|
Re: Do you judge tracks negatively if they "sound old?"
| quote: | Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles
Judging by some of the things I've seen people say around here, it seems like the presence of "modern" mixing and mastering techniques in a track is almost as important to them as the track's musical composition and arrangement. It seems like if a track "sounds dated," a number of people will automatically have a strong negative bias against it.
How do you feel about this issue?
Personally, I don't care much at all whether a track "sounds old"... |
Here's the thing for me - there's a distinction between thinking negatively of a track and/or deciding not to play it. I will never, ever give up on giving something a chance because it "sounds old" - and many times some of my favorite tunes are indeed "old" or "old sounding."
Where the problem comes in is playing them out at clubs with less than perfect sound. Sometimes they'll work fine even if they're mastered poorly, but every once in a while you'll throw something in that's in the highest quality possible, and it still just sounds like arse when it's cranked up over a huge system. In that sense, I may deem a track "unplayable" from the point of view of a DJ, but I'll never deem something "unlistenable" or somehow less worthwhile solely for being/sounding old.
___________________
last minute disco dot net
|