What does everyone think about "complex" verses "simple" music - General

[QUOTE=Akayz;25681152]He must have ONE pop oriented album.[/QUOTE] The poppiest my dads library goes is 2112 by Rush

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25680004]Feel free to ignore me all you want, but makes you think I know nothing about music?[/QUOTE] Comments like: [QUOTE=TehKaboose;25680004]Also, the 18th century was and is really considered the "golden age" of music, look it up.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=TehKaboose;25680004]Music now might be bigger than ever, but it´s not only about quantity.[/QUOTE] ...pretty much seal the deal on that one. Also, you know, the guy immediately below you pointing out how much shit you're full of, that helps.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;25684090]The poppiest my dads library goes is 2112 by Rush[/QUOTE] Riiiight. Not sure where to go with that :v: Is he the same now?

[QUOTE=Dopey Trout;25683058]...[/QUOTE] Yup, you´re probably right. That sounded retarded to begin with. [QUOTE=Xenocidebot;25684108]Comments like: ...pretty much seal the deal on that one. Also, you know, the guy immediately below you pointing out how much shit you're full of, that helps.[/QUOTE] Well, I don´t really know shit about the history of music, but I can find many sources calling 18th century the golden age of music. But what ever... Also, you make it sound like you´re some kind of great composer or a music teacher or something. And why are you being so offencive in your posts? Did I offend you somehow with my theories and opinions?

[QUOTE=Akayz;25684271]Riiiight. Not sure where to go with that :v: Is he the same now?[/QUOTE] worryingly, despite the fact he's the wrong side of 50, yes.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;25684311]worryingly, despite the fact he's the wrong side of 50, yes.[/QUOTE] Guess thats not bad at all actually. Being crazed with one type of genre shows how much love he has for music. Obviously not in general, but still :smile:

[QUOTE=Akayz;25684436]Guess thats not bad at all actually. Being crazed with one type of genre shows how much love he has for music. Obviously not in general, but still :smile:[/QUOTE] Yeah, I'd rather have a dad who's overly interested in music than one who doesn't really give a shit. Even if he did insinuate I was gay for listening to rap music :saddowns:

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;25684595]Even if he did insinuate I was gay for listening to rap music :saddowns:[/QUOTE] :v:

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25682650]And I guess I feel like the prog movement in the 70s was an attempt to rescurrect music or something.[/QUOTE] prog rock was good for only one singular reason, it was the setting stone for the backlash that was punk

[QUOTE=professor cool.;25683407]whoa. it took me all this time to realize that the OP meant "versus", not "verses"[/QUOTE] Well shit, I've been caught out I've been trying to secretly convert you all [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] [QUOTE=TehKaboose;25684282]Yup, you´re probably right. That sounded retarded to begin with. Well, I don´t really know shit about the history of music, but I can find many sources calling 18th century the golden age of music. But what ever... Also, you make it sound like you´re some kind of great composer or a music teacher or something. And why are you being so offencive in your posts? Did I offend you somehow with my theories and opinions?[/QUOTE] Bro, the "Golden Age" of music was shit like Led Zeppelin/Pink Floyd/Beatles stuff Get it together, I've never heard anyone say the 18th century was the golden age

golden age is every year if you know where to find it

Too goddamn right

The golden years are music usually correlate with the genre of music the person likes and when the quality and quantity of that genre booms. But one thing that is for certain, the production done on most albums these days do not at all compare to that of the 70's and 80's. The mixing and mastering quality have gone way down. This is part of the whole loudness war that gets brought up. This isn't to say that there aren't some albums that aren't mixed and mastered well, it's more to say that there are far less. Take Death Magnetic for instance.

if you were trying to mention the worst mixed album in all of humanity you should've said st anger

[QUOTE=Pepin;25695995]The golden years are music usually correlate with the genre of music the person likes and when the quality and quantity of that genre booms. But one thing that is for certain, the production done on most albums these days do not at all compare to that of the 70's and 80's. The mixing and mastering quality have gone way down. This is part of the whole loudness war that gets brought up. This isn't to say that there aren't some albums that aren't mixed and mastered well, it's more to say that there are far less. Take Death Magnetic for instance.[/QUOTE] I dunno, I've heard a lot of really well mixed albums from the 2000's.

[QUOTE=Pepin;25695995]The golden years are music usually correlate with the genre of music the person likes and when the quality and quantity of that genre booms. But one thing that is for certain, the production done on most albums these days do not at all compare to that of the 70's and 80's. The mixing and mastering quality have gone way down. This is part of the whole loudness war that gets brought up. This isn't to say that there aren't some albums that aren't mixed and mastered well, it's more to say that there are far less. Take Death Magnetic for instance.[/QUOTE] yeah, "golden years" people are just whingers honestly to hell with the lot of them, I'm sick of listening to them complain about things they have no idea about, as they've never strayed further than the beatles or led zeppelin

[QUOTE=Eluveitie;25696781]I dunno, I've heard a lot of really well mixed albums from the 2000's.[/QUOTE] I really haven't heard any mixing that catches my ear. If anything I'm disappointed because there is a huge lack of clarity on so many tracks due to masking. Tracks are commonly over-compressed and lack dynamics. To state it again, I'm not saying there aren't any well mixed albums anymore because quite the opposite is true, there are many, but I am saying that the art of mixing has degraded quite a bit. Also, just to define some terms so you know what I mean by a good mix and such. Bad mix: many masking issues; obviously some issues with the mix; certain elements don't fit in very well; lack of dynamics Good mix: no real issues with clarity; dynamics are present; the mixer successfully brought some creative mixing into play Great mix: same as above; the mixer enhances the music greatly and makes the songs much more enjoyable Of course, the quality of a mix has nothing to do with the music really because the mixer typically only handles the music, they don't create it. Just as an example of how much of a difference can be made, here is the first mix of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Butch Vig. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi5tUK2Ie2k[/media] And of course the original by Andy Wallace. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTWKbfoikeg&ob=av3e[/media] Same music, big difference, Wallace's mix brings about a totally different atmosphere than Butch Vig's.

[QUOTE=Pepin;25697259]I really haven't heard any mixing that catches my ear. If anything I'm disappointed because there is a huge lack of clarity on so many tracks due to masking. Tracks are commonly over-compressed and lack dynamics. To state it again, I'm not saying there aren't any well mixed albums anymore because quite the opposite is true, there are many, but I am saying that the art of mixing has degraded quite a bit. Also, just to define some terms so you know what I mean by a good mix and such. Bad mix: many masking issues; obviously some issues with the mix; certain elements don't fit in very well; lack of dynamics Good mix: no real issues with clarity; dynamics are present; the mixer successfully brought some creative mixing into play Great mix: same as above; the mixer enhances the music greatly and makes the songs much more enjoyable Of course, the quality of a mix has nothing to do with the music really because the mixer typically only handles the music, they don't create it. Just as an example of how much of a difference can be made, here is the first mix of Smells Like Teen Spirit by Butch Vig. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi5tUK2Ie2k[/media] And of course the original by Andy Wallace. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eOUq4Z6R7xI[/media] Same music, big difference, Wallace's mix brings about a totally different atmosphere than Butch Vig's.[/QUOTE] vBulletin Pre-Populated Search Results Demo?

[QUOTE=En-Guage V2;25695291]Bro, the "Golden Age" of music was shit like Led Zeppelin/Pink Floyd/Beatles stuff Get it together, I've never heard anyone say the 18th century was the golden age[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Some website;25695291]However, the best years of music is classified and known as the Golden age of music, and this article explains the Golden age of music with reference to the famous composers of that period and other events that took place during that era. It is the music of the Classical period (the music of the 18th century), which is referred to as the “Golden Age of Music”. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Wikipedia;25695291]The term "classical music" did not appear until the early 19th century, in an attempt to "canonize" the period from Johann Sebastian Bach to Beethoven as a golden age.[/QUOTE] Though, it´s propably just people romantisizing the past. I don´t really care about classical music either and to me the "golden age" is the 60s and 70s too. Music is all about opinions and I don´t think you can name a one and only golden age. [QUOTE=Pepin;25695995]The golden years are music usually correlate with the genre of music the person likes and when the quality and quantity of that genre booms. But one thing that is for certain, the production done on most albums these days do not at all compare to that of the 70's and 80's. The mixing and mastering quality have gone way down. This is part of the whole loudness war that gets brought up. This isn't to say that there aren't some albums that aren't mixed and mastered well, it's more to say that there are far less. Take Death Magnetic for instance.[/QUOTE] Absolutely. This man speaks the thruth. The mixing really is horrible nowadays. Pretty much only thing you hear in most modern albums are the vocals, and things like bass and drums are just secondary background noise. Bass can contribute a huge deal to the atmosphere of the song and drums can make a song that much more interesting, only if done right and mixed well. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHsiP1aLqhU[/media] This is an example of fine mixing in the 70s. No instrument is overwhelming the others, a perfect balance.

[U][media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAqbnTKQBIY[/media][/U] I think this is probably one of my favorite examples of a 'simple' song that gets it point across. It's a simple riff, very basic drumming for the most part, structured in a rather standard fashion, but the strength behind it is enough to knock some of the more robust music on it's ass.

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25701919]This is an example of fine mixing in the 70s. No instrument is overwhelming the others, a perfect balance.[/QUOTE] The mixing back then was horrible. Just listen to this overproduced and compressed crap. The vocals are very dominant and the rest of the instruments are just background noise. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q_CKzWqIHQ[/media] Thank God for today's music. This is how a real mix should sound like! [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jI6OupafUgY[/media] And incase you can't tell, I'm messing with you... you don't know shit about mixing and how it has evolved during the last 50 years.

Wow, Radcool. You actually know nothing. [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] Technology advances have made production easier, not a WHOLE lot better. Loudness is what you are obsessed with. I prefer warmth in music.

What? I'm just saying that there are bands today which are mixed in a 70's prog-fashion and that there are bands from the 70's which are mixed in a compressed pop fashion which you all complain about. (I'm not talking about the loudness war).

They weren't all like that :colbert: Some mixings can let albums down, but the artist sometimes pull through on their own. Theres a prime example of this, but I've forgotten it for now :psyduck:

[QUOTE=Rad McCool;25704601]What? I'm just saying that there are bands today which are mixed in a 70's prog-fashion and that there are bands from the 70's which are mixed in a compressed pop fashion which you all complain about. (I'm not talking about the loudness war).[/QUOTE] Of course there are, but generally. Most music today (of what I hear on the radio, anyway) souds like they took a fuckload of instruments and effects, put them all into blender, made it into a thick paste and then poured it over the vocals. It´s just an overflowing stream of sound invading your ears. You can´t really tell anything apart, except for the vocals. I´m sure there are finely mixed albums still these days, but I haven´t heard any very horribly mixed songs from the 60s or 70s. That rainbow song is pretty well mixed, really. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrO4YZeyl0I[/media] Compared to this clusterfuck. And why does that other song sound like One of These Days?

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25704943]Of course there are, but generally. Most music today (of what I hear on the radio, anyway) souds like they took a fuckload of instruments and effects, put them all into blender, made it into a thick paste and then poured it over the vocals. It´s just an overflowing stream of sound invading your ears. You can´t really tell anything apart, except for the vocals. I´m sure there are finely mixed albums still these days, but I haven´t heard any very horribly mixed songs from the 60s or 70s. That rainbow song is pretty well mixed, really. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrO4YZeyl0I[/media] Compared to this clusterfuck.[/QUOTE] It's not really fair comparing [I]yes [/I]and [I]rainbow[/I] to Lady gaga. The first two are rock music, and Yes is prog at that, a pretty underground genre, where on the other hand, Lady Gaga is a pop musician. Pop has almost always been hella shite, it's really nothing new. [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] I guess my point is, if you found a contemporary equivalent to Yes, Rush or any such band, they would have decent mixing [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] also I just noticed, you compared Yes and Rainbow to what you 'hear on the radio' as if Radio hasn't always been consistently mainstream and mediocre

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;25705032]It's not really fair comparing [I]yes [/I]and [I]rainbow[/I] to Lady gaga. The first two are rock music, and Yes is prog at that, a pretty underground genre, where on the other hand, Lady Gaga is a pop musician. Pop has almost always been hella shite, it's really nothing new. [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] I guess my point is, if you found a contemporary equivalent to Yes, Rush or any such band, they would have decent mixing [editline]28th October 2010[/editline] also I just noticed, you compared Yes and Rainbow to what you 'hear on the radio' as if Radio hasn't always been consistently mainstream and mediocre[/QUOTE] I guess modern progressive bands like Tool and Porcupine Tree have descent mixing, but do note that Yes and prog in general was (quite) mainstream in the 70s.

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25705868]I guess modern progressive bands like Tool and Porcupine Tree have descent mixing, but do note that Yes and prog in general was mainstream in the 70s.[/QUOTE] Yes were never mainstream, shit like Abba was mainstream. Yes may have had a big following, but they were in no way the radio standard of popular music in the 1970's. The popular 'radio-friendly' music was more Disco and europop, bands like Yes and Rainbow were only played by select DJ's.

[QUOTE=TehKaboose;25701919]No instrument is overwhelming the others, a perfect balance.[/QUOTE] That's still subjective. I hear a lot of noise upon first listen to that Yes tune, because the last thing I was making was hard rock. Giving myself a moment of silence clears it up again (now I just think the vocals are shit.) Now consider the fact that you're just as vulnerable to misinterpretation and listen to Bad Romance again, because I can guarantee you think the mix is shit because you're paying too much attention to the terrible woman singing and none to the actual song. In actuality Bad Romance is hella clean and the instrumentation pretty thin. Simplistic is a given, a bad mix isn't. "Clusterfuck" describes pretty much anything depending on how you went into it.

[QUOTE=strayebyrd;25705951]Yes were never mainstream, shit like Abba was mainstream. Yes may have had a big following, but they were in no way the radio standard of popular music in the 1970's. The popular 'radio-friendly' music was more Disco and europop, bands like Yes and Rainbow were only played by select DJ's.[/QUOTE] In the UK it was. Prog didn´t really get big anywhere else (that big). I don´t know how much airtime they got, after all you can´t really play 20 min songs on the radio, but at least they were topping album charts and were generally popular. But I still think that 60s and 70s manstream, Beatles, Abba and whatnot, were mixed better and weren´t as cluttered as todays mainstream. You can´t really deny that. [QUOTE=Xenocidebot;25706136]That's still subjective. I hear a lot of noise upon first listen to that Yes tune, because the last thing I was making was hard rock. Giving myself a moment of silence clears it up again (now I just think the vocals are shit.) Now consider the fact that you're just as vulnerable to misinterpretation and listen to Bad Romance again, because I can guarantee you think the mix is shit because you're paying too much attention to the terrible woman singing and none to the actual song. In actuality Bad Romance is hella clean and the instrumentation pretty thin. Simplistic is a given, a bad mix isn't. "Clusterfuck" describes pretty much anything depending on how you went into it.[/QUOTE] Ok, well I guess mixing too comes down to opinions and prefernces. Maybe we should just stop arguing about music because it´s ultimately all opinions. But still, to me Bad Romance etc. (or anything nowadays, when I think about it) sounds much more overwhelming than stuff in the 70s.