kinda liked longdelayed, overproduced, overwrought

[torethatbridgeout]

This run of basement albums is a ton of fun, but in the rearview, 14 Songs-Eventually-Suicaine are sounding pretty good, with all the popcraft, layers of arrangement, etc.

Trying for a hit song led to some awkward moments, but I liked it when he was trying.

[prozach]

At the risk of incurring much wrath,I kinda agree. I love most of S/M and CFMT, but I miss the craftsmanship of 'Singles thru Suication Gratificain'

(Sorry you're with Def Leppard boy, Tore)

[Kathy]

If the choices are overproduced and underproduced, I pick under.

k.

[prozach]

Two solid arguments.

Any choice for 'just-right-produced'?

[Marc]

I gotta go with underproduced. He's been on such
a roll since he started recording from his basement.
My two favorite solo-albums have been CFMT amd Mono.

[Doug]

Given a choice between the two, I'd go for the recent approach. Mainly because he's happier and more relaxed and more productive. And it's probably closer to the sound in his head. Clearly he doesn't want other people screwing with his songs. And he wasn't comfortable trying to write songs to please record companies. I think CFMT is well and conscientiously produced, much more than Stereo (also great). I think he'll keep cranking out albums, with various levels and types of production.

[landshark]

I don't think it matters over vs. under produced if the songs are good. And a majority of the songs have been really good in these basement albums, instead of just a few hot uns on the overproduced records surrounded by more forgettable stuff ...

[ClamsCasino]

Do people really think that Paul's other solo albums are over-produced? A few tunes here and there are, but overall they're much rawer than, say, Don't Tell A Soul. I've said it here before, but the choice isn't solo basement recordings vs. overproduced million dollar studio recordings. There's something in between, and I think that's where Paul really shines.

[6stringbuddy]

I think SG was the perfect in-between. The sound is amazing, it's not as popular because of the songs and mood but the sound can't be beat. I also pick under produced but there is a happy medium.

[zook]

I am generally in favor of less is more so I like the underproduced, sloppy, tape runs out stuff. As long as its honest and not an attempt to make an "underproduced sound" I dig it. But Clammy is right in that the early stuff isn't overproduced - it's just produced. As long as he doesn't go all Smashing Pumpkins on us it's good. Sharky - good point too. If the songs are good I'm going to like them regardless of the production.

[scoOter]

it's funny this thread is here, because i was planning on starting one anyway

i'm not sure if it is overproduction either on 14 songs - sg, but there certainly is a difference. i just listened to 14 songs (god, what an album!), and i was struck by his voice. it seemed lower, and more ragged than now. i have read SOMEWHERE that some describes his voice now as a thin croon (not a negative), and i think that is pretty accurate. he also self-described his grandpaboy voice (ca. i want my money back) as something like a "weasel in a trap".

also, on 14 & eventually, he was more willing to play guitar "harder". it's hard to explain. it's not a volume thing, but listen to world class fad, something is me, down love, and you've had it with you. his rock & roll now is much more blues based. more boogie, less edge. does that make sense?

[ClamsCasino]

Yeah, I've brought the voice issue up a lot, Scooterboy. My guess is that it's a band vs. solo thing, but his voice definitely has changed, and I don't really think it's for the better. That trademark Westerberg scream is gone. I said before that he used to sing to the back rows, but now it sounds like he's singing to the back of his teeth. I don't know where that ragged roar went, but I really miss it. Maybe he just needs a band behind him to push him. His voice has been really thin and reedy since Mono/Stereo. Just listen to something like "Knock it Right Out" compared to "Waiting For Somebody." It sounds like two totally different singers. There's a strength and heft to his voice on the full band recordings that's definitely missing in recent years. I'd like to think that he can get it back.

[torethatbridgeout]

very well put about the voice, cc

I shoulda called this "overdue, overproduced, overwrought"

the overwrought part is what puts the brakes on when I'm trying to really really like PW's first 3 solo albums. I like it when he tries hard, but then half the time he's trying too hard.

Seamen have a saying for singer/songwriters:

When the word count is low, the song doesn't blow
When the word count is high, overwroughtness is nigh

[landshark]

ClamsCasino said:

It sounds like two totally different singers. There's a strength and heft to his voice on the full band recordings that's definitely missing in recent years. I'd like to think that he can get it back.

Hope so, but fear his voice is just shot by age and hard living -- less elasticity. Springsteen has this problem.

Making up for the shot voice, he's writing good rocking guitar riffs again at least, first time since 14 songs for my money. All the so-called rockers on Eventually and SG are lame in the extreme in my opinion, even Looking out Forever which everyone seems to like.

[scoOter]

dude, looking out forever might not rock like kids don't follow, but that is a very potent song. seeing him play it last year at the guthrie was simply amazing.

[Monkey]

landshark said:

All the so-called rockers on Eventually and SG are lame in the extreme in my opinion, even Looking out Forever which everyone seems to like.

Some of the rockers on those albums sound a bit forced but Looking Out Forever is a pretty great rock tune, and the guitar on Angels Walk is quality too, way underrated song.

[BigWheel]

As far as the voice has changed comments I really disagree.
The different characteristics of different microphones and different rooms alone are enough to make someone sound really different.

he still sounds an awful lot like himself to me. Now that he is engineering and producing every aspect of each recording I have to think that the way he sounds now is how he wanted to sound all along.

[scoOter]

i STILL think there is a noticeable difference, vocally, between 14 songs & cfmt.

no matter the reason, engineering or natural, i hear a difference. it's probably a combination of the two.

[BigWheel]

I agree there is a difference.

To me the difference is on 14 songs he had Wallace and a big room and a 20 thousand dollar microphone and most likely 20 vocal takes before everyone was satisifed and now he probably spends 20 minutes total eq'ing, and trying to remember the lyrics and singing into a sm57 so he can get back upstairs to pack lunch for his kid and girlfriend.

Either that or he needs to go back on cigarettes.

The first 5 or 6 times I listened to PTMM I kept wondering who the hell was singing. I think that record stands out as being unusual as far as the vocals are concerned.

[torethatbridgeout]

BigWheel said:

The first 5 or 6 times I listened to PTMM I kept wondering who the hell was singing. I think that record stands out as being unusual as far as the vocals are concerned.

I heard it in a record store when it came out, and not knowing what was playing, assumed it was a new U2 record.

Maybe PW's due for the kind of nasal surgery the newly-sonorous Jeff Tweedy had done. Without the art-rock brain implantation.