BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Yeah, for JMJ's stuff, distorted is way better. Marvin was nice for once, but his sound is to sissy for JM's music IMHO

IOHO! (In our humble opinion)

Have no clue, I think I have got a short memory!!!

Love Leelene

GeeJee wrote:Yeah, for JMJ's stuff, distorted is way better. Marvin was nice for once, but his sound is to sissy for JM's music IMHO

You know you can diztort the guitar sound in many ways.
I think a very hard and havy distorted guitar with super overdrive and stuff is just a way to make the strings more sensitive and alow you to play faster with only the fingers on the guitar neck.
For an example Mike Oldfield often use a "slightly" distorted guitar and that in my opinion makes it a bit harder because you really have to pick every string to make it sound properly.
The sound itself though is a matter of taste. To Jarre's music I think you can use many different guitar sounds depending on wich track you choose.

Yeah, sure, you're right, I mean I don't really like Marvin's clean sound and style of playing.

GeeJee wrote:Yeah, sure, you're right, I mean I don't really like Marvin's clean sound and style of playing.

Yeap...I'm with you on that one. I guess even his GLASSES was kind of sissy.
Well, put it like that I think JMJ's music doesn't belong in the 50's.
In that case I choose Mr. Rondat 5 times over.

Wahey - finally someone who seems to love Rondat's input

Rondat blew me away at the Mont Saint Michel concert, when he entered the musical stage at Chronologie 2. I think it'll be Chronologie 2 forever for me.

For me .....Digi Sequencer

avalonia wrote:For me .....Digi Sequencer

That's almost an entire track...