REC
Active topics
  1. I am noticing a trend lately of mixing IEM with audience & am wondering why? A clean IEM is the gold standard IMO. Why muck it up with a bunch of "whoooohoooos" all the time.

    Like Seattle 2017 IEM + Audience. Couldn't a clean IEM be posted as well??



  2. Originally posted by andrewinbrooklyn:I am noticing a trend lately of mixing IEM with audience & am wondering why? A clean IEM is the gold standard IMO. Why muck it up with a bunch of "whoooohoooos" all the time.

    Like Seattle 2017 IEM + Audience. Couldn't a clean IEM be posted as well??



    [..]
    A pure IEM will please IEM fans only whereas an IEM/Audience mix will likely appeal to a wider audience. That would be the case for me.

    IEM's are fascinating but I can't enjoy listening to one for more than a view minutes. Bono sounds terrible when he is isolated in some of those IEM recordings.
  3. I have to concede that is a fair point. And I certainly do download anything IEM/audience.

    An IEM feels more intimate to me... with the count ins from Joe(?) and all.

    I remember the days of paying $20+ for a mediocre audience CASSETTE tape so Im thankful for it all.
  4. I really cannot stand IEM recordings. They're so dry and lifeless.
  5. I listen to live recordings to relive the show or to imagine what a show felt like. One of my favourite shows to listen to is the edomedo recording of Barcelona 1 in 2009 simply due to the fact that it sounds exactly how the show sounded on the night for me. It's a great recording but Milan on the same tour is heralded as being superior but I dislike that one purely because it doesn't sound like how I hear the gigs.

    Same goes for IEM's. They are super interesting but not an enjoyable listen for me.
  6. A IEM is not, and never will be, the gold standard.

    Each IEM is individually mixed for each band member to their preference. Amsterdam 2015 is very clearly mixed with low guitar and loud vocal left ear and clear equal drum/bass in right. It's not the sound of the band you hear but the sound Adam prefers to make sure he makes his parts correct.

    Cardiff 2005 has a drop out in Gloria so all you can hear at one point is the DURNGDURGNDURNG of raw bass.

    Each IEM is customised to the band members preferred sound they need to play in time with everyone else. Guitars will be too loud, or very quiet, or vocals will be absent, in IEM's. It's not representative of the bands sound.

    A Matrix that takes the audience recording is the best solution as it allows to add atmosphere and fill out any missing or low mixed instrumentation.
  7. Originally posted by markreed:A IEM is not, and never will be, the gold standard.

    Each IEM is individually mixed for each band member to their preference. Amsterdam 2015 is very clearly mixed with low guitar and loud vocal left ear and clear equal drum/bass in right. It's not the sound of the band you hear but the sound Adam prefers to make sure he makes his parts correct.

    Cardiff 2005 has a drop out in Gloria so all you can hear at one point is the DURNGDURGNDURNG of raw bass.

    Each IEM is customised to the band members preferred sound they need to play in time with everyone else. Guitars will be too loud, or very quiet, or vocals will be absent, in IEM's. It's not representative of the bands sound.

    A Matrix that takes the audience recording is the best solution as it allows to add atmosphere and fill out any missing or low mixed instrumentation.
    Reading your first sentence makes it obvious you never heard an Adam IEM feed, sorry.
  8. I don't actually care with members it is - it was an arbitrary example. Other bands IEM's are circulating as well with horiffic sound mxies.
  9. It doesn't change the fact the Amsterdam 2015 (I mean the one circulating) isn't an Adam feed but simply two feeds completely panned, one on the left, and obviously one on the right.
  10. Yeah, whatever. I haven't the patience to debate semantics about individual IEM's. My original points stand whether you agree with them or not.
  12. Who cares?