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 ]

dkaycom Group: Members Posts: 443 Joined: Jan. 2002 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 09:36 Quote (qjamesfloyd @ Mar. 02 2004, 15:05) What instuments did he use on TB2003 that he could'nt on the original? a bunch of...... as written  in http://tubular.net/discography/TubularBells2003.shtml Later, dkay -------------- Bootlegs should be shared not sold. (BlackCottonMafia) Find more tubular sounds at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Incantations/ Back to top

Korgscrew Group: Super Admins Posts: 3511 Joined: Dec. 1999 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 10:01 Quote (qjamesfloyd @ Mar. 02 2004, 14:05) What instuments did he use on TB2003 that he could'nt on the original? I see dkay's posted while I've been writing this, but here it is anyway! A high percentage of the synthesisers, specifically the Roland JV880 and 2080, the JD990 and XP50, Korg Trinity, Akai S6000 and Emagic EXS24. Those are all sample based instruments, and give sounds that not even the Fairlight CMI of 1979 could have created. The Boss DR Rhythm falls into this category too. The Nord Lead we can maybe just about excuse, being as it is an instrument modelled on the sounds of earlier analogue synthesisers, and I could say the same for the Emagic ES1 and EVP88. Not so lucky is the Native Instruments Pro 52 which, being a polyphonic analogue synthesiser emulation (based on 1979's Prophet V from Sequential Circuits) is rather beyond the capabilities of what was available to musicians in 1973. There are other things that mean it's not how it would have sounded had Mike had the time - the digital reverb and other effects (from TC Electronic M5000, Eventide DSP4000, Lexicon 300 and Yamaha SPX1000) are very modern sounding and unlike the plates, springs, echo chambers and tape effects of the 1970s, the guitar sounds from modern processors like the GP-8 (not to mention the VG-8 re-synthesiser) are very like anything that would have been achieved in 1973, while the Wal bass also has a very modern sound (the Wal Custom was first released in the early 1980s). So I don't think it could really be claimed that Tubular Bells could have sounded like the 2003 version if Mike had been given the time back in 1973. It could be claimed of course that if all this equipment had been available in 1973 that Mike would have used it. He probably would, but I think with his personality the way it was at the time, the feel of the album would certainly have been different even if the sound wasn't. The influence of Tom Newman and Simon Heyworth would also have had an impact. I think all that can really be said is that it's the way Mike wanted it to sound in 2003. Back to top

TOBY Group: Members Posts: 1562 Joined: May 2002 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 10:51 I've never once ever managed to get my head round this argument that some fans seem to be obsessed with which is along the lines of TB2003 is in some way excusable because this is what Mike always wanted it to sound like. Rubbish. It's what a very, very different 50 year old MO wants it to sound like now. OK he didn't whant the occasional bum notes or things going out of time, but as literaly millions of people know and have said, these are the things that make the album great and anyway its not as if the mistakes are glaringly obvious, especialy to the untrained ear. I was always opposed to the rerecording because what you are in effect doing is trying to rewrite history, not an artisticaly great move by anyone's standards. It's also intersting to note that if you read the excelent Making of TB book TB was a COLLABORATIVE effort between Mike, Tom Newman and Simon Heyworth, something which I think Mike has played down rather over the years. I haven't read the book for a while but if I remember rightly there were at least a few occations during the albums production where Mike had to be persuaded to keep things in such as the Viv Stanshall MCing (it may have been Mike's idea but he wasn't convinced it worked) and the 'Ghost Bells' bit which again Mike had to be persuaded to keep in. Basicaly what this proves is what Mike wants isn't always whats best for his music. Most other artists realise that forging a good working relationship with a producer who knows whats best for them (and not Trevor Horn) is quite often central to their succcess. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 10:52 Quote (Korgscrew @ Mar. 02 2004, 10:01) It could be claimed of course that if all this equipment had been available in 1973 that Mike would have used it. He probably would, but I think with his personality the way it was at the time, the feel of the album would certainly have been different even if the sound wasn't. The influence of Tom Newman and Simon Heyworth would also have had an impact. That's what I was talking about, really. It's not just the sound: it's the style, the arrangements, the mindset, the feelings. I have no problems with respecting Mike's effort. Mike is probably happy with it, and I can accept the album as a re-reading of the original music. But I find it extremely foolish to try and replace the '73 album: No Tubular Bells boxset is "complete" without the original. Sorry if this sounds narrowminded, but it makes sense to me. -------------- 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

wowser Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: Nov. 2003 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 12:14 Quote (TOBY @ Mar. 02 2004, 10:51) I've never once ever managed to get my head round this argument that some fans seem to be obsessed with which is along the lines of TB2003 is in some way excusable because this is what Mike always wanted it to sound like. Rubbish. It's what a very, very different 50 year old MO wants it to sound like now. OK he didn't whant the occasional bum notes or things going out of time, but as literaly millions of people know and have said, these are the things that make the album great and anyway its not as if the mistakes are glaringly obvious, especialy to the untrained ear. I was always opposed to the rerecording because what you are in effect doing is trying to rewrite history, not an artisticaly great move by anyone's standards. It's also intersting to note that if you read the excelent Making of TB book TB was a COLLABORATIVE effort between Mike, Tom Newman and Simon Heyworth, something which I think Mike has played down rather over the years. I haven't read the book for a while but if I remember rightly there were at least a few occations during the albums production where Mike had to be persuaded to keep things in such as the Viv Stanshall MCing (it may have been Mike's idea but he wasn't convinced it worked) and the 'Ghost Bells' bit which again Mike had to be persuaded to keep in. Basicaly what this proves is what Mike wants isn't always whats best for his music. Most other artists realise that forging a good working relationship with a producer who knows whats best for them (and not Trevor Horn) is quite often central to their succcess. very well put -------------- Pointless act! You don't give a five hundred dollar tip to the housekeeper! That's inappropriate! That's inexcusable! Back to top

Holger Group: Members Posts: 1506 Joined: Feb. 2003 Posted: Mar. 02 2004, 19:05 Quote (TOBY @ Mar. 02 2004, 10:51) I was always opposed to the rerecording because what you are in effect doing is trying to rewrite history, not an artisticaly great move by anyone's standards. Good point, almost like what they do in Orwell's 1984, eh? I guess Mike would take the original off the market if it was in his powers. Fortunately it isn't. Back to top

Sir Mustapha Group: Musicians Posts: 2802 Joined: April 2003 Posted: Mar. 03 2004, 06:24 Heh, it seems me and Toby posted almost at the same time. Yes, he said everything I wanted to say. -------------- 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

MusicallyInspired Group: Musicians Posts: 1445 Joined: June 2001 Posted: Mar. 03 2004, 07:24 Quote I've never once ever managed to get my head round this argument that some fans seem to be obsessed with which is along the lines of TB2003 is in some way excusable because this is what Mike always wanted it to sound like. Rubbish. It's what a very, very different 50 year old MO wants it to sound like now. OK he didn't whant the occasional bum notes or things going out of time, but as literaly millions of people know and have said, these are the things that make the album great and anyway its not as if the mistakes are glaringly obvious, especialy to the untrained ear. I agree with that, but I still prefer TB2003 more than the original. And not because he wasn't happy with the first. I've never been totaly satisfied listening to the original. And for that matter I'm not totaly satisfied listening to TB2003 either. (Maybe that's because of the music itself? Maybe not. If it had a more epic feel like TSODE did...not the same production, but if TB2003 had the same epic flare that TSODE did, I'd like it better. And that goes for Tr3s Lunas as well) But I like TB2003 more then the original. -------------- BrandonBlume.com "The beauty in life is in the embracing of the variety of things. If all the world was blue there would be no colour blue." Back to top

wowser Group: Members Posts: 37 Joined: Nov. 2003 Posted: Mar. 03 2004, 17:04 Quote (MusicallyInspired @ Mar. 03 2004, 07:24) Quote I've never once ever managed to get my head round this argument that some fans seem to be obsessed with which is along the lines of TB2003 is in some way excusable because this is what Mike always wanted it to sound like. Rubbish. It's what a very, very different 50 year old MO wants it to sound like now. OK he didn't whant the occasional bum notes or things going out of time, but as literaly millions of people know and have said, these are the things that make the album great and anyway its not as if the mistakes are glaringly obvious, especialy to the untrained ear. I agree with that, but I still prefer TB2003 more than the original. And not because he wasn't happy with the first. I've never been totaly satisfied listening to the original. And for that matter I'm not totaly satisfied listening to TB2003 either. (Maybe that's because of the music itself? Maybe not. If it had a more epic feel like TSODE did...not the same production, but if TB2003 had the same epic flare that TSODE did, I'd like it better. And that goes for Tr3s Lunas as well) But I like TB2003 more then the original. i liked that aspect of tres kunas - simpler songs, like to be free -------------- Pointless act! You don't give a five hundred dollar tip to the housekeeper! That's inappropriate! That's inexcusable! Back to top

MusicallyInspired Group: Musicians Posts: 1445 Joined: June 2001 Posted: Mar. 03 2004, 19:26 Quote i liked that aspect of tres kunas - simpler songs, like to be free Yeah, you have a point. It would be completely different if it was produced differently. I think Tr3s Lunas (for it's goal) is perfect as it is. -------------- BrandonBlume.com "The beauty in life is in the embracing of the variety of things. If all the world was blue there would be no colour blue." Back to top

The Big BellEnd Group: Members Posts: 971 Joined: Jan. 2004 Posted: Mar. 11 2004, 16:45 FIDDLESTICKS -------------- I, ON THE OTHER HAND. AM A VICTIM OF YOUR CARNIVOUROUS LUNAR ACTIVITY. 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