Jump to content
Tina Sixx

Green Day is already going straight into the studio?

Recommended Posts

Soooooo I heard that the band is going to start recording a new record as sooooooon as the RevRad Tour is over. Like asap. Anyone else hear any news about this? I find this super exciting! Waiting so long better albums before! And a new sooner than later would've awesome!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has been suggested recently but I think we all need to keep calm.  Nobody wants more music than me but there are still the engagements this week and Revrad shows in South America to go and let's not burnout (sic) the band.  I would rather wait a bit longer than put them under unnecessary stress, they need a break too!  I am not trying to burst anyone's bubble or be negative, but they are human and by the time they finish in November they will have been on the road for more than a year! Imagine what that must be like, wow.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Starlight said:

Where did you hear that? Did it happen to be from @BillnTed?

@BillnTed answer us please

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, MysticManiac said:

If they plan on releasing an album this quickly after RevRad, I think we can rule out any big project or epic album like AI/21CB/trilogy. It's more likely to be just a regular album like Warning or RevRad which certainly isn't a bad thing

It's Green Day and it's new material,who can't say no on that?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, GreenDayTheory said:

It's Green Day and it's new material,who can't say no on that?

Yeah I'm fine with GD releasing another album like RR or Warning. Those albums are quite high on my album ranking. Personally AI and 21CB are my favourite but idk if GD would/should release another album like that

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yay, the thread is finally here and @LaughingClock is famous :lol:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a happy medium between the simplicity of RevRad and the ambition of 21CB. At the hint that they want to do something more ambitious than RevRad next, I'm thinking an actual full size studio with the Jasons and a Producer involved. Just that would result in a bigger album without going too overboard. Just great songs is all they need to be off and running.

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They most likely just want to keep the momentum going, same for most bands/artists. They've got the resources to do whatever they want so may as well make the most of the creativity!

  • Like 3
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MysticManiac said:

If they plan on releasing an album this quickly after RevRad, I think we can rule out any big project or epic album like AI/21CB/trilogy. It's more likely to be just a regular album like Warning or RevRad which certainly isn't a bad thing

I actually like Warning and RevRad best. And the Trillogy was really great. It was very real and free sounding with lots of experimentation and it felt very true and open. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MysticManiac said:

Yeah I'm fine with GD releasing another album like RR or Warning. Those albums are quite high on my album ranking. Personally AI and 21CB are my favourite but idk if GD would/should release another album like that

Green Day's probably go with a concept album.Maybe 21th Century Breakdown part 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be sweet. That's all I know!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MysticManiac said:

Yeah I'm fine with GD releasing another album like RR or Warning. Those albums are quite high on my album ranking. Personally AI and 21CB are my favourite but idk if GD would/should release another album like that

Tbh, whatever they end up doing, I hope they go back into a proper studio. I like the songs on RevRad, but some of their best albums in my opinion were produced in a studio environment under, let's say, also some creative pressure. Production is also an important point, because RevRad's production felt a bit too cheap and compressed for my liking. Of course, going back into the studio may not change anything in that respect, but production has usually been quite good on Green Day albums, at least starting from Dookie up until 21CB (please don't hate me, I just think Butch Vig didn't do such a great job there, production on American Idiot and previous albums was much better in my opinion). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MillenniumFan said:

Tbh, whatever they end up doing, I hope they go back into a proper studio. I like the songs on RevRad, but some of their best albums in my opinion were produced in a studio environment under, let's say, also some creative pressure. Production is also an important point, because RevRad's production felt a bit too cheap and compressed for my liking. Of course, going back into the studio may not change anything in that respect, but production has usually been quite good on Green Day albums, at least starting from Dookie up until 21CB (please don't hate me, I just think Butch Vig didn't do such a great job there, production on American Idiot and previous albums was much better in my opinion). 

Everything since 1975 is too compressed in my opinion.  Little known fact, it was actually the Beatles (the band to really start playing with sonic differences and engineering tactics in the studio) who really took advantage of compression, eventually for loudnesss, especially how it plays on the air (radio).

Go listen to Led Zeppelin 1 on vinyl with cans to really hear dynamic range that we don't get ever anymore.

Dynamic range is hearing the spaciality of the instruments that are miced.  Such as hearing a guitar over there, a bass over there and something else over there. The loss of that is the cost of loudness (compression).

Visually, this is a compressed waveform:

dont-stop-believin-compressed-wav.jpg

And here is a more spacial waveform. Keep in mind that waveforms as I'm showing them here are recorded digital samples of recorded music. It was once all tapes and reels and a machine to show the analogue version of this in various forms.

A less compressed and better looking waveform:

1480265737878

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, herewegoagain said:

^^ Pretty much.

Plus Billie just literally said they want to "make more music" so there's an indication they're pumped to get back in the studio. 

billie should start using blue is the studio again

  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would as u know love to see a live DVD and a live album. And then in a few years they can make a studio album. What i actually thought about one day, might not be a good idea at all, but i have always dreamed a bit for a Green Day Acoustic album... All the hits on one album , just acoustic. 

  • Like 2
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@LaughingClock You're probably right and some Green Day albums (such as American Idiot) were very compressed already. But I don't know, I especially dislike the production on RevRad. I like that it's less polished than the trilogy or 21. Century Breakdown, but Green Day's sound has always flourished somewhere in between. Enough compression and polishing to make for a more tidy and less overwhelmingly raw sound, but not too much to drown out any of the vibrance, energy and punch. This works well with Green Day's music, as it is at least instrumentally, not all too complicated. I think however, what really took the general sound of mainstream music to where it is today was (and still is) the loudness war. In the 90s Oasis and the Red Hot Chili Peppers were some of the first culprits in the rock/alternative scene, but of course, this was happening across the board, mostly in pop music. When I'm talking about compression, I'm talking about digital limiting, a technology that first really came around in the 90s. This is what took compression to a whole new level. There's also standard compression which, yes, reduces the dynamic range to a certain extent, but if used appropriately, this can actually enhance certain songs. Digital limiting rarely does on the other hand. This is one of the main reasons why everything on the radio/charts today appears to sound more or less the same (though there are of course other factors; such as dumbed down lyrics, simple chord progressions or song structure etc. the list goes on).

EDIT: Yes, the actual reduction in file size through lossy audio formats on internet streaming services and portable sound devices such as iPods is also a large factor. Really frustrating that you have sometimes got to go to great lengths to find high quality lossless audio...

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MillenniumFan said:

@LaughingClock You're probably right and some Green Day albums (such as American Idiot) were very compressed already. But I don't know, I especially dislike the production on RevRad. I like that it's less polished than the trilogy or 21Century Breakdown, but Green Day's sound has always flourished somewhere in between. Enough compression and polishing to make for a more tidy and less overwhelmingly raw sound, but not too much to drown out any of the vibrance, energy and punch. This works with Green Day's music, as it is at least instrumentally, not all too complicated. I think however, what really took the general sound of mainstream music to where it is today, was (and still is) the loudness war. In 90s Oasis and Red Hot Chili Peppers were some of the first culprits in the rock/alternative scene, but of course, this was happening across the board, mostly in pop music. When I'm talking about compression, I'm talking about digital limiting, a technology that first really came around in the 90s. This is what took compression to a whole new level. There's also standard compression which, yes, reduces the dynamic range to a certain extent, but if used appropriately, this can actually enhance certain songs. Digital limiting rarely does on the other hand. This is one of the main reason why everything on the radio/charts today appears to sound more or less the same (though there are of course other factors; such as dumbed down lyrics, simple chord progressions or song structure etc. the list goes on).

Yes, I wasn't trying to debate anything about the compression or anything, just letting people know who might not what compression actually is. That's all my post was there.

Here, I do actually disagree with you a little. Right now the biggest problem with music is not compression (well it is) but a different kind of compression.

Compression in the form of MP3 to reduce file size for streaming and storage in 1997.

THE EXACT same compression algorithm used in 1997 is the one used today and it's a 10 to 1 compression algorithm. This is NOT a lossless codec.

A compressor/decompressor is a digital method of making something small and then injecting it back to be large again once playing. In 1997, MP3s were great as storage was much more expensive and streaming was much more slow.

THE ONLY reason we still use MP3 is because the average user doesn't care about sound as much as they think. You would think the studios would start pushing a new compression that is lossless such as FLAC which is a lossless algorithm.

Example. Here is for simplicity an algorithm.

A sample is made of x amount of slices and we can make them large enough now that those slices are so close to each other it's damn near analogue in it's capture. For example if you make 3 samples over a sound wave, it will play back like shit but 500 over that same slice will sample (record) the sliced audio a ton and make it completely lossless.

But to deliver and stream a lossless codec, you need to use one.

So we record something live and turn it into a bunch of 1s and 0s.

Fake algorithm on the compression part; Remove a "1" after anywhere where there are three "0"s in a row.

Fake algorithm on the uncompression: Insert a "1" after anywhere there are three "0"s in a row.

This would be a completely lossless algorithm but the files would be huge.  There are much more complicated lossless algorithms.

Mp3 are notoriously lossy and make it sound like shit WAY more than any comprsssion does. The fact that people are even judging stuff when they are steaming it over an MP3 always makes me nuts.

FLAC or some other codec including MP4 would be a million times better for making the original product reproduced as intended.

The biggest enemy of sonic quality right now are codecs (specifically mp3s), not compression. (Although codec is a compression as to not be confused, it's a compression of a file, not the waveform). I am saying that to the uniniatiated. I know you understand this.

Its something that desperately needs fixing. :off soapbox:

Edit: Still using MP3s is the sonic equivalent to still watching a 480i cathoray tube television then a 4K one today and yet we have tons of lossless video codecs but still using MP3s because people more easily see the difference.  However, if you polled people and gave them an A/B choice of audio, the difference between MP3 and FLAC would be massive.

I implore all of you to demand better audio!

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×