Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Derek
All I know is that a lot of drummers I know have called Dave Grohl an influence. I can't say that much about guitarists being influenced by him.
|
Right oin, Derek. I mean, he just plays boring predictable chord sequences, usually power chords. Competent music, but not anything groundbreaking. On the other hand, some of his drumming is downright inventive and interesting, he didn't really get a chance to slam with Nirvana (though the Scentless Apprentice drum beat is probably up there with "(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction" is one of the most iconic and memorable drum lines ever), but his drumming on Queens' mini-epics is intricate, inventive, and GREAT. He is just an excellent timekeeper; as far as Nirvana goes, that never shined through on record that much (even with Albini's traditionally loudass drum "engineering"), but LIVE, he sounded fucking awesome.
The thing is, Nirvana ALWAYS played with loud drummers. Chad Channing and Dale Crover were also really really loud (well, Crover still is).
As for drummers who are quiet, a lot of the D.C. bands (Fugazi, El Guapo, Warmers, Q and Not U) seemed to play inventive and unique and quiet drum patterns, which really worked for those bands for the most part. I never really associated Steve Shelley with "LOUD" drumming. Also, Boredoms had 6 drummers at one point, but they never really played "LOUD". I mean, drums are always loud, period, I guess I'm just saying... their method wasn't to play as loud as humnaly possible at all times, to the point that their sticks and snare broke 3 times per song. Haha. I think Can played pretty quietly too. Bands primarily based around drumming seem to play quieter, for whatever reason.
Now that I think about it, I know what makes Dave stand out most as a drummer: He was loud, but he was also IN CONTROL. It's hard to play loud and fast and still be able to do intricate things. Dave was an intelligent drummer, he also knew when
not to play. Again, this all comes across better in a live setting.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Derek
You know what the worst thing is that I find about the Foo Fighters? It's not the shitty, lazy songwriting, oh no. It's the vocals and how they're double-tracked in EVERY song. It sounds terrible and annoying.
|
I'm actually trying to think of some mainstream "alt rock" albums that DON'T have multi tracked vocals. Besides Ross Robinson's stuff (though even At the Drive-In did it), I can't think of any at the moment. It's pretty much a staple of mainstream music -- from rap to "alt rock" (Bush, Live, Foo Fighters, and so on).. every pop album ever (BRitney Spears I mean). Even stuff like Beach Boys. I know you're saying the Foos' use is particularly annoying -- because even though most mainstream albums have it, it's not as DISTRACTING as the Foo Fighters. Multitracking can add a lot to a sound, especially if you use it sparingly and intelligently -- but yeah, actually, I'm listening to some Foo stuff on youtube. I'd never noticed it before, they mutli track every single line, pointlessly. It doesn't make the sound fuller and more interesting. It just sounds ANNOYING. So, you're right, Derek, this sucks! Haha!
..but yeah, I remember when we were doing RUINHORSE and Lyrch tried to get me to double track the vocals on every song. I really really did not like that sound, but he insisted on it, so I did it on a few tracks... Now, years later, I multi track SS vocals, sometimes doing 4 or 5 vocal tracks for one line, but I try to do it in a way that isn't distracting, and try to create -- in my mind -- interesting little melodic counterpoints between the different voices. There's a song on the new album... tearing the wings off of a pigeon, with a few multi tracks, including the really really high Alvin and the Chipmunks counterpoint, that emerges to emphasize a few lines. I think it sounds fine when used on a few lines, but can you imagine how bad it'd sound on every line? Distracting and annoying, indeed.
My way of thinking is, if you're going to double- (or more-)track, you should have different vocalists harmonize with you, or at least use a different voice (something Patton does a lot, singing in a high register with his low self, and so on). You know who is really fucking good at multi tracking? Bad Religion. Their 3-or-more-vocal harmonies
make some of their songs.
You know who else is good? QUEENS OF THE STONE AGE. Man, I used to dislike Queens a lot ,found em boring as hell (and they are pretty boring and dull and awful compared to the genius KYUSS, I think). But I think they really have something interesting. They're always out of tune and sloppy, even though it sounds a bit calculated, and they're always throwing interesting little new instruments/riffs/sounds in their very very full, ALIVE mixes. SONGS FOR THE DEAF was described as boxy and badly recorded, but it's one of the best sounding mainstream releases I've ever heard. And again, Grohl's drumming is topnotch on that album. A song like "Go With the Flow" is just incredible. Has some of the best guitar solos ever, too.
I'm going to listen to RATED R right now, actually. Great band.