Going back to the whole studio vs live thing, most bands I like and listen to would rather not polish their sound. A lot of bands actually go for a lo-fi sound, because it's "cool". They basically use the lo-fi production to blanket the quality of songs. Some bands however decide to have an unpolished album, yet the quality of song writing is still good. Some artists may choose to have their music more polished, and if it sounds good on the record but they can't quite produce that sound live then so be it. One of my favourite bands, The Smiths for example. Johnny Marr could never quite recreate that guitar sound on How Soon Is Now? from the album version. He didn't know how he got that sound. Does that mean he lacked talent because he couldn't quite recreate that sound live? No. Same applies to many bands.
I didn't mean to come across as an arse, but it annoys me because it's so easy to look at Justin Bieber, JLS and Lady Gaga and totally write off music from the 00s. I don't think it comes down to personal preference, if I'm honest I don't know if I could pick a favourite decade. I think there's so much music out there, and only concentrating on a certain period (whether it's the 60s or 70s) limits yourself dramatically.
Floyd bores me to tears. I thought you'd be into The Who, The Doors, The Stones etc.
Usually Floyd follows that list.
__________________
I don't feel and I feel great.
Last FM
|