When I reviewed Fluke's album Puppy, I opened the review by criticising the terrible cover and musing whether it actually put a lot of people off from buying a very under-rated and ignored album. At the end of the review I gave the album 10/10.
Originally posted by FCB_Fanatic
oh please, don't make more of it than it is ... a nice cover is a good bonus, something I would prefer, but for me the music still remains the most important aspect of a release.
So ? Why would that make me apathetic then ? I didn't say anything that wasn't true ... a cover IS a marketing tool, a perfect selling point to potential customers (as someone has already proven earlier in the topic).
I never said I couldn't like or dislike a cover
Aug-01-2009 11:55
SMC
custom title addict
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
quote:
Originally posted by FCB_Fanatic
So ? Why would that make me apathetic then ? I didn't say anything that wasn't true ... a cover IS a marketing tool, a perfect selling point to potential customers (as someone has already proven earlier in the topic).
I never said I couldn't like or dislike a cover
You said:
quote:
it can be a powerful (marketing) tool to attract people, to stand out among other covers. But there's where it ends.
I'll try to seek a higher meaning in each cover in the future
jus for you
Aug-02-2009 09:23
Hrvoje
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Jun 2006
Location: Croatia,Zagreb
Good album,good cover
Aug-17-2009 14:45
Chimney
Low pH
Registered: Oct 2008
Location: Helsingborg
Good album. Variable, overall well-produced, one can really see they put hard work into this.
Aug-18-2009 22:44
Domesticated
Supreme tranceaddict
Registered: Feb 2007
Location:
This release annoys me. The melodies are uniquely produced and euphoric without being overdone. The percussion is driving, the bass lines suitably energetic and varied. The vocal samples are tasteful.
The mixing and mastering is better than their previous releases, but it's still frustratingly muddy. I can't quite get into each track properly because of this one fatal flaw. Otherwise this would be brilliant and close to the best album of the year.
I don't understand what they're doing in the studio. '90s releases can often sound muddy in comparison to the super-compressed and finely mixed tracks of today, but 00.db and J00F tracks lack detail in a completely different way to those of the '90s.
Listen to these two examples:
Astral Projection - Mahadeva (1995)
00.db - Lantra (2009)
To be fair, I'm not sure if the first version has been remastered or not, so it's not a completely accurate comparison. However, as far as I know, re-mastering can't rectify a poor mix down (someone feel free to correct me). The bassline on the first track pulls clearly through all the other elements and can still be heard properly throughout the whole track. In the second example the bassline seems to disappear when things get too frantic.
