Author Topic: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?  (Read 4005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline astor

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 22
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #15 on: February 14, 2009, 03:26:24 PM »
Rick Rubin is not even a producer per se. All he does is come in once or twice a week during a bands recording session and just gives his opinion of the song out of ear.. He's not even technically savvy he just says what sounds good, what doesn't and what needs to change. He is an armchair producer...lazy just take a look at Metallica's new album which he "produced." And the worst thing is he gets paid top dollar for this the fat b@st@rd....

Offline Bono in Bonolands

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 881
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #16 on: February 14, 2009, 03:38:11 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
U2 said rubin likes the band to come to the studio with the songs completed whilst U2 like to improvise in the studio and mix and match sounds and even songs to make a song. So they work completely differently. U2 wanted to break new ground for this one so he was the wrong guy.he could suit next album or ep if they already have the songs anmd as suggested by bono the next album is a slow one.


Correct.

Offline Bono in Bonolands

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 881
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #17 on: February 14, 2009, 03:39:25 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's too bad things didn't work out, because I really liked the production on The Saints Are Coming.... big drums, upfront vocals; what U2 needs to sound like. I find the past 2 albums to be overcompressed and dynamically lacking.

Saints was a brilliant sound. I wish there was more Saints sound on NLOTH.

jimyjazz

  • Guest
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #18 on: February 14, 2009, 03:50:56 PM »
It may not have had to do with the jamming method of writing.  Rubin's produced the Chili Peppers since 91 and they write by jamming too.  It may have had to do with time constraints and irregular recording due to Bono being a part time member. But I find the jamming thing to be an unlikely deterrent for that Hippy Rick.

Offline adam1

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 274
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #19 on: February 14, 2009, 04:40:28 PM »
Jamming for three weeks and coming up with a good song like 'Kite' does'nt sound bad to me. Thirty six weeks and you've got 12 songs !

I was'nt impressed with 'Window in the Skies'. An album full of songs like that will send me to sleep. Both parties must have gone into it with good intentions and gave it their best shot. At the end of the day, U2 decided they would'nt be happy with the finished product.

Offline Izzy

  • Numb
  • **
  • Posts: 964
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2009, 04:45:26 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Rick Rubin is not even a producer per se. All he does is come in once or twice a week during a bands recording session and just gives his opinion of the song out of ear.. He's not even technically savvy he just says what sounds good, what doesn't and what needs to change. He is an armchair producer...lazy just take a look at Metallica's new album which he "produced." And the worst thing is he gets paid top dollar for this the fat b@st@rd....

Its a bit more than that. He may be more stripped down in his production but he influences everything from the performance on through additional strings etc. He also was a DJ for a group of three guys straight outta brooklyn.

Offline tommyboy6913

  • Refugee
  • *
  • Posts: 240
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2009, 05:35:24 PM »
I think Rick Rubin is a brilliant producer. He won a Grammy this year for Producer of the Year. However, I have not been too impressed with the songs he produced for U2. Namely, Saints, Windows in the Sky, and the other beach clips from 2006. Brian Eno, and Lanois are prefect for u2.

Offline rager1969

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2009, 07:03:03 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's too bad things didn't work out, because I really liked the production on The Saints Are Coming.... big drums, upfront vocals; what U2 needs to sound like. I find the past 2 albums to be overcompressed and dynamically lacking.

And I thought Rubin was the King of Compression, or is that Butch Vig?

Offline rager1969

  • Babyface
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2009, 07:13:43 PM »
Seing as how Rick Rubin produces 1,000 albums a year (exaggerating?), he probably didn't have the time to spend on a U2 album.  It seemed that U2 were starting to write songs before going in the studio, but even if they're "improvising", The Joshua Tree took less than a year to record.  Achtung Baby took about a year to record.  Why is it taking them two plus years now?  I think it's a combination of side work, personal lives and not wanting to put out a "crap record".

Offline Nlee

  • Stateless
  • *
  • Posts: 189
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2009, 07:15:37 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
It's too bad things didn't work out, because I really liked the production on The Saints Are Coming.... big drums, upfront vocals; what U2 needs to sound like. I find the past 2 albums to be overcompressed and dynamically lacking.

And I thought Rubin was the King of Compression, or is that Butch Vig?

There's two different kinds of compression: there's quick attack, slow release drum compression (which is your huge "levee" Zep drum sound) and there's limiting, which sets a hard dynamic threshold.

shockdocta22

  • Guest
Re: Rubin & U2, what went wrong ?
« Reply #25 on: February 14, 2009, 07:22:56 PM »
You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Seing as how Rick Rubin produces 1,000 albums a year (exaggerating?), he probably didn't have the time to spend on a U2 album.  It seemed that U2 were starting to write songs before going in the studio, but even if they're "improvising", The Joshua Tree took less than a year to record.  Achtung Baby took about a year to record.  Why is it taking them two plus years now?  I think it's a combination of side work, personal lives and not wanting to put out a "crap record".


Pretend your a legendary producer.  Would you rather work with some no name band or a legend that is still alive?