STEVE KING'S MUSIC COMMENTARY
A semi-regular introspective into the music of rock radio
Summer was a lousy time to be listening to the radio. Weak singles and a
generally miserable local radio scuffle made me want to pop my tapes in
more than ever. Past summers have been hot melting pots for good music,
but they're really feeding us the crap this time. The stations are
essentially just waiting for a couple releases that happen this fall, such
as Everclear (which probably won't have much radio power) and Green Day
(which might) to keep them going. Further off in the horizon are releases
from R.E.M. and Pearl Jam, and we can only hope that they won't bomb like
the last albums did. If they turn out gems, then radio will be something
you can turn off.
Semi-Charmed Life: Third Eye Blind
"I want something else to get me through this half-baked fanboy
song." This is the classic "listeners will like anything" single that
some record company decided to release. Radio stations, being from the
same philosophy, promptly play it 80 times a week. This song has very
little substance to it, just a slightly catchy gimmic and a legion of less
musically inclined fans backing it up. I might not have minded this song
so much if I hadn't seen it performed live on Conan, where Third Eye Blind
tried to pass itself off as several different types of bands at once, and
failed miserably. If you want to create some sort of live image, stick to
one, please.
Old: Bush
Where was this song when I needed it? Specifically, on Razorblade
Suitcase? This is what Bush is all about; energetic, fun, fast, and most
notably short. There are good Bush songs that are long, but there are
also horrible ones. This doesn't drag on, and it doesn't try to pretend
that Bush's many weaknesses aren't there. It just doesn't hit on any of
them. It's fun to listen to.
Listen: Collective Soul
Every album. Every album Collective Soul puts out seems like it
might finally push them into anonymity, but they always come up with
something that defies it. Listen is a great song, like many that precede
it, and exemplifies Collective Soul's best points. The chemistry the band
has, the soulful introspection in Rolland's lyrics, and the wonderful
harmonics they always seems to throw together. I wish some people would
actually listen to this song.
D'you Know What I Mean?: Oasis
After the disaster that was Whatever, which was easily the worst
single released on radio in years that got any airplay, this song comes as
a big relief. As annoyed as I am at Oasis' ultra obnoxious egos and
demeanor, and their callousness toward everything else, I have to admit
they have talent. This is a well composed and performed song. I don't
particularly like it, but I can see why people do. I just hope they fade
away nice and easily like the Gin Blossoms (remember them?) or somebody.
AEnima: Tool
Pity this song is on a year old album. It's terrific. Even the
slice-and-dice-for-radio version sounds great. You can easily forget to
change the station listening to this song. It has terrific layers and
sections, and great band effects. Alternating between soft and ominous
and hard and oppresive, this is what more songs should be like. Hear
anything, Oasis?
And the song I review that's old but I like:
Welcome to the Jungle: Guns 'n' Roses
There's something wrong with you if you don't like this song.
Energetic, fun, irreverent, and high powered. What happened to all that
great stuff from GnR? This song gets cranked on my radio every time. The
best part is that the album is now in the cheap section at most good
record stores, so if you don't already have it its easy to get. And
plenty worth it. This song rocks.
14 responses total.
More to come...
Steve, you remind me of the gap I have with the second phase of Generation X. I can't stand Tool-- maybe it's the dischordance. I must be a weird man because I don't listen to loud, distortedd, alternative rock. I prefer cool and smooth sounds. I don't know what's wrong with me.
Help is available. Take a seat on the couch and wait for your name to be called.
re# Don't make over broad generalazations. I am part of the older part of generation-x (isn't this just a marketing term at this point?) and I like dischordant music ala Tool, though I prefer John Zorn or early Sonic Youth for this sort of music because they have more substance IMO.
re #2: Take two Steely Dan albums and call us in the morning.. I listen to a fairly wide range on the "smooth <-> rough" scale from the uber-produced, every note polished individually studio maniacs like Steely Dan to rough-sounding lo-fi nobody-knew-what- the-finished-cut-was-going-to-sound-like throw-together-a-bunch-of- stuff-and-see-what-we-get experimenters like early Pere Ubu.. However, looking through my record collection I'm surprised to find how strongly my purchases are weighted towards the smooth end of that scale -- perhaps it should have been a tip-off that out of 1000 or so CDs I can recall the producer on 1/3 to 1/2 of them.. The more I listen, too, the more conscious I become of the decisions that resulted in a piece of music ending up a certain way and the more opinionated I become about such matters -- there are a few albums I own that feature great songs and good performances that I still find it difficult to enjoy because of conscious or unconscious production decisions.. Maybe I'm just getting more anal as I get older, do other people find themselves more sensitive to such issues?
Smooth can mean different things to different people. All depends on how you look at it.
All I can say is that I generally ralph at contemporary music. Love watching AMP on MTV from time to time, though.
I used to like really smooth productions (within reason, I never liked stuff like Mariah Carey), but after a few years of Tom Waits...
Personally, I think the composition and harmonics achieved by modern (anti-lumen) music is superior to that of older classical rock. But that's my opinion. Obviously :)
Well, that's a bit broad too. Certainly, there are a lot of cliches and bad compositional devices and suchlike in 'classic rock', but there are a lot of them in current music too. The "Four chords repeating over and over and over and over and over" or "quiet verse LOUD CHORUS quiet verse LOUD CHORUS" or "bassline that keeps descending to show how depressed I am" that are typical of grunge will someday seem as tired as some older music does now; the Beatles, Hendrix, Paul Simon, etc - the reall *classics* - will most likely outlast anything on the radio right now.
We'll see. Good ideas certainly got overused quite a bit. (How many Oasis or Bush songs have you heard that sound the same?) But the innovators of the decade will endure. Everybody supposedly clones Pearl Jam, yet I haven't heard anything remotely like Ten since it came out. I wonder why.
(Steve, thanks for copying this in here from ripclaw's .plan...)
Okay, so I was exaggerating. A lot. But the point remains, there's good music and bad music in all eras, but a lot less of it sounds good in retrospect.
I've identified and named two elements of Rock & Roll that
are not *exactly* at opposite ends of one scale. More likely they
are two scales.
One I call 'High Energy'. The Who beating their instruments
to near death. The Rolling Stones getting no satisfaction. Stray
Cats, ready to Ruble In Brighton. Not the same as the 'spontinaity'
element. But I can enjoy soem high energy rock & roll.
The next I call 'High Production'. The Moody Blues. Gerry
Rafferty's "Baker Street". The Rollig Stones in the 2,000 Light
Years from home, Dandelion, and other Satanic Majesties requests.
Don't have to be symphonic sounding, but could tend to, mostly the
well crafted.
Maybe "Symphony for the Devil" is my good example of both
of these elements.
You have several choices: