Here Today... Gone To Hell!

has anyone noticed, if you listen with head phones on the amount of little things ore you hear that are really cool. but in speakers they arnt really easy to hear.

Is this production problems or bad sound set up?

Production problems. I've recently come across a remastered version of Appetite (fan made)... and you can hear all those things even through the speakers.

I think with headphones you can pick things out better because all of your attention and hearing is focused on the music. If your listening to it on your stereo you probably have other things going on and all of your attention isn't on the music.

As great as Appetite sounds...I would give anything to hear a remixed and remastered version today. Even the 'Sweet Child' snipit from Big Daddy sounds amazing. Would also love to hear the once rumored 'new' version of the album recorded with the new members.

?

That sounded like shit and wasn't from Appetite. It was Axl singing in the late 1990s over live and/or studio versions of the song done by the original band. Then the pitch was increased to hide the fact that Axl sounded like garbage.

are you kidding? Appetite sounds amazing even to this day. Let's not forget that this is a 20 year old record and it still stands up to anything released since! Things have come a long way in 20 years but a great record is still all about vibe, feel, emotion....20 years of pro tools doesn't add that to any recording. For my money Abbey Road is one of the best sounding albums ever made and it's almost 30 years old.

It's raw and still as electrifying as when I first heard it in 1987.

The first half was live (Paris '92 I think?) but the second half was all new. Finck plays the solo.

Abbey Road is almost 40 years old is what you meant to say I think.  ;) ;D

EFISH, I'm interested in hearing the fan remastered AFD. Could you hook me up? Thanks.  :beer:

it rules just the way it is... i don't think it should be messed with... any imperfections give it a edge.    UI 1 and 2 could be stripped down to AFD productions quality though

Headphones and Speakers are two different listening experiences.  : ok:

 I know what you mean. I particulary like listening to PC with headphones. You hear so much more of that song.

Not really Appetite but the "Better" demo intro sounds completely different with headphones..

Exactly. That's why I think the new "Better" leak is mostly just a remix with the left channel cranked where you can hear all the crappy sound effects in the background even without headphones.

 : ok: Exactely...that's why I said 'snipit'...as in the last part of the song. I like it very much. I wouldn't trade it for the original, but I like to give it a listen every now and then.

What I listen when i put head phones is the Izzy's marvellous work with the rithym guitars.

Appetite is TIMELESS! it just is! I was jaming it yesterday and it brought me right back to the first time I heard it in 87 that is the magic of that album it never dies at all! I listen to it frequently and it alwasy sounds rocking. I would like to see one thing though. When Chinese Democracy comes out hopefully the media won't always compare it to Appetite, it seems they won't let GNR move on past that, fans also. Enjoy what we get there will never be another Appetite but Illusions were just as good if not ''Better'' in spots agree?

Like Janabis said.. The first part was paris '92... No rerecording there...
The last part was new members w/ Axl at that present time singing

Ok.  I'm sure this has been brought up already.  I will be amazed if it hasn't.  In fact, I didn't want to start a new topic on it.  So, since we're talking about AFD, I started to wonder something and I looked it up on Wikipedia.  Release date: 8/21/87.  That got me thinking...could CD be released around the time of the anniversary of AFD?  So...I looked at a calender for this year.



August 21, 2007...Tuesday.


Please tell me I'm not crazy.

You're not crazy... It was released 7/21/1987.. My b-day  : ok:

Really?  Because wikipedia says August.  And there's never anything wrong on wikipedia.


Can anyone for sure tell us what the actual date for sure was for the release of AFD?

I can tell you for sure... July 21st 1987... Look at your calendar... 8/21/87 was a friday...

Oh and you're kidding about the wikipedia remark surley  ???

I think the "production" of a record ?is just as important, if not more important ?than the music itself. Appetite has a "sound" that is timeless, much like many great albums, regardless of time period. ?The Illusions are arguably "over produced", which almost makes the Illusion material sound more "dated", ?even though much of the body of work on the Illusions is right up there with Appetite. ?Such is the paradox, Appetite and Lies were so "simple", Illusions were "complex". ?If one takes the "complex" route, it best be up there with the White Album or risk it being cliche 10 years down the road.

Well.  I don't keep a 1987 calender on my wall, but I'll take your word for it.

So...for CD to be out by the 20th Anniversary it would have to be 7/17/07 then, huh?  Hmm.

I meant on your computer smart ass? :hihi:

Go somewhere better for GNR info.. Like here:

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/history/history87.php

July 21st, 1987 - "Appetite For Destruction" is released in the US by Geffen Records. The record was produced by Mike Clink who had been working with Ozzy Osbourne and Heart. The cover art featured a painting by Robert Williams which got censored.

Yes you can change your sig now? :P

You know, I did a bunch of google searches trying to find the right date when I could have just looked here on HTGTH the whole time.  I'm kind of a moron sometimes. 


Thanks.  Sig changed.

Dont worry, it took me a minute to sit and think of a good place to find solid evidence  ;D

WONDERFUL, FANTASTIC GUITAR PLAYING.  :D :D :D
IZZY AND SLASH'S GUITARS TOGETHER ARE PURE GREAT ROCK N' ROLL.  :D :D
NO RECORD SINCE APPETITE HAS TOPPED THAT.  :'(
YEAH, I AM SCREAMING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  :beer:
 :D :D :D :D :D :D

i love the raw and honest sound of appetite. recorded in a time were protools didn't exist. i'm a little bit worried that CD might get overproduced with all the multimedia that's around these days.

The mixing and production quality on AFD is below par. Even back then, most records sounded heaps better, production wise. It speaks volumes for the quality of the music that the disc is regarded as a classic these days, despite the terrible mix. It doesn't really sound dated, as such, it sounds cheap. As in, recorded in a cheap recording studio, mixed and mastered by cheap engineers.

I would love to hear the fan remastered version of the disc mentioned earlier. I don't know if it's against the rules to ask for that, since I have Appetite and bought it legally (obviously) several times?

Wasn't the original master rejected because it sounded too polished? The low-fi sound of the album was quite deliberate, I'm sure.

Production quality on AFD was as good as it could at the time. Wasn't AFD out just before the invention of the compact disc. With the arrival of the compact disc, a new digital recording process became available. Sadly AFD missed out on this. Sound quality issue's a side, AFD is still the best thing to emerage from the Gn'R camp.

Who knows, maybe one day the old AFD master tapes will be re mastered, or better still have a few tweaks made here and there, as I know Slash wanted to make some of the songs heavier. They should leave Axl's vocals as they are though. If Axl were to re do the vocals for AFD, then he should only do them with the new line up, and make it an AFD 2010 or something.

You're quite mistaken. The compact disc and digital recording pre-dated AFD by five years*. Listen to any mainstream album from the same period and you'll notice an incredible difference in sound quality.




*In fact, the "red book" cd standard pre-dates AFD by about seven years. Commercial availability of the format came about two years later, in 1982.

can someone upload this one please?? ?::)
Thank you

It probably did pre date AFD, but the fact remains, AFD did not make use of (for what ever reason) up-to-date recording technology at the time, and the quality of compact disc shows up the average sound recording of AFD  :peace:

The quality of compact disc shows up the average sounding mix of AFD. It would be a stretch to say that it shows anything about the quality of the actual recording, which was likely done on industry standard DAT. Let's not pretend that it wasn't recorded in a pro studio by recording professionals.

 You could probably find out exactly which format was being used at the studio at the time of the recording, I'd think that a combination of digital and analog tapes were used. It's hard to say exactly what "industry standard" would have been at the time, with open-reel digital being firmly established and analog still widely used. Regardless, the point is that AFD would have been recorded on the same equipment used on other professional recordings of the time, so it's not as if the sound quality was hampered by sub-standard hardware.

Most cds carry the old "limitations of the source tape" warning, though many would argue that 44.1 kHz @ 16bit is hardly the high bar of sound quality and that cds fail to capture the quality of the source in many cases.

You are kidding, right? What record sounded better back then "production wise"? Maiden's Somewhere in Time? Some Poison record? Bon Jovi?

What? You gotta be kidding! What next? Now you are gonna say that UYI has a better production, right?

On the cover of AFD it clearly states that AFD was recorded using analog equipment. Analog equipment was probably the industry standard at the time.

Well, slippery when wet probably is a good example of a better mix (not better record, of course...)

Not really, UYI is overproduced. What I'm saying is that you can record a raw rock album without the imbalanced, unprocessed sound of AFD. The overheads and cymbals are way too high in the mix and the bass sounds flat and hollow. I'm saying you could've produced a way better sounding album with the seperate tracks as they existed back then, without resorting to pro-tools alike trickery, or endless layers of effects and synths. Just a better mix and EQ would've helped a lot.

I don't believe someone can think that. Slippery when wet has a pop production. AFD is rock at its finest.

I don't believe someone can think that.

Analog equipment is still used today, many prefer the sound of the old magnetic tape. AFD was recorded and mixed in three different buildings, so at least three different rooms, analog equipment was probably used at some point; and that's the point of those classifications on cd labels, to describe the "lowest" level of equipment used in recording, mixing and mastering, so you know what sound quality to expect.

As I already said, industry standard is hard to define. The tech standard was undoubtedly open-reel dat, what was used on any individual recording would depend on preference. Regardless, you can find albums much older than AFD which sound much "nicer," so I'm not sure exactly what your point is. AFD's sound is clearly deliberate, it's meant to be low-fi - it's hard to market a band as "dangerous" or "sleazy" if their album is polished like pop.

Mike Clink is god

Axl: We did test tracks with different people and they came out smooth and polished. We did some stuff with Spencer Proffer and Geffen records said it was too fuckin? radio. That?s why we went with Mike Clink, we went for a raw sound because it just didn?t gel having it too tight and concise.
Axl: And so... when you get this record, maybe it's not produced as well as something else you might hear, that is done by the best people in the world. But that's because this is more real, this is us! This isn't somebody else doing it.

"What people don't understand is that there was a perfectionist attitude to 'Appetite For Destruction'. There was a definite plan to that," Rose explained. "We could have made it all smooth and polished with [original producer] Spencer Proffer, but it was too fuckin' 'radio'. That's why we went with [eventual producer] Mike Clink. It just didn't gel having it too tight and concise. We knew this, cos Guns N' Roses on stage, man, can be out to lunch; you don't know what to expect. But how do you get that on record?"

great quotes by Axl. Good Old Axl!
It is a shame that he sees things in a VERY different way now.

Well, deliberate or not, the production quality is sub par on AFD. Axl admits this in the quotes above. Some might like it, but I don't, it makes it sound even more dated than it actually is.

But hey, that's my take, I'm one of those people who actually prefers Megadeth's new "A Tout Le Monde" to the original, because of it's production. And yet I still think the UYI's are overproduced :), now isn't that saying something? ;)

raw sound does not mean sub par production
axl is not saying that
he is saying the production is real and genuine which is true, because GNR could play appetite live in a fantastic way

I was referring to that quote when I paraphrased in my previous post. It's all just wordplay anyway; it's a phenomenal album regardless of the "bad" or "raw" production; it's just that I would've preferred a more balanced sound (I think).

yeah.. he saud also that it wasnt easy..
they recorded things a lot of times.. they played the songs and beat them a lot

^agreed^ I've heard some Appetite demos and Nightrain and WTTJ had a LOT of demos..and not all that good :smoking:

i totally forgot id made this thread.

but yeah, appetite on headphones owns speaker appetite  :hihi: