Gearslutz.com - View Single Post - Quality of heavy/dirt guitars

hourglass · 4th June 2004

I notice this all the time...

You take a big selling band and record them on a big-ass budget and their guitars sound huge, distorted & sort of "round" in a high-class kinda way...

You take the same band (or maybe just the same guitar player) and record on a much smaller budget and the guitars are just as loud, just as huge and distorted, but also rougher and harsher - kinda jagged around the edges.

Some examples of what I'm talkin'...

Zakk Wylde - No More Tears vs. any BLS record.

Motley Crue - Dr. Feelgood vs. New Tattoo.

No More Tears is shiny and clean sounding - yet distorted as shit.

Dr. Feelgood (or just about any other Motley record...) is the same way - Hell, even the C-Tuned guitars on the self-titled record from '94 are gorgeously high-class.

Then you move along to New Tattoo, recorded just a few years ago and while the SOUND is Motley Crue, and you know it's Mick Mars playing the guitar, it doesn't have that high-gloss to it like the old stuff. It's kinda got more of a buzzy, demo sound to it like a lot of the indie death & thrash metal stuff that gets spun thru my CD machine.

My question is - what's the major difference here?

I mean, I imagine it has something to do with the budget for the project, but in what way?

Is it a matter of spending ten days getting a guitar sound?

Is a matter of playing thru the producer's audiophile poweramps? (yeah - i scanned a lot of posts lookin' for answers to this...)

Is it a matter of spending ten days on the mix tweaking just the guitar sounds?

Being that the "demo" and "Indie" sounds are more in line with the jagged, rough sound, is it showing the difference of just one 57 on the grille vs. a couple of 57's or 2 (or more) different mics?

Perhaps multiple amps/cabs all eq'd differently, miced and then mixed together... I dunno...

Thanks for any info or insight into this...

ryan

4th June 2004	#1
hourglass Gear addict Joined: Jan 2004 Location: Bawl'mer Posts: 355 Thread Starter	Quality of heavy/dirt guitars - mwagener or anyone else? I notice this all the time... You take a big selling band and record them on a big-ass budget and their guitars sound huge, distorted & sort of "round" in a high-class kinda way... You take the same band (or maybe just the same guitar player) and record on a much smaller budget and the guitars are just as loud, just as huge and distorted, but also rougher and harsher - kinda jagged around the edges. Some examples of what I'm talkin'... Zakk Wylde - No More Tears vs. any BLS record. Motley Crue - Dr. Feelgood vs. New Tattoo. No More Tears is shiny and clean sounding - yet distorted as shit. Dr. Feelgood (or just about any other Motley record...) is the same way - Hell, even the C-Tuned guitars on the self-titled record from '94 are gorgeously high-class. Then you move along to New Tattoo, recorded just a few years ago and while the SOUND is Motley Crue, and you know it's Mick Mars playing the guitar, it doesn't have that high-gloss to it like the old stuff. It's kinda got more of a buzzy, demo sound to it like a lot of the indie death & thrash metal stuff that gets spun thru my CD machine. My question is - what's the major difference here? I mean, I imagine it has something to do with the budget for the project, but in what way? Is it a matter of spending ten days getting a guitar sound? Is a matter of playing thru the producer's audiophile poweramps? (yeah - i scanned a lot of posts lookin' for answers to this...) Is it a matter of spending ten days on the mix tweaking just the guitar sounds? Being that the "demo" and "Indie" sounds are more in line with the jagged, rough sound, is it showing the difference of just one 57 on the grille vs. a couple of 57's or 2 (or more) different mics? Perhaps multiple amps/cabs all eq'd differently, miced and then mixed together... I dunno... Thanks for any info or insight into this... ryan