Tubular.net :: Mike Oldfield Forums Discussion, news, reviews, fan music, and more.
	Search :: Members :: Help :: Guidelines

Pages: (2) < [1] 2 > [ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ]

Drealm Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 03 2011, 08:33 The lasts listens I made of the TB album was always the 2003 version, as I was thinking "if Mike consider it to be the absolute final version, there's no point to listen to the old anymore". I just had a big shock in the last days: I decided to give a listen to the old, just for fun: what a wonderful re-discovery it was. I liked the album as if I was in my firsts listens, couldn't resist re-listen to it 2 days later and again, wonderful. So, I have to admit, I like the old much more than the 2003. Like Mike said in an interview: "I've remade it...perfectly! (laughs)...in my local shop they had the old for years, they put the new and one month later, the old is back, so what can I do...it's just the force, the energy, idiosyncrasies, that make it, give it it's caracter..." So I guess he was right about that! Tubular Bells was among the albums I liked the least, now he just took a big step up my list. I understand now why it's so praised and why it's the core and lifeblood of Mike's career. Back to top

larstangmark Group: Members Posts: 1767 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Feb. 03 2011, 11:23 Tubular Bells was all about multi-track recording and it has the unmistakeable sound of early multi-track recording that makes early 70s studio recordings so special. It's the sound of the tape machine as much as the sound of the instrument; Compression, reduction, distortion etc. It's propably natural that the artist wants to belive that it was the composition alone that made the record, not the recording. But I was baffled that the TB2003 project ever passed the ideas stage. -------------- "There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste" Mark E Smith Back to top

bob the screamer Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: Jan. 2011 Posted: Feb. 03 2011, 13:56 Quote (larstangmark @ Feb. 03 2011, 11:23) Tubular Bells was all about multi-track recording and it has the unmistakeable sound of early multi-track recording that makes early 70s studio recordings so special. It's the sound of the tape machine as much as the sound of the instrument; Compression, reduction, distortion etc. It's propably natural that the artist wants to belive that it was the composition alone that made the record, not the recording. But I was baffled that the TB2003 project ever passed the ideas stage. Interesting. I always felt there is a very special atmosphere in those old recordings (from TB to incantations) which is not present in the same way later... Didn't think much about that it might be the sound of the recording. -------------- New free album out: http://www.bobthescreamer.com/music/twinety-twine/ Back to top

Drealm Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 04 2011, 08:21 It's probably true when some people say that digital recording have this cold feeling, compared to tape or vinyl for example. A curious experimentation would be if Mike could go in 1973 and record TB 2003 whit multi-track or if he could jump from 1973 to now and record the original TB with today's equipment. I wonder if TB 2003 would be better... Edit: I just realized that he could actually record TB 2003 with multi-track NOW with old equipment, but I don't think this will happen. I remember him talking about how a mess it was working with these compared to a computer today... Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Feb. 04 2011, 10:34 If I may butt in, I will say that the biggest problem with the 2003 rerecording for me is in the arrangements, not in the recording technology. Also, people only say that analogue stuff feels "warmer" because that is what people got used to hearing. They are conditioned to accept that sound better, so anything that is radically different will sound strange. -------------- Check out http://ferniecanto.com.br for all my music, including my latest albums: Don't Stay in the City, Making Amends and Builders of Worlds. Also check my Bandcamp page: http://ferniecanto.bandcamp.com Back to top

bob the screamer Group: Members Posts: 108 Joined: Jan. 2011 Posted: Feb. 04 2011, 17:56 What is the problem with the arrangements? I think this is actually better on 2003... it is more thought of which is instruments should be in the foreground and which goes to the background etc. Also, the production is better. What I don't like is that many instruments got replaced by synth (the bass in the beginning, the nasal choir and others). -------------- New free album out: http://www.bobthescreamer.com/music/twinety-twine/ Back to top

larstangmark Group: Members Posts: 1767 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Feb. 05 2011, 03:25 Imagine if Mike would re-record The Songs of Distant Earth using only technology available in 1974! (16 track reel-to-reel with worn-out tapes, no computers etc.) That would be one interesting experiment.   -------------- "There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste" Mark E Smith Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4770 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 05 2011, 03:38 Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Feb. 04 2011, 10:34) If I may butt in, I will say that the biggest problem with the 2003 rerecording for me is in the arrangements, not in the recording technology. Also, people only say that analogue stuff feels "warmer" because that is what people got used to hearing. They are conditioned to accept that sound better, so anything that is radically different will sound strange. If John Cleese is an arrangement, I agree. There's probably a bit of Derridean "metaphysics of presence" at work too (oh no what fun Milamber will have with that!   ). People can see and feel the stylus drop into the record groove, and the rumble as it approaches the music makes them feel that the music is somehow closer to them, more a part of them. And so is born the vinyl fetishist!   Back to top

Ugo Group: Members Posts: 5495 Joined: April 2000 Posted: Feb. 05 2011, 14:30 Quote (nightspore @ Feb. 05 2011, 09:38) People can see and feel the stylus drop into the record groove, and the rumble as it approaches the music makes them feel that the music is somehow closer to them, more a part of them. And so is born the vinyl fetishist!   This reminds me of what Ray Manzarek from The Doors said in a fairly recent (2000) interview. When asked whether he prefers CD or vinyl, he says he prefers vinyl because it's how "we" (= people of his generation) listened to The Doors: they got high for half an hour, then they had to get up to turn the record over (Pleeeeease turrrrrrnnn meeee ooouuuuu-verrrrrr, as Jeff Lynne would've said! ), so, in Manzarek's own words, "we couldn't get too high". -------------- Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian Back to top

ex member 892 Group: Members Posts: 827 Joined: July 2008 Posted: Feb. 05 2011, 16:20 Quote (Ugo @ Feb. 05 2011, 14:30) they got high for half an hour, then they had to get up to turn the record over (Pleeeeease turrrrrrnnn meeee ooouuuuu-verrrrrr, as Jeff Lynne would've said! ), so, in Manzarek's own words, "we couldn't get too high". Unless you were listening to The Beatles' Sgt. Pepper! Then the sky was the limit (or so I've heard ). Back to top

Ugo Group: Members Posts: 5495 Joined: April 2000 Posted: Feb. 06 2011, 07:41 @ Syd: yes, but like all other albums of the era, Sgt. Pepper was only released on vinyl (cassettes didn't exist), so people still had to come down from the sky when Side A ended, turn the record over and get back up there as Side B started. In the Anthology series, Paul McCartney says that Sgt. Pepper was specifically conceived to have a Side A (ending with "Mr. Kite") and a Side B, and was a little bit concerned that this got lost with the CD [although, obviously, the CD sounded better. ]. -------------- Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian Back to top

ex member 892 Group: Members Posts: 827 Joined: July 2008 Posted: Feb. 06 2011, 10:23 @Ugo: I was talking about how sounds ran into the very last groove of Sgt. Pepper, causing it to loop into infinity. Pink Floyd did the same thing with Atom Heart Mother. Back to top

Cavalier (Lost Version) Group: Members Posts: 598 Joined: Nov. 2010 Posted: Feb. 07 2011, 14:16 Quote (Ugo @ Feb. 06 2011, 07:41) In the Anthology series, Paul McCartney says that Sgt. Pepper was specifically conceived to have a Side A (ending with "Mr. Kite") and a Side B, and was a little bit concerned that this got lost with the CD [although, obviously, the CD sounded better. ]. In mono or stereo though? -------------- "Who was that?" "That was Venger - the force of Evil!  I am Dungeon Master - your guide in the realm of Dungeons & Dragons!" Back to top

ex member 892 Group: Members Posts: 827 Joined: July 2008 Posted: Feb. 07 2011, 14:24 Sort of related: I've only heard the stereo of Sgt. Pepper, but the version of Pink Floyd's Piper at the Gates of Dawn I have has both mono and stereo versions; I actually prefer the mono (all the "cool" psychedelic panning in the stereo gives me a headache). Has anyone else heard both versions, and if so, which do you prefer? Back to top

larstangmark Group: Members Posts: 1767 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Feb. 07 2011, 16:25 I prefer the mono Piper. The crazy stereo panning distracts from this beautifully mixed and produced album. "Flaming" and "Matilda Mother" sound very different from what I remember, but only to the better. If you haven't heard the recent Syd Barrett compilation you should, just to check out the alternative version of "Matilda Mother" with different mix and lyrics. -------------- "There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste" Mark E Smith Back to top

Ugo Group: Members Posts: 5495 Joined: April 2000 Posted: Feb. 07 2011, 19:18 @ Cavalier: I assume Macca was talking about the mono mix. All four Beatles were always present when their albums were being mixed in mono, but they left the stereo mixes to the engineers. @ Syd & Lars: I have the mono and stereo versions of the Piper album in a special deluxe edition, but I don't really like the album in itself, so I can't comment. -------------- Ugo C. - a devoted Amarokian Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4770 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 07 2011, 19:42 Quote (Ugo @ Feb. 07 2011, 19:18) @ Cavalier: I assume Macca was talking about the mono mix. All four Beatles were always present when their albums were being mixed in mono, but they left the stereo mixes to the engineers. @ Syd & Lars: I have the mono and stereo versions of the Piper album in a special deluxe edition, but I don't really like the album in itself, so I can't comment. Yes, Barrett's vocals never worked for me. Also, many of the sound experiments (eg Pow R Toc H) are embarrassing rather than psychedlic, in my opinion. I think "Matilda Mother" is the best piece on the album, probably because it isn't dominated by Barrett's vocals. Back to top

Drealm Group: Members Posts: 170 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 08 2011, 17:04 Quote (Sir Mustapha @ Feb. 04 2011, 10:34) If I may butt in, I will say that the biggest problem with the 2003 rerecording for me is in the arrangements, not in the recording technology. Also, people only say that analogue stuff feels "warmer" because that is what people got used to hearing. They are conditioned to accept that sound better, so anything that is radically different will sound strange. You have a point here. Yes, I can say it's more about the arrangements. The first time I heard TB2003, I was very disappointed by the changes he made to the music. I was hoping the exact replica, with great sound. But it seems he decided to change some things while at it and even if I think some part are actually great in their new way, it's more like a TB 1½ than a strict identical re-recording. So that's why I still like the original more: because I feel TB2003 is actually Tubular Bells 1 ½ and I can't do anything about it.. Back to top

larstangmark Group: Members Posts: 1767 Joined: Mar. 2005 Posted: Feb. 08 2011, 17:15 Quote (nightspore @ Feb. 07 2011, 19:42) [quote=Ugo,Feb. 07 2011, 19:18] Yes, Barrett's vocals never worked for me. Also, many of the sound experiments (eg Pow R Toc H) are embarrassing rather than psychedlic, in my opinion. I think "Matilda Mother" is the best piece on the album, probably because it isn't dominated by Barrett's vocals. And in what way does embarrasment rule out psychedelia?   Some of the best psychedelic music from the late 60s is cringeworthy to come extent, that's part of the charm. What's your definition of succesful psychedelia Ugo? I'm very much interested in how different people define psychedelia. -------------- "There are twelve people in the world, the rest are paste" Mark E Smith Back to top

nightspore Group: Members Posts: 4770 Joined: Mar. 2008 Posted: Feb. 08 2011, 18:56 I understand Vicki gave Ugo a funny look one time when he put on In-A-Gadda-da-Vida. Since then he's been a bit iffy with psychedlia. Better not ask him to define it. Back to top

[ Track this topic :: Email this topic :: Print this topic ] Pages: (2) < [1] 2 >

Forums | Links | Instruments | Discography | Tours | Articles | FAQ | Artwork | Wallpapers
Biography | Gallery | Videos | MIDI / Ringtones | Tabs | Lyrics | Books | Sitemap | Contact


Mike Oldfield Tubular.net