|
Post by gentlemanjoe on Aug 30, 2019 17:56:14 GMT
With respect, Am Not going to argue or fall out about this just to have the last word, I’m just expressing my liking of the record and what I heard and saw the band talking about at the time it was released.
I think we best leave it there as it’s going round in circles now.
Best wishes.
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Sept 10, 2019 17:54:04 GMT
I'll be totally honest, I didn't understand a word of that but it sounded impressive. 😂😂😂 Turns out I have my issues with the album... but the sound quality certainly isn't among them. I like that I didn't have to turn the volume down. Now about the songs...
|
|
|
Post by frozenhero on Sept 10, 2019 17:58:54 GMT
The band said they recorded and produced it like Piledriver, Hello etc. With them all going for it in the studio, That’s what gives the life and vibe. I get that you don’t like it, but it was successful and as always .... it’s a matter of opinions The ‘band’ say all sorts of things when an album is released. Just as Francis has said with Backbone that he was unhappy with how the most recent albums have sounded. As a result he says he produced the album. You really believe they recorded it in the same manner as Piledriver. It was ‘successful’ you are correct it’s a matter of opinions. How many ‘singles’ did the album have and not one charted. Well, Francis also said that he was surprised when Michael Lorant (eclipsed reviewer) said Backbone reminded him of the 70s albums, because "it was recorded with the most modern technology". These days, you can get a very clean sound even with all the musicians playing together. QPQ perhaps is the other way round, because of the way it was mixed and mastered it might have convinced people they recorded it together when in fact they didn't (as Francis himself says in the Hello Quo DVD). Although, as I may have said before, digital compression tends to sound uglier than analog one, which is why I'll always prefer Piledriver's sound to that of QPQ. What must also influence the sound is the band playing to a click track. Obviously it's harder to get into a comfortable groove like that (only Francis doesn't seem to get that).
|
|
|
Post by fretbuzzzzz on Sept 10, 2019 20:08:19 GMT
Of the ‘modern’ Quo, Rock til you Drop was For me the worst recording techniques used since Back to. Back. RTYD sounded compressed, their wasn’t a really good live sound to it, and at certain points Rossi’s guitar sounded like a xylophone. I still find it a very difficult listen. Quid Pro Quo was by for the best sound I think I’ve heard since NTL and the songs were quality as well, which for all these reasons I think it did so well I’m the charts As 4th Chord has mentioned and as I understand it... the band set up as in the old days, as a band, in the studio or hangar (Bray studios wasn't it?) to record as live as possible for the 'Rock til You Drop' album. Rossi and Parfitt talked about this in Guitarist mag back in 1991 from memory. Wish I still had that particular copy now! Rossi had been at pains to point out that they had turned their backs on what had by then become the norm in the studio where they would have been mic'ing up a variety of separated but multiple amp/cabinets but often combined, whilst listening back through their headphones trying to get the perfect guitar tones. Opting for a back to basics approach with RTYD. Rossi even said that he wondered how they had ever got away from that basic way of doing things. Strange to think it didn't take him long to return to a more studio-fied recording approach in the shape of 'Thirsty Work'. I would think that any overdubs and mixing of RTYD had taken place at Arsis. Later on it had been said that Rick wasn't a fan of RTYD, though don't recall a dissenting voice from him in Guitarist mag.
|
|