A little Observation

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.

gman

New Yorker
Joined
Jun 13, 2001
Messages
2,570
Location
Highlands of Scotland
I went to see Radiohead in concert last night. Something leapt out straight at me about it. ANY time i have seen U2 live (going back to every tour since UF) I have been left dissapointed at the quality of the sound mix. Yet Radiohead last night was lush. You could clearly define every instrument. Pick out the detail of Hi hats and symbols and the more intricate background sounds.
Same goes with Cds. I have always felt that the sound quality of U2s studio recordings were very poor, and again, compare Radioheads Cds to them, they are light years ahead in terms of sound. Radioheads recordings sound alive, 3 dimensional and vibrant whereas U2s sound dull...flat and lifeless.
SACK THE SOUNDMAN!!:D
 
I went to see Radiohead in concert last night. Something leapt out straight at me about it. ANY time i have seen U2 live (going back to every tour since UF) I have been left dissapointed at the quality of the sound mix. Yet Radiohead last night was lush. You could clearly define every instrument. Pick out the detail of Hi hats and symbols and the more intricate background sounds.
Same venue? Venue has a lot to do with it...

Same goes with Cds. I have always felt that the sound quality of U2s studio recordings were very poor, and again, compare Radioheads Cds to them, they are light years ahead in terms of sound. Radioheads recordings sound alive, 3 dimensional and vibrant whereas U2s sound dull...flat and lifeless.
SACK THE SOUNDMAN!!:D

I agree in some sense, but it depends on which albums we're talking about. A blanket statement comparing all U2 albums to all Radiohead albums is a little ridiculous, for there are far too many factors.
 
U2's first three albums sound better than Pablo Honey, Amnesiac, and Hail To The Thief IMO.
 
Same venue? Venue has a lot to do with it...

No, not same venue, and i know where your coming from BUT.......am talking about the quality of the sound coming directly out of the PA system. Take the Vertigo tour, the vocals were clear one minute, muddy the next and at other times inaudible.

And LemonMelon....i can assure you that on my decent seperates system setup, your statement about u2s first three albums simply isnt true IMHO.
Maybe its down to the individual ear.
 
gman is on the mark....U2's albums have always lacked 'punch'...
Over produced....?
Not mixed well...?
Not mastered well...?
I dont know either, yet it has been a thing I have always battled with as a fan also...
 
No, not same venue, and i know where your coming from BUT.......am talking about the quality of the sound coming directly out of the PA system. Take the Vertigo tour, the vocals were clear one minute, muddy the next and at other times inaudible.

Wow, you went to every show of the Vertigo tour? That's awesome.
 
Stop being a fud BVS! My history of going to see u2 stretches back to EVERY tour from the UF. and each u2 show I have seen, the sound has been less than impressive compared to many other acts i have seen over the years.
 
U2's first three albums were well produced, the next three produced decently, and the last five have been horribly produced.
 
You really need to be comparing venues. U2 Arena shows always play to a full house, including sides and behind the stage.

An open air amphitheater with no building to bounce sound off of an donly having people in front of stage is a lot easier to get the sound right on than every corner of an arena where people on the floor may get a different sound than in the upper reaches at the back. Want the best sound ? Stand next to the sound mixer.
 
Well, sound should be the best standing IN the mixing station not necessarily standing NEXT to it... and even then, the console could have been situated poorly when it comes to the natural acoustics of the room, and where they might deaden, or pop too much.

I haven't seen Radiohead on this tour, but every other time I've seen them, I don't think they've brought their own PA/ sound system, unless it was a few extra speakers and maybe their own mixing console. Who knows. But obviously, U2 travel with their own PA rig, so it could boil down to that. From what I can remember (I haven't seen U2 since Hawaii, and Radiohead since their summer tour in '06 where they played all the new songs), U2's mix is more bass heavy, leading their sound to kind of encompass all four members' outputs and creating a cohesive "unit" of sound. Radiohead have so much more going on that their mix almost demands clarity for every single instrument (and as we all know, they bring just about every instrument ever created on tour with them).

As others have said, I think it comes down to the venue(s) first and foremost. But other than that, I personally think that the way they're mixed live is totally dependent and reliant on the dynamics of the bands.
 
Back
Top Bottom