Stone Temple Pilots fire lead singer

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Driving Wheel

in 1991 and 1992, when 'grunge' was huge and Nirvana was hitting #1 (you know, contexually the period of time we're talking about) Geffen was pushing GN'R like they (hehehe) were going out of style.

And why wouldn't they push GNR? Why couldn't Geffen do both (which they did)?

Originally Posted by Driving Wheel

But hey, you were in the know in '86 when Zutaut brought them to Geffen, I'm sure you were at the first meeting.

Actually, I wasn't living in Los Angeles in 1986 (unfortunately) but I later knew Tom. And Vickie Hamilton had far more to do with Guns & Roses than Tom Zutaut.

But go ahead and keep insulting me. I'm sure that's great for your ego.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

And why wouldn't they push GNR? Why couldn't Geffen do both (which they did)?

They did - I would spin the Illusions as regularly as Nevermind and Incesticide.

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Actually, I wasn't living in Los Angeles in 1986 (unfortunately) but I later knew Tom. And Vickie Hamilton had far more to do with Guns & Roses than Tom Zutaut.

I know, Vicky got ****ED. She held their hand all the way to Geffen's front door.

But Zutaut is technically who signed them, so I went with him. He would've been the one in the room at that point (note : SARCASM, kind of)

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

But go ahead and keep insulting me. I'm sure that's great for your ego.

Dude, you're one of the biggest vile-spewing shit-stirrers on this board.

Wiser man than me once said 'if you're gonna dish it out, you better be ready to take it.'

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Driving Wheel

Dude, you're one of the biggest vile-spewing shit-stirrers on this board.

Wiser man than me once said 'if you're gonna dish it out, you better be ready to take it.'

Except for the fact that you're talking out of your ass: You didn't experience any of what you've written on this subject, you've read it on the internet or in books, etc.

You're very closed minded, especially when it comes to the process of recording. A little advice: Stop with your preconcieved notions (which also happen to be incorrect) and stop acting as if you know everything.

You don't. Otherwise, you wouldn't be in Missouri right now. You'd actually have a career in the music business instead of dreaming about one.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Except for the fact that you're talking out of your ass: You didn't experience any of what you've written on this subject, you've read it on the internet or in books, etc.

You're very closed minded, especially when it comes to the process of recording. A little advice: Stop with your preconcieved notions (which also happen to be incorrect) and stop acting as if you know everything.

You don't. Otherwise, you wouldn't be in Missouri right now. You'd actually have a career in the music business instead of dreaming about one.

What DIDN'T I experience??

The rise and fall of Nirvana and GN'R?? In my own way, I was totally involved in that.

Just because I wasn't in LA, hobknobbing with the key players doesn't mean I don't know what happened...

What is it, exactly, that I didn't experience that I shouldn't be posting about??

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

You're very closed minded, especially when it comes to the process of recording. A little advice: Stop with your preconcieved notions (which also happen to be incorrect) and stop acting as if you know everything.

Man, I just don't want my record to sound like everyone ****ing body else's ****ing record. I don't have a producer, I don't have anyone with any real recording studio experience, I don't know what I'm doing with digital a good 3/4 of the time...

...I just think that if you record a good performance on good equipment that it should sound good.

That's not me having preconceived notions or thinking I know it all; quite the opposite - it's that I don't know what I'm doing so much that I don't know what else to do, if that makes any sense...

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Driving Wheel

Man, I just don't want my record to sound like everyone ****ing body else's ****ing record. I don't have a producer, I don't have anyone with any real recording studio experience, I don't know what I'm doing with digital a good 3/4 of the time...

...I just think that if you record a good performance on good equipment that it should sound good.

That's not me having preconceived notions or thinking I know it all; quite the opposite - it's that I don't know what I'm doing so much that I don't know what else to do, if that makes any sense...

Yes, it sounds like you're inexperienced and don't know what you're doing. There's nothing wrong with that, as everyone needs to start somewhere. But you're mixing up terminology.

Furthermore, taking three signals and combining them into one is a recipe for disaster, IMO. Get a great sound coming from your instrument and amp, then select the best microphone, mic preamp and compressor (if necessary) in order to capture your sound.

Your sound might come for a REDDI box or an old Ampeg or a solid state Acoustic amp. It doesn't matter, as long as it's your sound. Don't get caught up in "Well I read on the internet that if I take a signal from here and one from there and one from there, then mix them, it'll be great!". Phasing is most certainly an issue, unless you're using something like a Little Labs IBP but even still, it should not be difficult.

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

Yes, it sounds like you're inexperienced and don't know what you're doing. There's nothing wrong with that, as everyone needs to start somewhere. But you're mixing up terminology.

Furthermore, taking three signals and combining them into one is a recipe for disaster, IMO. Get a great sound coming from your instrument and amp, then select the best microphone, mic preamp and compressor (if necessary) in order to capture your sound.

Your sound might come for a REDDI box or an old Ampeg or a solid state Acoustic amp. It doesn't matter, as long as it's your sound. Don't get caught up in "Well I read on the internet that if I take a signal from here and one from there and one from there, then mix them, it'll be great!". Phasing is most certainly an issue, unless you're using something like a Little Labs IBP but even still, it should not be difficult.

old Ampeg/Orange is definitely the sound, and not necessarily recording all three with the intention of mixing them; just to have the options.

Probably going to have someone else (who knows what they're doing) mix it, and that way, you know, for a particular cut he doesn't like the sound of the miked amp. Well, he can take that dry signal and either re-amp or use a plug-in, however he feels is best. It's more to provide options during mixing than to acheive some monstrous bass sound.

Like, the more I hear 'new' albums with 'modern' bass sounds, the more I want to have that old school, warm Ampeg Noel Redding/Geezer Butler sound. To me, the way Paul McCartney's bass sounds on Revolver is ideal. There's almost TOO MUCH bass in the sonic spectrum in music today, but with mp3 and compressed digital formats, along with bigger speaker, modern equipment and evolving tastes, there HAS to be some of that bottom end, or yohr record can't ever compete on any level. Like, it has to sound good on the radio, next to the prominent regional and national acts that it hopefully will be played alongside...

and that's just the BASS; the guitars have been a NIGHTMARE, woth tuning issues, percussive 'chukkas' that muck up the mix, etc.

Yeah...I thought 'we'll just go in and bash out 8-9 songs and mix 'em and call that a record.'

That was over 9 months ago, we're almost halfway through, but with no real end in sight.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by Driving Wheel

old Ampeg/Orange is definitely the sound, and not necessarily recording all three with the intention of mixing them; just to have the options.

Probably going to have someone else (who knows what they're doing) mix it, and that way, you know, for a particular cut he doesn't like the sound of the miked amp. Well, he can take that dry signal and either re-amp or use a plug-in, however he feels is best. It's more to provide options during mixing than to acheive some monstrous bass sound.

Like, the more I hear 'new' albums with 'modern' bass sounds, the more I want to have that old school, warm Ampeg Noel Redding/Geezer Butler sound. To me, the way Paul McCartney's bass sounds on Revolver is ideal. There's almost TOO MUCH bass in the sonic spectrum in music today, but with mp3 and compressed digital formats, along with bigger speaker, modern equipment and evolving tastes, there HAS to be some of that bottom end, or yohr record can't ever compete on any level. Like, it has to sound good on the radio, next to the prominent regional and national acts that it hopefully will be played alongside...

and that's just the BASS; the guitars have been a NIGHTMARE, woth tuning issues, percussive 'chukkas' that muck up the mix, etc.

Yeah...I thought 'we'll just go in and bash out 8-9 songs and mix 'em and call that a record.'

That was over 9 months ago, we're almost halfway through, but with no real end in sight.

This post illustrates perfectly what I tell young kids that want a career in the music business: Go to school.

Go to Berkelee School of Music, USC Film school, UCLA Film school, NYU, etc. There are very few people working successfully (and by that, I mean actually earning "real" money) in the music business that didn't graduate from one of those prestigious schools.

Whether it Film/TV composition and production, Music Supervision, marketing and promotions, songwriting, etc., it's nearly impossible to compete with well-educated and extremely talented individuals that had had the benefit of a music education taught by the world's best teachers.

You're a mid-20's guy in Missouri that's needed more than nine months to cut 12 songs. I know film and TV composer/producers that create 12 Master Quality tracks per day.

It's a really, really tough road otherwise. Good luck, Dude!

[Easy 6]

Speaking of GNR, did anyone catch the VH1 concert from london last saturday?

Gotta say, they sounded awesome... Axls voice hasnt been that good in ten years, it was GREAT to hear all of the stuff from the Illusion albums live.

Axl looks like he's kinda going through the motions more than i ever remember, he doesnt have that physical fire he used to, but still, he sounded very good.

Feel like punching myself in the junk for forgetting to record it... it made them seem relevant again.

[DaneMcCloud]

Originally Posted by scott free

Speaking of GNR, did anyone catch the VH1 concert from london last saturday?

Gotta say, they sounded awesome... Axls voice hasnt been that good in ten years, it was GREAT to hear all of the stuff from the Illusion albums live.

Axl looks like he's kinda going through the motions more than i ever remember, he doesnt have that physical fire he used to, but still, he sounded very good.

Feel like punching myself in the junk for forgetting to record it... it made them seem relevant again.

All of those "Live Concerts" go through an enormous amount of audio post-production, including tuning the vocals with with either Autotune or Melodyne.

That said, the new GNR band is comprised of some ridiculously talented players but to me, they come off as bland because they're so good. Slash and Duff and Izzy and Steven were "feel" players. The difference between Matt and Adler's drumming is shocking and Matt's songs don't "feel" anywhere near as "good" as Steven's. This was no more apparent than their Rock And Roll Hall of Fame induction, where Guns and Roses sounded like Guns and Roses (minus Axl).

[Deberg_1990]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

All of those "Live Concerts" go through an enormous amount of audio post-production, including tuning the vocals with with either Autotune or Melodyne.

That said, the new GNR band is comprised of some ridiculously talented players but to me, they come off as bland because they're so good. Slash and Duff and Izzy and Steven were "feel" players. The difference between Matt and Adler's drumming is shocking and Matt's songs don't "feel" anywhere near as "good" as Steven's. This was no more apparent than their Rock And Roll Hall of Fame induction, where Guns and Roses sounded like Guns and Roses (minus Axl).

Dane, do you think we will ever get an Axel/Slash reunion in our lifetime?

[rabblerouser]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

All of those "Live Concerts" go through an enormous amount of audio post-production, including tuning the vocals with with either Autotune or Melodyne.

That said, the new GNR band is comprised of some ridiculously talented players but to me, they come off as bland because they're so good. Slash and Duff and Izzy and Steven were "feel" players. The difference between Matt and Adler's drumming is shocking and Matt's songs don't "feel" anywhere near as "good" as Steven's. This was no more apparent than their Rock And Roll Hall of Fame induction, where Guns and Roses sounded like Guns and Roses (minus Axl).

yeah, Izzy said one of the biggest reasons he left was because he didn't like the way the band's music had changed.

His sobriety and Axl's erratic behavior were the other main contributing factors.

Poor Izzy; he's so scarred from LSD (lead singer dysfunction) that when VR was forming, it was him, Duff, Slash, and Matt, and Izzy was down...as long as they didn't get a ****ing lead singer.

Izzy just wanted to tour clubs with him and Duff singing...

maybe they could still get that together.

WAY more likely than the original Guns ever getting back together.

[Easy 6]

Originally Posted by DaneMcCloud

All of those "Live Concerts" go through an enormous amount of audio post-production, including tuning the vocals with with either Autotune or Melodyne.

That said, the new GNR band is comprised of some ridiculously talented players but to me, they come off as bland because they're so good. Slash and Duff and Izzy and Steven were "feel" players. The difference between Matt and Adler's drumming is shocking and Matt's songs don't "feel" anywhere near as "good" as Steven's. This was no more apparent than their Rock And Roll Hall of Fame induction, where Guns and Roses sounded like Guns and Roses (minus Axl).

Yeah, you could kinda sense that trickery was at work at certain points.

I seriously couldnt agree more that a given players "feel" can totally change the dynamics of a song, Steven Adler? LOVED his style and no one has even come close to it yet in GNR, what he may have lacked in technical virtuosity he made up for with sheer instinct and muscle, i'd take him ANY day over Sorum, he was just too robotic or something in many ways... he was kinda the Bruce Kulick of GNR drummers. Whoever was playing in london was ok, i guess.

Gotta say though, that i REALLY enjoyed what the new lead guitarist brought to each song... nobody will ever replace Slash, but his style was more than enjoyable, to quickly try to categorize him i'd say he's more technical and futuristic... kinda Muse on steroids, if that makes any sense.

But yep, no replacement players will ever have quite the same magic as the original lineup in ANY band, its literally like chemistry imo, some people just belong together.