Korgscrew
Group: Super Admins
Posts: 3511
Joined: Dec. 1999 |
 |
Posted: April 04 2004, 14:48 |
 |
Well...
All in all, I'm not sure quite what I think of Tubular Bells 2003. Its smoothness in performance seems to at times be an asset and at others, a drawback. I enjoyed listening to it, and still do (though my current favourite is the 4 channel Boxed mix, which to me feels less rough and of course more spacious than the original stereo mix, while still having the same feel), but it's not without flaws.
I don't totally object to the bass in Introduction, I think it fits reasonably well with the feel of the rest of the track, which is generally more 'processed' and forceful than the original. The forceful aspect is what I'm least sure about - whereas the original was very quiet and crept slowly up on you, Tubular Bells 2003 is loud, and jumps right out of the speakers. While the original built up in volume, the re-recording is almost at full from the outset. WHILE LOUDNESS MIGHT ATTRACT ATTENTION AT FIRST IT QUICKLY BECOMES BORING IF THE MUSIC STAYS AT THAT LEVEL THE WHOLE TIME AND CAN BEGIN TO FEEL TIRING A BIT LIKE READING A SENTENCE WHICH IS WRITTEN ALL IN CAPITALS WITHOUT PUNCTUATION. If you see what I mean...
I still like Introduction, with the smooth feel quite befitting of the '2003' tag, but it would be nice to see some more dynamic range in it.
Fast Guitars...I'm not sure I'd call it generic in the playing, but I don't go for the sound much myself. The rhythm guitars sound suspiciously like they've been played through the 'metal stack' preset of an amp simulator - the slightly mushy lack of presence and body is the exact reason I don't use those things...the lead guitar fares a little better, but I could do without the Peavey-style spring reverb which it seems to acquire.
That's not to say that the original had a 'nice' guitar sound...it was fuzzy and harsh, but somehow it worked. Also note that the section didn't have the rhythm guitars on the original, just an edgy bass sound - something which has been replaced on Tubular Bells 2003 by something which sounds suspiciously like another synthesiser...now, I know Mike has a nice 5 string Wal bass, and seeing as he was aiming for a heavy feel here, my favourite treatment of this section is to play the C#-D-E-D# section down on the 5th string instead of going up on the 3rd for it - heavy indeed  But that's me and not Mike...
Somehow Basses is missing something...hmm...could it be the basses? I'm talking string basses here - I loved that growly bowing sound in the way it filled out the midrange. As it is, the track somehow sounds like a synth bass that's overloading...which could well be what it is...
I'd agree that Latin does seem to stand out as a separate section and it's definitely very smooth sounding, as opposed to the rather angular feel of the original...but hang on...what's this? There are some out of tune notes in the solo which were in tune on the original (which I reckoned to be about 8 bars into the acoustic solo at the end when I gave a reference on another forum)...wasn't the idea to get rid of out of tune bits and not put them in? It sounds like the guitar's intonation is out up the top end there - that can be compensated for by bending up a little on those notes, or there's the Trevor Horn method of pitch shifting them to the right value.
To skip a few...Russian, nicely played, but quite a synthetic sound on the guitar. Fits with the rest of the album though, so Mike's choice, but it's not the more naturalistic sound I'd have aimed for were it my decision. Differing opinions again...
With Finale we come back to the old issue of build up...Viv Stanshall was very clever in this section and subtly varied the way he introduced the instruments as he progressed, starting with the very low key 'Grand Piano' building to the tense 'Spanish Guitar and introducing Acoustic Guitar'. I can't believe that John Cleese is incapable of doing the same, but it seems like he wasn't asked to here...instead we get...well...John Cleese. Wind him up and let him go, it's always the same thing really...but perhaps yet another reprise of Basil Fawlty is just what yet another reprise of Tubular Bells was calling for. As he announces 'Tubular Bells' he almost squeezes it out - insert schoolboy comments here.
I think the girlie chorus misses Mundy Ellis - the sound of two voices blended together is quite different to one that's been doubled up...Sally on her own, especially with the multiple performances conforming so precisely to each other, gives very much a 'one voice harmonised' rather than a 'chorus' effect...it's a minor point, but I prefer the less precise and more blended effect which the original has at that point. As for the drums, the less said the better, I think! I don't mind the tambourine so much as the drum machine snare that's in there. The secret to that part of Finale is in the things which are lacking, though - the increase in volume when the bells arrive, and the big sound of the blended voices. The piece really opens out at that point, and has such a towering feel that it doesn't need any percussion...but of course, if the bells are barely any louder than the piano at the beginning of the album, it's not going to seem so exciting at that point without something drastic...like percussion.
The organ is a real one, by the way...just a slightly suspicious choice of sound.
Now, Part Two...the Peace section was always a favourite of mine too, with Mike's breathing, the wobbly timing and feeble, crackly organ sound lending a vulnerable quality to it which was quite lovely. Knowing that he'd remove those attributes in the rerecording, I was worried that I'd find the new version to be a minor abomination, but I quite like the new version, in the context of the album. The organ sound is a Farfisa again, just with a slow attack - he uses a similar sound in the 1971 demo at one point.
Caveman though...the precision of the track doesn't really work for me. The drums...if they were programmed from scratch then they're quite well programmed, if the data was derived from a recorded performance then I guess it worked, if they're really live drums then they don't sound much like it. However they were done, they seem to stand out a bit. There are a few tricks which can be done to help synthetic drum sounds sit a bit more comfortably in a mix, but it doesn't seem like any of them were used...
The cavepeople did make me laugh, I have to say, but I still have to say I prefer the original Piltdown Man - the roughness and aggression was part of the feel of the section.
Ambient Guitars I don't mind. Tom Newman once mentioned Mike's Telecaster having farty pickups, and they do fart in some places on the original, which Mike thankfully doesn't repeat via synthetic means for the rerecorded version! Not that it ever really mattered, it was a nice section anyway...the new version is smoother and more considered than the original and I think perhaps in a contest, the original would win in the feel stakes, but I don't object to either. The transition into The Sailor's Hornpipe is smoother too, the original had Mike continuing to play a note sequence which didn't fit over the ending chords, which I never liked much.
But yes...the Pornhipe (remember that word anyone?  )...
The best way to get a good sound out of a mandolin over fast passages is to approach it gently, and not to bash the living daylights out of it with the picking hand...sadly, it seems Mike hasn't yet discovered that. Gear freaks will note that Mike plays an F style mandolin by Mike Vanden, the same model favoured by British mandolinist extraordinaire Simon Mayor. He shows that Mike Vanden's mandolins can have a beautiful delicate sound (take a listen to 'The Wasp Reel' from his album 'New Celtic Mandolin' - jaw dropping stuff) and indeed, Mike coaxes some nice sounds out of his elsewhere on the album, but sadly, not here. Still, he gets the speed, though only after some cheating (Mike admitted that at a press conference...who knows what he did, it sounds almost like he sampled the mandolin and played the notes back off a sequencer...).
Ok, now I've said all that, can I say again that I really quite enjoyed Tubular Bells 2003...just...well...all of that up there!
Could I have done it better? No, of course not...Would I have done it differently? Yes...but then, the point of it was Mike doing it to satisfy himself, and he's satisfied with this. 'Nuff said.
|
We are different people!