Write a controversial opinion

Dinosaur Jr is underrated, and this cover is amazing.
When I was in college, I was at the Bursar's office on what must have been the first week I was there. I'm in line, and I'm behind these two guys, and one of them is throwing a hissy fit that he saw The Toadies the weekend before and they sounded exactly the same live as they did on their album.

The other guy he was talking to was mystified by this criteria, but the first guy was adamant that bands should sound different live.

I disagree, but a cover that takes a strong divergence from the original often wins me over even when I loved the original. I respect creativity.
 
It's not bad, but that's not the kind of song where you can let the vocals get overpowered like that.

But if we are doing hot takes on remakes.
The Canons version of Dancing in the Dark is the better than Bruce's.

It's too "pretty" for me, her voice is too thin. Needs far more grit.

I'm hearing in my head Marianne Faithfull or Lucinda Williams doing a cover of the song - either would bring far more to it than this girl. 'cept Marianne is dead, so there's a problem!
 
It's too "pretty" for me, her voice is too thin. Needs far more grit.

I'm hearing in my head Marianne Faithfull or Lucinda Williams doing a cover of the song - either would bring far more to it than this girl. 'cept Marianne is dead, so there's a problem!
Speaking of Marianne Faithfull:

Load and Reload are good, actually, and everyone who was upset about the demise of Metallica post-Black Album was a few years premature.
 
Even if you don't care for his music Sinatra was a great singer because of his innovations in the studio. His use of German audio tape recording devices in music production was groundbreaking. His use of electronic microphones with sound cancellation was revolutionary because he could lay down a vocal track with no instrumentation even while working with a full orchestra.
Do you have a source for this? Trying to find specific brands for the audio tapes and have come up with nothing. For the microphone, I assume you are referring to the Neumann U 47 which doesn't have "sound cancellation"; it picks up sound better in one direction because it can switch to a cardioid polar pattern.

The man gets little credit for being the first to use "mixing" and "dubbing" to produce recordings that had not been completely cut in one take.

He was a giant of the music industry and is IMHO utterly unappreciated for the amazing advances in technology he brought to the industry.
Sinatra was the electrical and audio engineer you're referring to.
As @iwatchus said, Les Paul is largely credited with developing what I assume you are referring to as "multi-track recording". If you are referring to something different, please let me know.

I wasn't aware Sinatra was an electrical & audio engineer who mixed and dubbed his own recordings. Curiously, his own website makes no mention of any of the accomplishments that you've referred to.
 
Last edited:
He also had great agents who managed to obtain other people's songs, which were then made into Sinatra's hits. Almost every single one of his great ones is a re-arranged song that someone else performed first.
That was the way the music industry worked back then. There were almost no singer-songwriters. Everyone was recording the same songs with their own style and flair. Some songs you can find dozens of covers of them.
 
Do you have a source for this? Trying to find specific brands for the audio tapes and have come up with nothing. For the microphone, I assume you are referring to the Neumann U 47 which doesn't have "sound cancellation"; it picks up sound better in one direction because it can switch to a cardioid polar pattern.
It's mentioned briefly in the wikipedia article about him. Bing Crosby founded Ampex to commercialize the tape recorder technology invented in WWII. Allegedly (not mentioned as number two in the wikipedia article -- I would have to search more to find that reference. I think Bing Crosby said it at some point), Crosby gave Paul the second tape recorder ever made and he immediately "broke" it by adding a second read head and some electronics to allow the mixing.

Microphones in general were far better post WWII. They invented new technology in WWII (to make sure bombardiers could hear the call from the navigator over the noise in the plane)) that quickly moved over to music recording. You can hear the difference easily if you listen to say a Glenn Miller recording from 42 and a Bing Crosby recording from 47. Paul did apparently make innovative use of the new technology. He and his wife (Mary Ford) were very successful recording, making heavy use of audio tricks (e.g.,recording 47 tracks of them on one song, all singing on top of each other).

I do not know the names of the mics.
 
That was the way the music industry worked back then. There were almost no singer-songwriters. Everyone was recording the same songs with their own style and flair. Some songs you can find dozens of covers of them.
MoTown still worked that way into the 70's. Marvin Gaye broke that mold for them.
 
I disagree, but a cover that takes a strong divergence from the original often wins me over even when I loved the original. I respect creativity.

Agreed.

In my opinion, the best cover ever made is the Pet Shop Boys' version of "Always On My Mind." Which, of course, had already been covered by everyone from Elvis to Willie Nelson. But most of those versions were just retreads.

 
If you serve me water at a restaurant, what tf are you putting fruit in it for. Fuck that! I will send it back.
 
Going backwards here. My favorite cover ever is Johnny Cash doing NIN 'Hurt'. Brilliant and painful.
 
I often like covers as much as, and sometimes more than, the original versions of songs.

Even when I adore the original.
 
I often like covers as much as, and sometimes more than, the original versions of songs.

Even when I adore the original.
Agreed. Although I do have my 'sacred' vocalists who's songs in my opinion should not be attempted, but we all probably have at least one of those, right? For me I cannot listen to someone singing a song Freddie Mercury sang, or Prince. It just doesn't work.
 
Speaking of Marianne Faithfull:

Load and Reload are good, actually, and everyone who was upset about the demise of Metallica post-Black Album was a few years premature.

I don't know why they waste effort hating those either. The real issue was St. Anger. To me it was... fine? Even though every song sounds the same?

I get some of the lyrics were stupid, and the lack of solos is not really a big complaint for me (you really get tired of the wah-wahs after a Metallica marathon), but I think the biggest problem with St. Anger are the drums. No kidding, they sound like Lars is beating a bunch of Tupperwares with a wooden spoon.
 
I often like covers as much as, and sometimes more than, the original versions of songs.

Even when I adore the original.
Gary Jules cover of Mad World has made the Tears for Fears original unlistenable to me. The original is way too fast and just sounds wrong now.
 
Back
Top