Arcade Fire - Funeral
Posted by: droodzilla on 26 November 2007
I like this album very much, but I've never been altogether happy with the way it sounds on my system (5x/122x/150x/Spendor S6e). It just sounds too "murky", for want of a better word, to be enjoyable, and eventually the effort of trying to like it gives me a headache.
Does anyone else have this problem with the album? Is it the way it's produced, or could it be a system issue?
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by RichardM
It doesn't sound that good on my CDS3 555PS 552 either.
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by droodzilla
Thanks Richard, that's reassuring... I guess!
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by Noopz
It's a brilliant album however not fantastically produced.
Neighbourhood 1 & 2 sound the best IMO. Power out is my favourite but just sounds a complete mess on my hifi.... the PC speakers do the track much more justice.
Neon Bible has much much better production though.... sounds pretty nice on my setup.
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by mike/dallas
Definitely recorded in lo-fi, murky mix, with odd effects throughout the CD but brilliant never the less.
Neon Bible is cleaner/more hi-fi. More money for production no doubt. Rocks like crazy.
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by Sloop John B
Just went away to listen to it and when I come back there's loads of replies.
Anyway, don't worry about your system Drood.
just some water getting hotter in the flame - I love that line.
SJB
Posted on: 26 November 2007 by droodzilla
Yes, a ferociously good album, but - as the concensus appears to be - shame about the production.
Funny thing is it sounded brilliant on tinny Headphones in the shop formerly known as Virgin.
Posted on: 01 December 2007 by ClaudeP
This will make me sound very, very old but my 19-year-old son is a big fan. He says he'll introduce me to the band during the Holidays.
BTW Arcade Fire are a Montreal band. That may not add much to the thread, granted, but it's always nice to see local boys do so well.
Claude
Posted on: 01 December 2007 by scottyhammer
sorry but i totally disagree, the albums just plain awful as are the band !
Posted on: 01 December 2007 by droodzilla
quote:
sorry but i totally disagree, the albums just plain awful as are the band !
sorry but i totally disagree, the albums just plain great as are the band!
Posted on: 02 December 2007 by Mike Hughes
I'll take the disagreement further shall I?
The album is very good indeed albeit somewhat derivative in places of Talking Heads and others. That particular trait had gone completely by the time of Neon Bible.
However, the production is what it is and it is what it was intended to me. I find breathtaking arrogance on this forum sometimes in as much as you would think that
a) we are all producers
b) all modern production is crap.
c) there is an overwhelming trend toward disliking a production if it doesn't sound good on your system.
What does that latter point mean? Not all productions nowadays are overcompressed (that's mostly the mastering process) and most producers know exactlty how to get the best out of what they're working with. Not all producers or bands want hi-fi quality instrumental separation. Indeed, there's a bloody good argument to be had that says such things have been the death of great music. Hardly a mjor concern of Phil Spector and George Martin was it, even when they did have the facilities finally at their fingertips.
Perhaps Funeral is what it is. A damn good debit album by a band without money at the time and with a distinctive production. There was a time when we valued those things. The same people who whine here about a decline in standards etc. are the same people who are so cloth eared they can't hear the above. They just obsess on how someone else must have got it wrong because it doesn't sound great on their system. Wrong approach methinks.
Ahem...!!!
Mike
Posted on: 02 December 2007 by droodzilla
Mike, I agree that the production is what it is - and, most likely, is what it was meant to be, given the resources available to the band at the time. All I'm saying is that, for me, it gets in the way of fully appreciating th music. Dunno if that makes me arrogant. I'd think the worst thing anyone could accuse me of is favouring "hi-fi" over "music" - a heinous crime, admittedly.
Posted on: 06 December 2007 by Sloop John B
quote:
Originally posted by Mike Hughes:
I'll take the disagreement further shall I?
The album is very good indeed albeit somewhat derivative in places of Talking Heads and others. That particular trait had gone completely by the time of Neon Bible.
However, the production is what it is and it is what it was intended to me. I find breathtaking arrogance on this forum sometimes in as much as you would think that
a) we are all producers
b) all modern production is crap.
c) there is an overwhelming trend toward disliking a production if it doesn't sound good on your system.
What does that latter point mean? Not all productions nowadays are overcompressed (that's mostly the mastering process) and most producers know exactlty how to get the best out of what they're working with. Not all producers or bands want hi-fi quality instrumental separation. Indeed, there's a bloody good argument to be had that says such things have been the death of great music. Hardly a mjor concern of Phil Spector and George Martin was it, even when they did have the facilities finally at their fingertips.
Perhaps Funeral is what it is. A damn good debit album by a band without money at the time and with a distinctive production. There was a time when we valued those things. The same people who whine here about a decline in standards etc. are the same people who are so cloth eared they can't hear the above. They just obsess on how someone else must have got it wrong because it doesn't sound great on their system. Wrong approach methinks.
Ahem...!!!
Mike
Mike, it may well be that Funeral is intended to sound like it does and it is not due to any limitations.
However in the same way that I like music, I also like good recordings.
In the same way that I have personal taste about music that not everyone would agree with, I have similar tastes about production (that not everyone may agree with!). There are some producers that once I see their name I can reasonably expect to like the sound therein (if not the music).
While I wouldn't say that all "modern production is crap" I often listen to recordings from Jazz in the late 50's early 60's and punk and new wave from 76-81 and wonder have we lost some magic ingredient. A bug bear for me would be drums. I think that a lot of producers simply don't know how to record them anymore. Studio's are more like hospital operating rooms and the music that comes from some of them is just as sterile.
I like Funeral, I'm not enamored with it's production.
However I have to say it sounds much better since I changed my speakers so I can see where you are coming with your "breathtaking arrogance" remark but not all of us who put mass on recording quality can be lumped in that category.
RANT over
SJB