Rolling Stones Superbowl Sound By ABC Was Attrocious

[EdwardGein]

I hope someone loses their job on this one The halftime sound of the Rolling Stones at the Superbowl was attrocious and would have been rejected for a bootleg CD as not good enough. I don't know how a major network on a major show for a major band could allow this to happen. The Stones, not that I personally care- I think they sucked after Mick Taylor left, should be ticked off beyond belief at whoever did the sound. I'm sure with their monitors they weren't aware of this but it was recorded as if there was no PA run through or something. Absolutely ridiculous and no excuse for ABC. The sound by Paul McCartney last year was flawless & this was a disgrace. The terrible sound had nothing to do with their playing.

[westcott]

I hope someone loses their job on this one The halftime sound of the Rolling Stones at the Superbowl was attrocious and would have been rejected for a bootleg CD as not good enough. I don't know how a major network on a major show for a major band could allow this to happen. The Stones, not that I personally care- I think they sucked after Mick Taylor left, should be ticked off beyond belief at whoever did the sound. I'm sure with their monitors they weren't aware of this but it was recorded as if there was no PA run through or something. Absolutely ridiculous and no excuse for ABC. The sound by Paul McCartney last year was flawless & this was a disgrace. The terrible sound had nothing to do with their playing.

I agree totally. It sounded like a bad MP3 recording. The sound man should be taken out back and taught the Huntsville Hustle.

I watched U2 Vertigo Tour live the night before and it sounded perfect.

[phillyguy]

Man, I glad I am not the only one who noticed it. I thought it might be just me, or the cable box, but then I realized the ads for the movie trailers sounded MUCH better than the halftime show! ABC did a horrible job with the sound.The volume change between the game and the commercials was incredible. Commericials are usually louder, but never as loud as they were tonight!

[EdwardGein]

I'm amazed at this kind of level with this kind of money, ABC could let this type of thing happen. When I saw McCartney last year at the Superbowl, while his performance I thought was OK, the sound was fantastic, same with U2. Not that the Rolling Stones need the money & I personally stopped listening to them 25 years ago, but this will cost them plenty in lost album sales & possible ticket sales in the future. I could have gotten a better recording off a cassette recorder.

Funny thing was I didn't notice the volume changes between the commercials & the game as I usually do when watching TV. Outside of the first couple of commercials, they were pretty lame and is Amerquest or whatever its called on crack or something as their commercials were both distasteful & were pointless and I usually like distasteful things but not in this case!

[luvs2jam60]

Yeah, it was a lousy job. I don't have an HDTV (no room in the dorms for a decent one, sadly) and I was listening to the analog signal, and it still sounded aweful. Almost as if someone totally cut off the highs during the half time show. Really bad job, which is suprising because apparently the NFL brought in the guys that has done a ton of superbowls and has a big reputation for doing a phenomenal job with live broadcasts, Don Mischer Productions I believe. Maybe its because it was ABC and not one of the big sports networks for football like FOX or CBS besides monday nights, but they need to go back to the drawing board. And, just an aside, the monkey-infested CareerBuilder.com commercials were absolutely hilarious!

[jamison]

i thought the sound quality sucked ... but the performance wasnt super either.. then again i didnt expect it to be ... I thought the national anthem was absolutly retched..

i dont think anyone will ever outdo whitney houstons performance

[EdwardGein]

The sound was so bad, I couldn't evaluate the performance. I thought after the first 15 seconds that maybe there was a technical problem that would be corrected right away, but nooo. The game though did look great visually on HDTV. Unfortunately during the regular season they put the scores and crap constantly blocking the picture and it looks more like a pinball game.

[Eric Z]

A pinball game- that's funny- nice analogy!

Regarding the Stones...I just thought it was because they are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay past their prime

[drseid]

I hope someone loses their job on this one The halftime sound of the Rolling Stones at the Superbowl was attrocious and would have been rejected for a bootleg CD as not good enough. I don't know how a major network on a major show for a major band could allow this to happen. The Stones, not that I personally care- I think they sucked after Mick Taylor left, should be ticked off beyond belief at whoever did the sound. I'm sure with their monitors they weren't aware of this but it was recorded as if there was no PA run through or something. Absolutely ridiculous and no excuse for ABC. The sound by Paul McCartney last year was flawless & this was a disgrace. The terrible sound had nothing to do with their playing.

Yes, I agree... terrible sound quality. To make matters worse (as others have already mentioned) the performance was not so hot either. Bad all around.

---Dave

[EdwardGein]

What I still can't comprehend, the same way I can't comprehend when major companies like HP release shoddy product to the public, is how ABC's or the NFL's quality control could be so bad to allow this. The beauty is, alot of people didn't even notice the shoddy sound. I gave up on the Stones years ago- when I saw them at the Garden in 1969 when the Ya Ya's album was recorded, they were great but when I saw them on some free cable TV concert a few years ago, they sucked. Other then Start Me Up, I can't think of one song they've done that's impressed me in over 25 years. I hope people weren't tinkering with their TV's & receivers, thinking it was their equipments fault.

[markw]

Today, they are just the best paid nostalgia act in the business. Their music is secondary to their maintaing their original lineup, their presence, and their ability to draw a crowd* based soley on their past reputation.

*as well as their ability to still walk and breathe without visible aid.

[kexodusc]

Today, they are just the best paid nostalgia act in the business. Their music is secondary to their maintaing their original lineup, their presence, and their ability to draw a crowd* based soley on their past reputation.

*as well as their ability to still walk and breathe without visible aid.

I'm not a Stones fan at all. Most of what I know about them came from Saturday Night Live skits and such poking fun at the age and state of the members. I probably couldn't name 3 album titles, maybe 4 song titles, but I did see them play this summer. I have to admit, they impressed the heck out of me live. 120,000 people went home happy that day. Could be because they played their old music?

Too bad at about the half time show. I missed it, our plane was landing just as the 1st half ended...didn't get home until the 3rd quarter. Oh well, guess I didn't miss much.

[Worf101]

as I do on the weekends, you'd know that the sound for that show was about as good as you could expect for a LIVE PERFORMANCE! Most halftime shows lip synch. Whitney's famous Star Spangled Banner was a lip synch. 99% of halftime shows are L.S'd. The Stones, god bless em, did it live. When you put all that sound in a massive enclosed structure it's not gonna sound like a CD any way. If it were a Stones concert, sound crew would've been there weeks or days ahead of time. The sound system would've been optimized for music reproduction and performance NOT Football. The halftime show is an afterthought NOT the main focus so it's not surprising that with those shortcomings and limitations that the show sounded like ass.

Da Worfster

[shokhead]

RS have been overdone for 20 years.

[edtyct]

I'm not a particular fan of the rolling stones either, though I'm more contemporary with them. The thing that gets me is how people feel like they have the inside track on musicians' ability or motivation merely because they listen to music or because music is important to them or because their particular taste/bias inclines them a certain way, etc., as if they have some special entitlement. The idea that the rolling stones "sucked after Mick Taylor left" doesn't really mean all that much, since lots of people seemed to like them after that point. Is their judgment somehow less credible? And what about the suggestion that the rolling stones' "music is secondary to their maintaining their original lineup, their presence, and their ability to draw a crowd based solely on their past reputation, as well as their ability to still walk and breathe without visible aid"? So, what they want to do first and foremost is to keep the original core members together, which is valuable to them because it maintains their audience and makes them lots of money by allowing them to exploit their past reputation. Why don't all those people who flock to their concerts and buy their records see what we, who are really in the know, see--that the rolling stones have no genuine musical/performing relationship, or any direct interest in the experience of playing before a big friendly crowd? We know, unlike everyone else, that they're only in it for the money, which they need so badly.

But how many of us, if we were millionaires many times over, would still do our jobs if we didn't love them? And the ageism in this dismissal is hard to take--that the ability of the rolling stones to make viable music is suspect because they are old by some people's standards. Why don't they just go home and leave the music world, not to mention the rest of the world, to the kids, who incidentally will never age themselves? I'm reminded of Jerry Seinfeld's line in the show when confronted with someone who persisted in making questionable jokes about religion. When asked if he was insulted as a religious person, Seinfeld answered, "No, I'm offended as a comedian." I'm not defending the rolling stones as a fan, I'm defending them as a person with a few years.

[EdwardGein]

They managed to get Crystal Clear Sound for Paul McCartney & U2 live amongst others, so they should have managed to do the same for the Stones. Whether or not the Stones performance was good or not is irrelevant for me, I couldn't hear them properly to evaluate this.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

as I do on the weekends, you'd know that the sound for that show was about as good as you could expect for a LIVE PERFORMANCE! Most halftime shows lip synch. Whitney's famous Star Spangled Banner was a lip synch. 99% of halftime shows are L.S'd. The Stones, god bless em, did it live. When you put all that sound in a massive enclosed structure it's not gonna sound like a CD any way. If it were a Stones concert, sound crew would've been there weeks or days ahead of time. The sound system would've been optimized for music reproduction and performance NOT Football. The halftime show is an afterthought NOT the main focus so it's not surprising that with those shortcomings and limitations that the show sounded like ass.

Da Worfster

Thank you very much Worf. I do not think people really understand just how difficult it is to setup a stage in ten second, and then get all of the levels perfect. Doing this for a concert takes days, not minutes.

Unless this was exclusively a live performance, your expectations should be realistically lowered. I do not think anyone is fathoming the difficuly in pulling this thing off is.

Worf, thanks for the SNAP! back to reality.

Side note; I am not defending ABC as an employee, I am defending the knowledge of difficulty and emphasis.

[Eric Z]

I have to admit, Jaggar can still get around quite well for his old age- even though a couple times I thought he was going to tumble over.

There's doing something right as one of the (if not, the) most successful band in history.

[topspeed]

as I do on the weekends, you'd know that the sound for that show was about as good as you could expect for a LIVE PERFORMANCE! Most halftime shows lip synch. Whitney's famous Star Spangled Banner was a lip synch. 99% of halftime shows are L.S'd. The Stones, god bless em, did it live. When you put all that sound in a massive enclosed structure it's not gonna sound like a CD any way. If it were a Stones concert, sound crew would've been there weeks or days ahead of time. The sound system would've been optimized for music reproduction and performance NOT Football. The halftime show is an afterthought NOT the main focus so it's not surprising that with those shortcomings and limitations that the show sounded like ass.

Da Worfster

Gotta agree 100%!

You nailed it Worfster. How good are you guys expecting it to be when they have minutes, not hours, to roll out a stage and get the band and fans on the field? It's a miracle that all the pickups worked! I'm no fan of the Stones, but you can't really compare this to U2's Vertigo concert where they had months of prep time knowing they were recording the Chicago concert (btw, the Vertigo concert is one of the best sounding, best looking concert recordings I've seen).

Considering how many respondents have noted their dislike of the Stones, I'm surprised the opinions on sound have been so fervent. I don't like 'em that much so honestly, I could care less how they sound.

[Resident Loser]

as I do on the weekends, you'd know that the sound for that show was about as good as you could expect for a LIVE PERFORMANCE! Most halftime shows lip synch. Whitney's famous Star Spangled Banner was a lip synch. 99% of halftime shows are L.S'd. The Stones, god bless em, did it live. When you put all that sound in a massive enclosed structure it's not gonna sound like a CD any way. If it were a Stones concert, sound crew would've been there weeks or days ahead of time. The sound system would've been optimized for music reproduction and performance NOT Football. The halftime show is an afterthought NOT the main focus so it's not surprising that with those shortcomings and limitations that the show sounded like ass.

Da Worfster

Mick is still dancin' around like a lunatic AND actually singing! Most of these pop-of-the-moment, little prima donna's can't do that...even when standing still.

Minimalist, straight-ahead RnR...two guitars, bass and keyboard...and Charlie Watts...still that same bemused expression, bashing away on the most basic of kits...it doesn't get any better.

Audiophile concerns? Sound quality?...when the entire audience was standing on the arm-rests at MSG in 1970-whatever, do you think there was concern for sound quality? Say whaaa? ..It ain't McCartney-pop, it ain't DSOTM with lasers and video screens in ancient ruins...it was three-friggin' songs at halftime...The only thing I cared less about was the football. I know it's only rock and roll...

jimHJJ(...but I liked it...)

[robert393]

I'm not a particular fan of the rolling stones either, though I'm more contemporary with them. The thing that gets me is how people feel like they have the inside track on musicians' ability or motivation merely because they listen to music or because music is important to them or because their particular taste/bias inclines them a certain way, etc., as if they have some special entitlement. The idea that the rolling stones "sucked after Mick Taylor left" doesn't really mean all that much, since lots of people seemed to like them after that point. Is their judgment somehow less credible? And what about the suggestion that the rolling stones' "music is secondary to their maintaining their original lineup, their presence, and their ability to draw a crowd based solely on their past reputation, as well as their ability to still walk and breathe without visible aid"? So, what they want to do first and foremost is to keep the original core members together, which is valuable to them because it maintains their audience and makes them lots of money by allowing them to exploit their past reputation. Why don't all those people who flock to their concerts and buy their records see what we, who are really in the know, see--that the rolling stones have no genuine musical/performing relationship, or any direct interest in the experience of playing before a big friendly crowd? We know, unlike everyone else, that they're only in it for the money, which they need so badly.

But how many of us, if we were millionaires many times over, would still do our jobs if we didn't love them? And the ageism in this dismissal is hard to take--that the ability of the rolling stones to make viable music is suspect because they are old by some people's standards. Why don't they just go home and leave the music world, not to mention the rest of the world, to the kids, who incidentally will never age themselves? I'm reminded of Jerry Seinfeld's line in the show when confronted with someone who persisted in making questionable jokes about religion. When asked if he was insulted as a religious person, Seinfeld answered, "No, I'm offended as a comedian." I'm not defending the rolling stones as a fan, I'm defending them as a person with a few years.

I couldn't have said it any better. Nice.....very nice indeed.

Robert

[Woochifer]

They managed to get Crystal Clear Sound for Paul McCartney & U2 live amongst others, so they should have managed to do the same for the Stones. Whether or not the Stones performance was good or not is irrelevant for me, I couldn't hear them properly to evaluate this.

Worf and Terrence got it right. The RS halftime show was a live performance, and one that had to be setup in the middle of a football field in less than 10 minutes. In a normal stadium concert (like the Rolling Stones show last year in San Francisco), the stage and sound rigging are setup about a day in advance with plenty of time to do sound checks. Obviously, you don't get that luxury during a Super Bowl.

My recollection was that a lot of the background music with McCartney and U2 sounded pre-recorded, and that's been the norm with Super Bowls since they went to the overblown stage productions starting with the wretched "Up With People" halftime shows that had completely canned music. If a show's pre-recorded, then the sound quality and timing/length can be controlled in a studio environment with multiple takes.

If you want better audio quality and live-not-prerecorded performances, then maybe the Super Bowl should get back to its roots and just let marching bands provide the halftime entertainment. No need for elaborate choreographed and prerecorded productions or amplification. Just 400 musicians on the field making a lot of noise. That's how it was for nine of the first eleven Super Bowls.

http://www.superbowl.com/features/en...time-honorroll

[Eric Z]

i had a co-worker who was at the game and he said they sounded great (and he was in the nose bleed seats). he tivo'd the game and watched it this morning and said it was abc who screwed things up- they even talked about the sound on some sports shows.

[Woochifer]

i had a co-worker who was at the game and he said they sounded great (and he was in the nose bleed seats). he tivo'd the game and watched it this morning and said it was abc who screwed things up- they even talked about the sound on some sports shows.

Has anyone had a chance to compare the HD 5.1 sound feed with the analog stereo feed? I remember that the two-channel analog feed sounded really bad on a few of ESPN's HD simulcasts (and presumably the same crew worked on ABC's production last night).

[drseid]

Has anyone had a chance to compare the HD 5.1 sound feed with the analog stereo feed? I remember that the two-channel analog feed sounded really bad on a few of ESPN's HD simulcasts (and presumably the same crew worked on ABC's production last night).

I can't speak for the 2 channel, but the HD 5.1 feed was the one I heard.

I understand the comments by some about the difficulties in setting up a live performance on the fly, but this was definitely a *very* bad audio job by ABC (I don't think any live performance could possibly be setup this poorly). While I don't really like the Stones and I did not care for their performance no matter how good the sonics were, *no one* deserved the audio butcher job ABC did.

---Dave