29 in 2009 - The Beach Boys: "Pet Sounds"

The Beach Boys:  Pet Sounds

Originally Released:  May 16, 1966

Genres: Rock, Pop

Rating:  9 out of 10 Stars

I know, I know; the idea of writing an article in a series called "29 in 2009" seems a bit silly now that it's February 2010.  But duty calls, folks.  Though I wasn't able to write about all of the albums in this series by December 31, 2009, I was able to listen to all of them at least once.  So that's got to count for something, I assume.

Speaking of assuming, when I saw Pet Sounds would be appearing at the end of this series, I assumed I'd be listening to a collection of the band's more notable hits.  Song like "Surfin' USA" and "California Girls," are what I usually associate with the band.  But to my surprise, Pet Sounds is a subdued album that focuses more on soft, emotional ballads than upbeat, beach party tunes.  When I first downloaded this album in December, I figured I could knock it out in a week because I would already be familiar with the majority of its songs.  False.

Of course, the album's best tracks are still the ones I had heard before.  "Wouldn't It Be Nice" is a fun lead-off track that I've been jamming to pretty consistently for the last month or so, while "God Only Knows" is surprisingly touching, even for a chronically single guy such as myself.  When people say they're influenced by The Beach Boys' sound, I've never really been able to hear it.  But Pet Sounds seems to be incredibly influential!  I'm hearing bits of pieces of some of my favorite artists in here (and even some that I don't like...Panda Bear).

The cool thing about Pet Sounds, for me, is that every song on it sounds unique and yet they all seem to fit together.  There's not a bad one on here.   And that makes this whole series of mine end on an extremely positive note, which is nice.

Verdict:  Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Tom Waits: "Rain Dogs"

Tom Waits:  Rain Dogs

Originally Released:  September 30, 1985

Genres: Rock, Folk, Avant Garde

Rating: 6 out of 10

Hey, the rest of the world may be a few weeks into 2010, but it's still 2009 here at Audio Overflow!  Just two more albums to get through and then I can wash my hands clean of this long-winded series and maybe get a chance to post a "Best of the Decade" list or a review of a new album.  But first, there's Rain Dogs.

Truth be told, I've been listening to this album since the last few weeks of 2009.  It's a tough one to get through, what, with 19 tracks, all of which are teetering on the line of the "weirdest shit I've ever heard" classification.  Tom Waits is a weird dude, and if this album is any indication, a pretty messed up one at that.  Rain Dogs sounds like nothing else I've heard in my life; like something I would hear playing out of a New Orleans voodoo shop or soundtracking a really demented Don Bluth film.  He paints a very vivid picture of desolation, despair, and filth through the tales told on this album.  While impressive in that regard, musically, this album just doesn't do it for me.

Not even a little bit.  Rain Dogs came off as a lesson in tedium rather than a legitimate musical expression.  I'm not familiar with Wait's other music, but the album sounds more like blatant experimentation.  Like I said, the album's nothing to scoff at, and I suppose it's quite impressive if taken at face value.  But listening to this album was a chore.  That's part of the reason that it took me so long to write this simple, short article on it. 

I have nothing else to say, really.  Waits is a talented guy, but Rain Dogs is just an album that I could never get into and will probably never listen to again.  Bring on the Beach Boys!

Verdict:  Tedious

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Rolling Stones: "Exile on Main St."

The Rolling Stones:  Exile on Main St.

Originally Released:  May 12, 1972

Genre:  Rock

Rating:  9 out of 10 Stars

First of all, Merry Christmas to all of you!  Secondly, thanks to me for nominating this album to be included in this series.  I did so due my relative unfamiliarity with The Rolling Stones, and my desire to hear more of their stuff.  Still, you guys voted it in, and I appreciate that as well.

My experience with The Stones is pretty much nonexistent.  I grew up during a time when the band was well past their prime, and so I always associated the band with a bunch of old rockers performing mediocre versions of what were probably great songs 30 years earlier, but more or less non-effective now.  I totally skipped out on that Super Bowl performance, as I did any time "Satisfaction" came on the radio.  I was blissfully unaware of how awesome this band was.

But you have to think, if a band's been around 50 years, they have to be doing something right (or at least to had done something right).  Honestly, if Exile was the only CD the band had ever made, that alone would qualify them as one of the greatest of all time.  It is, in every sense of the word, a perfect rock 'n' roll album.  And the crazy thing about this album, for me, is that I had never heard a single song from this record before this series.  Maybe "Rocks Off," but I can't say for sure.

With that in mind though, listening to an 18-song record is one hell of an undertaking.  I've listened to it 4 times through now, and I still don't think I'm able to fully-appreciate it yet.  On a superficial level alone, it's one of the best rock albums of all time!  That I can say with absolute assurance.  But anything deeper than that will have to be revealed to me over time.  In the interest of wrapping this year-long 29 in 2009 series up, I'm writing about it now, rather than a month from now. 

But from what I've heard so far...damn.

Verdict:  Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Janis Joplin: "Pearl"

Janis Joplin:  Pearl

Originally Released:  February 1, 1971

Genres:  Rock, Blues

Rating:  7 out of 10

I have a few spare moments on my hand right now.  What better way to spend them than by trying to wrap up this 29 in 2009 series?

First off, I'd like to thank whoever recommended this album.  It's the first album by an artist that died in their prime that hasn't been a complete disappointment.  Believe it or not, I had never heard a Janis Joplin song in my life, with the possible exception of seeing her perform in a Woodstock documentary or two.  She is awesome!

"Move Over" is an awesome opening track, and maybe the perfect introduction to her sound (that's what I'm assuming at least, based off of my brief interaction with her tuneage).  The best track comes next though, "Cry Baby" is just one of the most powerfully sung songs I've ever heard.  Janis' voice is like a gift from god, here; fully displaying the passion and emotion of the lyrics.

"Mercedes Benz" is really the only song on Pearl that needs to be retired.  Sure Joplin's got a great voice, I'm just not sure its suited for acapella performances.  Here it sounds grating and disastrous.  This song is definitely worth skipping.

Overall though, a really good album.  Released posthumously, it really doesn't seem like a quick cash-in by the label.  Janis Joplin really seems like, if she had made some better choices, would still be around today, rocking just as hard as ever. 

Sorry for the short analysis, but as you may have noticed.  Things have been quite busy as of late.

Verdict:  Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Sonic Youth: "Daydream Nation"

Sonic Youth:  Daydream Nation

Originally Released:  October 1988

Genres:  Indie, Rock, Alternative

Rating:  2 out of 10

I'm totally okay with admitting that I don't "get" what the big deal about Sonic Youth is/was.  The first time I ever hear the bad is when they covered The Carpenters' song several years back.  I didn't get it then.  So I ignored them.  Later on as I got more and more into indie music, the band's name kept on creeping up.  I finally downloaded Daydream Nation to see what all the fuss was about.  I listened for about 15 minutes and decided that what I was hearing was entirely too shitty for words, and went to listen to some decent stuff instead.

So a few years pass.  "Juno" comes out and Diablo Cody perfectly expresses my sentiments toward the band through a fictional high school girl.  Finally!  I'm not alone!  But tastes change, people.  My musical preferences go through phases.  With that in mind, I happily nominated this album for this series and you all voted it in.

Why?  I'm not sure because this album still sucks a fat one.  Granted, "Teen Age Riot" is much more pleasant to my ears these days than it used to be, as are a few others (like the first two parts of "Trilogy"), but the last time I checked there isn't a single person in Sonic Youth who has any sort of vocal talent whatsoever.  Thurston Moore is least guilty for crimes against humanity ('s ears), as his tunes are at least listenable.  Ranaldo is a little more flagrant in his lack of vocal abilities, most notably in "Hey Joni." 

But let's focus for a second on Kim Gordon who more or less vomits into her hands and then flails that at the microphone.  Her singing is not bad.  It's atrocious.  When she sings "I wanna know/should I stay or go," I literally cringe.  It is something that has no place in the world, much less a music record.  Her voice absolutely ruins "Trilogy," which until she stepped up to the mic was becoming one of the album's best tracks. 

The guitars, bass, drums and all that sort of stuff?  It's passable; definitely much more acceptable to me now than it was with my first listen to this album all those years ago.  However, when it comes to music, the whole is usually the sum of its parts, so my feelings about this album are abolutely weighed down by the vocals that are far too distracting for me.  It's a shame, really, that my opinions are more in line with a fictional high school girl than with the majority of the fawning music press.  But Juno was more or less right.  Sonic Youth is "just noise" most of the time.  The rest of the time they are amateur at best and not worth my time.

Verdict:  Overrated Crap

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - David Bowie: "The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars"

David Bowie:  The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars

Originally Released:  June 6, 1972

Genre:  Glam Rock

Rating: 8 out of 10

David Bowie has always been an artist that I've known I needed to listen to, but never took the time to do so.  I got into Queen in high school (one of the few classic rock bands that I feel completely familiar with), and one of their best songs - one of my favorite songs - is "Under Pressure" with Bowie.  In fact, up until the release of the video game Rock Band, that was all I had heard of the guy.  Rock Band got be acquainted with "Suffragette City,"  which I instantly fell in love with.

On Ziggy Stardust, "Suffragette City" remains the highlight, but is surrounded by a tracklist that is almost as impressive.  Simply put, there ain't a bad song on this album.  Not one.  My personal favorites include "Five Years," "Ziggy Stardust" and "Soul Love."  I had my iPod on shuffle yesterday and "Soul Love" came on.  I had never really, really listened to it, but damn, that song and those lyrics are in a class above most everything else I've listened to for this series!

I spent all of about 5 minutes trying to figure out the vague storyline or meaning behind the album, as it is a concept album.  However, it fails in the way that most concept albums do:  it tries to fit the story within the framework of the songs and it ends up watering down the lyrical punch in the process.  Would the songs on Ziggy Stardust be better if they were about fact rather than fiction?  Almost assuredly.  But Bowie is compotent enough to make it work, and "Starman" and "Rock 'n' Roll Suicide" are great songs with or without the story of Ziggy.

I definitely enjoyed the time I spent listening to this album, the problem for me was finding time that I actually wanted to do so all the way through.  Sure, if  "Suffragette City" or "Soul Love" started playing, I'd listen to it, but I never really wanted to listen to the album as a whole during the 4 weeks or so that I've had this album.  Nevertheless, Ziggy Stardust is a great album, and one that I would say everyone should probably listen to at least once in their lives.  I'm officially a Bowie fan.  What should I listen to next?

 Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Joy Division: "Unknown Pleasures"

Joy Division:  Unknown Pleasures

Originally Released:  June 15, 1979

Genres:  Indie Rock, Post-Punk

Rating:  5 out of 10

I gave up on trying to like Joy Division shortly into my first listen to Unknown Pleasures.  Whether it was the spacious, cold production or Ian Curtis' tragically awful vocal performance that turned me off is debatable.  In truth, it was probably a bit of both.

I could have ended my "journey" there, but I chose to press on.  Once I had determined that this was music that I simply could not get into, I tried to figure out why this album is such a big freaking deal.  As it goes with most overrated BFDs, there's a death involved.  This was not news to me.  I have long been familiar with the story of Ian Curtis, his depression, his epilepsy, his marriage, and his suicide.  It's a tragic tale.  Not so tragic (or unsurprising, really) is knowing that the band didn't become the legendary, worldwide-known, indie-rock patriarchs that they are until after Curtis' unfortunate demise.  Listening to a "classic" artist after they've passed away tends to change one's perception of the artist's music.

For Joy Division's two albums (both of which received a perfect score from Pitchfork...really?), Curtis' death is really a blessing in disguise because it presents the music of Joy Divsion in an entirely different context than it would have otherwise been presented.  One knows the ending before they even think about listening to the music.  Unknown Pleasures plays out like a jigsaw puzzle, each song a different piece to complete the image seen on the front of the box.  By the time the album is over, Curtis' death isn't so much an unexpected tragedy as it is the logical conclusion. 

Listening to the album from this perspective, I can't say that I enjoyed it more, but I definitely understood and appreciated it to a greater extent.  The music, when slow and methodical, is strenuous and boring; when upbeat, almost amateur in sound.  "She's Lost Control" proudly displays the band's punk roots, but it sounds downright awful to these ears.  That's nowhere near as bad as Curtis' missed (and sustained?!?) note on "I Remember Nothing," which just flat out has no purpose on an album full of music. 

The production of Unknown Pleasures, which others have referred to as "legendary" and "perfect," predictably gets more melancholic scores from me.  Even by 1979 standards, the quality of the recordings are far below what I would consider acceptable.  Admittedly, the style of production does provide a certain atmosphere to the music, but it in no way makes Unknown Pleasures easier to listen to, or enjoy.

In my opinion, the album's best moment comes on the second track "Day of the Lords," in which Curtis, with as much emotion as he ever musters, repeats the question, "How will it end?"  Modern audiences have the luxury of hearing that line and seeing a bit of irony in it.  I, however, imagine Curtis locked away in a room, penning the line with an acute sense of fear and anxiety over his future.  That, to me, makes the song a dozen times better.  And this is why I think Unknown Pleasures is an overrated album.  Because without the knowledge of Curtis' passing, the album is simply mediocre, losing all of its power and importance. 

The end.

Verdict:  Classically Overrated

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Frank Zappa: "Over-Nite Sensation"

Frank Zappa:  Over-Nite Sensation

Originally Released:  September 7, 1973

Genres:  Rock, Comedy

Rating: 4 out of 10

I had just gotten onto a bus in high school when I noticed my friend Justin motioning for me to come to his seat.  I walked back a few rows and sat down next to him.  He was wearing headphones and listening to a portable CD player (kids, that's like an olde-timey MP3 player).  He took his headphones off and handed them to me, saying, "Dude, listen to this," with a wide smile on his face.  I eagerly put the headphones on to hear what was being offered to me.  It turned out to be a random Frank Zappa song off of a random Frank Zappa album.  I don't remember the name of it, or any specifics about the song.  I do remember that the lyrics were quite dirty, but humorous.  This is the primary reason why Justin showed it to me.  I laughed, took off my headphones, and let him continue to listen to his latest musical discovery.

That was my first and only run-in with Zappa before last week.  I kinda wish it would've stayed that way.

Truthfully, Frank Zappa has some amazing skills as both a lyricist and a musician (that guitar...whoah).  I have the lyrics to "Camarillo Brillo" in front of me right now, and it reads like a short story, not song lyrics.  That's quite an achievement for any artist, much less one like Zappa who I have to assume didn't take himself too seriously.  I mean, if he did, maybe his lyrics wouldn't enter the gross-out department so often; or perhaps he would release an album maybe once every few years as opposed to several a year as he did for much of his career.

But my biggest problem with Zappa isn't the shoddy nature of the work, but more just how everything comes together.  I'm all one for having fun in music, even if that fun is quite juvenile.  But too often the lighthearted comedy of Zappa's lyrics don't flow well with the mastery of his guitar, or the brilliant rock work of the rest of his band.  To me, it feels like they're clashing, constantly battling for supremacy until I ultimately just lose complete interest.

This is clearly an album that is not meant for all audiences.  Some will get it, others will not.  Zappa's so renowned in the rock world that it leads me to believe that I simply don't understand exactly what he's trying to accomplish with Over-Nite Sensation.  When you have such an extensive catalogue, as Frank does, I would think it'd be difficult for me, let alone anyone, to fully grasp the concept without at least listening to 2 or 3 albums.  That theory alone makes me question whether or not this can be considered a classic album.  Assuming I'm entirely wrong, what makes this one classic?  Is it the fact that it was his commercial breakthrough, or is it really just that good?  Let's discuss this in the comments, because as disappointed as I am by Over-Nite Sensation, I'm not entirely ready to give up on Zappa yet. 

Verdict:  Overrated

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Pink Floyd: "Dark Side of the Moon"

Pink Floyd:  Dark Side of the Moon

Originally Released:  March 10, 1973

Genre:  Progressive Rock

Rating:  8 out of 10 Stars

So after all the voting wrapped up, there could only be one Pink Floyd album.  To tell the truth, I'm kind of glad it was Dark Side of the Moon.  Now to say I'm completely unaware of Pink Floyd's music would be false.  In fact, of all the artists in the 29 in 2009 series, I would say that I'm most familiar with Floyd's music than any other artist or band.  Back in high school I owned a copy of The Wall (until that d-bag Matt threw it against a tree and completely ruined disc 2) and I've even heard Dark Side of the Moon before too.  Which brings me to the Wizard of Oz thing. 

There, I acknowledged it.  Let's move on.

Why I decided to allow DSOTM to even be included in this series is because I really wanted an excuse to hear more Floyd, and being a fan of the song "Money" (the only song I was remotely familiar with on the record), it seemed like a good place to start.  I was right to do so, as it turned out, because Dark Side of the Moon is just a flat-out great album!  As far as progressive rock goes, it easily deserves a spot at the top of any genre-specific "Best of" lists.

It starts out with the beautiful and haunting "Speak to Me/Breathe."  The slow build-up into the song-proper ("Breathe") is a bit too slow, but the climax into the first chords of the song is one music's greatest moments.  I remember thinking that 12 years ago when I last listened to the album, and listening to it now only confirms it.  The song itself, as I said, is a thing of absolute simplistic beauty.  "On the Run" on the other hand, is worthless.  But I haven't tripped balls recently...so I may be mistaken.

"Time" is a fairly decent piece of music, though its length can be a distraction.  The only thing that really keeps me listening throughout its 7 minutes is the solid guitar-playing courtesy of David Gilmour.  "The Great Gig in the Sky" is mostly-instrumental, though there are a bit of spoken word lines and a pretty sweet vocal performance from Clare Torry.  Does she say anything of sustinence?  Nope.  But it sounds pretty killer.  And this of course brings us to "Money," the most accessible song on the album, which is probably why I've always liked it so much.  It's got a bouncy blues progression, pop vocals, and only the coolest use of a cash register sample ever!  How could anyone not like this song?

"Us and Them." Dang.  The first time I heard this track, whenever that was, I remember thinking about how boring it was.  Now it's easily one of the best tracks on the record, giving "Money" a serious run at the top spot.  It is gorgeous from start to finish, with some of the best performances I've heard by any artist yet in this series.  Love it! "Any Colour You Like?" No thanks.  You know for some reason, I find myself not liking these instrumentals all that much.  Granted, I do see the value in them, but I find myself skipping over them after repeated listens.  The album closes with the fantastic duo of "Brain Damage" and "Eclipse."  Both are great songs, but "Eclipse" is particularly epic despite its short length, and serves as the perfect close to the album. 

So I like this album a lot.  Yeah.  Would I say I'm a Pink Floyd fan?  Not yet, but I'm a definite fan of Dark Side of the Moon, which is a good start.  A friend is telling me that I have to listen to Wish You Were Here, and I'm definitely more inclined to do so after taking this one out for a spin.  One thing's for sure, I'm definitely more of a fan than I was a few weeks ago, and I can't help but feel more complete as a person (and certainly, a music-blogger) as a result.

Verdict:  Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Joni Mitchell: "Blue"

Joni Mitchell:  Blue

Originally Released:  June 1971

Genre:  Folk

Rating:  9 out of 10 Stars

Literally about 30 seconds into my first listen of Blue, I thought to myself, "Wow, if this album continues to go this way, I am going to love the heck out of it!"  The song, "All I Want" is such a gorgeous track, that I thought for sure that it was the highlight of the album.  How, after all, could anything top this?

I was wrong.  Blue is an incredible album from start to finish. 

This is one of those albums that makes me hate my parents.  Not because they were bad parents, mind you; but because when they were too busy introducing me to Michael W. Smith and Carman rather than Joni Mitchell.  I had never heard a Joni Mitchell song before I listened to this album.  That's sad.  And while I typically adhere to my strict, "I'm not really into folk music" policy, I'll go ahead and make an exception for this album (and a few others, sure) simply because it's rather awesome.

My favorite song is "California," a song so simple, yet so catchy.  James Taylor rocks some mad guitar skills on the song (and elsewhere on the album).  But the true awesomeness comes only from Mitchell, whose child-like voice is perfectly suited for such a pretty song.  The least-favorite goes to the title track, "Blue" where Mitchell shows does perhaps a bit too much with her voice.  But really, that's the only track on the entire album that isn't completely awesome.

It started with Nick Drake and it continues with Joni Mitchell.  If this 29 in 2009 series keeps going this way, I may have to rethink my whole "I'm not really into folk music" policy.  Granted, I'm not there yet...but it's definitely going in that direction.

Verdict:  Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - R.E.M.: "Murmur"

R.E.M.: Murmur

Originally Released: April 2, 1983

Genres: Alternative Rock

Rating: 7 out of 10

One Word and One Sentence

1. "Radio Free Europe" - Overrated. This is a good song, but it has been hailed as this great game-changer in rock music which unfortunately leaves me with unrealized expectations.

2. "Pilgrimage" - Lacking. It's got boring verses and a semi-weak hook, which I've always sort of associated with R.E.M. anyway.

3. "Laughing" - Good. I like the guitars and the slight harmonies enough to call this song a classic in and of itself.

4. "Talk About the Passion" - Influential. This song just sounds like it could've been a Nirvana song 10 years later, only it would've had to be severely dumbed down for that to happen.

5. "Moral Kiosk" - Meh. The song's got a really cool groove, but its wasted by Michael Stipe's lyrical and melodic nonsense.

6. "Perfect Circle" - Lame. The obligatory ballad makes an appearance.

7. "Catapult" - Perfect. The only song on this album that I've actually been compelled to listen to over and over again.

8. "Sitting Still" - Worthy. The groove of "Moral Kiosk" with the catchiness of "Catapult"...yes, please.

9. "9-9" - Disappointing. Guitars this cool shouldn't have to deal with Stipe.

10. "Shaking Through" - Late. I feel like I would've loved the heck out of this song in 1995, but nowadays it's just not doing a thing for me.

11. "We Walk" - Simple. Proof that basic riffs and a classic sound don't always equal a poor, outdated song.

12. "West of the Fields" - Worst. Hook...ever.

Verdict: Almost Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Smiths: "The Queen Is Dead"

The Smiths: The Queen is Dead

Originally Released: June 16, 1986

Genre: Alternative Rock

Rating: 6 out of 10

Not putting a lot of thought into this article. Just writing what comes to my head. You have been warned.

I don't love this album. It's hard for me to say that I even like it. I'm giving it a 6 out of 10 simply because as far as 80s music goes, it's not half bad. But really, when I'm done writing this piece, I'll never listen to it again. It's not really my style of music, and in my opinion, there's not a great piece of music on the thing. It's best song is "The Boy with the Thorn in His Side," and there are a few comparable tracks on there as well. Unfortunately, nothing stands out. Nothing infects me or gets stuck in my head. Everything is pretty much straightforward, and nothing is special.

So this is my biggest complaint with the album. And it's the one thing that I can't get over. Every time a song starts playing, I start to wonder if I'd be better off just skipping ahead to the next song. Even the good ones get boring and repetitive half way through. Morrissey just annoys me after a while.

Is there anything positive for me to say about this album. Probably, but I just can't think of anything overwhelmingly positive about it. It's a "meh" album through and through. Nothing special about it. That's my opinion.

I don't feel like writing any more about it. Goodbye forever, album.

Verdict: Nope

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Beatles: "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band"

The Beatles: Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band

Originally Released: June 1, 1967

Genres: Rock, Psychedelic Rock

Rating: 8 out of 10 Stars

So here it is, the album which makes it to the top of nearly every best-ever list. Quite a daunting thing for the average blogger to review without mentioning the cultural/historical impact of the record. But then again, I am not the average blogger - so I won't mention it.

Taken out of the context of the era, where The Beatles were in their career, and how influential it became, Sgt. Pepper's is still a wonderful album! And yes, believe it or not, this was my first time to ever listen to the album - ever! The only song on this album that I had previously heard was "Getting Better" which I believe I saw on a TV advertisement. Weak sauce, sure. I understand this. I am a failed music blogger.

Despite this, I would say I'm at least passingly familiar with The Beatles' earlier, poppier, more-commercial work. It is with that passing familiarity that I've always said, "Meh, I'm just not much of a Beatles fan." Blasphemy!! Cue the pitchforks and torches. Well, Sgt. Pepper's is far removed from the band's earlier career, and I like it all the better because of this.

My personal breakdown, interjected into this middle of this article for kicks:

Great Songs

"Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band" (Track 1 & Reprise)

"Getting Better"

"She's Leaving Home"

"When I'm Sixty-Four"

"Lovely Rita"

"A Day in the Life"

Good Songs

"A Little Help From My Friends"

"Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"

"Fixing a Hole"

Okay Songs

"Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite"

Bad Songs

"Within You Without You"

"Good Morning, Good Morning"

I'm sure someone could argue with me about the value of "Within You Without You." Someone could also argue the value of "2 Girls 1 Cup," and honestly I'd be more-inclined to listen to this that. It's just not a very good song. Unique and experimental, absolutely! Just not good.

I once read a review (perhaps from AMG, not sure) that compared Of Montreal's The Gay Parade to this album, and I certainly see the similarities. Of Montreal is my favorite band, mind you, so listening to this album was a long-awaited treat. Of course, I prefer The Gay Parade due to its consistency in tone and, in my opinion, perfect tracklist; but Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is still a fantastic album! What The Gay Parade lacks in variety, musicality and polish, it has in spades. Both are classic albums, and I'm happy to have finally listened to both of them.

I'm also happy that the next time someone searches for "2 girls 1 cup" and "the beatles" in google, I'll likely be the top result! Score!!!

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Miles Davis: "Bitches Brew"

Miles Davis: Bitches Brew

Originally Released: April 1970

Genres: Jazz, Fusion, Experimental

Rating: ? out of 10

Early 2oth-century jazz: THAT I get. This stuff: not so much.

If that swingin', ragtime-esque jazz from the 1920s is in fact jazz, this stuff is not. It's like calling Nickelback "rock n roll." No, Buddy holly and Elvis were rock n roll, you guys make really mindless, uncreative modern rock! There's a difference. And it may just be an evolution of the genre, but at some point you have to draw a line and say, "This is no longer the same thing. This is something entirely different." So again, I say:

Jazz I get. Bitches Brew, I do not.

Cool your jets though. That's not to say that I completely dislike what I'm hearing. I actually think that this is a fantastic album when listened to in the right state of mind. Right state of mind: needing some background music to cleaning, writing, whatever. Wrong (well, misguided) state of mind: wanting to dissect and analyze music that is probably far beyond what you can grasp without a degree in music theory.

See, I could've spent months listening to this album, reading up on other peoples' interpretation of what the hell is actually going on, and then coming up with my own unique interpretation. But I chose to take it at face value. I'm happy with that decision because while some people may find such endeavors rewarding, it probably would've ruined this album for me.

Really the only distracting thing about the record - apart from its 1 1/2 hour length - is that I kept thinking that Miles' trumpet playing sounds a lot like the music on Sim City 4. Somehow I doubt many others will be bothered by this. So with that, I can do no less than award Bitches Brew my coveted "classic" verdict if only for the fact that it was indeed groundbreaking and a catalyst for an entirely new generation of artists willing to think outside the realm of what people considered possible or acceptable.

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Allman Brothers Band: "Eat a Peach"

The Allman Brothers Band: Eat a Peach

Originally Released: February 12, 1972

Genres: Rock, Southern Rock, Blues Rock

Rating: 8 out of 10 Stars

So I got the idea several weeks ago to listen to this album in one sit down and to have my write-up of it be a "live blogging" of my first listen. Not as insightful as some other posts, sure, but different. Here goes.

"Ain't Wastin' Time No More" - Already I've felt that I've made the wrong choice here. I should've listened to this album tomorrow. That's what I've been saying for a month now...(1:33) I like the song so far. It's a very soulful rock and roll song. Digs for sure. (3:11) Yep, this is defintely a really good song, and while I'm not familiar with The Allman Brothers Band at all, this is kind of what I imagined them sounding like.

"Les Brers in A Minor" - (0:14) Just looked at the tracklisting and saw that this was 9:07 long. Great! Of course it could be worse (see track 4). (2:01) Is there an old saying that I'm unfamiliar with? "If you can't find a good way to start a song, don't?" (2:56) Yep. Probably. (3:46) Oh great, an entirely different song! Great to know the last 4 minutes weren't completely worthless....(5:47) I guess this is just a random jam song. Good to know. I swear if any singing comes in in minute 8 I'm going to be completely dumfounded! (9:03) Nope. No singing.

"Melissa" - (0:08) This song is on an AT&T commercial. I figured that out in 8 seconds. During the last song I looked up the band on Wikipedia. Turns out that the band's most commercial songs, "Ramblin' Man" and "Jessica" (two good ones, I think) were featured on the next album. Not this one. At least I can say that I know some Allman Brothers Songs though. That's good. (1:50) I know this song too, and I like it a lot. I never knew this was them (I've found myself saying that a lot during this 29 in 2009 thing). (3.30) A really smooth, melancholic song. Good stuff. So far a really good CD.

"Mountain Jam" - This song is 33 minutes long, and according to Wikipedia, originally covered two sides of an LP. (0:35) My gut is telling me to just skip this song or at the very least, take a break from listening to it and finish it some other time. After all, the readers (you) will never know that you didn't do one whole listen. Integrity, people. That's what's keeping me here. On a related note, my Top Album of 2007 was shorter than this song. (2:50) I'm just going to go lay down while this plays. Maybe play some Peggle. (11:29) This is definitely the same band that did "Jessica." That sounds gross. (12:25) Missed a note on the guitar but it's cool cause it's "improvisation" oooh! (19:01) I'm imaging that the rest of the band just went backstage and got super blazed during that 6 minute drum solo. The bass player was the first to finish his pretzel and cheese Combos (they had those then, right?). (21:49) REALLY cool bass stuff going on. You don't hear that often! (22:38) How the heck am I supposed to get 400,000 points on this challenge?!?!? (30:15) I'm very concerned that I still have 5 more tracks to get through. (32:07) I feel like this is a really satisfying jam, though I would've hated to be there when it was recorded. Any time a band breaks out into an extended jam at a show....gosh, I'm just not a fan.

"One Way Out" - (0:38) This is beginning to sound like another jam. (1:05) Lyrics! Yay!! (3:47) At this point the once-awesome guitaring is losing a bit of it's appeal. Still cool, just not as impressive as it was 40 minutes ago. The lyrics on this song and the vocals themselves are not all that impressive either. Of course, I'm not a huge blues fan either.

"Trouble No More" - (0:14) The riff sounds familiar, though I'm not sure if that's just my mind playing tricks on me. This song has a bluesy feel to it as well. (1:18) Already better than the previous song. Much more emotion coming through on this one. Nice.

"Stand Back" - (0:35) I'm really digging the southern rock. This song is fairly bitchin' thus far. (2:04) Oh yes, this song is definitely one to remember; the standout track on the album for me at this point! Has there been a bad song on the album up to this point? Nope. I'm actually surprised by how much I'm enjoying this!!

"Blue Sky" - Sounds like a pretty standard single. *Checks Wikipedia* Nope, but apparently Dickey Betts is singing lead vocals for the first time. That means nothing to me, but hey, fun trivia! (2:15) I'm finding that a lot of the solos for The Allman Brothers Band sound similar. Maybe that's just their style, you know, something that will make them immediately identifiable. It's good. But unvaried. Maybe it evolved more as the band went on. I'm still new to this whole thing.

"Little Martha" - (0:49) Sounds like a Nick Drake song. I can say that now because I've listened to him (thanks, guys). More specifically, I could say that it sounds like Pink Moon-era Drake. (1:43) Assuming this is an instrumental, but it would be cool if someone just said the word "cabbage" right at the end all nonchalantly. (End) Nope.

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Clash: "London Calling"

The Clash: London Calling

Originally Released: December 14, 1979

Genres: Punk, Rock, Ska

Rating: 7 out of 10

I've been listening to London Calling for over a month now, but with nothing really concrete or interesting to say about it, I've been holding off on this post for some time. Since I started the 29 in 2009 series at the beginning of the year, this has happened time and time again; where I just don't feel like writing about an album. However, it dawned on me this morning that the 29 in 2009 series was never about the words I wrote, it's about the music I'm listening to. My words don't have to be this grand review if I don't want them to be. So with that in mind, I give you my thoughts on London Calling, a very very good record!

For some reason, when I thought about The Clash I always sort of equated them with The Ramones, Iggy and the Stooges, or the Sex Pistols; this really raw, mostly-talentless, sound that punk rock has always been remembered as. While that may be true for some of their earlier albums that I'm unfamiliar with, that's certainly not the case with London Calling. Sure, Mick Jones has his moments where he's barking out lyrics (like on the title track - the album's best), but the music that accompanies it strays far from the simplistic repetitive nature of their contemporaries.

So oddly enough, I found myself liking London Calling quite a bit, which isn't what I was expecting. The songs on it are incredibly varied in style; from reggae and punk, to rock and pop. There are some songs that don't work for me and are guaranteed skips ("Brand New Cadillac" comes to mind), but for the most part I found the album to be quite exciting...in short doses. Another reason that it's taken me so long to write this is because, for the most part, I have never been in the mood to listen to this album. It's style doesn't really fit with me right now. A few months down the road, though...who knows?

What should be made abundantly clear, however, is that this album is definitely to be considered a classic, not only for the greatness of some of its songs, but for its ability to set itself apart from the other punk bands of its time. It must be viewed as an essential listen for anyone interested in the genre because it took something that developed in crappy bars and scenes and made it mainstream. Sure, by the time "Rock the Casbah" came around, they may have taken it a bit too far. But London Calling represents a band at the top of their game at the right moment in time. You simply have to become acquainted with it!

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Led Zepplin: "House of the Holy"

Led Zepplin: House of the Holy

Originally Released: March 28, 1973

Genre: Rock

Rating: 9 out of 10

If you're looking for an Audio Overflow review of House of the Holy, you should look here, as one's already been done. Not by me, of course, but by some other writer who hung out here for a while.

If, however, you're looking for what is probably the most varied, yet consistently entertaining rock album to ever grace these ears, you should look no further than Led Zepplin's 1973 masterpiece. My "relationship" with Zepplin has always been weird. I have always been passingly familiar with their most-famous tunes; familiar enough to even say, "Yeah, I like Zepplin." But had I ever actually sat down and spent time with the band, fully digesting everything that they have to offer? Nope. That's one of the reasons why I added this album to this series. I really wanted a good excuse to listen to an entire Led Zepplin album in full.

House of the Holy is a roller coaster ride of rock goodness, beginning with the upbeat, guitar-heavy track, "The Song Remains the Same." If you've never listened to Zepplin before (who hasn't?) then this song is really the perfect introduction, as it showcases the band members' individual talents proudly. Jimmy Page is a f***ing FORCE on the electric guitar, John Bonham is a BEAST on drums, Robert Plant is an ANIMAL on the mic, and John Paul Jones is...well...a bass player. Sorry.

That song collapses into the beautiful "The Rain Song," Erin's (the aforementioned AO writer) favorite Led Zepplin song of all time. The song is the exact opposite of its predecessor, featuring soft pianos and lush string instrumentation. Bonham's drums are even more powerful here as they playfully interact with the guitar and never overpower a thing. Is it my favorite Zepplin song? Nope, that still belongs to "Misty Mountain Top," but damn!

Elsewhere on the album are the fantastic "The Crunge" - a confusing, yet wholly enjoyable rock freak-out that only gets better as you listen to it over and over again - and "D'yer Mak'er" - an island-esque ballad that was the first Zepplin song I can ever remember hearing. It's brilliant in its simplicity, and a whole lot of fun to sing at karaoke (probably the only Zepplin song that any sane person would attempt, too). "Dancing Days" is another fun guitar-rocker, and one of the band's more famous tracks, though it never charted well in its day.

So what do I think of House of the Holy? I think it's a fantastic rock album. Easily one of the best of that decade, if not ever! There isn't a single bad track on this album, and every song shows a different side of the band that you never would have guess existed. Honestly, to think that the band playing on "The Crunge" is the same band playing on "D'yer Mak'er" is mind-blowing. Aside from Plant's iconic vocals, they are entirely different in both their influences and execution. That, to me, is what makes this such a fascinating listen. It is an album worth coming back to over and over again, as I'm sure millions have done over the course of the last 36 years.

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Doors: "The Doors"

The Doors: The Doors

Originally Released: January 4, 1967

Genre: Rock

Rating: 6 out of 10

When I first sat down to listen to this album, I took a look at the tracklist and recognized the name of two songs. Obviously, those two are "Light My Fire" and "Break on Through (To the Other Side)" - really, their two most-notable songs. I thought to myself, "Cool, I like those songs. I'll probably like this album." For the most part, that's true. The Doors' self-titled debut is a classic American rock album that's totally deserving of all the hoopla that surrounded it then and all the nostalgia that follows it now.

A quick note on "Break On Through"...Whoah! Could this be the greatest song to ever be Track 1 on a debut album? Probably. The song perfectly captures the essence of the band, and honestly whole feel of the late sixties (or at least what I imagine the late sixties to have been like). It's simplistic, honestly, though its power rests mostly within the ferocious howls of the legendary (yet overhyped) Jim Morrison. The song is followed by "Soul Kitchen," a song which may even be better than the album's famous lead-off single. That debate is to be had another day on another random blog. Not here, sadly.

Some of the album's better songs also include "Twentieth Century Fox," "Light My Fire," and "Take it as it Comes." The latter, unfortunately, is the sole track on the album's second half (or Side Two for you old folks out there) that is even remotely interesting to me. "The End," while completely open to dissection and discussion, as a song just doesn't do a thing. Twelve minutes of nonsense if you ask me.

So there are those four songs that I've mentioned enjoying; the rest is either just not my style ("The Crystal Ship" or "I Looked at You") or just downright poor ("Alabama Song" or "Back Door Man"). I can handle, "End of the Night" sometimes, but I just have to be in the right mood. You see, The Doors is not an awful album by any means, but it is definitely a debut; equal parts greatness and missteps. That's too be expected, I suppose, though it's a little disappointing considering the hype that surrounds the band. I guess when the "star" dies at 27, hype is inevitably part of the equation (does anyone care to argue that Nirvana was really that good?).

In these days of digital downloads, I'd be much more inclined to tell someone to download the handful of great tracks off of this album rather than go out and purchase the whole thing. That, to me, is a sign that an album doesn't deserve the "classic" label. So this one won't be receiving it from me. It is a good album though. Weak at parts, but definitely worth listening to.

And am I the only one that finds the organ annoying 90% of the time?

Verdict: Overrated

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - The Velvet Underground: "The Velvet Underground & Nico"

The Velvet Underground: The Velvet Underground & Nico

Originally Released: March 12, 1967

Genres: Rock, Experimental Rock

Rating: 3 out of 10

Well folks, according to the clock on my wall, there's less than 4 hours left in the month of May. No better time to squeeze out another update in my 29 in 2009 series. This one will be brief, and it will be a bit out of character for me. The simple fact of it is that I absolutely abhor this album. Having listened to it off an on for the entire month of May, that is the only thing I can say with absolute certainty.

The first thing I think about when I start listening to a song, any song, on this album is that I would much rather be listening to something else. The music to me is absolutely un-gripping, mediocre (amateur, even), overrated, and bad. Lyrically, it's hit or miss. Songs like "There She Goes Again" show just how simplistic and predictable the band's lyrics can be, while others such as "Heroin" show an unparalleled introspection. The songs themselves are almost all boring, the best ones being when Lou Reed doesn't open his mouth and Nico takes over vocals.

At that, ladies and gentlemen, is the extent of my write-up for this album. I want nothing more than to start the month of June with a clean slate, and having this album still on my to-do list would not be the best way to start. It gets the amount of attention from me that I think it deserves. No more no less.

Pretty terrible considering that of all the albums that have been chosen for the list so far, THIS was the album I was most excited to hear. No joke. Oh well...

Verdict: Classically Bad

Click to Read More...

Summary only...

29 in 2009 - Serge Gainsbourg: "Histoire de Melody Nelson"

Serge Gainsbourg: Histoire de Melody Nelson

Originally Released: 1971

Genres: French Rock, Spoken Word, Concept Album

Rating: 9 out of 10 Stars

My sincerest apologies to anyone who expected to see The Velvet Underground as my next album in this series. It'll come soon enough. Meanwhile, I've added a few of my own personal choices to list of albums which you can view by visiting the introduction page. These albums will be reviewed as I get to them, when I feel I've given them enough attention.

Histoire de Melody Nelson is the first of these albums. I've had the pleasure of listening to it for the last two months or so, and I'm still getting songs stuck in my head. Now usually, that's not such a huge deal, but when the lyrics are in French and the majority of the album is pretty much spoken, that's saying quite a lot.

For the uninitiated, Melody Nelson is considered to be the late Gainsbourg's greatest achievement in music. If you want to read people rant and rave about it, go ahead and click here. Almost any music critic who has ever come into contact with it has nothing but positive things to say about it (probably because the know they're supposed to), so I won't spend too much time dissecting the greatness of it. I initially listened to it because of these perfect review scores, not to mention due somewhat to my familiarity with his daughter Charlotte (Actress - 21 Grams, The Science of Sleep / Singer - 5:55).

Simply put, it's a strangely attractive album that is both haunting and endearing. Clocking in at under 28 minutes in length, Gainsbourg does a wonderful job of creating a mood with his deep, thudding bass and freewheeling guitars. Perhaps even more notable are the lush string compositions courtesy of his producer, Jean-Claude Vannier. On any album, these instruments would almost certainly clash, but on Melody Nelson they complement each other perfectly.

The album is a concept album, telling the Lolita-esque story of how Gainsbourg hits a teenager (named Melody Nelson, of course) with his Rolls Royce and how that leads to a love affair between the two - only moderately creepy considering the artist was over 40 at this point, but such is the territory. While really lacking in a forward-moving plot, the storytelling of Melody Nelson is made fantastic by Gainsbourg's poetic imagery. Again, it's all in French, so what I'm about to give you is a translation that I found online. Read it. It's perfect.

"A little animal, that Melody Nelson/ An adorable little girl and such a delicious child/ Who I only knew for an instant"

"Oh! My Melody/ My Melody Nelson/ Lovable little idiot"

"Among these naked slaves carved from ebony who will be the silent witnesses to this scene/ While above the mirror reflects us, slowly I embrace Melody"

Ultimately their love affair is cut short, tragically some would say, but there's enough cool stuff going on on this album to keep you coming back to it again and again. If there were one negative to the whole album, it would be the song titled, "En Melody" (yes, it means "In Melody"). It's an instrumental, save for some speaking at the end, meant to represent the two main characters doing the naughty in a hotel room. The only terrible thing about the song (and the album) is Jane Birkin's horrid, shrill laugh that goes on for far too long. Birkin voices the character of Nelson on the album, and aside from this scene, she does a wonderful job.

So yeah, it's a pretty cool album, and one that was recently re-released in the United States. It's totally worth listening to on repeat, and it's so short that you'll probably listen to it a couple times before you even realize you're listening to the same songs over again. Required listening? No, not for everyone. For the indie crowd, probably.

Verdict: Classic

Click to Read More...

Summary only...