Anyhoo, I had good intentions going into this thing, but unfortunately, fate has intervened in the form of me moving some time in the future (hopefully soon) and 90% of my CD collection is packed in storage for the time-being. That means, I'm going to have to put this blog on "hiatus" until I get into my new space and have some room to go nuts. Hopefully by the end of the year, I'll get back to weekly updates, and before starting again I'll probably stock-pile a few weeks worth so there won't be any further interruptions.
Anyway, here are a few albums that have been getting a lot of spins lately:
New Pornographers: ChallengersI know it only "dropped" (as the kids say) yesterday, but I am enjoying it. It's not as good as the first two albums, but I'm liking it better than Twin Cinema, but that may be simply because I saw that album as a disappointment. I'm also kinda pissed that I didn't pre-order it to get the super-special edition with all of the bells and whistles, but so are the bonds of living in the independent-record-shop-less 'burbs.
The Times - Go! With The TimesDouglass Wolk is quickly becoming one of my favorite critics/art writers out there. Both his articles on music for eMusic and his comics writing on Savage Critic have steered me right just about every time. So with some downloads to blow at eMusic, I gave this late-70's garage pop band a taste, based upon his article, and it was exactly what I was looking for. Nothing that will change the world, but good enough to get the head-bobbin'.
Here's a fun-un:
The Times - Red With Purple Flashes
The Beatles - The Capitol Albums Vol. 1You know, I never really delved deep into the Beatles early catalogue, I just kinda assumed that I knew all of the songs, since, well...they're the Beatles. The albums I own are all pretty much from the late-period and I literally knew every single song prior to purchase. So when I picked up this box at the library featuring the American versions of their first four releases, I got a pleasant surprise. It's not that there's anything revelatory in here, just it's fun to hear a band that in their later work seemed so polished, at their roots as a rough little bar-band. If you haven't given this stuff a listen in a while I'd highly recommend throwing them back on.
Incidentally, I've got to say, after listening to these early records, there's a lot to recommend a new band putting some covers on their debut recordings. How many albums from the newest "next big thing" have come in with 4 great songs, 4 decent ones and the remainder fall into the "OK B-Side to utter dreck" division? Just jettison that last bunch for some covers as that can say just as much about your band's creativity and artistic ability as the crappy songs you write during the last 2 days of recording just so you have some stuff at the end of the album. Hell, if it was good enough for the Beatles, why not you?
3 comments:
At last...good to see you back. You've given me hope in regards to the new New Pornos album; I was kinda balking at picking it up due to lackluster reviews but I reckon I'll take the plunge after hearing your positive write-up.
As soon as you've axhausted "Go! With The Times" then go back and download "Privilege" by the Television Personalities who were basically the Times but fronted by Dan Treacy instead of Ed Ball. Just trust me because I guarantee that you'll thank me when we next get together. I would almost rank it above the Stone Roses debut (also released in '89); I did say 'almost.'
I think that what those early Beatles records demonstrate is that as of that point the Beatles were probably better at playing American R ‘n’ B than any of their British peers, including the Stones. It just seems that the Beatles sounded more assured of themselves while running through any Motown or Chuck Berry number than the Stones did.
I'm sure part of the reason the Beatles sound so much more accomplished is because they had a lot of time in Hamburg strip clubs to perfect their R&B skills, whereas the Stones were thrust into the spotlight pretty quickly after their initial formation.
I think the reviews of the New Pornos album would've been a lot better simply if it wasn't a NP album. For some reason they seem to have a giant weight of expectations on them. Plus, I don't think Pitchfork can give a band a good review if the band has sold more than 100,000 copies of a record.
That's a bold statement about "Priivlege", I'll check it out once my eMusic tracks renew.
Well, I tend to compare and contrast the Stone Roses debut with "Privilege" not only for the release time but also some of the production choices that both records share.
There's that late 80's, early 90's shimmer to the guitars (instead of the jangle that tends to permeate most of the 80's) found on most UK records of the time where you couldn't decide whether to dance or rock, a trait that was kind of lost when the whole Brit-pop phase took over. That and the fact that both albums are so quintessentially British.
Ian Brown couldn't hold a candle to Dan Treacy's lyrics however...
Post a Comment