Some artists care more than others about the sound quality of the finished product. It may seem strange, but most pop/rock artists don't care at all. (for various reasons, I'm sure. Musician does not imply audiophile, to be certain). Neil Young, an artist that could easily rely solely on the quality of his songs, is a great example of an artist that really tries to get quality sound every time, too.
Impact of recording/mastering studio?
Why is it that the recording quality varies so much?
Some are so consistently well engineered...Eagles, Joe Walsh, Pink Floyd, Allan Parsons, Tom Petty, Telarc, Robin Miles... but many are a crap shoot...sometimes good and sometimes poor.
Is it that some artists take a rigorous control of the sound of the final product while others allow each sound engineer/studio too much freedom? Or is time and budget pressures to get the recording out?
Some are so consistently well engineered...Eagles, Joe Walsh, Pink Floyd, Allan Parsons, Tom Petty, Telarc, Robin Miles... but many are a crap shoot...sometimes good and sometimes poor.
Is it that some artists take a rigorous control of the sound of the final product while others allow each sound engineer/studio too much freedom? Or is time and budget pressures to get the recording out?