not logged in
| re: Jim Steinman Collections | |
Posted by:  |
CultOfByron 12:24 pm UTC 12/04/09 |
| In reply to: | re: Jim Steinman Collections - rockfenris2005 04:29 am UTC 12/03/09 |
| Which is why FCOL really stands out on that album and in my opinion eclipses most of Bat II in terms of production values (and THAT's saying something!) Can you imagine 'Back Into Hell' (the track) with real orchestration?!? :drools: (and yes I know emoticons don't work ;) ) > I think if Steve Margoshes is fully allowed to do “his > thing…” on the musicals, the results will be spectacular. > Hopefully this production will not only be a feast for the > eyes… If the orchestrations are anything like the > orchestrations for “Tanz…” we are in for a treat. I don’t > think they’ll go Jeff Bova on this, especially if Todd > Rundgren is involved? I get the impression he would want > to do everything with real instruments. If Rundgren and > Margoshes are standing alongside Jim, we’ll finally know > what Jim wanted all along since the 70s, something I don’t > think the original album captured because they didn’t have > the budget or the support. Whatever the case, the music is > bound to sound better than Meat Loaf and the Melbourne > Symphony Orchestra! > > I don’t like the keyboards either but small effects here > and there over real instruments are quite cool sometimes. > I’m talking about “Carpe Noctem”…for example. > > > > It's the opposite way round for me and I do slightly worry > > what Jim might do to the original Bat songs without the > > original constraints of 1970s production. > > > > I think Jim tends to embrace technology a little too > > eagerly (and many of his mid 80s-early 90s productions > > suffer as a result). I'm a big fan of a simpler > > production, with more live instrumentation, that lets the > > song speak for itself. > > > > That's not to say I don't love the cacophony of noise that > > some of Jim's best songs are. I just prefer it when that > > cacophony is produced by real instruments. > > > > > I’ll be honest. I think it’s better than Bat 1 in some > > > ways. Bat 1 is great and all but Jim didn’t have the > > > resources available to him to truly realize his vision. > > > I’m not saying this is fact or anything, just my opinion, > > > but I believe if Meat and Jim had the kind of support and > > > technology available to them that they had on Bat 2, Bat 1 > > > would have been an even greater album. > > > > > > Bat 2 is like an amazing journey in listening that you > > > can’t describe. I still can’t quite categorize into > > > anything else I've heard. Bat 1 is raw though and that has > > > its charm. Again, this is another reason why I’m so > > > looking forward to the musical, to see what Jim can do > > > with the Bat 1 material without any of the constraints he > > > had in 1977. > > > | |
| reply | | |
| Previous: | re: Jim Steinman Collections - rockfenris2005 04:29 am UTC 12/03/09 |
| Next: | re: Jim Steinman Collections - steven_stuart 08:42 pm UTC 12/03/09 |
| Thread: | |