not logged in
| re: Steinman would have sounded ordinary | |
Posted by:  |
Pudding 03:35 am UTC 06/29/09 |
| In reply to: | re: Steinman would have sounded ordinary - Scaramouche 02:18 am UTC 06/29/09 |
| I lived in Sheffield for a few years and met a number of people who knew the guys from Def Leppard and nearly all of them said that as soon as they got a sniff of success they turned into prima donna assholes. Apart from a couple of songs I don't really like Def Leppard anyway. > > Q. How different would Hysteria have sounded if Jim > > Steinman had stayed on as producer? > > > > A. It wouldn't have been special. Those songs were written > > with Mutt Lange. He had the foresight for what it was > > supposed to sound like. It would have sounded very > > ordinary. It wouldn't have made your heart race. > > It would have been different for sure, but certainly not > 'ordinary'. I think Jim only got to cutting (some) basic > tracks so Phil Collen can't have any idea what he would > have done had the production/arrangements progressed. > > I could at least have seen Jim taking the multi's back to > NYC and bringing in Rory Dood/Eric Troyer to stick BV's > all over it. > > I think the project was doomed for several reasons: > > 1.Def Lep didn't want anyone producing other than Mutt > Lange, so I think Jim (or whoever else had been brought > in)was on the back foot from day one, especially with Joe > Elliott? > > As Mutt Lange was co-writing a lot of the material, I > think Def Lep would only accept his interpretations of the > songs, and presumably Jim had different ideas/approaches. > > 2.I think Jim was a management choice rather than band > choice (as Def Lep were/are huge fans of Queen I thought > they may have approached RTB or Mack). > > I don't think any of the band had much of an idea of what > Jim had done apart from BOOH, and Joe Elliot has said in > interview that he doesn't like 'those type of songs'. > > 3.I think Jim isn't a band producer? You will note that > before or since Def Lep he has never produced a band as > such, preferring to work with vocalists and session > musicians (who are probably more professional/controllable > than a young disfunctional band)? > > 4.Don't think Jim liked the studio or working in Holland. > Would have probably preferred to have done the sessions in > NYC? > > Having said all that, would still like to hear the tracks > that were done, if they still exist. > > > > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Steinman would have sounded ordinary - Scaramouche 02:18 am UTC 06/29/09 |
| Next: | re: Steinman would have sounded ordinary - BULLWHIP 02:21 am UTC 06/29/09 |
| Thread: | |