Talk:Wall of Sound

message: This is trash, the real wall of sound is the kinda thing used in metal, not some crap by this spector guy... I think this should have something to do with the technique of instruments used, not just reverb shit... That would cover the REAL wall of sound
   You sir win the award  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.241.232.122 (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you live to be older, you may someday understand, but you probably won't.  As Heinlein once wrote, "the Meth is a harsh mistress".  Wall of Sound preceded metal (you douche).  Also, check out the Grateful Dead's PA from the mid-70s.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.200.32.170 (talk) 09:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: WTF??

message: anyone have any song examples by artists that really use this type of orchestration?
:I know Trent Reznor uses the reverb-room method for his percussion.  Instead of putting a drum machine directly through an artificial reverb effects machine, he'll take a drum machine and some speakers in a room, put a microphone somewhere else in the room, and then record it.  Just about every synthesized drum you hear in a Nine Inch Nails track is actually a recording of that drum synthesizer being played in the location of some room.  --69.234.183.71 20:06, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples?

message: Unfortunately, there is a 21st century meaning of "Wall of Sound" that has hardly anything to do with Phil Spector (it'd rather OFFEND the quality of his work!) but with mastering as loud as possible, see also Loudness_war. Maybe it could be added to Disambiguation page directly or to THIS page. Well, I'm as reluctant as mastering gurus like Bob Ludwig - answering a "make it louder!" request with: Do you REALLY want that? Seriously? - that is, not fire it on the page without asking first. -andy 80.129.89.152 02:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wall of Sound (disambiguation 2) :-(

message: Discussion moved to Talk:Phil Spector#Merge. Hyacinth 12:03, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge with [[Phil Spector]]?

message: It would be interesting to know if the Wall of Sound technique is being reproduced with modern digital techniques and, if so, what those might be.
* The "wall of sound" concept really only describes the birth of layering as multitrack recording developed (due to Les Paul.) Spector was the first one to widely employ this technique with impunity and the term originates WITH him and ought not be associated with the heavily biased and contentious discussions of "loudness wars" aka the practice of overlimiting final recordings in the MASTERING stage, because Wall of Sound is a MIX concept and this represent "definition creep" and belongs on urban dictionary, not wikipedia, due to lack of historical depth and lack of widespread usage. In addition to layering the use of reverberant spaces, tape delays, etc can be considered a part of it, basically you are talking about three dimensional mixing or spacial mixing, which came into its own even more with the introduction of stereophonic recording and producers like Alan Parsons. This article needs a cleanup from a real engineer.
I'm currently researching, and building a wall of sound template using Logic as my DAW, There are a few teething problems, but, if anyone would like a copy of the template please email me: thompsom15@roehampton.ac.uk  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.182.182 (talk) 16:09, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern Implementations?

message: :Image:Xmas phil spector.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 08:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Xmas phil spector.jpg

message: I think it's inaccurate to say that Spector's 're-production' of Let It Be is any kind of example of the wall of sound, let alone 'the most famous use' of it. 
There's an particular 'feel' to a wall of sound record, which these recordings don't have. The overdubs are standard horn and string arrangements, penned by arranger Richard Anthony Hewson and recorded in a straightforward way.
I suggest removing this part of the article unless someone can come up with a citation to back up the idea that the retouched 'Let It Be' songs were meant to be wall of sound arrangements. The mere fact that Spector's name is on the record isn't enough. 
Domino42 (talk) 03:10, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just did this, using quotation from original LP sleeve. 99.93.246.124 (talk) 21:40, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let It Be album 

message: The section on recording techniques contains some very wacky turns of phrase - megalomanic conundrum, vocal protagonism - rewrite?
Bitbut (talk) 13:50, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Megalomanic conundrum 

message: I've marked the growing list of acts that are purport to use wall of sound production. For these to be included in the article, we need to find reliable sources that use the term (wall of sound) when describing these efforts. Without references, this material is original research and/or fancruft. --Kvng (talk) 21:27, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited other musicians and producers

message: I removed the "see also"-section, linking to loudness war, as I fail to see any relation between these concepts whatsoever. Devanatha (talk) 23:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Unrelated concept

message: but a promo for Spector/WoS. Utterly disgraceful.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.68.94.86 (talk) 15:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: What do you suggest to improve it?--Ilovetopaint (talk) 23:29, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: This is not an article

message: The end of the intro repeats about 70% of the quote from Layering. Perhaps this could be "pared down" to the minimum so that we don't (deja vu) read the same thing twice in the same article.2600:8807:4800:463:3D25:DF12:49E2:D9BE (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A little too much repeated early 

message: The article uses "critical shorthand" in the second paragraph: "Critical shorthand usually reduces the Wall of Sound inaccurately to a maximum of noise.", and then again later: "It has been inaccurately suggested in critical shorthand that Spector's 'wall of sound' filled every second with a maximum of noise". The article fails to define what this term means and the answer is not easily obtainable from a search engine or dictionary search; it seems to be an obscure term used in academia. Ericobnn (talk) 22:41, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: removed from lead, clunky, it's trying to say critics of the method thought 'Wall of Sound' = 'Maximum noise.' Acousmana 20:43, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The use of the term "critical shorthand"