| re: Michael Beinhorn and Bat 3 |
|
Posted by:
 |
Pudding 03:16 am UTC 07/14/09 |
| In reply to: |
re: Michael Beinhorn and Bat 3 - Conas 03:07 am UTC 07/14/09 |
|
Most people who reviewed Bat3 said the songs were sub-par, Desmond Childs production rarely gets mentioned. Had Jim been involved fully then the quality of the songs would have been higher and the production has it should have been.
But at the end of the day even if Jim had been at the helm and it flopped, then it would have been a genuine Bat album that had flopped and not some half-baked nonsense cobbled together.
> Even if Jim had been involved in Bat 3 it might not have
> been a success either. You can have all the talent and
> ability, but at the end of the day you need the luck. How
> many good albums flopped in the charts through the years?
> Many! and how many dire albums got to Number 1 and sold
> hundreds of thousands if not millions? Plenty! Well there
> you go then.
>
>
> > Same reason that Michael Crawford, John Rando
> > and whoever DOTV's choreographer were brought in. Shove
> > in a bunch of big names and it has to be a success right?
> >
> > >
|
|
|
|
reply |
|
|
| Previous: |
re: Michael Beinhorn and Bat 3 - Conas 03:07 am UTC 07/14/09 |
| Next: |
re: Michael Beinhorn and Bat 3 - Conas 02:03 pm UTC 07/14/09 |
|
| Thread: |
|