Thursday, September 15, 2005
People make fun of me ALL THE TIME for liking Yes.
Making fun of Yes is the new making fun of all other music, apparently. Because any time they come up in polite company, the best I'll get is a cruel snigger. Okay, I can understand the disdain for Prog Rock, an entire genre was invented to destroy it, after all, but come ON -- we've all reclaimed Disco, now, can't we be okay with Prog, too?
Because you really cannot find a finer album from that genre (arguably!) than "Close to the Edge." I played it on my drive in this morning, and it never fails to amuse. Here's a tightly-written, tightly-played prog album with NO CHAFF. None. I know that sounds odd to call a 20+ minute song "tight," but it IS -- you listen to the the title track and tell me there's a section you think should be removed. Cause there isn't one.
And "Siberian Khatru" is heavy. Just plain heavy. A hard-hitting slam-bang of a song.
Alright -- I'm pleading with you folks. You think prog sucks? Uh huh. Whatever. Give me this ONE album. Pick it up, and listen a few times, and THEN tell me "all prog sucks."
Making fun of Yes is the new making fun of all other music, apparently. Because any time they come up in polite company, the best I'll get is a cruel snigger. Okay, I can understand the disdain for Prog Rock, an entire genre was invented to destroy it, after all, but come ON -- we've all reclaimed Disco, now, can't we be okay with Prog, too?
Because you really cannot find a finer album from that genre (arguably!) than "Close to the Edge." I played it on my drive in this morning, and it never fails to amuse. Here's a tightly-written, tightly-played prog album with NO CHAFF. None. I know that sounds odd to call a 20+ minute song "tight," but it IS -- you listen to the the title track and tell me there's a section you think should be removed. Cause there isn't one.
And "Siberian Khatru" is heavy. Just plain heavy. A hard-hitting slam-bang of a song.
Alright -- I'm pleading with you folks. You think prog sucks? Uh huh. Whatever. Give me this ONE album. Pick it up, and listen a few times, and THEN tell me "all prog sucks."
Thursday, September 08, 2005
After managing to score 11th-row tickets to Bauhaus at the State Theater in Minneapolis (the closest I've EVER been at one of those big theater shows!!) I'm moved to post a few words about the Godfathers of Gawth.
To begin, despite my obvious 60s fixation which I've had FOREVER, at one point in life I *was* a goth. Unfathomable? Not really. I viewed the goths at the time (bands like the Sisters of Mercy, Mission UK, Bauhaus and Love & Rockets, etc) as the logical antecedents of bands like the Velvets and the Stooges -- nihilistic, psychedelic, dark and eminently cool. There's a direct line you can trace from the Velvets and "Gimme Shelter," as well as dark-psych like "I Had Too Much To Dream Last Night," through the glam bands, through punk, into goth. I didn't see it as at ALL far removed from the other stuff I loved.
And Bauhaus were perhaps the coolest of the bunch. They took a Bowie fixation and a VERY rudimentary knowledge of rock and created an entire genre, as well as making some damn fine records in the meantime. The entire Bauhaus catalog is well worth seeking out, especially my favorite, the sophisticated, forward-looking "Burning From The Inside," a record that sounds even now like it could have been made in LA by some Brian Jonestown spinoff.
The bands and sub-bands they formed after Bauhaus broke up were cool too. Peter Murphy and Japan bassist Mick Karn did a neat turn with Dali's Car, a surreal fretless-bass-driven venture that sounds like nothing I've ever heard. Daniel Ash formed the dance-pop-freak-pop-new-wave band Tones On Tail, who managed to somehow get played at every party I ever went to in the 80s and early 90s. And Love and Rockets? Well, mainstream success beckoned, but their albums are some of my favorite music ever. I almost like 'em better than Bauhaus in a certain sense -- they were certainly more influential to the music *I* eventually ended up making. Oh yeah, and Peter Murphy's solo career is worth more than "Cuts You Up," by the way -- he had four or five really great solo albums, all of which are worth checking out.
They were more than just a footnote, or a kind of vampiric joke in rock history -- they were a tremendously innovative and inventive and fun band with depth, breadth and thrills galore. I'm sorry people feel the need to blame them for Marilyn Manson. They SURE don't deserve that!!!
To begin, despite my obvious 60s fixation which I've had FOREVER, at one point in life I *was* a goth. Unfathomable? Not really. I viewed the goths at the time (bands like the Sisters of Mercy, Mission UK, Bauhaus and Love & Rockets, etc) as the logical antecedents of bands like the Velvets and the Stooges -- nihilistic, psychedelic, dark and eminently cool. There's a direct line you can trace from the Velvets and "Gimme Shelter," as well as dark-psych like "I Had Too Much To Dream Last Night," through the glam bands, through punk, into goth. I didn't see it as at ALL far removed from the other stuff I loved.
And Bauhaus were perhaps the coolest of the bunch. They took a Bowie fixation and a VERY rudimentary knowledge of rock and created an entire genre, as well as making some damn fine records in the meantime. The entire Bauhaus catalog is well worth seeking out, especially my favorite, the sophisticated, forward-looking "Burning From The Inside," a record that sounds even now like it could have been made in LA by some Brian Jonestown spinoff.
The bands and sub-bands they formed after Bauhaus broke up were cool too. Peter Murphy and Japan bassist Mick Karn did a neat turn with Dali's Car, a surreal fretless-bass-driven venture that sounds like nothing I've ever heard. Daniel Ash formed the dance-pop-freak-pop-new-wave band Tones On Tail, who managed to somehow get played at every party I ever went to in the 80s and early 90s. And Love and Rockets? Well, mainstream success beckoned, but their albums are some of my favorite music ever. I almost like 'em better than Bauhaus in a certain sense -- they were certainly more influential to the music *I* eventually ended up making. Oh yeah, and Peter Murphy's solo career is worth more than "Cuts You Up," by the way -- he had four or five really great solo albums, all of which are worth checking out.
They were more than just a footnote, or a kind of vampiric joke in rock history -- they were a tremendously innovative and inventive and fun band with depth, breadth and thrills galore. I'm sorry people feel the need to blame them for Marilyn Manson. They SURE don't deserve that!!!
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
1. Totally agree with John -- a video document of the Kinks. In fact, any kind of Kinks hooplah that isn't related to "Village Green" would be great. Deluxe edition of "Arthur?" Sure, I'll take it. Three-disc compilation of "Face to Face" outtakes? Yup. Fine! Bring it on. Not that I don't adore "VGPS" -- because god knows I DO -- but just because the REST of their stuff is so god-damn tremendous it deserves some airing
2. The new Macca is almost impossibly good. I expected, much like the Stones record, to like it, kinda -- to maybe have three or four songs I really loved, and the rest of it just be kind of throwaway filler, and I'd come away being ultimately disappointed. I'm here to say, however that this is Paul's version of XTC's "Apple Venus Vol. 1" -- all low-key melancholy. It's sad, and filled with the kind of wistful gorgeousness Macca has only *very occasionally* stumbled across in his later career ('Little Willow' maybe, and a few others). Its almost all slow and pretty, too, with only a VERY FEW mid-tempo numbers and none of the embarassing rockers he sometimes puts forward.
Nope, its good all the way through, and very very sad and pretty. I have a feeling I'm falling for it. I have a feeling you will too.
2. The new Macca is almost impossibly good. I expected, much like the Stones record, to like it, kinda -- to maybe have three or four songs I really loved, and the rest of it just be kind of throwaway filler, and I'd come away being ultimately disappointed. I'm here to say, however that this is Paul's version of XTC's "Apple Venus Vol. 1" -- all low-key melancholy. It's sad, and filled with the kind of wistful gorgeousness Macca has only *very occasionally* stumbled across in his later career ('Little Willow' maybe, and a few others). Its almost all slow and pretty, too, with only a VERY FEW mid-tempo numbers and none of the embarassing rockers he sometimes puts forward.
Nope, its good all the way through, and very very sad and pretty. I have a feeling I'm falling for it. I have a feeling you will too.
Sunday, September 04, 2005
Okay, cough, and also "Dirty Little Secret" by the All-American Rejects.
New Power Pop Kinda Rules, A Little, When You've Had A Couple Drinkz.
New Power Pop Kinda Rules, A Little, When You've Had A Couple Drinkz.
Okay, the Click Five. New Guilty Pleasure. Fluffy pop confectionary of the lowest order. Total nonsense.
Their new song is "Just The GIrl," and I'm sorry, but it seems to have lodged itself in my head in the kind of way that really large slivers lodge themselves in tender skin. Its awful. I think -- I mean, isn't it? Its about a Chick, and they're Kids Who Play Their Own Instruments, but I'm pretty sure the label thinks theyr'e Cute Enough To Appeal To Young Girls, or maybe even The Next Big Thing For The Kidz To Like.
Its generic, homogenous, and utterly innocuous.
Its cute.
Its nothing worth your while.
And yet? I can't help but think: SO WERE THE MONKEES.
Weren't they? I mean, cute and innocuous and actually NOT REALLY, only we all thought they were? And still dismissed?
Sebastian over on the Smiley Smile board would probably dig, what with his Busted fixation and all. Only this is maybe even MORE good/bad. Actually, DEFINITELY even more good/bad.
I'm about five Large Vodka Drinks down, so disregard this ENTIRE POST. Only don't, and download the iTunes single for like 99 cents. Come on -- stupid crappy teenage pop is worth 99 cents, isn't it? ISN'T IT?????????
Their new song is "Just The GIrl," and I'm sorry, but it seems to have lodged itself in my head in the kind of way that really large slivers lodge themselves in tender skin. Its awful. I think -- I mean, isn't it? Its about a Chick, and they're Kids Who Play Their Own Instruments, but I'm pretty sure the label thinks theyr'e Cute Enough To Appeal To Young Girls, or maybe even The Next Big Thing For The Kidz To Like.
Its generic, homogenous, and utterly innocuous.
Its cute.
Its nothing worth your while.
And yet? I can't help but think: SO WERE THE MONKEES.
Weren't they? I mean, cute and innocuous and actually NOT REALLY, only we all thought they were? And still dismissed?
Sebastian over on the Smiley Smile board would probably dig, what with his Busted fixation and all. Only this is maybe even MORE good/bad. Actually, DEFINITELY even more good/bad.
I'm about five Large Vodka Drinks down, so disregard this ENTIRE POST. Only don't, and download the iTunes single for like 99 cents. Come on -- stupid crappy teenage pop is worth 99 cents, isn't it? ISN'T IT?????????
Friday, September 02, 2005
Dear everybody that's been so kind and supportive of the new site: You are all awesome. The reason the Smile Shop community became our home-away-from-home for so long is because of YOU FOLKS. (sniffle) You really are the greatest. Honestly.
That is all!
That is all!
Thursday, September 01, 2005
Two "olds" who have good records coming out, to the delight and shock of all:
1. The Rolling Stones. I made brief mention of it here and elsewhere, but the new album is kind of a stunner. Okay, its overlong -- I would have trimmed about 4 songs, and I've got 'em all picked out already. And Mick's lyrics? As usual since about the mid-70s, not-so-hot, and that verges on understatement. But we do have: a) tough, tough sounding guitars -- Keith is in TOP form. b) great melodies -- Mick's writing some killer tunes this time out, and there's only one kind of embarassingly sappy tune. c) KILLER vocals -- Mick hasn't sounded this good in forever. No pitch-correction here!! I don't think I'm being hyperbolic at ALL by calling this the "best Stones album" since Tattoo You -- since there hasn't been much good since then anyway! Pick it up. Give it a chance. Honest.
2. Macca -- I've heard about half the album, now, and it's beautiful. Some magnificent pop, some interesting arrangements, some terrific melodies, some delightful lyrics. He's been on good form since "Flaming Pie," IMO -- he's done some intriguing electronic experiments with the Fireman and with the Liverpool Sound Collage, and his last 2 albums have been either good or very very interesting failures. This one strikes me as an EXTREMELY strong set. Paul needs to work with Nigel Godrich again -- the guy knows how to say NO.
Whoda thunk it, huh?
1. The Rolling Stones. I made brief mention of it here and elsewhere, but the new album is kind of a stunner. Okay, its overlong -- I would have trimmed about 4 songs, and I've got 'em all picked out already. And Mick's lyrics? As usual since about the mid-70s, not-so-hot, and that verges on understatement. But we do have: a) tough, tough sounding guitars -- Keith is in TOP form. b) great melodies -- Mick's writing some killer tunes this time out, and there's only one kind of embarassingly sappy tune. c) KILLER vocals -- Mick hasn't sounded this good in forever. No pitch-correction here!! I don't think I'm being hyperbolic at ALL by calling this the "best Stones album" since Tattoo You -- since there hasn't been much good since then anyway! Pick it up. Give it a chance. Honest.
2. Macca -- I've heard about half the album, now, and it's beautiful. Some magnificent pop, some interesting arrangements, some terrific melodies, some delightful lyrics. He's been on good form since "Flaming Pie," IMO -- he's done some intriguing electronic experiments with the Fireman and with the Liverpool Sound Collage, and his last 2 albums have been either good or very very interesting failures. This one strikes me as an EXTREMELY strong set. Paul needs to work with Nigel Godrich again -- the guy knows how to say NO.
Whoda thunk it, huh?
