Since the beginning Mark has been synonymous with quality in his records, not by chance in the 80s people who wanted to listen to beautiful and well recorded songs came out of the shops not only with the first album but also with Making Movies or Love over Gold.
It is well known that those albums were the result of overdubs and similar things.
So I wonder what's the point of relying on people who record in a way that you consider inappropriate?
The general sound of an album is often confused with the production of beautiful songs, one does not exclude the other, but if there are no good songs at the base, you can record them in the first bar without touching them, but it will remain a bad song.
Dream of a drowner submariner, what it is, sailing to philadelphia, rudiger and so on (wasn't there), but they sure have overdubs, but they're great.
The wall and dark side, aren't they milestones? chock full of overdubs, for the beatles phil spector didn't put his own on its record?
This is to say if you rely on someone, you have to do it to the end also for a matter of consistency, it is as if you called the plumber and told him 'the sink is leaking but iou sits down' as well as I'll fix it' when I finish do other damage 'ok here is the money for the time lost bye' and the sink is leaking anyway.
Returning to Bob Dylan and Infidels I think that he did not respect Mark as an artist and producer and that if he did we would have a great album.
