearly see the clipping:

http://www.xero.com/deathtrip.jpg

not all ideas are good ideas ... I think that about sums up my thoughts

Originally posted by ZackZ


I still have no idea where you are getting this "1974" reference from.

Stop reading 1974 as a literal date, because I don't intend it that way. I keep saying the same year only for consistency's sake. It's the general time period I'm referencing, not that year specifically.

I keep thinking of the 70s in my head, but too early in the decade risks hippie taint and too late in the decade gets disco backwash. 1974 seemed like a good place to rest. I'm even wrong in that aspect; '65 is probably a better date to use.

- dave

Originally posted by Pmack

Below is a screen capture of a few seconds of Death Trip. You can clearly see the clipping:


The magic is back.

I wonder how long before this thread dies and the future "Zwan is a gay band" thread takes off?

The only complaint that I have about the album really is the drum sound. It's bad. The guitars maybe a little overlayered but it's not as annoying as the drum sound.

I still have no idea where you are getting this "1974" reference from. Let's see, popular albums from 1974: Bad Company...How does MSOTS relate to any of these albums in any way?

hu duhh!!! Dude. Bad Company had an album called Bad Company that had a song called Bad Company!, :eek: and Zwan has an album called Mmmmmuh...o, wait. nevermind.

<font color=018f81>Intended or not, I fucking hate clipping. Since I am the consumer and zwan depends on my and others' purchase of their product, they should take such considerations in mind. If you don't like the color of a desk cause its too bright, but you love that design, why should you keep quiet and just settle for it?

simply put:

I don't like the way MSOTS was mixed/mastered.</font>

i remember when i said it was intentional, but ppl like me are considered crazy.

Intentional distortion is a valid aesthetic choice, but it still sounds like dog ass.

Clearly, MACHINA was also intented to be produced the way it was (thin and lifeless), but its still a completely valid complaint to say the production sounded like shit.

If Corgan wants MSOTS to sound like the seventies, maybe he should have released it on 8-track only.

I would only validate this distortion if it was already there (even if it was really old analogue fuzz put over) before and not only in the final suport. By this way it can't sound as someone meant it because each stereo will clip his own way, not replicating a concept like Billy (really?) wanted it to. Someone could have put some compression damn it.

SHUT UP!