Expecting Rain

This question raised it´s ugly head again the other night while me and some other fans and followers where musing what Scott Litt´s part on the new album could possibly be. Let´s just try to straighten this one out by simply voting for "because" or "despite". Don´t feel obliged to participate if you don´t think that TOOM is great. Don´t try to walk on neutral ground. Just make up your mind

It's great because of Bob.

TOOM is what it is because of Lanois.

Is there a record that´s bad because of Bob? (Okay, maybe KOL.)

Is TOOM great because of or despite of Daniel Lanois?

Absolutely, yes.

How about both Daniel Lanois and Bob Dylan? Musicians too. Have to give the most credit to Bob though.

It's actually a flawed question.

It couldn't be great with poor songs so it's great because of both of them but the songs could still stand without Lanois

It is a bit of a false dichotomy; maybe a more precise version would be, 'is TOOM great in part because of Lanois, or mostly despite Lanois?'

From what I've read of those sessions, Lanois was pretty key in terms of being able to hang in there with Bob and summon up some coherent sounds from the semi-controlled chaos. Dylan himself seemed to be in a state of fragile confidence and not yet willing to step up as his own producer, which would come after. Given the state of Bob's career and studio track-record at that point, we can easily imagine the sessions having fallen apart, or yielded some monstrous muck, in the hands of a less sympathetic (and determined) producer. Also, the coherence of the album's sound - the way it seems to make a single sonic statement, which is part of what people love about it - surely owes much to Lanois. So I'd err on the side of 'because of' myself.

Maybe Danny should've thrown a little *more* reverb on there. Great "atmosphere", dude.

The songs all sound better live.

What do you think? l I do not tell anyone, will be a secret.

Despite.
At least it didn't have any robot cricket chirping.

I am not crazy about the Lanois touch here... The "swampy" thing works on a few tunes to me "Not Dark Yet" "Lovesick"... Overall I like the songs better live and the Cold Irons recut. It's a great album nonetheless but I guess what I am saying is I'd prefer to hear what it would of sounded like without Lanois touches............. MEZ

It would have been great either way because the songs are good, but remember Bob first said he wasn't even going to record them.... so if he felt comfortable enough recording them with Lanois, that's great because it gave us one of Bob's best albums.

TooM is not great.

I'm leaning towards 'good' myself. But what the hell, not really what we're arguing here.

because of, for the reasons Lone Pilgrim mentioned, that from what i've read he wasn't all that comfortable or confident in the studio at that time and needed someone else to guide the process and push things along.

Lanois on Time Out of Mind:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 971578450#

No, it's fantastic. The number one best ever, along with "LAT".

As someone said, it's great basically because of Bob, but Lanois' influence in it was positive and he adds some value to it.

Taking his great years and albums out of the equation, TooM is great, if that's the way you want it, with Daniel Lanois having found a way to assist the re-kindling of a hitherto burnt-out flame. And the answer to the question is 'neither'.

Assuming I would think it 'great' and knowing the back story about it's making, I vote because.

The Lanois production is up and down, helps some some songs succeed, pulls a few others into the undertow. Contrary to I've heard other people say, I don't think the album has aged badly (yet.)

This.
Great summation LP.

TOOM is in my top 2 or 3 albums by Bob Dylan. The outtakes (both Marchin' To the Citys, both Red River Shores, both Can't Waits and all three Mississippis) are among my favorites as well. I understand Shake Sugaree was done too but not sure. I definitely prefer Make You Feel My Love live with drums though. At first my favorite tracks were Not Dark Yet and Standing In The Doorway and I actually used to skip Dirt Road Blues. Of course now Dirt Road's one of my faves (love that little attempt on Masked & Anon), but Highlands takes the cake. Also, as good as Tryin' to get to Heaven is, I prefer the live 2000 arrangement (TTS). Ever notice he omits some lines, but not always? GREAT PRODUCTION but the record's great despite Lanois. I've never heard the vinyl either! One time I told a friend to listen to it with headphones overnight and the next day he said, "What's up with the drums? It sounds like the cymbals are in the next room and the bass/snare fluctuates ear to ear AND volume levels." I told him it was a producer/collaborator trick, I guess.

Benny has pointedly pointed out another presupposition making the question flawed. It could go like this:

1. Is TOOM great? Yes or no.

2. If yes, who is responsible for making it great and to what degree?
Lanois x%
Bob y%
Some other people or thing z%
Where x + y + z must add up to 100%

This should make EVERYBODY happy and set us on the sure course to a resolution of this thorny issue.

It is great, without a doubt... the reason? Probably cannot be reduced to an either/or choice. There are simply too many factors. Remove Bob and there are no songs, no great lyrics, no voice... no album. Remove Lanois and it sounds totally different... but not necessarily bad. But Lanois' production does evoke something no one else brought out previously.

I'll try, Mr. Nap...
1. Is TOOM great? Yes

2. If yes, who is responsible for making it great and to what degree?
Lanois 15%
Bob 75%
Augie Meyers 10%