That is a great observation. I don't feel like relistening but I'm wondering if it's the part that made me mention doing another take - it sounded like he got tickled mid sentence
You misunderstand my criticism if you think I'm saying it needs more production. I'm saying the vocals would be better if they sounded less produced. The super clean vocal recording/mixing it uses is a hallmark of pop, not folk.
Folk hooks are also just as catchy as any other genre but this song just isn't very catchy.
I am not saying you shouldn't like it, either. I'm glad it resonates with people. I just think it's mediocrity of being ignored because the message is good and he's a famous musician. If it was some random dude, no one would be praising it
I described it to a friend as "sounding like a parody" which I imagine is the same thing you're hearing. I would never have guessed this was a Springsteen song if I heard it in passing, it lacks so much of what made him good.
I love the message and truly believe he made it for the right reasons (not a Cash grab) but....the song is not good. The melody isn't catchy and the instrumentation is generic. The vocals are worst part - made even worse by the mixing. There was one part where his voice wobbles badly that made me think the engineers in the booth were just too afraid to ask a musical legend to do a second take.
Singers who are that far "past heir prime" need to give up on super crisp and clean vocal recording. Some muddiness would go a LONG way.
I feel that. I'm on the design side and have nothing to do with software....once my engineering package (drawings, hardware documentation, etc) is delivered, it's on the shop to program and configure. I wouldn't have known the firmware version even if this was a 2026 project!
I recently received a question along the lines of "Hey do you remember [project we did roughly 18 months ago]? What firmware version did we use on the controller?"
An anecdote doesn't disprove what I said, though. If everyone were spaced and distributed evenly, there would be 450k people in between each billionaire
I'll admit I'm a nitpicker but this isn't one of those times, the claim in the OP makes 0 sense
MOST of the billionaires live in California, New York, Florida, and Texas - a quick search says about 540 of them. And even if you're in those states, billionaires tend to not live by us poors
The closest you can get to backing up this claim is to isolate it to just one city...and even then, you're only *likely" to live by a billionaire if you're very generous with what counts as "near"
That is a great observation. I don't feel like relistening but I'm wondering if it's the part that made me mention doing another take - it sounded like he got tickled mid sentence