|
Post by dee on Oct 22, 2009 2:21:36 GMT -5
Seems alot of musical artists have similar peaks and valleys in their careers.Like they start out being ahead of their time or better than most others of their time,then they seem to fade for a while,then they come back with a great album and sort of get on a roll and then it feels like overkill.
Like Lou Reed had The Velvets and early solo career,then the introspective Arista years,then came back with New York,Songs For Drella and Magic & Loss,but after that it seems like there's not much interest.
Same with Neil Young with his great career,then came the Geffen years,then the return to form with Freedom,Ragged Glory,Harvest Moon,then by Broken Arrow or as early as Mirror Ball it seemed like it fizzled.
Does Paul follow this trend?Has he had his renaissance or is he still in the wilderness?Any other artists that follow this trend?
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Oct 22, 2009 9:40:12 GMT -5
......Does Paul follow this trend?Has he had his renaissance or is he still in the wilderness?Any other artists that follow this trend? I think it's hard to say right now. I don't see him departing TOO much from what he's known for and experimenting with genres like Neil Young did (Trans, Reactor, Everybody's Rockin'). Maybe Dead Man's Shake is his biggest departure. I dunno where I'd put him. You know, if he's got stuff left off of albums like C'mon Little Bitch or Cheyenne, or even an Outta My System, then what else does he have up on the shelf? Or what has he RECENTLY recorded that hasn't seen the light of day that would please us? I see Paul as being like Neil Young in that the songs are borne out of whatever he's feeling at the time. That's why I keep questioning Paul's motivation for releasing these batch of tunes. Are these recent recordings? Are these leftovers from Folker? What's he thinking and feeling these days? so who knows where he is?
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Oct 22, 2009 17:33:25 GMT -5
Like Lou Reed had The Velvets and early solo career,then the introspective Arista years,then came back with New York,Songs For Drella and Magic & Loss,but after that it seems like there's not much interest. Well, he's only released three new albums since Magic&Loss, and for my money two of them are among his very best. Set the Twilight Reeling and Ecstasy are both phenomenal. The Raven was ridiculous, and I'm not even counting his album of Tai Chi meditation music. And that's why you'll get a dozen different answers about Paul. Some think this is his best stuff, others his worst, and others somewhere in between.
|
|
|
Post by dee on Oct 22, 2009 19:22:24 GMT -5
I think Lou overplayed his hand as a lyrical shock rocker on Twilight & Ecstasy. His attemps at it seemed embarassing.Where as Harrys Circumcision was the real deal to me.His New Yorkness on Twilight seemed a little like posturing as well.Hated the CD cover on Twilight.Love Hooky Wooky though.Hilarious portrait of jealousy.The song he had on the Friends soundtrack "You Will Know You Were Loved" was really good.
|
|
Chris
Dances With Posts
Posts: 52
|
Post by Chris on Oct 23, 2009 7:10:09 GMT -5
as early as Mirror Ball it seemed like it fizzled. Any other artists that follow this trend? Neil Young's career "fizzled" in 1995? Bob Dylan, Emmylou Harris.
|
|
|
Post by kgp on Oct 23, 2009 9:20:59 GMT -5
Does Paul follow this trend?Has he had his renaissance or is he still in the wilderness?Any other artists that follow this trend? I think all you have to do is read the EP thread to answer that question. Rebirth? Slump? You say tomato, I say tom ahto... To say an artist is experiencing a renaissance, he'd have to be hitting a creative peak, or reaching a newer, younger audience (in my opinion), and I don't see Paul doing either. The closest I would say he's been to a renaissance in recent years was Stereo/Mono: freed from the major label hit-making machine, working alone, not giving a damn, etc. And it's been like that for almost a decade now. If anything we're on the downslide of that. But all art is subjective, right? tomato, tomahto...
|
|
|
Post by brianlux on Oct 23, 2009 9:26:53 GMT -5
Regarding Neil Young- personally I think '97's Year of the Horse has some great moments on it even though no new songs. Same with the movie version despite Roger Ebert's complaining about it being "autistic music where these guys huddle in a group and play the same thing over and over and over and over and over and OVER again". The live version of Slipaway is like a glimpse of heaven to me. And I thought Living With War was great. In my opinion artists like Neil Young, Lou Reed and Dylan are old enough and iconic enough to be exempt from discussions of being "past their peak"- especially because any one of them could still surprise us at any moment with something fresh and brilliant.
As for Westerberg- he seems content in his own world and his records are a bit of a glimpse into that world. He seems to have decided to create his music as a cottage industry- literally creating a home-made product, doing it all. Because of this, it's hard to place him in a frame of reference in terms of peaking or not. This kind of music making requires a lot of work and makes the music more personal and authentic. I like that about it and can only imagine the frustration of those who prefer a more "professional" or polished approach. If you don't like the down-to-earth quality of the music- the squeaking on the fret board between chord changes, the cracks in his voice, the loose druming style, etc., you probably don't like where the man is going these days. If you appreciate the flawed intimacy of the current stuff, you probably like it as much as I do.
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Oct 23, 2009 10:52:32 GMT -5
I like that about it and can only imagine the frustration of those who prefer a more "professional" or polished approach. If you don't like the down-to-earth quality of the music- the squeaking on the fret board between chord changes, the cracks in his voice, the loose druming style, etc., you probably don't like where the man is going these days. If you appreciate the flawed intimacy of the current stuff, you probably like it as much as I do. OK, this is getting at the meat of something that's been bugging me. Basically, your description of Paul's current output sounds like something I'd love...but I don't. See, I love squeaking, cracking and flawed intimacy. I love that raw sound. But I just don't love the sound that Paul is getting out of his current set-up. It's not that I necessarily want a more "professional and polished" sound, but I hear other artists doing raw, homemade analog recordings that sound way better than what Paul is coming up with. (And I'm not talking about songs, just the sound quality). You used the word "authentic," but I think somebody in the other thread pointed out that the way these are multi-tracked, it sometimes comes out sounding contrived instead. Too often it sounds like the different elements of the recording aren't meshing in an "authentic" way. Maybe that's the difference between a genuinely raw live, first-take type of recording, and one guy trying to recreate that feeling by tracking every instrument himself...even the ones he's not so good at.
|
|
|
Post by brianlux on Oct 23, 2009 16:31:55 GMT -5
I like that about it and can only imagine the frustration of those who prefer a more "professional" or polished approach. If you don't like the down-to-earth quality of the music- the squeaking on the fret board between chord changes, the cracks in his voice, the loose druming style, etc., you probably don't like where the man is going these days. If you appreciate the flawed intimacy of the current stuff, you probably like it as much as I do. OK, this is getting at the meat of something that's been bugging me. Basically, your description of Paul's current output sounds like something I'd love...but I don't. See, I love squeaking, cracking and flawed intimacy. I love that raw sound. But I just don't love the sound that Paul is getting out of his current set-up. It's not that I necessarily want a more "professional and polished" sound, but I hear other artists doing raw, homemade analog recordings that sound way better than what Paul is coming up with. (And I'm not talking about songs, just the sound quality). You used the word "authentic," but I think somebody in the other thread pointed out that the way these are multi-tracked, it sometimes comes out sounding contrived instead. Too often it sounds like the different elements of the recording aren't meshing in an "authentic" way. Maybe that's the difference between a genuinely raw live, first-take type of recording, and one guy trying to recreate that feeling by tracking every instrument himself...even the ones he's not so good at. ClamsCasino, you certainly do well represent that group of people for whom this record does not work and I respect your feelings about it. I always felt a little disappointed with much of "Pleased To Meet Me" and that album is generally considered one of the 'Mats best and highly regarded by many PW fans. We all hear through our own ears and have our own preferences. No matter how much I personally dig the EP and no matter what words I use to describe my feelings about it, some people will never like the record- hell, some may even hate it. I might think that's a shame or whatever but that's ok because everybody gets to decide for themselves. Also, no need to get ruffled over my choice of words- they might ring true or they might sound like b.s. This is just a place to express our thoughts- where everybody gets to speak for themselves. I don't see any of this as right or wrong. All I can say in my defense is that these are my thoughts and they're sincere and unless I wake up in the middle of the night and write something stupid, they are generally well thought out.
|
|
|
Post by ClamsCasino on Oct 23, 2009 18:12:16 GMT -5
Oh, I'm definitely not ruffled at all by your choice of words. We have different opinions about it, but I'm in complete agreement over everything in your last post.
And if you're just talking about recording quality, I'm with you on PTMM too. It seems like since Tim they were plagued by self-defeating production choices. Almost all those albums could have sounded better (or a little more raw, as the case may be). I remember when the Bash & Pop album came out, and I thought, "Damn, that's what the last few Replacements albums should have sounded like. It's recorded well, but not too polished. It still has that raw rock 'n roll energy, but it sounds great. And according to Tommy, he played most of it himself!
|
|
|
Post by brianlux on Oct 23, 2009 19:02:07 GMT -5
Oh, I'm definitely not ruffled at all by your choice of words. We have different opinions about it, but I'm in complete agreement over everything in your last post. And if you're just talking about recording quality, I'm with you on PTMM too. It seems like since Tim they were plagued by self-defeating production choices. Almost all those albums could have sounded better (or a little more raw, as the case may be). I remember when the Bash & Pop album came out, and I thought, "Damn, that's what the last few Replacements albums should have sounded like. It's recorded well, but not too polished. It still has that raw rock 'n roll energy, but it sounds great. And according to Tommy, he played most of it himself! Good point about post-Tim production. Lots of great stuff on those albums but underneath it all there seemd to be conflicting ideas and it seemed like they weren't sure where they were headed anymore (thus "Someone Take the Wheel"?). Also, I had the feeling that around that time in general post-hippie rock and roll music was generally going through some shifting and maybe a mid-life crises (so-to-speak)-- punk and early alt-type rock were getting absorbed by a more commercially slick new wave thing- sort of the same way 60's rock got thinned out by the 70's. Eventually some of the 60's survivors (Neil Young et al.) got it going again much the same way (for example) that Mission of Burma has which takes us back to the middle age renaissance theme. The question here seems to be whether or not Westerberg will go through a similar renaissance of past music styles or continue to veer off on another path the way he has and how will his listeners respond to that choice. (With more vigorous debate, no doubt!)
|
|
|
Post by Placemat on Oct 23, 2009 21:07:49 GMT -5
The closest I would say he's been to a renaissance in recent years was Stereo/Mono... I agree.
|
|
|
Post by dee on Oct 24, 2009 3:23:52 GMT -5
Neil Young's career "fizzled" in 1995?
Neils career didn't fizzle.He is a mainstay of the music world.It just seemed like he was flooding the market with new material and records began to blur into one another after a while,with each new release(I'm guessing)selling less and less.Van Morrison is kind of the same way. I think Neil fans want all the stuff from the vaults that he has been promising every x-mas for the past 15 years.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Oct 24, 2009 8:12:41 GMT -5
Neil Young's career "fizzled" in 1995? Neils career didn't fizzle.... well, it didn't necessarily fizzle, but he sure went off into different directions. I saw him on the Greendale tour and it was okay, I didn't mind the music but some of the lyrics and the story concept was a little ehhhh. But it was funny cuz Neil likes touring BEFORE the CD or album is released, so some people in the audience were yelling out, "Play something good!" and "Play something we know!" I guess he's had his peaks and valleys in terms of what's "popular". isn't he doing that now? i thought he had a bunch of boxed sets out now. i haven't read any reviews of it but I'm sure he's been releasing the vault material in the last year or so.
|
|
|
Post by A Regular on Oct 28, 2009 18:07:06 GMT -5
Neil Young's career "fizzled" in 1995? Neils career didn't fizzle.He is a mainstay of the music world.It just seemed like he was flooding the market with new material and records began to blur into one another after a while,with each new release(I'm guessing)selling less and less.Van Morrison is kind of the same way. I think Neil fans want all the stuff from the vaults that he has been promising every x-mas for the past 15 years. vault stuff tends to be overrated! I would vote for Decade as a top ten box set ever released.
|
|
|
Post by FreeRider on Oct 28, 2009 20:37:05 GMT -5
A Reg,
you may be right in this instance with Neil. i finally got around to looking at what was in his box set and it consists of 8 CDs, TWO THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN RELEASED! (Live At Massey Hall, and Live at the Fillmore).
And on top of that, his so called archives consists of "re-mastered" songs from After The Gold Rush. There are some things that hadn't been released, but it seems like a really blatant effort on Neil's part to exploit his fans. There doesn't seem to be a need for 8 CDs and he easily could've pared it down to maybe 3 CDs.
|
|
|
Post by wecantgetanybetter on Oct 28, 2009 21:00:13 GMT -5
vault stuff tends to be overrated! In the eternal words of Art Brut: Second hand records are cheaper Reissue CDs, extra tracks Second hand CDs are cheaper Reissue CDs, extra tracks Second hand records are cheaper Reissue CDs have extra tracks
|
|
|
Post by dee on Oct 28, 2009 21:17:11 GMT -5
I checked out the Neil Young box as well and it doesn't begin to compare to Dylans bootleg series.I look forward to the next part of Neil Youngs backlog as it is my favorite era.I hope they do without all the previously released material.As far as live stuff goes I'd like to hear a show where Neil is wasted and borders on falling apart.What other kind of live performance is there that he hasn't already released?
|
|
|
Post by brianlux on Oct 28, 2009 22:49:42 GMT -5
I checked out the Neil Young box as well and it doesn't begin to compare to Dylans bootleg series.I look forward to the next part of Neil Youngs backlog as it is my favorite era.I hope they do without all the previously released material.As far as live stuff goes I'd like to hear a show where Neil is wasted and borders on falling apart.What other kind of live performance is there that he hasn't already released? From what I've heard and read of Neil Young I wouldn't label him a "teetotaller" but on the other hand he always seemed to have things pretty well under control. Somewhere in Jimmy McDonough bio, SHAKEY it is mentioned that Young once passed out from exhaustion while working very, very hard on a tour, but not from being wasted. An album of wasted falling down Neil Young would be both unlikely and, well, a waste.
|
|
|
Post by GtrPlyr on Oct 28, 2009 23:10:50 GMT -5
As far as live stuff goes I'd like to hear a show where Neil is wasted and borders on falling apart.What other kind of live performance is there that he hasn't already released? For what it's worth we did get a coked-up Neil playing on The Band's Last Waltz. I think I read that it cost around $80,000 to rotoscope the powder off Neil's nose for the segments he was in.
|
|