Does Steely Dan sound bright to you?


This is going to sound like a somewhat random question but I’m wondering how many of you find Steely Dan’s recordings to sound a bit bright. I’m particularly thinking of Gaucho, and Aja but some other recent recordings, too, such as Fagen’s Nightfly.

My typical media include streaming (CD and HD quality) and CD’s. I have not played my old vinyl because I’m presently without a turntable.

At first I thought it was my system and it was driving me a little bit mental; eventually, I decided it wasn't my stuff, it was their stuff. Because most other recordings on the same system with no other changes don’t typically have the brightness of Steely Dan.

Whether or not you’re a fan (I am) Steely Dan has often been a go-to for testing out equipment, so I imagine there will be experiences people have had about this.

P.S. Any other recordings which, for you are unnaturally bright?


128x128hilde45

Showing 1 response by akgwhiz

Big fan back when but had been a while to sit critically.  Added TT a few years ago to revisit many of that era vinyl that I'd been toting since the CD took over.  Compared last night after this thread.  So to me, I sort of agree with OP but it's not a brightness thing.  I'd submit that much of the "processed" and over-engineered sound noted here by many, to my ear, falls on the snare drum (and hi-hat).  It seems compressed with the snare having little to no lower timbre.  Sounds like a drum track machine (I know it's not).  Not a natural, acoustic sound IMHO.  I think it was an 80s thing.  For example, 2 Against Nature seems more natural to me, fuller range in all instruments in fact.   

Otherwise the SQ of SD is overall well done.  But yeah, many tracks do seem to be an exercise in producing sonic ear candy!  I guess my blues listening has changed my preferences some.