Billboard Singles Review: Better

[adman2374]

They could've shot the Godfather with one single hand held camera.

It would be the same story and everything, but not the same movie.


Same goes with music.

A lot of great songs are like that. You could strip them down and they'd still be great, just not the same.

So why should people complain about them being "overproduced" in the first place?



/jarmo

It's just one person's opinion on how the album is produced, that's it. We don't have to agree with him/her, but its just how he hears the record. So he can complain and you don't have to. Really that simple...

[Naltav]

They could've shot the Godfather with one single hand held camera.

It would be the same story and everything, but not the same movie.


Same goes with music.

A lot of great songs are like that. You could strip them down and they'd still be great, just not the same.

So why should people complain about them being "overproduced" in the first place?



/jarmo

Why, should people complain?

Some people simply just like music like that, stripped to the bone....  I guess.

Not sure I agree/understand the Godfather-reference...   

Like the extreme metal/black metal-fans. Some people dig Dimmu Borgir, with their huge production, lots of synths, multi-layered guitars and vocals, live symphony in the studio and shit like that. Then you have the Darkthrone-fans, who loves the fact that they record some of their albums in 36 HOURS(!). Raw feelings stripped to the bone!
Some Darkthrone-fans might think that Dimmu has some great tunes, but they can't help thinking: "jeez, this would be fuckin' awesome if it weren't so overproduced."

And then you have people who love both (like yours truly)... 

Some critics might think ChiDem is a great record! But at the end of the day, they would rather listen to White Stripes or Wolfmother...  

Same thing with movies. Some like The Wrestler and some don't... 

[jarmo]

Some people simply just like music like that, stripped to the bone....  I guess.

Sure!

But if you like that kind of things, should you even review things that are the opposite?

Not sure I agree/understand the Godfather-reference...   

It was just an example of how you can take something great and re-work it. It wouldn't be the same movie, but it might seem similar (same great actors, same great story etc)....


So if you took Better and stripped it all. It would be the same musicians, same great lyrics, same great melody etc, but it wouldn't just be the same....

Kinda hard to explain.



/jarmo

[adman2374]

Some people simply just like music like that, stripped to the bone....  I guess.

Sure!

But if you like that kind of things, should you even review things that are the opposite?

Not sure I agree/understand the Godfather-reference...   

It was just an example of how you can take something great and re-work it. It wouldn't be the same movie, but it might seem similar (same great actors, same great story etc)....


So if you took Better and stripped it all. It would be the same musicians, same great lyrics, same great melody etc, but it wouldn't just be the same....

Kinda hard to explain.



/jarmo

Well, that's why he listned to the record to review it. How would he know how it sounded if he didn't listen to it? I love the album and how it sounds, he doesn't. No skin off my ears....nor should it bother you, but it does, so "I'm Sorry for you."

[Naltav]

Some people simply just like music like that, stripped to the bone....  I guess.

Sure!

But if you like that kind of things, should you even review things that are the opposite?

Not sure I agree/understand the Godfather-reference...   

It was just an example of how you can take something great and re-work it. It wouldn't be the same movie, but it might seem similar (same great actors, same great story etc)....


So if you took Better and stripped it all. It would be the same musicians, same great lyrics, same great melody etc, but it wouldn't just be the same....

Kinda hard to explain.



/jarmo

I guess the critic at Billboard thinks that this song in particular, could be stripped. And to his preference, it would rock even more!

And I think that could very well be..

But I don't think he feels that way about all the tracks on ChiDem. Like the huge epic ones (TWAT and Prostitute), if you stripped those it would defenitley loose its punch!  

Ok, I get your Godfather-thing...     Kinda... I guess...  

Some movies needs to be "huge". Lord Of The Rings would not be great or the same if shot on a Bad Taste- or Meet The Feebles-budget....  

[ppbebe]

I don't think the reviewer listend to it as much as we have. see many posts in this thread are better reviews than the article.

[Voodoochild]

Well, I did an accoustic version of Better. Of course it's my shitty singing and playing, but still, the song sounded great to me. Of course I re-arranged it, but still, the same melody.

IMO, the overproduce bit is just a common cliche used for some people in the media. The word itself shouldn't do no harm, but it was so used as a harsh attack that everything that sounds well mixed (unlike The Strokes ridiculous compression and absense of gain in the vocal) is labeled as overproduced.

So, fuck that. Does it really matter if the song has many layers? Shouldn't be all about how it sounds, if it's good or bad?

[jarmo]

So, fuck that. Does it really matter if the song has many layers? Shouldn't be all about how it sounds, if it's good or bad?

Exactly.


It's a cliche word used to try to put down something that doesn't sound like it was done in the 60s/70s.... And even then some records sounded better than some made today. 



/jarmo

[ppbebe]

i wonder what they said about sgt peppers when it was released in the 60s.

[Axlative]

The thing is that "overdoing" anything is bad. If someone says CD is overproduced it is a negative comment. However, I've yet to read a reasonable review that actually justifies the position of CD being overproduced. I could understand if someone would say something in the lines of "the myriad of layers of sound detract from the core of the song". That's what overproducing means to me.

However, most reviews just throw the word there to have easily something negative to say. Why it is easy is of course the AMOUNT of production on CD. Especially in contrast to AFD. (Although I actually believe this is bullshit too. Just because something sounds simple doesn't mean there isn't meticulous consideration behind each and every sound recorded and I do get the impression that AFD was very carefully produced to make it sound exactly as it is.) The point is that I don't feel any detraction from what I feel is the "core" of any of the songs. Closest to that is the damn intro of the whole album... So what if there's a beatbox at the beginning of a song or two? It's an intro of sorts also! It's not the song itself! All the strings are professionally arranged and fit the songs just as in NR (synth or not). I also have liked the Maddy samples from the get go. This I can understand if someone feels they detract from the music, but if you ever actually apply a thought process to the lyrics you hear you can easily understand their relevance and reason in the song.

Bottom line is that neither the album nor Better, is not overproduced. There's a lot of production on CD, but overdoing it CANNOT BE MEASURED IN ABSOLUTE TERMS. No amount of production is overproduction if it doesn't ruin the song. And any amount of production can ruin a song.

[jarmo]

Bottom line is that neither the album nor Better, is not overproduced. There's a lot of production on CD, but overdoing it CANNOT BE MEASURED IN ABSOLUTE TERMS. No amount of production is overproduction if it doesn't ruin the song. And any amount of production can ruin a song.

Exactly.


It just gets thrown around as something bad when they have nothing else to say. It's the easiest thing to say since it doesn't sound like all those hip indie records.





/jarmo

[marknroses]

To respond earlier,

Better on CD to me just seems like a million sounds and whistles.
When its live, its just the band and fewer studio effects. I think the song on CD would have sounded even better if the guitar could be heard instead of Chris Pittman's toy box.

Mark

[jarmo]

To respond earlier,

Better on CD to me just seems like a million sounds and whistles.
When its live, its just the band and fewer studio effects. I think the song on CD would have sounded even better if the guitar could be heard instead of Chris Pittman's toy box.

Mark

I hear the guitars just fine.

Sorry but your complaint makes no sense.

It's a very guitar driven song.




/jarmo

[Skunk]

To respond earlier,

Better on CD to me just seems like a million sounds and whistles.
When its live, its just the band and fewer studio effects. I think the song on CD would have sounded even better if the guitar could be heard instead of Chris Pittman's toy box.

Mark

I don't know if there's actually less going on live or if it's just that you hear every single thing with the quality mix on the album.

[Ali]

To respond earlier,

Better on CD to me just seems like a million sounds and whistles.
When its live, its just the band and fewer studio effects. I think the song on CD would have sounded even better if the guitar could be heard instead of Chris Pittman's toy box.

Mark

I hear the guitars just fine.

Sorry but your complaint makes no sense.

It's a very guitar driven song.




/jarmo

I have no problems hearing the guitars at all. I think it is that the album is so well produced that you can hear everything. The lack of compression does that.

Ali

[Black Betty]

DUDE! If you can't hear the guitars in Better, then brother you're deaf. OR, don't know what's a guitar and what's a synth.

[Shoeboy517]

I think 'overproduced is just a throwaway adjective; a shortcut to thinking.  I don't really have a problem with the term.  Frankly, any album that took this long to make is inherently overproduced without listening to a note.  I love the song.  I love all the frenetic changes it goes through and I think it (along with If The World) sounds the most like I always imagined this album would sound.

[coolman78SLASH]

I think Better is well.. better than all the other tracks, I love it, and I am a huge old GnR/Slash fan, but I must admit that Better made me belive more in this GnR and Axl than I did before. But for me GnR have moved in the direction of Dream Theater, Symphony X, Circus Maximus and prog-rock land, and away from the dirty RnR that was GnR's sound before, but its cool, I like it, and they are fine musicians all of them. So as a musician you gotta respect the album, because there is lot of skills and time on CD!

[The Illusionist]

The lyrics to this track are the best part.  You listen to the lyrics in this song by legendary W. Axl Rose and then you listen to the lyrics in these other "Nu-Rock" bands out there and your head begins to spin.  Nobody cares about talent or any of that anymore.  And like Kurt Loder said describing old Axl...there isn't anything like that anymore...there's no more real Rock N Roll...instead of partying and smashing things and stories about chucking TV's out windows...these guys have publicists, attorneys, and investors and such hanging out with them after the shows.  I mean I'm all for investing and making money and stuff...but it's not Rock N Roll! 

And by "overproduced"...I think anything that took 13 years and over $10 million dollars could be considered "overproduced".  But the word is thrown around so loosely without ever being described as anything specific.  A GREAT album that took a long time and cost a lot of money is still considered "overproduced" but an extremely bad album that still cost a decent amount but took less time and holds no talent but sells records...because it's selling regardless...it was adequately produced??  If you're going to throw a term around...at least explain what you meant by it or at least compare it to an album of similar caliber that WASN'T overproduced...

I'm sure if you requested this information his head would explode...he has no real answer for you.

[badobsession81]

"Overproduced" is going to be thrown around by critics simply because of the unique amount of time it's taken to present a final product.

There are a ton of "little things" on this album, which is what I'm getting into now with the album.  A lot of times the vocals blend into and out of guitar tones that are the same notes and creates things sonically that I've not heard before on albums. 

The vocal tracks are what I keep focusing on early.  A lot of "doubling" effects that I've never heard come together so nicely.  Listen to Stevie Wonder or John Lennon and their doubling usually has a "warble" to it.  Axl's tracks are super tight (which to me is very cool and suggests a lot of attention to detail), but will draw these "overproduced" critiques.  I like when albums are slick at times and raw at times.  CD has all that in spades.
 

I like this explanation. While we may view it as 'attention to detail' and quality production, we need to accept that others may view this as overproducing. Neither description is right or wrong.