The Kinks Sixties records

[ChrisChopping]

The Kinks were a great band. These past couple of days I’ve been listening to a lot of their stuff and enjoying the quality songwriting, the great tunes and lyrics.

That said, I often feel like The Kinks sound bad compared to their Sixties peers. Certainly not the case with every track, many of the singles still sound sublime but in a lot of cases I feel like the production feels thin or brittle in a way that you just don’t get with The Beatles, The Stones or The Beach Boys. Plus I find Ray’s voice very hit and miss.

Just me?

[yomptepi]

I am not sure about the production. They always sounded fine to me, if a little sparce. And certainly no worse than the majority of the early Stones recordings, which, apart from the singles, were uniformly very poorly recorded ( check out the London sessions). I suspect, as with the Stones , the money was spent on the singles. After all, people didn't really listen to albums so much in 1965.

[Matt Wilson]

One of the great bands of all-time, not just the '60s. I still place the Beatles and Stones above the Kinks but go 'round and 'round comparing the Kinks to The Who in terms of the third best UK act of the era.

The Face to Face through Muswell Hillbillies string of LPs is among my favorite runs of any band or artist, and the stand-alone 45s were of equal quality. As to the crude recording quality of some of the early stuff, it doesn't bother me one bit. The same can be said of The Who. Some things you want to be raw.

[The Slider]

Andrew Oldham was no record producer.
I'd not be holding the Stones up as any example of how a record should sound
Not till Jimmy Miller came along

[Rorschach]

Any dodgy production on The Kinks 60s recordings doesn't bother me at all. I enjoy them primarily as a singles band and those singles always sounded just fine booming out of a jukebox.

[goldstoned]

The Kinks were a great band. These past couple of days I’ve been listening to a lot of their stuff and enjoying the quality songwriting, the great tunes and lyrics.

That said, I often feel like The Kinks sound bad compared to their Sixties peers. Certainly not the case with every track, many of the singles still sound sublime but in a lot of cases I feel like the production feels thin or brittle in a way that you just don’t get with The Beatles, The Stones or The Beach Boys. Plus I find Ray’s voice very hit and miss.

Just me?

Always felt the same. They kept the raw overdriven sound of rock'n roll for a long time while the album please please me had already presented ways to sound dynamic and vital and still ... to quote mccartney in hard days night: 'very clean.'

[robertff]

The first couple of albums aren’t particularly good but from some of Kink Kontroversy right through to Muswell the quality doesn’t drop. Fantastic singles band, one of the best run of singles of any decade. From Muswell onwards albums can be a little hit and miss but there are some good albums among the not so goods. A very fine band and one that should have some sort of place in any music lover’s collection, even if it’s just the greatest hits.

Saw Ray Davies live three or four years ago, he was very good but very loud.


.

[Tactful Cactus]

The same can be said of The Who. Some things you want to be raw.

Shel Talmy is the common denominator here. He produced both bands in the early years and his production style was definitely quick and dirty.

The Kinks recorded in IBC studios in London which is also where the famous mellotron samples were originally recorded.

[Muskrat]

As to the crude recording quality of some of the early stuff, it doesn't bother me one bit. The same can be said of The Who. Some things you want to be raw.

I don’t know…we may have lost a lot from not understanding the vocals on Louie, Louie.

As for those Kinks records: I think Talmy was looking for a sound, and got it. I love those first few Kinks albums; in fact, the most recent one in my current stash is “Face to Face,” which of course is their “Rubber Soul.”

[C]

Fantastic singles band, one of the best run of singles of any decade.

I agree - I've never been much of a fan.

I don't know why - my loss I suppose

I have Kinda and Kontroversy and that's it

It may be sacrilegious to say but I did see them as a singles band - whatever that means - good or bad

Perhaps, Just didn't explore them enough

As for the sound/production I don't know but then singles always sounded good





.

[Rorschach]

Fantastic singles band, one of the best run of singles of any decade.

I agree - I've never been much of a fan.

I don't know why - my loss I suppose

I have Kinda and Kontroversy and that's it

It may be sacrilegious to say but I did see them as a singles band - whatever that means - good or bad

Perhaps, Just didn't explore them enough

As for the sound/production I don't know but then singles always sounded good.

Wow. Something we totally agree on. The Kinks were a fabulous singles band.

The end.

[BARON CORNY DOG]

A fabulous singles band with a very strong run of LPs from Kinda through Arthur (though if you wish to start it a record later or take it a record further, that's your doing).

[BARON CORNY DOG]

Though the production leaves something to be desired, I will admit.

[Walk In My Shadow]

A fabulous singles band

This.

[robertff]

Fantastic singles band, one of the best run of singles of any decade.

I agree - I've never been much of a fan.

I don't know why - my loss I suppose

I have Kinda and Kontroversy and that's it


.

That might just be why you didn’t explore further C. Kinda Kinks is not a very good album and Kontroversy was the album which only really just saw them get going albums' wise. The four immediately following that are definitely worth your time getting to know them. It won’t be instant but like all good things (albums especially) repeated listens will reveal what great albums they are.

Imagine starting with Rubber Soul and then working through the next three Beatles' albums as a comparison as to how the four albums improve. That may not be a great comparison as nothing can really match the progress made with those four albums but I’m sure you will understand my meaning.

.

[Mike Boom]

Something Else is my favorite, end to end brilliance.The songwriting easily matches anything the Beatles came up with.
Much much more than a singles band , all the albums from Face to Face all the way to the Preservation Act albums in 73 and 74 are great, but they were indeed always much more low key than the Beatles and the Stones in the production department, nothing flashy, just charming brilliantly written socially observant little vignettes as pop songs. But there are an abundance of brilliant album tracks, stuff like Love Me Till The Sun Shines, Lazy Old Sun, Fancy, Situations Vacant, Lazy Old Sun, Gods Children, Shangri La, Mindless Child of Motherhood etc etc etc etc

[C]

Imagine starting with Rubber Soul and then working through the next three Beatles' albums as a comparison as to how the four albums improve.

.

Thanks Rob - that's helpful



.

[pcqgod]

I have to agree somewhat. Some of their earlier tracks, especially, have an amateurish quality in both performance and production. I think the drums sound awful on a bunch of their recordings, like Mick Avory was bashing on trash cans. Of course this haphazard sound worked fine with their best songs; it was part of the charm. And by the time they started sounding uniformly polished, the songs weren't there anymore, for the most part.

[BARON CORNY DOG]

Though the production leaves something to be desired, I will admit.

I'm playing Village Green since it's someone's birthday and I never play this and its summertime. But it does remind me that their records are very weedy, production wise. You get the feeling that Davies is almost singlehandedly dragging the music along behind him, doggedly forging forward purely on the strength of his melodies and vocals.

[GoogaMooga]

Album band for me right up to and including Muswell Hillbillies. Cherry-picked albums after that one.