Has everyone seen Neil's latest tweet over on Twitter?

Apparently, he wants to bring us along for the ride as he lays down the tracks on his new album. 

Webcasts every Friday in August (His words). 5PM Australian Eastern Time. (GMT +10:00) August 4th, 11th, 18th, 25th & Sept 1st.

________________________________________________________________________________________

 

And so, that's how it goes. Never the first, always the last to know! Last To Know-Neil Finn "

 

*There's a lot of good acts around. Plenty of profound performers, but there's only one, who really gets through to me*

Original Post
silent stream posted:

but, um, do we take from this that he has NOT recorded anything yet as we had all been led to believe ?

Or has he thrown out what he had for this live idea?

I don't think Neil or anyone else has specifically said he's been recording his solo album, I think it's just been said that he's "working on it" and our minds naturally went to recording.

He's also been "working on" an album together with Liam - if any recording has been mentioned it's probably in connection with that album.

I seem to recall that Mick Fleetwood's visit a while back involved some recordings. So I too was under the impression that there were recordings in progress.

Whether or not they end up being for a Neil & Liam collaboration, a musical with Tim, some kind of reworking of old CH songs, or another 7 Worlds Collide-type project, we'll just have to wait a little longer...

This is very good news.  Should be fascinating to follow along as the songs "take shape."  Neil Finn said today that this is likely to be his most complex project to date.  And the brilliant Victoria Kelly is helping write the arrangements which may be the best news as Victoria and Neil work so well together. Can't wait!

First, thrilled to be a getting a new NF album.

To dig a little deeper here, I have to admit to having slightly mixed feelings about the process. I mean, judging from his live improvisational songs over the years, alone, if anyone could pull off something more spontaneous, it's Neil Finn. On the other hand, judging from the development of some of my favorite CH/NF songs from demo through final recording, sometimes taking a step back and rethinking a song with a good, objective producer's input creates magic. 

I guess he's splitting the difference here by doing the song composition first (as well as including older, already established songs) and just playing with more spontaneous arrangement ideas in the studio. Plus, I suppose the same kind of rethinking and evolution that happened to "Now We're Getting Somewhere" and "Fall At Your Feet" could happen during the arranging process. Either way, he'll certainly be getting a lot of feedback on the progress, so he'll have an idea what everybody (including the fans) thinks, which he can take into account, in terms of the songs and what to include or not on the final album, if he chooses to. 

I'm very interested in seeing the process and hearing the final results, but some little voice inside is just worried that setting the mixing, mastering and release all on the same date - where just allowing the public to watch the entire process up to that point would have generated enough interest and spontaneity, alone -  may not be a particularly useful risk he NEEDS to take artistically. I'm not sure, exactly, what the point is of rushing the final steps and trying to compact them into one day. He could have attempted it in one day and released it that way if he was thrilled with the results, but leaving himself no escape clause means if he's not 100% happy, artistically, with the results, he's knowingly releasing an album with which he COULD have been completely satisfied had he allowed for a little reflection. 

Ultimately, I have faith in Neil to know what he's doing and to know what he needs to keep himself as actively engaged in the process of creating music as possible at this point in his career. Maybe it's simply a mental bias on my part that I'd prefer to hear a new album without having to consider the context in which it was made as part of the artistic statement (for instance, it's almost impossible to divorce Nick Cave's new album from the context of the tragic loss of his son, which, for me, at least, colors the final results in some way). If one publicly puts unnecessary, purposeful restrictions and limitations on oneself in creating a piece of art, can that art ever truly be viewed independently of those restrictions and limitations? Will there always be an (at the very least, subconscious) addition of "despite the restrictions" or "for an album made under those limitations" to any opinion of the results and/or the sense that somehow the restrictions were a "gimmick" or some reflexive assumption that the results may not be as good as they could have been had the artist not placed those restrictions on themselves (though we'll never know)?

koabac posted:

First, thrilled to be a getting a new NF album.

To dig a little deeper here, I have to admit to having slightly mixed feelings about the process. I mean, judging from his live improvisational songs over the years, alone, if anyone could pull off something more spontaneous, it's Neil Finn. On the other hand, judging from the development of some of my favorite CH/NF songs from demo through final recording, sometimes taking a step back and rethinking a song with a good, objective producer's input creates magic. 

I guess he's splitting the difference here by doing the song composition first (as well as including older, already established songs) and just playing with more spontaneous arrangement ideas in the studio. Plus, I suppose the same kind of rethinking and evolution that happened to "Now We're Getting Somewhere" and "Fall At Your Feet" could happen during the arranging process. Either way, he'll certainly be getting a lot of feedback on the progress, so he'll have an idea what everybody (including the fans) thinks, which he can take into account, in terms of the songs and what to include or not on the final album, if he chooses to. 

I'm very interested in seeing the process and hearing the final results, but some little voice inside is just worried that setting the mixing, mastering and release all on the same date - where just allowing the public to watch the entire process up to that point would have generated enough interest and spontaneity, alone -  may not be a particularly useful risk he NEEDS to take artistically. I'm not sure, exactly, what the point is of rushing the final steps and trying to compact them into one day. He could have attempted it in one day and released it that way if he was thrilled with the results, but leaving himself no escape clause means if he's not 100% happy, artistically, with the results, he's knowingly releasing an album with which he COULD have been completely satisfied had he allowed for a little reflection. 

Ultimately, I have faith in Neil to know what he's doing and to know what he needs to keep himself as actively engaged in the process of creating music as possible at this point in his career. Maybe it's simply a mental bias on my part that I'd prefer to hear a new album without having to consider the context in which it was made as part of the artistic statement (for instance, it's almost impossible to divorce Nick Cave's new album from the context of the tragic loss of his son, which, for me, at least, colors the final results in some way). If one publicly puts unnecessary, purposeful restrictions and limitations on oneself in creating a piece of art, can that art ever truly be viewed independently of those restrictions and limitations? Will there always be a (subconscious, at the very least) addition of "despite the restrictions" or "for an album made under those limitations" to any opinion of the results and/or the sense that somehow the restrictions were a "gimmick" or some reflexive assumption that the results may not be as good as they could have been had the artist not placed those restrictions on themselves (though we'll never know)?

I agree with your concerns about getting the best out of Neil when he allows a little editorial control to pass to someone else but I also think Neil has let himself down a few times by overthinking things. I think many felt that Intriguer ended up losing much of the spontaneity he was seeking once it got to the studio and he started second guessing himself. I suspect that his decision to do this in public (and to mix and master the album in a day while we watch) is an attempt to force himself into not being able to overthink things: he's set himself a deadline he needs to keep.

Finally, I think magic can happen this way: The Beatles famously recorded their debut album in a day (albeit with the addition of four tracks recorded previously) and most of their material was worked up in the studio on the day each songwriter presented their song to the others.

I suspect in truth, that this isn't going to be as "bottom up" as it's being made out. Rest assured the songs are written, the players rehearsed. This is about trying to catch some of that spontaneity I mentioned earlier and, by doing so in public, adds a little excitement that may otherwise be missing.

if nothing else, it shows that our man is prepared to do something new and different even at this (later) stage in the game. Whether it works or not will, as with all projects, depend on the quality of the songs rather than the way they're recorded.

Paul H posted:

I suspect that his decision to do this in public (and to mix and master the album in a day while we watch) is an attempt to force himself into not being able to overthink things: he's set himself a deadline he needs to keep.

Where are you guys getting this idea about mixing and mastering the album all in one day?

As far as I know, we only have the Spinoff article and Neil's announcement video to go on. And neither of them mention mixing or mastering. They just say the album will be recorded in one 3 hour session with songs being played no more than twice.

I tend to agree with those who are saying that Neil can sometimes overthink his songs so studio versions are often vastly inferior to the live versions. Some of the best versions of Neil's songs have been live such as 7 Worlds Collide, Sessions at West 54th, the Auckland concert from 2015, etc. I cannot wait to hear these 11 songs as they evolve and breathe over the next month.

Paul H posted:
koabac posted:

First, thrilled to be a getting a new NF album.

To dig a little deeper here, I have to admit to having slightly mixed feelings about the process. I mean, judging from his live improvisational songs over the years, alone, if anyone could pull off something more spontaneous, it's Neil Finn. On the other hand, judging from the development of some of my favorite CH/NF songs from demo through final recording, sometimes taking a step back and rethinking a song with a good, objective producer's input creates magic. 

I guess he's splitting the difference here by doing the song composition first (as well as including older, already established songs) and just playing with more spontaneous arrangement ideas in the studio. Plus, I suppose the same kind of rethinking and evolution that happened to "Now We're Getting Somewhere" and "Fall At Your Feet" could happen during the arranging process. Either way, he'll certainly be getting a lot of feedback on the progress, so he'll have an idea what everybody (including the fans) thinks, which he can take into account, in terms of the songs and what to include or not on the final album, if he chooses to. 

I'm very interested in seeing the process and hearing the final results, but some little voice inside is just worried that setting the mixing, mastering and release all on the same date - where just allowing the public to watch the entire process up to that point would have generated enough interest and spontaneity, alone -  may not be a particularly useful risk he NEEDS to take artistically. I'm not sure, exactly, what the point is of rushing the final steps and trying to compact them into one day. He could have attempted it in one day and released it that way if he was thrilled with the results, but leaving himself no escape clause means if he's not 100% happy, artistically, with the results, he's knowingly releasing an album with which he COULD have been completely satisfied had he allowed for a little reflection. 

Ultimately, I have faith in Neil to know what he's doing and to know what he needs to keep himself as actively engaged in the process of creating music as possible at this point in his career. Maybe it's simply a mental bias on my part that I'd prefer to hear a new album without having to consider the context in which it was made as part of the artistic statement (for instance, it's almost impossible to divorce Nick Cave's new album from the context of the tragic loss of his son, which, for me, at least, colors the final results in some way). If one publicly puts unnecessary, purposeful restrictions and limitations on oneself in creating a piece of art, can that art ever truly be viewed independently of those restrictions and limitations? Will there always be a (subconscious, at the very least) addition of "despite the restrictions" or "for an album made under those limitations" to any opinion of the results and/or the sense that somehow the restrictions were a "gimmick" or some reflexive assumption that the results may not be as good as they could have been had the artist not placed those restrictions on themselves (though we'll never know)?

I agree with your concerns about getting the best out of Neil when he allows a little editorial control to pass to someone else but I also think Neil has let himself down a few times by overthinking things. I think many felt that Intriguer ended up losing much of the spontaneity he was seeking once it got to the studio and he started second guessing himself. I suspect that his decision to do this in public (and to mix and master the album in a day while we watch) is an attempt to force himself into not being able to overthink things: he's set himself a deadline he needs to keep.

Finally, I think magic can happen this way: The Beatles famously recorded their debut album in a day (albeit with the addition of four tracks recorded previously) and most of their material was worked up in the studio on the day each songwriter presented their song to the others.

I suspect in truth, that this isn't going to be as "bottom up" as it's being made out. Rest assured the songs are written, the players rehearsed. This is about trying to catch some of that spontaneity I mentioned earlier and, by doing so in public, adds a little excitement that may otherwise be missing.

if nothing else, it shows that our man is prepared to do something new and different even at this (later) stage in the game. Whether it works or not will, as with all projects, depend on the quality of the songs rather than the way they're recorded.

I imagine (and hope) you're correct in that this will bring out some new energy and creative zest in Neil. He definitely seems to like to shake things up, take more chances and experiment with his solo albums (rather than with CH) - and the results are always, at least, interesting, and many times transcendent. 

slowpogo posted:
Paul H posted:

I suspect that his decision to do this in public (and to mix and master the album in a day while we watch) is an attempt to force himself into not being able to overthink things: he's set himself a deadline he needs to keep.

Where are you guys getting this idea about mixing and mastering the album all in one day?

As far as I know, we only have the Spinoff article and Neil's announcement video to go on. And neither of them mention mixing or mastering. They just say the album will be recorded in one 3 hour session with songs being played no more than twice.

I got it from this article:

 

http://www.udiscovermusic.com/...-new-album-silence-1

ah ok. Hmm, I love the rest of his plan but this mixing/mastering part kind of worries me. Even someone like Bob Clearmountain, known for his speed, might still take several hours to mix a song (I seem to recall it took him about 10 days to mix Together Alone, which was considered blisteringly fast). Neil also says this album features his most complex arrangements to date.

All of which makes it seem very reckless to mix 11 tracks in one day AND leave time enough to master.

I'm all for the spontaneity and crowd-sourcing of the album recording process. But I wish he'd allow even just TWO days to mix and master.

slowpogo posted:

ah ok. Hmm, I love the rest of his plan but this mixing/mastering part kind of worries me. Even someone like Bob Clearmountain, known for his speed, might still take several hours to mix a song (I seem to recall it took him about 10 days to mix Together Alone, which was considered blisteringly fast). Neil also says this album features his most complex arrangements to date.

All of which makes it seem very reckless to mix 11 tracks in one day AND leave time enough to master.

I'm all for the spontaneity and crowd-sourcing of the album recording process. But I wish he'd allow even just TWO days to mix and master.

Right? I agree with the comments about trying to throw some spontaneity and urgency into the recording process, but I'm not really sure I see the creative advantage of forcing yourself to mix, master and release an album in one day. If, for whatever reason, he really IS attempting to avoid the issues from which some say "Intriguer" suffered, I would think those issues originated long before the mixing and mastering stages. Then again, NF knows himself and how to make albums as well as anyone does, so he must have his reasons. 

Add Reply

Likes (2)
Okada KeisukeAnnie99999
Post
    All times London, UK.

    ©1998-Eternity, Frenz.com. All post content is the copyrighted work of the person who wrote it. Please don't copy, reproduce, or publish anything you see written here without the author's permission.
×
×
×
×
×