Overdubbing: Difference between revisions

Not much. With Bill and U.K. the rehearsals had almost nothing to do with what ultimately went on the records. We just played bits and pieces of songs, and they would shake them up and record them. Then we had to try to reproduce those parts live. And I just don't feel at home doing that. I'd 'rather play something first, and then record it. Now, I'm not against overdubbing - it's great. It's nice to embellish things, but I think that the important things should go down on the tracks so that when you play the songs onstage, nine times out of ten they'll sound better. With U.K., particularly, we had millions of overdubs, and then we had to try to decide who could play what parts live because one guy doesn't have four hands, and so on. Again it comes back to the magical quality of interplay between band members.

   

"For me, yeah. That's not to say the product is no good. But it was too sterile for me. Too cold. I'd like to think that you could do a good piece of music in the studio and take it to a gig and play it better. Those kind of bands are always chasin' the album. Everything is done in bits and pieces. And it drives me crazy. The only thing I felt reasonably happy about was that I got left to do the guitar pretty much at the end by myself, which was great. Everything was put together by then and I could just play along with the tape.