2. music
  3. 146415-18279

Ever tossed a record aside as poorly engineered and produced only to think otherwise later

I did this with John Lee Hooker's "Mr. Lucky".  I bought this in high school and thought it was great.  As I progressed through the hobby I thought it was light, limp wristed and too soft.  I think some of this downward evolution was due to the loudness wars. Everything became more bombastic. 

Here I am 25 years later and hearing great dynamics in this Johnny Lee recording.  After I lap up this goodness of audio delight, I think to myself, "what other recordings have I dismissed before that I loved the music on but couldn't stand the production?" 

Have you done this?  I'm thinking if you offer up your experiences I can check in with them too to make sure I don't discard recordings I shouldn't. 
128x128jbhiller
jbhiller's avatar
jbhiller OP
464 posts
 
@lowrider57 , 

I meant weak or ineffectual by design or in effort.  I've never known that term to mean anything other, but the Urban dictionary says it can mean something like that to some. Whoops.  

Please allow this to be amended on its face to state "feeble". 
jbhiller's avatar
jbhiller OP
464 posts
 
I think the Hooker album didn't sound so great to me years later and it's because the loudness wars skewed my view a bit.  The recording actually has great dynamics and it allows the listener to crank it up to get a ton of range.  

All of this aside, it's John Lee Hooker!  I'd vote him for president.
jtcf's avatar
jtcf
303 posts
 
John Lee Hooker is wonderful!But his singing and playing have subtleties that don't come across well on the lofi equipment many of us had back in the day.It's pretty cool to rediscover music that you felt 'meh' about when you can hear all of the layers and dynamics.
maplegrovemusic's avatar
maplegrovemusic
981 posts
 
Who you calling "Feeble" ? Now the feeble are going to be offended !
stevecham
3,298 posts
 
Man, you gives 'em an inch, they takes a mile.
More to discover