Log In
Register
5.09pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline
I wonder if it reflects the changes in recording equipment and technology.
([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site! 
6.20pm
7 November 2022
Offline I guess to refute that possibility we’d need recordings of acoustic guitar work in the late 60s that sound crisp, and the reverse, recordings in 80s and 90s that sound used. I can’t think of any examples of the former off hand, but I know James Taylor’s guitar sounds used on his albums in the 80s and 90s. I prefer the used sound myself. When I buy new strings, I don’t get real enjoyment from playing until after a couple of months of regular playing has “de-crisped” that brittle metallic sound.
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
BeatlebugNow today I find, you have changed your mind
1.01am
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline 
I agree, I prefer the warmer sound of Paul’s earlier recordings myself in most cases (a notable exception being “Calico Skies”, where I think the brighter sound perfectly suits the song, and also I’m not sure that song wasn’t slowed down by half a step, which would lend it a warmer sound).
The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:
Sea Belt([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site!
3.08am
7 November 2022
Offline Yes, warmer is a good word. Also comfortably worn, like a trusty pair of shoes. If they get too worn and get holes, it’s time to go back to the guitar store!
The following people thank Sea Belt for this post:
BeatlebugNow today I find, you have changed your mind
