White Stripes on MTV last night

Posted by: Dobbin on 16 May 2003

Saw their interview last night - talking about Elephant and how they had recorded it without lots of (any) electronic processing etc - no 'millions of tracks were recorded'

Bollocks IMHO!

They showed them playing live and although I liked what they were doing that wasn't Charlie Watts on drums was it? I'm no drummer but neither is she.

The album's great (some tracks I think are abs fab) however I can't believe that the album was produced (entirely) in the way it is purported to have been.

Have I missed something?
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by JohanR
Dobbin wrote:

"The album's great (some tracks I think are abs fab) however I can't believe that the album was produced (entirely) in the way it is purported to have been."

Through the years I have spent quite some time when my friends different garage/cover bands have been rehearsing (and even done some crap guitar playing myself). WS Elephant is one of very few Rock albums that manages to, at least, give a hint of how a real Rock band sounds. With real I mean without sound quality killing PA systems for every instrument, just live and direct.

I wasn't there when they recorded Elephant, but to me it sounds just the way they say it was. I. e. with a minimum of processing. Just such simple things like that they seem NOT to have filtered away the low frequencies on the guitar, or the bass drum (it SHOULD start with a 'thump' and then give a big, low frequency wallop, not a short 'pop' with pitch that is higher than the snare drum's).

Let's hope this starts a new trend in Rock music, with the aim of better, more natural recording quality!

JohanR (IMHO)
Posted on: 16 May 2003 by John K R
Dobbin what makes you think "Bollocks"
I agree with Johan, you can hear the amps humming the rawness of the guitar, what makes you think that it has had “electronic tampering”. Sure there are probably overlays and Megs voice on cool cool night is way better than when I saw them live, but nothing on the recording makes me feel it is “processed”. This also applies to there other albums, and they are all the better for it.
No Meg is not Charlie Watts (and Jack is not Mick Jagger) but they gel together and make something a bit special that is rarely seen in today’s music.
John.
Posted on: 18 May 2003 by ajalden
I recently just bought this album and agree the recording is good but can't help thinking that it's another over hyped band which in places sounds like Pixes, Frank Black and early Iggy along with the obvious Blues influences.


It's good but no that good!..