Why was Randy Rhoads' tone so crap?

[Ventura]

... and it seems to me a lot of the problem with the sound was RR's insistence on using that noisy tonesucking POS pedalboard...That coupled with the low budget I doubt anyone could have recorded it any better.

I've read this/heard this many a time too. Ozzy apparently called it 'the fry tin' as in something you'd cook popcorn or kippers in. Always hissing and popping away.

Regardless, I think one thing that's come clear on this thread is that the recorded album tone wasn't the same mammoth wall of insane tone that was 'live'. Reality of a player's touch is live, at least IMHO.

And the beat goes on...

 

[headlessdeadguy]

Thanks for ruining everything you fuckers.... Now I'll never listen to either of those albums again because of the bad guitar tone.

 

[Zachman]

Hate to comment on your bullshit post, but maybe YOU have tin ears if you think Blizzard of Ozz guitar tone sounds like a Les Paul into a Marshall Plexi or JCM. The EQ curve is not natural sounding at all.

Its a Distortion + into a MXR eq with the mid sliders cranked. The Altec speakers also have a boosted mid kind of sound.

EXACTLY!!! Clearly the tone wasn't all in anyone's hands. Amazingly, the gear and the way it's used counts too.

 

[skoora]

The year it was recorded has nothing to do with it, or budget. Shit, whole bands recorded live into two mic''s in Sun Studios in the 50's still sounds kick ass today. Tons of NWOBHM stuff sounds better on a fraction of the budget that Ozzy would have had. It was probably just a perfect storm of gear performing as it did on that day and an inexperienced engineer. If you're on a tight schedule with no budget, you're not using 8 mics and triple tracking. So he either over reached or they had a decent amount of time and money to fuck around with and still over reached. We have the Tribute album to take care of all that.

Almost all Ozzy's records sound off in some way. It's just some kick ass songs that make 'em work. The drums on No Rest and Ultimate Sin are pretty bad but I still dig those records a lot. The guitars on Ultimate sound pretty thin and over affected but I enjoy it a lot because of the great playing and good songs.

 

[Epic]

Max Norman's work with Megadeth (RIP, Coundown, Youthanasia etc.) sounds better, IMO. Though RIP sounds good because of the songs/playing more than the "tone," too IMO. So not sure it's entirely his fault.

I believe Blizzard and Diary were Max Norman's first ever real producing jobs. He got better after that. One thing that is being overlooked is that at that time, none of us thought Randy had crap tone. If everyone thought the production on those albums was so poor, again, AT THAT TIME, Max Norman wouldn't have become one of the most in demand producers in the business.

Agreed. FWIW, I'm not saying I think those randy rhoads albums are pure crap, either. It's not my favorite tone, but since the playing speaks for itself, really not a huge deal IMO. Worrying about tone beyond actual songwriting/performance etc. is completely silly internet stuff IMO.

I was going to say something along these lines. I'm pretty new to Internet forums, but from what I've seen so far I'm not impressed. I played guitar for over 10 years, with my only goal being to become proficient at my instrument, before I EVER thought about my over all tone. Once I felt my playing was up to par I went ahead and treated myself to quality gear and really honed in on my sound.

Sitting at a computer in the year 2011 Monday morning quarterbacking a song or album recorded in the 80s seems odd to me. The fact that tone is so subjective means that any hack can have an opinion...and the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

 

[chumbucket]

I think its that funky compressor max Norman put on the guitar tracks (AMS?). Plus the combination of mics I think there's lotsa phase cancellation going on. I'm not a fan of the triple tracked solos either. But the playing is so good for me it doesn't matter.

Yeah, the AMS unit (DDL?) was the culprit. He used it and managed to make it sound like he had a microphone in a hollow pipe. Those things were brand new at the time and Norman was using it gratuitously.

 

[Greazygeo]

I was going to say something along these lines. I'm pretty new to Internet forums, but from what I've seen so far I'm not impressed. I played guitar for over 10 years, with my only goal being to become proficient at my instrument, before I EVER thought about my over all tone. Once I felt my playing was up to par I went ahead and treated myself to quality gear and really honed in on my sound.

Sitting at a computer in the year 2011 Monday morning quarterbacking a song or album recorded in the 80s seems odd to me. The fact that tone is so subjective means that any hack can have an opinion...and the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

I don't know how you can work on one without working on the other.

No one cares about musicianship, theory or music. Its all about gear.

 

[tweed]

It's all Sharon's fault.

 

[Greazygeo]

The year it was recorded has nothing to do with it, or budget. Shit, whole bands recorded live into two mic''s in Sun Studios in the 50's still sounds kick ass today. Tons of NWOBHM stuff sounds better on a fraction of the budget that Ozzy would have had. It was probably just a perfect storm of gear performing as it did on that day and an inexperienced engineer. If you're on a tight schedule with no budget, you're not using 8 mics and triple tracking. So he either over reached or they had a decent amount of time and money to fuck around with and still over reached. We have the Tribute album to take care of all that.

Almost all Ozzy's records sound off in some way. It's just some kick ass songs that make 'em work. The drums on No Rest and Ultimate Sin are pretty bad but I still dig those records a lot. The guitars on Ultimate sound pretty thin and over affected but I enjoy it a lot because of the great playing and good songs.

Ozzy's drums sounds are always pretty bad.

its pretty common knowledge they had very small budgets. That has everything to do with any project.

I can remember coming home from the record store with Blizzard (a real record too) and not having a clue who Ozzy was....just bought it for the cover and stage shot on the back, thought to myself this is probably cool. I'd been playing guitar for maybe a year. Anyway, put it on the record player, turn it up and the first thing I hear is the beginning of I don't Know....that was awesome! Think I played that record 6 times in a row that afternoon. I still think his tones were pretty good....Diary is better but I still listen to Blizzard more often.

 

[JackTripper]

One thing that is being overlooked is that at that time, none of us thought Randy had crap tone.

That's exactly right...most players I know from those days loved his tone at the time. .

I was one of them. It was what it was. Nobody--not EVH, Page or AC/DC --had that tone. Mission accomplished. It's senseless trying to disect it 30 years later. It's like criticizing the gas mileage of a '69 GTO.

 

[charveldan]

Randy had good tone and was in a class by himself, i can think of alot of shite guitar tones but Rhoads isn't one of them.

 

[rlord1974]

.....the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

Clearly, you are on the wrong forum. Please see upper left corner of your monitor screen - you are currently on "Rig-Talk".....

 

[skoora]

I just love when people pick and choose what's important between chops and tone when it helps their argument towards their anointed hero. Like it's been said, this is Rig.....Talk, not chops talk, not Theory Talk, Not Picking Hand Wizardry Talk. To me someone's tone is equally as important as their technique to fully enjoy it. Often the two are sometimes inseparable. I rarely listen to Blizzard because of the production but I do love those songs so I find live versions or some other version to listen to instead. Randy in general did have great tone as the After Hours vids show too but Blizzard is a total mess. Diary though is much better.

 

[Badronald]

I've got a buddy who is a great "musician". But.................he is terrible with tones. I can't listen to him for more than a tune or two. His tone is a terrible mess.

For me they go hand in hand. You have to be able to write a song, but people also have to "listen" to the song.

Offensive tone is, well, offensive.

 

[chunktone]

Yup, probably the guys who recorded it. Even the drums sound like shit on the 2 Ozzy CD's, it wasn't just Randy's guitar. Compared to the early VH records from a production standpoint.........well there is no comparison. However, at the time in the early 80's the Ozzy CD's sounded great and Randy had a unique sound. Plus, the live album sounds great.

This.

Remember, Ozzy wasn't exactly a bankable name in 1980. He was an alcoholic who just got kicked out of Black Sabbath. He wasn't getting the best recording/producing/mixing available at the time.

This!
Ozzy was not in the same boat VH were. I'm sure he had a much smaller recording budget, not to mention not having Warner Bros staff producers etc...Working with really good producers/engineers is not cheap!

 

[Epic]

.....the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

Clearly, you are on the wrong forum. Please see upper left corner of your monitor screen - you are currently on "Rig-Talk".....

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

I've got a buddy who is a great "musician". But.................he is terrible with tones. I can't listen to him for more than a tune or two. His tone is a terrible mess.

For me they go hand in hand. You have to be able to write a song, but people also have to "listen" to the song.

Offensive tone is, well, offensive.

I agree with that 100%, and apparently RR had an awesome live tone, I'm not a fan myself and have no idea. Regarding your buddy, if his tone is THAT bad...throw him a freakin' bone! I've yet to see a bad player with good tone

 

[JakeAC5253]

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

If you had been around for longer you would know, but since you weren't, you wouldn't.

Glad to help

 

[Epic]

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

If you had been around for longer you would know, but since you weren't, you wouldn't.

Glad to help

I ain't losing any sleep, lol.

 

[JakeAC5253]

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

If you had been around for longer you would know, but since you weren't, you wouldn't.

Glad to help

I ain't losing any sleep, lol.

Rig-Talk the main forum has been around for 6-7 years at least now, and people come to this site to view that forum. The theory forum is just over a year old and barely anybody knows about it. Plus gear and tone is much more fun to talk about than playing styles and people don't get so defensive about gear and tone as they do about what playing style is better than another. Just look at this very thread, you can't even discuss someone having poor tone without fifteen people getting belligerent and arguing aimlessly that he was a great player. Who gives a flying whale, we're talking tone here, not style.

 

[Zachman]

.....the fact that tone is placed before MUSICIANSHIP on nearly every online "community" related to guitar makes me sick. I've noticed discussion of actual music and theory is backseat to superficial nitpickings of tone.

Clearly, you are on the wrong forum. Please see upper left corner of your monitor screen - you are currently on "Rig-Talk".....

Um, I'm referring to Rig-talk.com as a whole. Now compare the post count of this forum to the music and theory forum, which is also...like...in rig talk...tell me if you "notice" anything.

I've got a buddy who is a great "musician". But.................he is terrible with tones. I can't listen to him for more than a tune or two. His tone is a terrible mess.

For me they go hand in hand. You have to be able to write a song, but people also have to "listen" to the song.

Offensive tone is, well, offensive.

I agree with that 100%, and apparently RR had an awesome live tone, I'm not a fan myself and have no idea. Regarding your buddy, if his tone is THAT bad...throw him a freakin' bone! I've yet to see a bad player with good tone

Playing music, Engineering, Producing, Writing, & Performing are all different facets that those with more than a hobbyist mindset, should-- imo consider seriously, and not casually dismiss-- BUT being good at one facet does NOT by default make someone good at the other facets.

In "Reality"-- Being a "Theory" genius doesn't equate to being a monster player, writer, engineer, or performer either-- doesn't hurt, but doesn't mean much if one isn't talented to begin with... Can't teach talent.