View Single Post
Old 03-28-2010, 09:19 AM   #17
soniclovenoize
Minion of Satan
 
soniclovenoize's Avatar
 
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 5,401
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by russian iha View Post
Great thread.

soniclovenoize, being by no means a sound pro, I'm still a fan of Machina (sans the final mastering clipping) and shoegaze sound approach in general. I assume it's just a matter of taste and purpose. I'd kill to get a rusty drowned-in-ocean Machina sound for my music, and I suppose it's gonna suit it well. Machina is accomplished in achieving a outworldish grandiose sonic pallete, it just works in terms of ambigious concept album, and it just won't click on every album.
Yeah, I hear what you're saying. I mean, of course music is subjective. And there are elements I can appreciate about Machina--I have no problem with Flood's digital distortion and manipulations (although I much prefer the big muff sound of 1993), and some of Corgan's best songwring. BUt I think it's the "when is enough enough" scenario... I know this was their intent with Machina, to go to the extreme, but by the time I hit Blue Skies I can't take much more of the overblown songs. I went on a huge geeky rant in the Machina Appreciation thread about it actually, how I believe they should have just said "Eh fuck it!" and put Machina out as the double-concept album it should have been. I posted my own reconstruction of the tracklist (using MI and MII tracks) in that thread if you're curious.

But I digress. My point I forgot to make is I much prefer analog distortion (from effects pedals or overdriven amplifiers) than digital distortion. It has to do with honesty and warmth in my eas (ears?)... Digital distortion just seems cold and lifeless--almost painful!--while analog distortion just seems more alive. If they would have done that on Machina, maybe I would like it a bit more. But then they'd be moving backward rather than forward. Damned if you do, damned if you don't!

So I suppose that's the crux of it, and explains my obsession with really pro-sounding homemade recordings, that they sound more honest than studio recording now-a-days... probably because digital is starting to be the industry standard. One of the bands in our circle of friends/bands just recorded an album in a pro studio (owned by some Hold Steady guys actually) and I think it's great, but I still feel like it doesn't have the warmth it could. Why? Because it sounds so digital, so ProTools. Sure, they got to use $1000 mics, but I still think using $100 mics in a 4-track very carefully sounds purer and more honest than a big-$$$ studio. Just my two cents.

 
soniclovenoize is offline