AC/DC with Bon Scott was a different beast to the Brian Johnson days though. They did their best work with Bon Scott, though I dare say no other band has had so much success with a new singer... (probably heaps I can't think of). Personally, I wouldn't really compare The Angels with ACDC, and especially not Cold Chisel. When it comes down to it though
Not liking AccaDacca is just fair dinkum un-Austrayan though cobber...
Van Halen is the other big one.
Lotsa band have stayed intact and changed singers(Audioslave, Army of Anyone, Blind Melon, AIC)
Does anyone know what the main difference in Angus' tone is between say dirty deeds and more present day stuff off the past couple albums. His sound seems to have more distortion and seems to be a little crisper. Just wondering if he uses more distortion or just different model amps
listen to a live clip from the 70's and now and his sound seems a little "heavier"
It's likely that he and his guitar and amp techs have worked on his sound a lot over the years, and little tweaks here and there can make a lot of difference over 30 years.
But the biggest difference is probably just the recording technology. The microphones, cabling, preamps/mixers, and recording medium (digital now vs. analog then), plus more modern mixing techniques (compression, anyone?), all combine to dramatically alter the sound of his amp as we hear it.
...and if you don't like it, you can suck on an egg.
Comments
Van Halen is the other big one.
Lotsa band have stayed intact and changed singers(Audioslave, Army of Anyone, Blind Melon, AIC)
It's likely that he and his guitar and amp techs have worked on his sound a lot over the years, and little tweaks here and there can make a lot of difference over 30 years.
But the biggest difference is probably just the recording technology. The microphones, cabling, preamps/mixers, and recording medium (digital now vs. analog then), plus more modern mixing techniques (compression, anyone?), all combine to dramatically alter the sound of his amp as we hear it.