Grateful Dead

...Return To

oakland
oct 31st 1991
today

PEACE for ALL
uncle_tripel

I think the mix JC had with the boards from 94-95, to my ears, sound fantastic. It doesn't seem many are in circulation but the "true" boards that are have a very "clean" mix, IMHO. I really wish the great spring 1993 tour was recorded in this way, but alas they werent. Also, I thinnk the drums/space segment from shows really showcase the potentail of this particular recording process. Mickey and Billy were some real MVP's in those final two years of the band

Just my 2 cents

Rock on, gang!

Because it's way Way WAY better than engaging with anything else that might be available/ongoing this evening.

GBtGOGD

double post

7/29/74 bonus disc

"Tempest" by Bob Dylan. How come he has made so many great albums ? Most people I know haven't made any.

A lot to do today!
3/17/95 currently
3/18&19/95 Shlater…

RE: Late era SBs…
I’m guessing John Cutler wasn’t letting folks patch in direct for whatever reason. I would certainly assume they made recordings.
I.e., Like the DATs used for the released DaPs…
Yeah, Harry Popick, the longtime monitor guy (at big mix desk left of Phil) might have been eventually delegated to making recordings? That would make it less likely for direct feeds to tapers…I’m guessing he must have had a master mix for guests or himself (he can hear any of the mixes individually or any combination) since the individual musician mixes were custom, which often did not include all the other musicians and definitely would have had things in their mix at different levels so a feed like that would probably sound pretty goofy to a civilian? i.e., smidge of kick drum, low bass, loud vocals, yours a tad louder, JG, no Vinny…you can customize it any way you like.
Now if someone had a comprehensive, balanced mix, THAT, could sound good, but in my experience, most musicians don’t want everything, or certain things up in their mix, if in it at all.
BITD we didn’t have in ears, so you often would just put certain things in your floor monitor mix, since you’d still hear most of the instruments etc from their amps (and often the PA) I mostly had vocals, a little kick drum, and any acoustic instruments I couldn’t other wise hear. It gets easily cluttered up so you learn to use just what you really need. But they of course were on a whole different level utilizing dozens of channels all custom mixed to their preferences.
Very interesting though? We’ll have to learn more about it.
There definitely are monitor mixes on arch labeled as SBs, but you’d have to think they have better stuff than that in the vault.
PLUS!, remember, this is the digital age now and folks were starting to bring in some serious digital gear by the end…so I can see the band not allowing direct hi res board feeds to such gear, which you could only really guarantee by not having any direct feeds. Pesky DH pranksters would find a way given the opportunity lol
Berry interesting…

Oh, yeah they had a talk feature so they could communicate verbally if need be, which since certain individuals didn’t have everyone in there mix could be helpful,., it was fun when occasionally that would accidentally get into the main PA mix and we’d hear it out front.

...in phl
aug 4th 1974

keep smilin'

PEACE for ALL!
uncle_tripel

Many/most that I’ve heard that are labeled ‘SBD’ are actually ear monitor.
I read years ago that the ear monitors were run by a separate soundboard on side stage which is why you can hear the band members talk to each other.
I don’t think that they sound as good as a true ‘SBD’.
I suspect that the true SBD’s do exist, due to the ease at the time of just recording to a HD, and they are being withheld.

Didn’t get to it on the anniversary so doing it now.

12-inch Klipsch subwoofer makes Phil the star.