And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

So someone says "let's see you do better." Well, with what I saw on
stage, I could do that with 8 channels or maybe fewer, and I wouldn't
screw it up that badly. I'll bet the mixer was handling 40 or more
channels and didn't have any idea what was what. I'd give 'em two or
three mics on the drums, a mic on each instrument (direct or amplifier)
and a mic on each vocal. No big deal. It's television.

I heard that Robert Johnson was going to get a lifetime achievement
award. Too bad he had such a short lifetime.

At least the commercials sounded OK.

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com...
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

So someone says "let's see you do better." Well, with what I saw on
stage, I could do that with 8 channels or maybe fewer, and I wouldn't
screw it up that badly. I'll bet the mixer was handling 40 or more
channels and didn't have any idea what was what. I'd give 'em two or
three mics on the drums, a mic on each instrument (direct or
amplifier)
and a mic on each vocal. No big deal. It's television.

I heard that Robert Johnson was going to get a lifetime achievement
award. Too bad he had such a short lifetime.

At least the commercials sounded OK.

They were probably pre-recorded.

Mike Rivers wrote:
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

At least the commercials sounded OK.

I didn't see that particular performance, but I've been watching most of
the show, and I think the sound is pretty darn good for a live show with
this many different performers in rapid succession. McCartney sounded
great (Helter Skelter had me on my feet bouncing around the room!), so
did U2. There's just no comparison between this and the awful sound
(and performance) on the Superbowl. Keith Urban (who's on at the
moment) sounds pretty good, too, if you like that sort of thing.

I'm glad to see Alison Krauss doing so well. So far, she's won 3
awards. U2 have won 3 as well, plus one more for their producer.

Les Paul won a couple, that's pretty cool!

Tim O'Brien and John Prine won the folk awards. Good to see some
appropriate winners in categories that had some rather inappropriate
nominees.

McCartney hasn't won anything so far. Kanye West has won 3.

Springsteen and Kelly Clarkson each have a couple so far.

Jim Gilliland wrote:
Mike Rivers wrote:
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

At least the commercials sounded OK.

I didn't see that particular performance, but I've been watching most of
the show, and I think the sound is pretty darn good for a live show with
this many different performers in rapid succession. McCartney sounded
great (Helter Skelter had me on my feet bouncing around the room!), so
did U2. There's just no comparison between this and the awful sound
(and performance) on the Superbowl. Keith Urban (who's on at the
moment) sounds pretty good, too, if you like that sort of thing.

I'm glad to see Alison Krauss doing so well. So far, she's won 3
awards. U2 have won 3 as well, plus one more for their producer.

Les Paul won a couple, that's pretty cool!

Tim O'Brien and John Prine won the folk awards. Good to see some
appropriate winners in categories that had some rather inappropriate
nominees.

McCartney hasn't won anything so far. Kanye West has won 3.

Springsteen and Kelly Clarkson each have a couple so far.

I tuned in just in time to see Keith Urban. That sounded okay...too
much acoustic guitar, not enough bass; just like they like it 'round
these parts.

The Sly tribute's ending right now. Sly Stone came out looking like a
rooster-headed Grandpa Munster and started singing into a dead mike with
a Talkbox Tube gaffed to it.

THAT was a train wreck.

jak

The Sly tribute's ending right now.

The Sly 'tribute' had the most *annoying* collection of acts.

I've had enough gymnastic vibrato to last me the rest of my life.

Frank /~ http://newmex.com/f10
@/

"jakdedert" wrote in message
...

The Sly tribute's ending right now. Sly Stone came out looking like a
rooster-headed Grandpa Munster and started singing into a dead mike with
a Talkbox Tube gaffed to it.

Not to change the subject, but Grandpa Munster died last Friday. Al Lewis
was either 83, 96 or one of several numbers in between. He was an
interesting guy, to say the least.

Peace,
Paul

I thought overall, the audio AND production was stellar!!!!!!!

Good, because there in the Staples Center the sound absolutely sucked
big time. One of the more amateurish allegedly pro audio affairs I've
ever attended. The mix apparently was handled by some 13 year old who
has determined that the 20 - 60Hz range should be 10 or more db above
the rest of the spectrum, & vocals should have no mids.
Lights & projections were brilliant, though.

Scott Fraser

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com...
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was


Missed it. Anywhere can be accessed online, esp Helter Sketer ?

geoff

Paul Stamler wrote:
"jakdedert" wrote in message
...

The Sly tribute's ending right now. Sly Stone came out looking like a
rooster-headed Grandpa Munster and started singing into a dead mike with
a Talkbox Tube gaffed to it.

Not to change the subject, but Grandpa Munster died last Friday. Al Lewis
was either 83, 96 or one of several numbers in between. He was an
interesting guy, to say the least.

Peace,
Paul

I get the feeling Sly still hates the music industry, and was paid a
lot of money to do that show. I thought it was funny.. Sly walks out ..
thinks 'what's this mess, the same damm song i played at Woodstock in
1969, being mauled'. Thought about what he was getting paid, and walked
off without a bow, or anything.

It should have just been Sly And the Family Stone, not everyone and his
brother. I don't think the camera made it on to Freddy Stone, or
Cynthia Robinson once. It showed Rose briefly, and the TV mix you could
hear the Rhodes pretty well in Family Affair.

Not worth sitting through the rest of the show for. Hope Sly made a lot
for doing that; compares to Marlon Brando in Superman.

flatfish wrote:
On Wed, 08 Feb 2006 22:58:40 -0800, Scott Fraser wrote:

I thought overall, the audio AND production was stellar!!!!!!!

Good, because there in the Staples Center the sound absolutely sucked
big time. One of the more amateurish allegedly pro audio affairs I've
ever attended. The mix apparently was handled by some 13 year old who
has determined that the 20 - 60Hz range should be 10 or more db above
the rest of the spectrum, & vocals should have no mids.
Lights & projections were brilliant, though.

Scott Fraser


Too bad...
You should have stayed home

My system:
Bryston.
Nad.
BW Nautilus (just stereo, no 5:1)
KEF 105.1

Sounded FANTASTIC.............

The digital feed sounded great. As far as I could tell, it was stereo
and not 5.1 (though it's possible that my local affiliate doesn't pass
5.1). But the HD video was excellent, and so was most of the audio -
with a couple of obvious exceptions. (System: Bryston driving Avalon
Radians.)

Mike Rivers wrote:

I heard that Robert Johnson was going to get a lifetime achievement
award. Too bad he had such a short lifetime.

It was good to see the Weavers get acknowledged as well. Too bad Pete
couldn't have been there.

Jim Gilliland wrote:

I didn't see that particular performance, but I've been watching most of
the show, and I think the sound is pretty darn good for a live show with
this many different performers in rapid succession.

We do that all the time at folk festivals. But we have a system and the
performers work with it because they know it's a rapid-fire live show.
No, it doesn't sound like the record, but it doesn't have feedback and
you can hear all the instruments. I really feel sorry for the
production crew who gets the tech rider calling for essentially the
same setup as the band gets when they do a concert.

I'm glad to see Alison Krauss doing so well. So far, she's won 3
awards.

I'm bored with her already, but we've been through that before. At
least she acknowledged Gary Paczoa (or however it's spelled) who
records all her recent albums.

Les Paul won a couple, that's pretty cool!

That's always nice. What's disappointing (and so typical of the
Grammys) is that he never won one when he was an active recording and
touring artist and wasn't acknowledged by the organization until he
became a legend.

Tim O'Brien and John Prine won the folk awards. Good to see some
appropriate winners in categories that had some rather inappropriate
nominees.

I didn't see the list of nominees but it's nice to see some old timers.
O'Brien's been working pretty steady all along, but Prine has been
practically unknown for quite a while. It's probably almost a
guaranteed Grammy when you come out with a new recording after several
years of absence. Am I getting too cynical yet?

Did Fink & Marxer get their usual Grammy in the Children's Music
category? They've never made the TV portion of the show.

"Geoff@home" wrote in message
...

"Mike Rivers" wrote in message
oups.com...
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was


Missed it. Anywhere can be accessed online, esp Helter Sketer ?

geoff

http://music.yahoo.com/promo-25023071

I don't know if you can see everything there, but they announced that on the
show.

"Mike Rivers" wrote:
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

Yeah. What the hell happened there!

I just watched the replay and it was during Sugarland's performance (about
29 minutes into the show).

First was the loud feedback blast as they opened their song.

Second, and worse, was the open mike offstage where you could hear someone
yelling "You okay with your mike? You okay with your mike?" Jennifer
Nettles (the singer) made an adjustment to her hip mike/monitor control
between the two screwups but I doubt if that was her fault. Never heard
anything like that go out live on TV.

On a side note, I saw them perform live as Brad Paisley's opening act in his
"Alcohol" tour. They are pretty good onstage. Jennifer Nettles has some
serious hip action that gets...well...hypnotic. They used to have a very
good writer who wrote most of their music but she mysteriously jumped ship.
Dunno why or what occurred but it was very odd since they made such a rapid
rise on the charts.

Oh, I wondered if the smoke machine got stuck on U2's performance of
"Vertigo." He got lost for a while and cameraman seemed to wonder where to
go. His "One Life" duet could have been passed though. Ugh! He'd done
netter had he had that snacky Irish woman Andrea Corr with him.

B~

"Mike Rivers" wrote:
And there was some sort of artist of the year, Sugarwear, or Sugarbear
or something, a blast of feedback, someone saying something about a
mic, couldn't hear the acoustic guitar and mandolin at all, and it was
all over in less than two minutes.

Yeah. What the hell happened there!

Well, the video projection in the arena was seriously out of sync with
the sound (just on this act,) so I think they were lip synching to a
pre-record. The mandolin was inaudible throughout, but it's hard to
tell what's going on when the mixer believes that the only thing of
interest in a mix is the kick drum & the bass, regardless of the
musical style.

Scott Fraser

Did Fink & Marxer get their usual Grammy in the Children's Music
category? .

No, it was a compilation of Fred Rogers' tunes from "Mr Rogers'
Neighborhood."

They've never made the TV portion of the show

There are 108 categories. The evening telecast (3.5 hours worth)
consists of the awarding of 12 Grammys. The other 96 are given the
bum's rush during the 2.5 hour long afternoon "Pre-telecast."

Scott Fraser

"B. Peg" wrote regading Sugarland's odd mike mishap --
Yeah. What the hell happened there!
I just watched the replay and it was during Sugarland's performance (about
29 minutes into the show).

Saw it. Heard it. Thought "What the hell is that engineer doin' talking
over the singer?"

Too bad for them. Good group though in person. I know what you mean by
Nettle's hips. g

On a side note, I saw them perform live as Brad Paisley's opening act in
his "Alcohol" tour. They are pretty good onstage. Jennifer Nettles has
some serious hip action that gets...well...hypnotic. They used to have a
very good writer who wrote most of their music but she mysteriously jumped
ship. Dunno why or what occurred but it was very odd since they made such
a rapid rise on the charts.

That'd be Kristen Hall that bailed out. From their website, "Kristen Hall,
a singer/songwriter specializing in searing heartache, has two well-received
solo albums." Maybe she went back to solo work? Still odd she jumped when
they hit it big. Afterall, Madonna was the opener for them. ;o)

Mack

Mike Rivers wrote:
Jim Gilliland wrote:

Tim O'Brien and John Prine won the folk awards. Good to see some
appropriate winners in categories that had some rather inappropriate
nominees.

I didn't see the list of nominees but it's nice to see some old timers.
O'Brien's been working pretty steady all along, but Prine has been
practically unknown for quite a while. It's probably almost a
guaranteed Grammy when you come out with a new recording after several
years of absence. Am I getting too cynical yet?

Actually, Prine has been making records quite consistently over the past
decade and more, all for his own label "Oh Boy" records (affiliated with
the late Steve Goodman's "Red Pajamas" records). This isn't his first
nomination, and in fact he won a Grammy in 1991 for his CD, "The Missing
Years". In my opinion, he has made much better records than this one,
with "German Afternoons" and "Missing Years" being two of my favorites.
His live CD was also very enjoyable. And his "In Spite Of Ourselves"
was a nice CD of duets with other artists.

You're right about Tim, he's been quite prolific.

Did Fink & Marxer get their usual Grammy in the Children's Music
category? They've never made the TV portion of the show.

No. They were nominated, but they didn't win. Here's the complete list
of nominees and winners:

http://www.grammys.com/Grammy_Awards..._nominees.aspx

On Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:34:06 -0500, Jim Gilliland

nomination, and in fact he won a Grammy in 1991 for his CD, "The Missing
Years". In my opinion, he has made much better records than this one,
with "German Afternoons" and "Missing Years" being two of my favorites.
His live CD was also very enjoyable. And his "In Spite Of Ourselves"
was a nice CD of duets with other artists.

You're right about Tim, he's been quite prolific.

The Missing Years lives in my cd changer. JP gets so much out of those
3 chords.

Frank /~ http://newmex.com/f10
@/

Scott Fraser wrote:

There are 108 categories. The evening telecast (3.5 hours worth)
consists of the awarding of 12 Grammys. The other 96 are given the
bum's rush during the 2.5 hour long afternoon "Pre-telecast."

Well, most of my friends are bums anyway. Glad to see that Del McCoury
made it in his category, and Delbert McClinton, too. They're two of my
favorites, though I don't realy consider McClinton to be a country
singer. Glad to see that Alison Krauss is out of the Bluegrass running
finally.

I'd have moved Tim O'Brien into the Contemporary Folk category (though
there wasn't a lot of real traditional folk this year) and given
Tradional Folk to the Chieftains, but then I don't run the show. I
don't even belong to the organization.

Mike Rivers wrote:

I'd have moved Tim O'Brien into the Contemporary Folk category...

Tim's two CDs this year (Fiddler's Green and Cornbread Nation, both
released on the same day) each contained a great many traditional songs,
and many more that are nearly so (songs like California Blues and Long
Black Veil, while not purely traditional, would tend to fit the
category). So while most of Tim's CDs would belong in the contemporary
category, in this case they got it right.

On Thu, 9 Feb 2006 09:09:26 -0800, "M. MacDonald"
trained 100 monkeys to jump on the keyboard
and write:

That'd be Kristen Hall that bailed out. From their website, "Kristen Hall,
a singer/songwriter specializing in searing heartache, has two well-received
solo albums." Maybe she went back to solo work? Still odd she jumped when
they hit it big. Afterall, Madonna was the opener for them. ;o)

My understanding is that Kirsten will still be writing songs for them,
but that she got tired of doing the touring bit.

Having seen Jennifer Nettles live several times before she hit it big
with Sugarland, I can attest to both her hips, and her talent. The
musicians she worked with in that band weren't any slouches, either.

Quite nice as a human, too. Hope she doesn't get spoiled by the Big
Time. :-)
--
jtougas

"listen- there's a hell of a good universe next door
let's go" - e.e. cummings

I find it hard to believe some of the replies I am reading in this
thread! The Grammy looked and sounded great? What show were they
watching/listening to? What I saw and heard was a train wreck!

1) Sugar Hill performance: Feedback on top of the song, halfway
through the song PGM audio muted and home-viewers heard PL over PGM.
Then a third of the way through the song it happened AGAIN!

2) Through-out the show the center hard cameras went in and out of
focus (I was watching the HD feed). Maybe I am more critical than
others in this regard, however focus is not a factory adjustment and if
the camera operator hired to operate the center-back tight shot cannot
hack it, he should not be there (assuming it was not a lens or camera
problem).

3) The Sly performance was one-after-another late cues on the vocal
mics. Sly's vocal mic (when he finally arrived on-stage) was OFF for
VERSES! There was two mics side-by-side. The mic that was stage left
of Sly (not the one that he was singing in) was on. The mic that he
was singing in was OFF.

4) Projection was the worst of any Grammy's in the past five years.
Bruce Springsteen's performance was an obvious (creative) rip off of
the projection design from the Grammy's Simon and Garfunkle performance
from a year or two ago. Simon and Garfunkle looked great. Bruce
looked GREEN and SOFT!

5) Video/iris levels were hot on many cameras through-out the show.

6) Lighting design (around 11:00PM eastern I think) included quick
strobe flashes. This was obviously never tested with transmission back
to CBS. It caused all sorts of pixelization on digital broadcasts
(including the HD). The same artifact was on CBS news clips (SD) of
that song the following morning on CBS news out of NYC.

It's no excuss to say that the audio sucked because the show was
"live." The Grammy's is the audio industry's biggest night of the
year. IT SHOULD BE PERFECT. Want to hear an example of great live
audio? Listen to Nashville Star on USA Network. Three years of great
sounding LIVE audio. Whoever mixes that show should be hired now by
CBS.

The shame of it is that the jerk who mixed Grammy's will probably win
an Emmy for it. He should get together with the idiot who mixed the
Superbowl pre-game and half-time music. They can tell eachother how
great they are. It wouldn't matter, they are both deaf. There is no
justice in the world.

Tim

"jtougas" wrote:
That'd be Kristen Hall that bailed out. From their website, "Kristen
Hall,
a singer/songwriter specializing in searing heartache, has two
well-received
solo albums." Maybe she went back to solo work? Still odd she jumped
when
they hit it big. Afterall, Madonna was the opener for them. ;o)

My understanding is that Kirsten will still be writing songs for them,
but that she got tired of doing the touring bit.

That's good. Too bad she won't be with the group though. Seems odd without
her.

Having seen Jennifer Nettles live several times before she hit it big
with Sugarland, I can attest to both her hips, and her talent. The
musicians she worked with in that band weren't any slouches, either.

I think she did better with the Sugarland gig than on her own as some of the
mp3's off her own site suck (to be blunt).

Quite nice as a human, too. Hope she doesn't get spoiled by the Big Time.
:-)

How true. Time will tell. I was more pleased with their performance than
with Sara Evans who was the mid-opener on Brad Paisley's tour. I had to be
dragged there to see Sara (yeah, right!) but was more awakened by
Sugarland's Nettle's performance. Some people got it, other's are so-so.

It'll be interesting to watch how the band evolves without Kristen. I did
see their late performance on Jay Leno where Nettles was dressed in some
long black formal dress that didn't look anything like country. I wondered
then if she was going to go out on her own (not to mention the duet on the
other awards show with Bon Jovi).

B~

I find it hard to believe some of the replies I am reading in this
thread! The Grammy looked and sounded great? What show were they
watching/listening to? What I saw and heard was a train wreck!

Then the broadcast mirrored what was going on in the hall, except that
the lights & projection were well done. Sound was atrocious.

1) Sugar Hill performance: Feedback on top of the song, halfway
through the song PGM audio muted and home-viewers heard PL over PGM.
Then a third of the way through the song it happened AGAIN!

We didn't get the comm in the house, but the mix was incomprehensible.

Also, the strings in the John Legend segment were never once audible.
Piano was stunningly harsh.

3) The Sly performance was one-after-another late cues on the vocal
mics. Sly's vocal mic (when he finally arrived on-stage) was OFF for
VERSES! There was two mics side-by-side. The mic that was stage left
of Sly (not the one that he was singing in) was on. The mic that he
was singing in was OFF.

Near as I could tell, he only uttered a few screams, no actual verses.
I believe he also never touched the keyboard he was hovering over.

4) Projection was the worst of any Grammy's in the past five years.
Bruce Springsteen's performance was an obvious (creative) rip off of
the projection design from the Grammy's Simon and Garfunkle performance

from a year or two ago. Simon and Garfunkle looked great. Bruce
looked GREEN and SOFT!

Projection looked OK in the hall, although the house left screen went
blank at one point. Springsteen was the one act that wasn't stupidly
loud, although the fool engineer had so much low end cranked on the
guitar that the piezo pickup was putting out an enormous thump on the
downbeats. I guess that seems cool to some guys; getting 40Hz flappy
boominess out of an instrument that only goes down to 84Hz. Smart.


It's no excuss to say that the audio sucked because the show was
"live." The Grammy's is the audio industry's biggest night of the
year. IT SHOULD BE PERFECT.

It was shocking that the ceremony celebrating the best of the recording
business could sound this lame. This was supposed to be a high
production value affair, & the quality of sound mixing was simply
amateurish.
Scott Fraser

Scott Fraser wrote:
I find it hard to believe some of the replies I am reading in this
thread! The Grammy looked and sounded great? What show were they
watching/listening to? What I saw and heard was a train wreck!

Then the broadcast mirrored what was going on in the hall, except that
the lights & projection were well done. Sound was atrocious.

1) Sugar Hill performance: Feedback on top of the song, halfway
through the song PGM audio muted and home-viewers heard PL over PGM.
Then a third of the way through the song it happened AGAIN!

We didn't get the comm in the house, but the mix was incomprehensible.

Also, the strings in the John Legend segment were never once audible.
Piano was stunningly harsh.

3) The Sly performance was one-after-another late cues on the vocal
mics. Sly's vocal mic (when he finally arrived on-stage) was OFF for
VERSES! There was two mics side-by-side. The mic that was stage left
of Sly (not the one that he was singing in) was on. The mic that he
was singing in was OFF.

Near as I could tell, he only uttered a few screams, no actual verses.
I believe he also never touched the keyboard he was hovering over.

4) Projection was the worst of any Grammy's in the past five years.
Bruce Springsteen's performance was an obvious (creative) rip off of
the projection design from the Grammy's Simon and Garfunkle performance

from a year or two ago. Simon and Garfunkle looked great. Bruce
looked GREEN and SOFT!

Projection looked OK in the hall, although the house left screen went
blank at one point. Springsteen was the one act that wasn't stupidly
loud, although the fool engineer had so much low end cranked on the
guitar that the piezo pickup was putting out an enormous thump on the
downbeats. I guess that seems cool to some guys; getting 40Hz flappy
boominess out of an instrument that only goes down to 84Hz. Smart.


It's no excuss to say that the audio sucked because the show was
"live." The Grammy's is the audio industry's biggest night of the
year. IT SHOULD BE PERFECT.

It was shocking that the ceremony celebrating the best of the recording
business could sound this lame. This was supposed to be a high
production value affair, & the quality of sound mixing was simply
amateurish.
Scott Fraser



God! Thank you both. I thought I must be hypercritical or something.
I couldn't watch it all...both because it wasn't 'that' fascinating a
train wreck; and I was doing other things.

Now I wish I'd caught a few more things...I totally missed U2, for one.

Nobody's commented on the train wreck of 'Yesterday'. McCartney was so
far down in the mix, that not only did the Linkin Park dude drown him
out, even his solo lines weren't up enough.

Then there was Herbie Hancock's performance. I believe he played
piano...I could see him pounding the keys, but about all I could hear
was Aguilera's WAY overheated vocal. Initially I was stunned at the
pairing. After the first few lines I started to actually be impressed
with her pipes. For a moment I wondered if this might be inspired. I
found myself really 'wanting' this to be good.

It didn't happen.

Shortly, her brain started writing checks that that she didn't have the
chops to cash...kept getting farther and farther out there. She started
the song set to '11' and spent the rest of it trying unsuccessfully to
get to 11.5...embarrassing.

BTW, I thought that might have been a wireless com unit bleeding into
somebody's performance wireless; but you say it didn't get into the live
mix? I guess it was somewhere farther down the chain.

Sad.

jak

I'm a folk nazi. Tim sings old songs, but he didn't grow up immersed in
the tradition. But then most of those are dying off, so we might need
another category sooner than later.

What do you think?
A new girl singer, named "Melisma".
She never sings the melody,
but she sure sings lots of notes around "it".
She will need, very good vocal technique, be hotter than hot, etc. Watch out
if she has any "taste" whatsoever, but don't you don't have to worry cause
all she wants to do is oversing everything. Here is the best part:
Her pitch is so bad, you have to AUTO-TUNE EVERY NOTE, but she looks great
on video so you do it.
Ok, now here's the most important question!



WHERE'S DR. KEVORKIAN????????????????



Tom



"jakdedert" wrote in message
news
Scott Fraser wrote:
I find it hard to believe some of the replies I am reading in this
thread! The Grammy looked and sounded great? What show were they
watching/listening to? What I saw and heard was a train wreck!

Then the broadcast mirrored what was going on in the hall, except that
the lights & projection were well done. Sound was atrocious.

1) Sugar Hill performance: Feedback on top of the song, halfway
through the song PGM audio muted and home-viewers heard PL over PGM.
Then a third of the way through the song it happened AGAIN!

We didn't get the comm in the house, but the mix was incomprehensible.

Also, the strings in the John Legend segment were never once audible.
Piano was stunningly harsh.

3) The Sly performance was one-after-another late cues on the vocal
mics. Sly's vocal mic (when he finally arrived on-stage) was OFF for
VERSES! There was two mics side-by-side. The mic that was stage left
of Sly (not the one that he was singing in) was on. The mic that he
was singing in was OFF.

Near as I could tell, he only uttered a few screams, no actual verses.
I believe he also never touched the keyboard he was hovering over.

4) Projection was the worst of any Grammy's in the past five years.
Bruce Springsteen's performance was an obvious (creative) rip off of
the projection design from the Grammy's Simon and Garfunkle performance

from a year or two ago. Simon and Garfunkle looked great. Bruce
looked GREEN and SOFT!

Projection looked OK in the hall, although the house left screen went
blank at one point. Springsteen was the one act that wasn't stupidly
loud, although the fool engineer had so much low end cranked on the
guitar that the piezo pickup was putting out an enormous thump on the
downbeats. I guess that seems cool to some guys; getting 40Hz flappy
boominess out of an instrument that only goes down to 84Hz. Smart.


It's no excuss to say that the audio sucked because the show was
"live." The Grammy's is the audio industry's biggest night of the
year. IT SHOULD BE PERFECT.

It was shocking that the ceremony celebrating the best of the recording
business could sound this lame. This was supposed to be a high
production value affair, & the quality of sound mixing was simply
amateurish.
Scott Fraser



God! Thank you both. I thought I must be hypercritical or something. I
couldn't watch it all...both because it wasn't 'that' fascinating a train
wreck; and I was doing other things.

Now I wish I'd caught a few more things...I totally missed U2, for one.

Nobody's commented on the train wreck of 'Yesterday'. McCartney was so
far down in the mix, that not only did the Linkin Park dude drown him out,
even his solo lines weren't up enough.

Then there was Herbie Hancock's performance. I believe he played
piano...I could see him pounding the keys, but about all I could hear was
Aguilera's WAY overheated vocal. Initially I was stunned at the pairing.
After the first few lines I started to actually be impressed with her
pipes. For a moment I wondered if this might be inspired. I found myself
really 'wanting' this to be good.

It didn't happen.

Shortly, her brain started writing checks that that she didn't have the
chops to cash...kept getting farther and farther out there. She started
the song set to '11' and spent the rest of it trying unsuccessfully to get
to 11.5...embarrassing.

BTW, I thought that might have been a wireless com unit bleeding into
somebody's performance wireless; but you say it didn't get into the live
mix? I guess it was somewhere farther down the chain.

Sad.

jak

..I totally missed U2, for one.

OK, but utterly indecipherable vocals. And there was absolutely nothing
coming out of The Edge's wall of racks, AC30s & Bassmans that could not
have been produced with a couple pedals & a Deluxe Reverb.

Nobody's commented on the train wreck of 'Yesterday'. McCartney was
so
far down in the mix, that not only did the Linkin Park dude drown him
out, even his solo lines weren't up enough.

You could hear McCartney in the hall OK on Yesterday. I think I have a
pretty good idea what McCartney's voice sounds like, being a rabid
Beatle fan for over 40 years, but if I had to do a blindfold test, I
would not have been able to identify his voice in his set based on what
we heard in the hall.

Then there was Herbie Hancock's performance. I believe he played
piano..

There was a piano in front of him, his hands were outstretched & moving
over the keys. If he actually played the instrument there's no way we
could tell because the mixer knows that a jazz piano legend is nowhere
near as important a musical element as making the drums sound like a
hiphop beatbox. So, what was audible was a kick drum, an electric bass
& Aguilera's vocal. There was some shrill upper midrangy noise that the
audio professional engineering this debacle may possibly have created
out of the instrument in front of Herbie, but I can't say for sure.

I could see him pounding the keys, but about all I could hear
was Aguilera's WAY overheated vocal. Initially I was stunned at the
pairing. After the first few lines I started to actually be impressed
with her pipes. For a moment I wondered if this might be inspired. I
found myself really 'wanting' this to be good.

I had heard from an industry insider describing a pre-broadcast
soundcheck with her that when she wants to she can really sing very
credibly. I too wanted to like this bit, & waited for her to reveal
that she had grown up idolizing Ella, Sarah & Carmen.

It didn't happen. Shortly, her brain started writing checks that that
she didn't have the
chops to cash...kept getting farther and farther out there. She
started
the song set to '11' and spent the rest of it trying unsuccessfully to
get to 11.5...embarrassing.

All emoting, no economy. Too many notes, trying to do with
ornamentation what should have been done with soul. Too bad.

BTW, I thought that might have been a wireless com unit bleeding into

somebody's performance wireless; but you say it didn't get into the
live
mix? I guess it was somewhere farther down the chain.

I didn't hear it, but that could have been the exact moment the
management person sitting next to me turned & said "Gee, this is highly
original isn't it?"

And there was feedback during Helter Skelter. Doesn't somebody of his
stature deserve better?

Could anybody actually hear whatever notes were being played whenever
anybody took a guitar solo, or did they all just come off as upper
midrange noise with no particular pitch information attached?
This is as good as our profession is able to do? I'm so ashamed.

Scott Fraser

You know I've noticed this sad trend for some time. The signal to noise
ratio is upside down on much popular stuff. The shear wall of
white/pink/brown/ ? noise from the bank of guitarist pedals is
amazing.Along with the inharmonic flat topped squarewaves they make out
of a beatiful strat tone. I know this is a goal on some death/speed
metal or techno What ever but its bled into everthing these days. The
lack of frequency info versus noise is no longer a rare used "special
effect" but just an overlooked constant in some bands especially live.

Kevin T

Mike Rivers wrote:
I'm a folk nazi. Tim sings old songs, but he didn't grow up immersed in
the tradition.

g I know quite a few "folk nazis", but I'm not one myself (as I'm sure
you can tell). Most of our older, established, traditional musicians
these days grew up listening to the Beatles. What the younger ones
listened to is anybody's guess.

But even today, some do grow up in a tradition if they happen to live in
an area where traditions still thrive, like perhaps Baton Rouge, Cape
Breton, or Galax.

Is there a singer/songwriter "tradition" in Boston or New York? How
about Austin?

"Jim Gilliland" wrote in message
...
Mike Rivers wrote:
I'm a folk nazi. Tim sings old songs, but he didn't grow up immersed in
the tradition.

g I know quite a few "folk nazis", but I'm not one myself (as I'm sure
you can tell). Most of our older, established, traditional musicians
these days grew up listening to the Beatles. What the younger ones
listened to is anybody's guess.

But even today, some do grow up in a tradition if they happen to live in
an area where traditions still thrive, like perhaps Baton Rouge, Cape
Breton, or Galax.

Is there a singer/songwriter "tradition" in Boston or New York? How about
Austin?


There is up in Western Mass, where I am fortunate to live. Long live the
tradition!

In article , flatfish
wrote:[snip]


Also that little alien from Green Day should be ashamed of himself for
that so called "Les Paul Tribute". By the time he makes it to Les's age I
doubt anyone will remember who he was.

There goes your credibility. (If you had any...)

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

Jim Gilliland wrote:

g I know quite a few "folk nazis", but I'm not one myself (as I'm sure
you can tell). Most of our older, established, traditional musicians
these days grew up listening to the Beatles. What the younger ones
listened to is anybody's guess.

It's certainly a problem if we choose to make it one. And one way of
looking at it is that people like Tim O'Brien and Jody Stecher and
Bruce Molsky and Walt Koken are the closest thing we have any more to
certain forms of tradional music. They grew up listening to pop music
but decided to immerse themselves in whatever traditional music they
could find, and sought out people who played it and learned it from
others before them rather than writing new music themselves. But today,
there are far more people learning from recordings of Tim O'Brien than
from watching him and learning how he holds his bow or how he picks his
banjo, and understanding how he harmonizes when he sings with others
(because it's rare to find someone nowadays who actually sings with
others unless he or she is a member of a band).

But even today, some do grow up in a tradition if they happen to live in
an area where traditions still thrive, like perhaps Baton Rouge, Cape
Breton, or Galax.

That's true, and those are the ones who should be getting the Grammys.
But many of them don't record, or when the do, they record what sounds
a lot more like pop music than traditional music, and it's performed in
a way that it's not very easy to learn. Learning how to carry the music
on is to me the essence of folk music.

Is there a singer/songwriter "tradition" in Boston or New York? How
about Austin?

There's certainly a scene, but I would hardly call it a tradition.
Songwriting isn't traditional, but some songs become traditional after
a while. Those are the ones that have some meaning and carry a message,
songs that you can remember the essence of even if you don't remember
the words exactly, and songs that you care enough to sing, even in your
own somewhat corrupted version, for the purpose of keeping them alive
for the next generation.

You can write a song that sounds like an old (or new) folk song, but it
doesn't become a fok song until it gets passed on through a few
generations.

Jay Kadis wrote:

Also that little alien from Green Day should be ashamed of himself for
that so called "Les Paul Tribute". By the time he makes it to Les's age I
doubt anyone will remember who he was.

There goes your credibility. (If you had any...)

Missed that one. Who was the little alien and what did he say about Les
Paul? I'll bet Les would be pleased to have had some influence on Green
Day (if that's what the tribute was about).

But it's true that there are few performers today that are rememberd
for more than about 10 years, much less 80. Though I could name a
couple of dozen singers from when I was growing up (and I'm about to
turn 63) to whom 30- or even 40-somethings would say "who?".

This is as good as our profession is able to do? I'm so ashamed.

It's funny, I can forgive a momentary audio screw up, when it'a good
performance, like feedback etc, this assumes one already has a good mix .
May be someone can come up with an
"oversinging cutoff algorithm" .
That way all the notes used to do one song, could be rearranged endlessly,
and one song could be the whole album. And the we can title the record,
"Style Over Substance Abuse"
Who cares? What does the video look like?

Hey, as long as you do your job to the best of your ability, the shame is
not yours my friend.

Tom











"Scott Fraser" wrote in message
ups.com...
..I totally missed U2, for one.

OK, but utterly indecipherable vocals. And there was absolutely nothing
coming out of The Edge's wall of racks, AC30s & Bassmans that could not
have been produced with a couple pedals & a Deluxe Reverb.

Nobody's commented on the train wreck of 'Yesterday'. McCartney was
so
far down in the mix, that not only did the Linkin Park dude drown him
out, even his solo lines weren't up enough.

You could hear McCartney in the hall OK on Yesterday. I think I have a
pretty good idea what McCartney's voice sounds like, being a rabid
Beatle fan for over 40 years, but if I had to do a blindfold test, I
would not have been able to identify his voice in his set based on what
we heard in the hall.

Then there was Herbie Hancock's performance. I believe he played
piano..

There was a piano in front of him, his hands were outstretched & moving
over the keys. If he actually played the instrument there's no way we
could tell because the mixer knows that a jazz piano legend is nowhere
near as important a musical element as making the drums sound like a
hiphop beatbox. So, what was audible was a kick drum, an electric bass
& Aguilera's vocal. There was some shrill upper midrangy noise that the
audio professional engineering this debacle may possibly have created
out of the instrument in front of Herbie, but I can't say for sure.

I could see him pounding the keys, but about all I could hear
was Aguilera's WAY overheated vocal. Initially I was stunned at the
pairing. After the first few lines I started to actually be impressed
with her pipes. For a moment I wondered if this might be inspired. I
found myself really 'wanting' this to be good.

I had heard from an industry insider describing a pre-broadcast
soundcheck with her that when she wants to she can really sing very
credibly. I too wanted to like this bit, & waited for her to reveal
that she had grown up idolizing Ella, Sarah & Carmen.

It didn't happen. Shortly, her brain started writing checks that that
she didn't have the
chops to cash...kept getting farther and farther out there. She
started
the song set to '11' and spent the rest of it trying unsuccessfully to
get to 11.5...embarrassing.

All emoting, no economy. Too many notes, trying to do with
ornamentation what should have been done with soul. Too bad.

BTW, I thought that might have been a wireless com unit bleeding into

somebody's performance wireless; but you say it didn't get into the
live
mix? I guess it was somewhere farther down the chain.

I didn't hear it, but that could have been the exact moment the
management person sitting next to me turned & said "Gee, this is highly
original isn't it?"

And there was feedback during Helter Skelter. Doesn't somebody of his
stature deserve better?

Could anybody actually hear whatever notes were being played whenever
anybody took a guitar solo, or did they all just come off as upper
midrange noise with no particular pitch information attached?
This is as good as our profession is able to do? I'm so ashamed.

Scott Fraser

Also that little alien from Green Day should be ashamed of himself for
that so called "Les Paul Tribute".

Well you can take the alien of of the rockstar but that might not be a good
idea..........
I remember when Little Richard came into this session I was at, he was
wearing a shower curtain as a cape, he brought his band with him, and they
all played upside down and backwards. Now that was strange.

I heard him say Les was in the hospital, but was that it?


Tom







"flatfish" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 10 Feb 2006 06:10:17 -0800, Scott Fraser wrote:


There was a piano in front of him, his hands were outstretched & moving
over the keys. If he actually played the instrument there's no way we
could tell because the mixer knows that a jazz piano legend is nowhere
near as important a musical element as making the drums sound like a
hiphop beatbox. So, what was audible was a kick drum, an electric bass
& Aguilera's vocal. There was some shrill upper midrangy noise that the
audio professional engineering this debacle may possibly have created
out of the instrument in front of Herbie, but I can't say for sure.

Scott Fraser

The drums were way too loud on just about every tune.
I was getting a normal feed BTW, no HD.
Hancock sounded ok at home but the piano was a bit bright
The other big mistake was not telling the audience who on earth half these
performers were/are...
I was able to figure out some of them, but why not just put a graphic on
the screen with the performers name?

Also that little alien from Green Day should be ashamed of himself for
that so called "Les Paul Tribute". By the time he makes it to Les's age I
doubt anyone will remember who he was.

--
flatfish+++
" Why Do They Call It A flatfish? "

In article t,
"Tommy B" wrote:

Also that little alien from Green Day should be ashamed of himself for
that so called "Les Paul Tribute".

Well you can take the alien of of the rockstar but that might not be a good
idea..........
I remember when Little Richard came into this session I was at, he was
wearing a shower curtain as a cape, he brought his band with him, and they
all played upside down and backwards. Now that was strange.

I heard him say Les was in the hospital, but was that it?


Tom


Pneumonia. He's supposed be released soon.

-Jay
--
x------- Jay Kadis ------- x---- Jay's Attic Studio ------x
x Lecturer, Audio Engineer x Dexter Records x
x CCRMA, Stanford University x http://www.offbeats.com/ x
x---------- http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jay/ ------------x

Missed that one. Who was the little alien and what did he say about Les
Paul? I'll bet Les would be pleased to have had some influence on Green
Day (if that's what the tribute was about).

I missed it, but here's one report:

"Less convincing were the get-well wishes by Billie Joe Armstrong of Green
Day, who read from a piece of paper: "There's a man getting better in a
hospital tonight. . . . His name is Les Paul." From the sound of it, his
name could have been John Doe for all the recognition Armstrong conveyed for
the music legend and guitar pioneer."

Mike Rivers wrote:

there are far more people learning from recordings of Tim O'Brien than
from watching him and learning how he holds his bow or how he picks his
banjo, and understanding how he harmonizes when he sings with others
(because it's rare to find someone nowadays who actually sings with
others unless he or she is a member of a band).

That's one of the great things about the festival and camp circuit.
Some of the festivals really do a good job of putting together workshops
where you can truly watch, question, and learn from the best of our best
musicians, whether traditional or contemporary. And the camps let you
do the same thing over the course of a week or even a month. So while
we no longer have communities that stay put the way they did a hundred
and more years ago, we can still pull interested people into temporary
communities where they can immerse themselves for some period of time.

A friend of mine does sound at Augusta each summer, and he has learned
an incredible amount (not to mention becoming a decent fiddler and
mandolinist).

http://www.augustaheritage.com/2006schedule.html