| re: Jim's involvement in Bat 3? | |
|
Posted by: |
daveake 07:24 pm UTC 04/14/08 |
| In reply to: | re: Jim's involvement in Bat 3? - Scaramouche 03:25 pm UTC 04/14/08 |
| If it would have been on Jim's terms - with Jim in charge, using musicians of his choice, insisting on Meat repeating the damn vocals till he gets it right, etc etc., then yes it would have been a top-notch product. Personally I doubt that was the option otherwise surely Jim would have taken the job? Dave > Difference is with Bat 3 Jim would have effectively been > in charge (day to day), and no doubt produced a top-notch > product (or better than the Bat 3 we did get), whereas > with DOTV it appears Jim was treated as just the > 'hired-help', and Sonnenberg & Crawford were the clowns > running the circus. > > > > ... and yet Jim appears to have been the > > > one to back away? > > > > Maybe because, post DotV, Jim had learnt how to avoid a > > train wreck before it's too late? > > > > Dave | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Jim's involvement in Bat 3? - Scaramouche 03:25 pm UTC 04/14/08 |
| Next: | re: Jim's involvement in Bat 3? - Rob 06:18 pm UTC 04/15/08 |
| Thread: |
|