I've got two wonderful innovators to add to the GNABB cemetery.
RIP John Glenn, 1921-2016
I know it’s a cliché, but do they make men like this anymore? I mean seriously. John Glenn was such of a different era, a different America. An America that was full of hope, that looked to the future, that was rising so fast that it broke the bonds of gravity and the earth. True, America wasn’t so rosy for many people during the Cold War era. Segregation still existed. I’m not downplaying that at all. But John Glenn and his fellow astronauts represented the best of what we were then. Duty, brains, work ethic, dreamer but with the technical know-how to actually reach those impossible dreams as the rest of the world watched slack-jawed. (I know the Soviets kept up and actually led for a little while, but that didn't last).
There was something extra special about the Mercury astronauts to me. Even more than the Apollo missions, as great as they were, these seven astronauts (and Glenn was the last of them, so they are all a memory now) were true pioneers. Talk about calm under pressure, John Glenn was the most celebrated of them all. It takes a special kind of man to sit on top of a missile that has a decent chance of blowing up at ignition. The re-entry drama and Glenn’s cool response during his history making first American to orbit the earth mission is the stuff of legend. He showed that no matter how technically advanced we think we are, sometimes it still takes the human instincts and decision-making of a pilot to get the ship down.
I know a big part of my romanticizing the Mercury program comes from one of my favorite movies of all time, The Right Stuff. Glenn was played pitch perfectly by the great Ed Harris. Maybe I need to pop that in tonight, and bask in a bygone age when the sky wasn’t the limit. John Glenn and the other six Mercury astronauts showed us that we could dare to go beyond the sky. Our moon landing, our eventual trip to Mars, even our eventual eventual colonizing and moving off the earth once we have destroyed it beyond repair…the foundation of all of that was John Glenn…and Alan Sheppard, Gus Grissom, Gordon Cooper, Wally Shirra, Deke Slayton and Scott Carpenter.
So not only RIP John Glenn. I can now say RIP The Mercury Seven. And thank you all for showing us what we can be and accomplish.
And...
RIP Greg Lake, 1947-2016
Man, 2016 has been a deadly year for music. As well-known and respected as Greg Lake was, I always felt that he could have done more. He sang and played bass on the groundbreaking King Crimson debut In the Court of the Crimson King (and sang on the follow-up), but then left the band to form Emerson, Lake and Palmer. As a massive Crimson fan, I have always felt that was a lost opportunity. It would have been fantastic to get two or three more records with Lake and Robert Fripp working together under the Crimson banner before moving on.
I could never get into ELP very much. I do love me some prog rock, but ELP has aged terribly. My favorite ELP tunes are the more down to earth folky Greg Lake numbers like “Lucky Man” and “Still You Turn Me On.”
Regardless of his career choices, the man was hugely talented. Great and expressive singer, virtuoso on the electric bass, and a good guitarist too. RIP Greg Lake.
Showing posts with label Music. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Music. Show all posts
Friday, December 9, 2016
Friday, October 21, 2016
2017 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominees
Once again, the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame has announced the nominees for a new class. Within the last year or so there has been a shake-up on the nomination committee, which has resulted in better and more varied nominees. They reduced the number of members, which sounds ominous, but I think they kicked off mostly dead weight, and the fewer members gives them a chance to really debate and kick these names around a bit more. Previously ignored genres and eras seem to be getting more attention.
The problem in recent years lies less with the Nominating Committee and more with the voters themselves. The voters are critics, record industry folk and all living inductees. Therein lies the flaw. While I respect Jerry Lee Lewis, I am not sure how much he can really evaluate the contributions of Kraftwerk to modern music. Although, there is word that they expanded the voters by a couple more hundred, and I bet it was to add more critics and experts to dilute Jerry Lee Lewis and Gene Simmons. Estimates vary, but there are around 800-1000 voters who will cast their votes for these nominees.
If recent patterns hold, then 5-7 of these 19 nominees will be announced in December as part of the Class of 2017.
If you go to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame website, you can cast a fan ballot (they will let you vote once a day, reacting to the fan vote debacle of last year where a bot flooded the fan vote). The total fan votes will count as ONE ballot. Hardly any real influence, but at least you can feel like you played a small part in the process, so I appreciate it. Also, don’t know if it is just coincidence or it just logically falls this way, but every year the #1 vote getter in the fan poll has also been inducted.
I will briefly discuss the nominees, give you my personal picks, and then my prediction of what will happen. In alphabetically order…
Joan Baez: in some respects it is strange that she has not been inducted already. The Hall loves singer-songwriters, and she was on the folk front lines with Dylan and others in the early days. Not a fan, but I respect her impact. It is hard to figure out her chances. It is a crowded field with big names, yet the Hall likes their singer-songwriters and there might be enough 60’s refugee voters to give her more votes than you might initially expect.
Bad Brains: More than any other nominee, this one reflects the new blood on the Committee. I’ve got to be honest. I’ve heard the name, but I had to look them up to figure out exactly who they were. Hardcore punk pioneers who also experimented with reggae and other styles of music. Influential on the punk and 80’s underground. A bit too obscure in this field to have much of a chance, but the nomination itself is a victory.
The Cars: One of my all time favorite bands, am so glad to see them back (they were nominated for the first time last year and didn’t make it). They’ve clearly got some boosters on the Committee. I have to think they came close last year, and I think they’ve got a good shot this year. Ric Ocasek’s acerbic 80’s pop is just so sharp and brilliant. I will push hard for the Cars this year. Ocasek has worked with a lot of artists as a producer, and many of the voters are artists. The Cars are one of those few bands that still have a cache of cool and hipness, yet they are also all over classic rock and 80’s radio. They had critical respect and also sold a ton of product.
Chic: Have mercy on Nile Rodgers and Chic! Please! Induct them already. The Nominating Committee is being stubborn here, this is a record 11th nomination. Looks like the voters are being equally stubborn. On this, I think the Committee is right. Chic were pioneers in dance and funk music, and Nile Rodgers
has been an influential producer. I don’t know if it is still some anti-disco bias (although ABBA and Donna Summer are in), or whether the voters just don’t appreciate the same band being forced on them. But this is embarrassing. As far as I go, I always feel like they are worthy, but there are usually five candidates that I want more. Maybe that is part of it too.
Depeche Mode: Very happy to see this nomination, this is their first. The Committee has been trying to get more 80’s pioneers in, but the voters don’t seem to be biting. In the last few years, The Cure, The Smiths and The Replacements have been nominated but not inducted. I feel like the same will happen here. All should get in eventually. Although before Depeche Mode, there is another nominee this year who should go in first (see Kraftwerk.)
Electric Light Orchestra: Surprisingly, this is the first nomination for Jeff Lynne’s band. Gotta admit, not a big fan. Lynne is too Beatles-influenced for me, and wears those influences way too much on his sleeve. They have their fans, and Lynne has worked with a ton of already-inducted artists, so I think ELO has a decent shot. He is also the only remaining Traveling Wilbury not inducted.
J. Geils Band: The story is that Jann Wenner and Steve Van Zandt are the big boosters for J. Geils. For me, this is a case of a great band, but not Rockhall worthy. There are a lot of great bands that should not be in the Hall of Fame (just as there are many great athletes who don’t quite get to their sports Halls of Fame). Great blues-based rock band with a fierce live reputation, but that ain’t enough.
Janet Jackson: There has been a huge Induct Janet movement building over the last few years, and she is unquestionably Hallworthy. She was nominated for the first time last year, and it was a surprise that she didn’t get in. She will. So many of today’s pop divas owe Michael’s little sister.
Jane’s Addiction: We definitely are moving into the 90’s now. Was not a fan, and I wonder how much of this is for Perry Farrell’s work on Lollapalooza. I don’t see them getting in this time around.
Journey: Woo!! Hold up cigarette lighters now for the power ballads and Steve Perry’s pink muscle shirts! A Journey nomination would have been impossible five or more years ago, but in recent years there has been a more populist trend (Chicago and Steve Miller got in last year, KISS and Rush recently). Despised by critics, loved by the masses. Corporate Rock at its best (or worst?) I’ve always loved Journey, and I think they have a shot at topping the fan poll (like Chicago did last year). Is “Don’t Stop Believin’” the 80’s “Stairway To Heaven”? I say let ‘em in. If Rock and Roll is a popular music, as in for the masses, then Journey is it.
Chaka Khan: She’s been nominated with Rufus and also solo, which is kind of confusing. I think she’ll be overshadowed by Janet Jackson, although she could also split some votes and prevent either of them from getting in.
Kraftwerk: I think the most influential and deserving of any of these nominees. You cannot overstate their influence on any music that is electronic, programmed, dance or synth-based. The problem is that few Americans have actually listened to their music (they are German). I happen to love their music, but I doubt they get in this time around. If the voters were only made of music historians, they’d be a shoo-in.
MC5: Furious punk precursors and revolutionaries. Not a lot of name recognition, though. Probably should be in for the track “Kick Out the Jams” alone, which is more rock and roll than anything else I can think of.
Pearl Jam: If there is anything such as a sure thing, this is it. Pearl Jam will get in, they can already start writing their acceptance speech and plan their setlist for the ceremony. This is the first year they are eligible, and like Nirvana a couple of years ago, the nomination and voting is a mere formality. Pearl Jam has everything the Rockhall wants and needs: still a working and beloved band so it modernizes the Hall, respected by everyone, but (unlike Nirvana) they also are as close to a classic rock band that the 90’s produced.
Steppenwolf: It looked like the Hall was finally ready to close the door on the 60’s, but not quite. There are still some stragglers. Steppenwolf were huge for about five years, and have some absolutely iconic songs (“Born to Be Wild,” “Magic Carpet Ride,” “The Pusher”). Not pushing for them, but wouldn’t be upset if they got in either. They are one of those borderline bands.
Joe Tex: Great funky soul artist. In my view kinda second tier, and probably won’t make it through this field.
Tupac Shakur: The first rap/hip hop solo superstar, his ghost still haunts the whole genre. The old “does rap belong in the Rockhall” argument is dead amongst everyone not named Gene Simmons. Many predict Tupac will get in this year (the first year he’s eligible), but I have a feeling he may wait a few more nominations like NWA did (who finally got in last year). The lifestyle and subject matter of his music still makes many voters uncomfortable.
Yes: The fact that Yes is still trying to get inducted is patently absurd to me. There are genres that have been neglected by the Hall, and progressive rock is definitely one, but come on. Whether you are a fan or not, just objectively speaking, any artist who has been an innovator and at the forefront of any genre within rock and roll should by definition be in the Hall. Add their longevity and that they have innovated and helped to define a genre and gotten substantial airplay and sold tons of records…what is the deal here?!
The Zombies: Another Steve Van Zandt 60’s pet project. That’s not quite fair, The Zombies were a great band with some, pardon the pun, haunting pop songs. Borderline for me.
So, there you have it. My personal votes:
Yes
The Cars
Depeche Mode
Kraftwerk
Journey
If a 6th and 7th: Pearl Jam and Janet Jackson
What I think will happen:
Pearl Jam
Janet Jackson
Journey
Yes
ELO
If a 6th and 7th: The Cars and Tupac Shakur
What do you think?
As usual, to discuss all things Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Future Rock Legends is the place to go.
The problem in recent years lies less with the Nominating Committee and more with the voters themselves. The voters are critics, record industry folk and all living inductees. Therein lies the flaw. While I respect Jerry Lee Lewis, I am not sure how much he can really evaluate the contributions of Kraftwerk to modern music. Although, there is word that they expanded the voters by a couple more hundred, and I bet it was to add more critics and experts to dilute Jerry Lee Lewis and Gene Simmons. Estimates vary, but there are around 800-1000 voters who will cast their votes for these nominees.
If recent patterns hold, then 5-7 of these 19 nominees will be announced in December as part of the Class of 2017.
If you go to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame website, you can cast a fan ballot (they will let you vote once a day, reacting to the fan vote debacle of last year where a bot flooded the fan vote). The total fan votes will count as ONE ballot. Hardly any real influence, but at least you can feel like you played a small part in the process, so I appreciate it. Also, don’t know if it is just coincidence or it just logically falls this way, but every year the #1 vote getter in the fan poll has also been inducted.
I will briefly discuss the nominees, give you my personal picks, and then my prediction of what will happen. In alphabetically order…
Joan Baez: in some respects it is strange that she has not been inducted already. The Hall loves singer-songwriters, and she was on the folk front lines with Dylan and others in the early days. Not a fan, but I respect her impact. It is hard to figure out her chances. It is a crowded field with big names, yet the Hall likes their singer-songwriters and there might be enough 60’s refugee voters to give her more votes than you might initially expect.
Bad Brains: More than any other nominee, this one reflects the new blood on the Committee. I’ve got to be honest. I’ve heard the name, but I had to look them up to figure out exactly who they were. Hardcore punk pioneers who also experimented with reggae and other styles of music. Influential on the punk and 80’s underground. A bit too obscure in this field to have much of a chance, but the nomination itself is a victory.
The Cars: One of my all time favorite bands, am so glad to see them back (they were nominated for the first time last year and didn’t make it). They’ve clearly got some boosters on the Committee. I have to think they came close last year, and I think they’ve got a good shot this year. Ric Ocasek’s acerbic 80’s pop is just so sharp and brilliant. I will push hard for the Cars this year. Ocasek has worked with a lot of artists as a producer, and many of the voters are artists. The Cars are one of those few bands that still have a cache of cool and hipness, yet they are also all over classic rock and 80’s radio. They had critical respect and also sold a ton of product.
Chic: Have mercy on Nile Rodgers and Chic! Please! Induct them already. The Nominating Committee is being stubborn here, this is a record 11th nomination. Looks like the voters are being equally stubborn. On this, I think the Committee is right. Chic were pioneers in dance and funk music, and Nile Rodgers
has been an influential producer. I don’t know if it is still some anti-disco bias (although ABBA and Donna Summer are in), or whether the voters just don’t appreciate the same band being forced on them. But this is embarrassing. As far as I go, I always feel like they are worthy, but there are usually five candidates that I want more. Maybe that is part of it too.
Depeche Mode: Very happy to see this nomination, this is their first. The Committee has been trying to get more 80’s pioneers in, but the voters don’t seem to be biting. In the last few years, The Cure, The Smiths and The Replacements have been nominated but not inducted. I feel like the same will happen here. All should get in eventually. Although before Depeche Mode, there is another nominee this year who should go in first (see Kraftwerk.)
Electric Light Orchestra: Surprisingly, this is the first nomination for Jeff Lynne’s band. Gotta admit, not a big fan. Lynne is too Beatles-influenced for me, and wears those influences way too much on his sleeve. They have their fans, and Lynne has worked with a ton of already-inducted artists, so I think ELO has a decent shot. He is also the only remaining Traveling Wilbury not inducted.
J. Geils Band: The story is that Jann Wenner and Steve Van Zandt are the big boosters for J. Geils. For me, this is a case of a great band, but not Rockhall worthy. There are a lot of great bands that should not be in the Hall of Fame (just as there are many great athletes who don’t quite get to their sports Halls of Fame). Great blues-based rock band with a fierce live reputation, but that ain’t enough.
Janet Jackson: There has been a huge Induct Janet movement building over the last few years, and she is unquestionably Hallworthy. She was nominated for the first time last year, and it was a surprise that she didn’t get in. She will. So many of today’s pop divas owe Michael’s little sister.
Jane’s Addiction: We definitely are moving into the 90’s now. Was not a fan, and I wonder how much of this is for Perry Farrell’s work on Lollapalooza. I don’t see them getting in this time around.
Journey: Woo!! Hold up cigarette lighters now for the power ballads and Steve Perry’s pink muscle shirts! A Journey nomination would have been impossible five or more years ago, but in recent years there has been a more populist trend (Chicago and Steve Miller got in last year, KISS and Rush recently). Despised by critics, loved by the masses. Corporate Rock at its best (or worst?) I’ve always loved Journey, and I think they have a shot at topping the fan poll (like Chicago did last year). Is “Don’t Stop Believin’” the 80’s “Stairway To Heaven”? I say let ‘em in. If Rock and Roll is a popular music, as in for the masses, then Journey is it.
Chaka Khan: She’s been nominated with Rufus and also solo, which is kind of confusing. I think she’ll be overshadowed by Janet Jackson, although she could also split some votes and prevent either of them from getting in.
Kraftwerk: I think the most influential and deserving of any of these nominees. You cannot overstate their influence on any music that is electronic, programmed, dance or synth-based. The problem is that few Americans have actually listened to their music (they are German). I happen to love their music, but I doubt they get in this time around. If the voters were only made of music historians, they’d be a shoo-in.
MC5: Furious punk precursors and revolutionaries. Not a lot of name recognition, though. Probably should be in for the track “Kick Out the Jams” alone, which is more rock and roll than anything else I can think of.
Pearl Jam: If there is anything such as a sure thing, this is it. Pearl Jam will get in, they can already start writing their acceptance speech and plan their setlist for the ceremony. This is the first year they are eligible, and like Nirvana a couple of years ago, the nomination and voting is a mere formality. Pearl Jam has everything the Rockhall wants and needs: still a working and beloved band so it modernizes the Hall, respected by everyone, but (unlike Nirvana) they also are as close to a classic rock band that the 90’s produced.
Steppenwolf: It looked like the Hall was finally ready to close the door on the 60’s, but not quite. There are still some stragglers. Steppenwolf were huge for about five years, and have some absolutely iconic songs (“Born to Be Wild,” “Magic Carpet Ride,” “The Pusher”). Not pushing for them, but wouldn’t be upset if they got in either. They are one of those borderline bands.
Joe Tex: Great funky soul artist. In my view kinda second tier, and probably won’t make it through this field.
Tupac Shakur: The first rap/hip hop solo superstar, his ghost still haunts the whole genre. The old “does rap belong in the Rockhall” argument is dead amongst everyone not named Gene Simmons. Many predict Tupac will get in this year (the first year he’s eligible), but I have a feeling he may wait a few more nominations like NWA did (who finally got in last year). The lifestyle and subject matter of his music still makes many voters uncomfortable.
Yes: The fact that Yes is still trying to get inducted is patently absurd to me. There are genres that have been neglected by the Hall, and progressive rock is definitely one, but come on. Whether you are a fan or not, just objectively speaking, any artist who has been an innovator and at the forefront of any genre within rock and roll should by definition be in the Hall. Add their longevity and that they have innovated and helped to define a genre and gotten substantial airplay and sold tons of records…what is the deal here?!
The Zombies: Another Steve Van Zandt 60’s pet project. That’s not quite fair, The Zombies were a great band with some, pardon the pun, haunting pop songs. Borderline for me.
So, there you have it. My personal votes:
Yes
The Cars
Depeche Mode
Kraftwerk
Journey
If a 6th and 7th: Pearl Jam and Janet Jackson
What I think will happen:
Pearl Jam
Janet Jackson
Journey
Yes
ELO
If a 6th and 7th: The Cars and Tupac Shakur
What do you think?
As usual, to discuss all things Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Future Rock Legends is the place to go.
Friday, September 16, 2016
Ladies and Gentlemen...Corey Feldman
This is f*cking outstanding. Corey Feldman and his new band Corey's Angels performing on the Today Show. Check out how he has the girls in his band dressed. Think he's "helping make their dreams come true"? Oh, and it's a double concept album!
Monday, September 12, 2016
An Album I Love By an Artist I Don’t Like (and Albums I Hate by Artists I Love)
Throw enough sh*t at the wall, and something is bound to stick. It worked for FDR during the New Deal, and it sometimes works in music as well. If someone has a base level of musical skill and talent, over time, they are bound to get something right.
It is easy to hate Billy Joel. Very easy. When I was in middle school, though, I loved his music. I own most of his records on vinyl from back when I was buying vinyl before the dawn of CDs (now I am back to buying vinyl again). But his music has not aged well at all. He was cheeseball with the ballads, and when he tried to pose as a rocker it just looked and sounded ridiculous (“Big Shot,” anyone?)
But…there is one Billy Joel record that still sounds so great, and it remains amongst my favorite records. Songs In the Attic (1981) is a live record he put out with a specific purpose, and he accomplished it brilliantly. In the well written liner notes by Joel, he talks about how he was never happy with the way his first four records sounded. After he got big with The Stranger, his band gelled and they presented the early material live the way he had wanted all along.
Hence Songs in the Attic. These are live renditions of album tracks from the early records performed with his more (at the time) current band. He only had one pre-Stranger hit, and that was the ubiquitous “Piano Man,” and thankfully that is not even on this record. As he stated in the liner notes, “Piano Man” never sounds different live than on the recording anyway, so why bother putting it here? The tracks that are here are uniformly superior to their studio counterparts, so he was right to try and get them a second listen. They are all deep album cuts, and good choices. Even though they are taken from different shows and even tours, for whatever reason, the record has a real cohesion to it. It sounds like it was meant to be put together in this way.
It is often this way with music, but I remember listening to this record during a certain period in my youth. Pulling the vinyl out late the other night…wow. A strong wave of nostalgia and those memories of youth came flowing back. Makes sense that the record closes with his own nostalgic look back, “I’ve Loved These Days” (a much, much more effective song that his later cheesy semi-hit “This Is the Time,” which tries to cover the same ground).
Even if you don’t like Billy Joel, this record may be the exception to the rule for you. It certainly is for me.
Now, to be fair, records I hate by artists I otherwise love. There are actually many of these I could choose from. We all make mistakes, even the best of us. Here are some mistakes…
Neil Young: My favorite artist of all time. But Living With War and The Monsanto Years both sound like some angry old man with half the facts on some simplistic political rant. Might be OK over the dinner table with friends, but it doesn’t make for great records.
Bruce Springsteen: Human Touch, where Bruce completely loses his sound and makes a record with slick L.A. session players. By the numbers songwriting too. Working on a Dream, where Bruce finally becomes a parody of himself in places.
The Who: Endless Wire. I was genuinely intrigued with what a post-John Entwhistle Who record would sound like. Surely someone as smart as Pete Townshend could age gracefully in music. Nevermind. Half-baked concept album about something I don’t care about.
Peter Gabriel: I don’t know, anything post-1992? Let’s go with OVO, his misbegotten soundtrack for the Millenium Dome Show in London. Bland songwriting, bland production, annoying guest artists. To quote Donald Trump, a disaster.
Dire Straits: On Every Street. Wonderful title track aside, it is no wonder Mark Knopfler ended it after this record. Pressure of following up something like Brothers In Arms was too much, or more likely, Knopfler doesn’t seem like an artist comfortable at that level. I think it all got too big.
Van Morrison: anything from the mid-1990’s on. Even into the 1980’s, Van Morrison was making challenging, vital music with depth (if you haven’t, it is worthwhile to delve into Van’s 80’s material). I chose to list Van here, because take your pick, record after record of cruise control, non-descript, mid-tempo R&B influenced product. Somewhere Morrison ceased to be an artist and became just an entertainer. Other artists who completely had me but took a turn like Morrison: Sting post-Soul Cages, U2 post-Zooropa and ZZ Top post-Afterburner.
What about you? Records you love by artists you otherwise dislike, or records you hate by artists you otherwise love?
It is easy to hate Billy Joel. Very easy. When I was in middle school, though, I loved his music. I own most of his records on vinyl from back when I was buying vinyl before the dawn of CDs (now I am back to buying vinyl again). But his music has not aged well at all. He was cheeseball with the ballads, and when he tried to pose as a rocker it just looked and sounded ridiculous (“Big Shot,” anyone?)
But…there is one Billy Joel record that still sounds so great, and it remains amongst my favorite records. Songs In the Attic (1981) is a live record he put out with a specific purpose, and he accomplished it brilliantly. In the well written liner notes by Joel, he talks about how he was never happy with the way his first four records sounded. After he got big with The Stranger, his band gelled and they presented the early material live the way he had wanted all along.
Hence Songs in the Attic. These are live renditions of album tracks from the early records performed with his more (at the time) current band. He only had one pre-Stranger hit, and that was the ubiquitous “Piano Man,” and thankfully that is not even on this record. As he stated in the liner notes, “Piano Man” never sounds different live than on the recording anyway, so why bother putting it here? The tracks that are here are uniformly superior to their studio counterparts, so he was right to try and get them a second listen. They are all deep album cuts, and good choices. Even though they are taken from different shows and even tours, for whatever reason, the record has a real cohesion to it. It sounds like it was meant to be put together in this way.
It is often this way with music, but I remember listening to this record during a certain period in my youth. Pulling the vinyl out late the other night…wow. A strong wave of nostalgia and those memories of youth came flowing back. Makes sense that the record closes with his own nostalgic look back, “I’ve Loved These Days” (a much, much more effective song that his later cheesy semi-hit “This Is the Time,” which tries to cover the same ground).
Even if you don’t like Billy Joel, this record may be the exception to the rule for you. It certainly is for me.
Now, to be fair, records I hate by artists I otherwise love. There are actually many of these I could choose from. We all make mistakes, even the best of us. Here are some mistakes…
Neil Young: My favorite artist of all time. But Living With War and The Monsanto Years both sound like some angry old man with half the facts on some simplistic political rant. Might be OK over the dinner table with friends, but it doesn’t make for great records.
Bruce Springsteen: Human Touch, where Bruce completely loses his sound and makes a record with slick L.A. session players. By the numbers songwriting too. Working on a Dream, where Bruce finally becomes a parody of himself in places.
The Who: Endless Wire. I was genuinely intrigued with what a post-John Entwhistle Who record would sound like. Surely someone as smart as Pete Townshend could age gracefully in music. Nevermind. Half-baked concept album about something I don’t care about.
Peter Gabriel: I don’t know, anything post-1992? Let’s go with OVO, his misbegotten soundtrack for the Millenium Dome Show in London. Bland songwriting, bland production, annoying guest artists. To quote Donald Trump, a disaster.
Dire Straits: On Every Street. Wonderful title track aside, it is no wonder Mark Knopfler ended it after this record. Pressure of following up something like Brothers In Arms was too much, or more likely, Knopfler doesn’t seem like an artist comfortable at that level. I think it all got too big.
Van Morrison: anything from the mid-1990’s on. Even into the 1980’s, Van Morrison was making challenging, vital music with depth (if you haven’t, it is worthwhile to delve into Van’s 80’s material). I chose to list Van here, because take your pick, record after record of cruise control, non-descript, mid-tempo R&B influenced product. Somewhere Morrison ceased to be an artist and became just an entertainer. Other artists who completely had me but took a turn like Morrison: Sting post-Soul Cages, U2 post-Zooropa and ZZ Top post-Afterburner.
What about you? Records you love by artists you otherwise dislike, or records you hate by artists you otherwise love?
Friday, July 1, 2016
Three Records I'm Supposed To Love But Don't (and Three I'm Not Supposed To Love But Do)
As an avid maker and reader of lists, I have become quite familiar with the consensus critical (and fan) picks for the greatest albums of all time. I agree with many of the choices. But there are three records that are considered to be amongst the greatest in rock/pop history that I have never warmed to. I’ve tried. I won’t argue against their importance or influence, but I’m just talking about my personal loves and dislikes, and I just can’t subjectively say that I love these records. Even though I’m supposed to.
1. The Beach Boys – Pet Sounds (1966). I can appreciate the genius of Brian Wilson, but sometimes I feel a little like cranky Mike Love when I say that perhaps it is sometimes, just maybe, a little overstated. Now there is one song on this record that I do love. In fact, I agree with Paul McCartney when he said that “God Only Knows” may be the most beautiful pop song ever written. But I can’t get into the rest of this record. I know it is Exhibit A of 60’s studio genius, pushing The Beatles to new heights (leading them eventually to Number 2, below). But as much as I try, I still hear the trite, sunny Beach Boys clichés. It remains in the shallows and never goes to the deep blue ocean for me.
2. The Beatles – Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967). You read the contemporary reviews and commentary, and this record was going to alter the very face of music itself, bring eternal world peace and cure cancer. Well, it did none of those things. In more recent critical assessments, it has become popular to put a few Beatles records above this one, but nobody really disparages it. This is one of my least favorite Beatles albums, only superior to the consensus bottom of the Beatles barrel (Yellow Submarine, etc.) Even John Lennon later dismissed many of these songs as lightweight. I agree with him. Sure, “A Day in the Life” is truly brilliant, I dig the title track, “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds” is cool. But most of the rest comes off to me as experimentation for the sake of experimentation, and trying way too hard to sound whimsical. And we get another tedious George Harrison Indian music piece (“Within You Without You”). Don’t get me wrong, I do love me some Harrison, but only when he is sans sitar.
3. Nirvana – Nevermind (1991). I remember taking a road trip with a girlfriend when this was just hitting. She was gushing over it, I dismissed it as a “flash in the pan” and derivative. OK, I was wrong. But I still don’t really dig it at all. I understand how, after the plastic 80’s (and I love the plastic 80’s, which perhaps is my problem), this was a breath of fresh, authentic, rock and roll air. I get it. But I don’t get Kurt Cobain’s alleged genius. Somebody please explain it to me.
I figure I should now flip this. Here are three records that are critically disliked or dismissed, yet I love them…
1. The Rolling Stones – Undercover (1983). I will defend this record all day (and night) long. Generally considered one of their worst (esteemed critic Charles Christgau, in fact, considers it their worst record. Yet he loves Dirty Work, which actually was their worst record). Christgau and others attack this record as mean, brutish, and violent. To which I answer, “and the problem is?” I mean, this is the Rolling Stones. Keith and Mick’s relationship was nearing its nadir (one more record and both would embark on solo careers for awhile, and they were already sniping in the press), and this was one of the few records that they never toured for. All that tension comes out in the music, though. “Undercover of the Night” is one of their greatest singles, in my opinion. Harnessing the same modern energy as “Miss You” yet remaining Stones. “Too Much Blood,” “Pretty Beat Up,” “It Must Be Hell” all seethe with anger and aggression. And Mick’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre spoken interlude in “Too Much Blood” is really funny.
2. Bryan Adams – Reckless (1984). Not that this record is considered bad, but it is generally dismissed as middle of the road, glossy 80's, non-edgy pop/rock and not taken that seriously. And maybe it is all of that. But it is also one of my favorite records of that entire decade. It is nothing more than pop/rock, but masterfully crafted pop/rock. It is all inviting rhythm guitars, soaring pop hook choruses. “Run To You,” “One Night Love Affair,” “Somebody,” kick ass duet with Tina Turner “It’s Only Love,” even cheeseball power ballad “Heaven” and silly nostalgic “Summer of ‘69”…I dig it all. So this is not so much a record that I am supposed to hate (although in many serious music fan circles I would be expected to), but it is more one that I am not supposed to like nearly as much as I do.
3. Thomas Dolby – The Golden Age of Wireless (1982). Similar to The Bryan Adams case, where this record is not considered bad, but for many it is probably seen as an 80’s novelty (as it contains his one big hit, “She Blinded Me With Science,” and is filled with other science/technologically themed tunes). Although, amongst listeners who really like 80’s synth-pop, it is a very respected record. Anyway, as with the selection above, I love this record way more than I’m supposed to. I think Dolby is incredibly talented. If he had stayed the course with this debut (and the even better sophomore effort, The Flat Earth), he would have a large, impressive catalogue. But after those two records, the discography becomes spotty (although I highly recommend the live, solo performance CD The Sole Inhabitant, that is excellent). At least here and on Flat Earth, Dolby is an underrated songwriter, crafting smart, catchy, complex, witty synthpop that was perfect for his time, and if you like that style, stands the test of time. Everyone knows the hit, but check out the so great Cold War tune “One of Our Submarines.” (NOTE: get the U.S. version of the album, it is much better than the UK version).
1. The Beach Boys – Pet Sounds (1966). I can appreciate the genius of Brian Wilson, but sometimes I feel a little like cranky Mike Love when I say that perhaps it is sometimes, just maybe, a little overstated. Now there is one song on this record that I do love. In fact, I agree with Paul McCartney when he said that “God Only Knows” may be the most beautiful pop song ever written. But I can’t get into the rest of this record. I know it is Exhibit A of 60’s studio genius, pushing The Beatles to new heights (leading them eventually to Number 2, below). But as much as I try, I still hear the trite, sunny Beach Boys clichés. It remains in the shallows and never goes to the deep blue ocean for me.
2. The Beatles – Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band (1967). You read the contemporary reviews and commentary, and this record was going to alter the very face of music itself, bring eternal world peace and cure cancer. Well, it did none of those things. In more recent critical assessments, it has become popular to put a few Beatles records above this one, but nobody really disparages it. This is one of my least favorite Beatles albums, only superior to the consensus bottom of the Beatles barrel (Yellow Submarine, etc.) Even John Lennon later dismissed many of these songs as lightweight. I agree with him. Sure, “A Day in the Life” is truly brilliant, I dig the title track, “Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds” is cool. But most of the rest comes off to me as experimentation for the sake of experimentation, and trying way too hard to sound whimsical. And we get another tedious George Harrison Indian music piece (“Within You Without You”). Don’t get me wrong, I do love me some Harrison, but only when he is sans sitar.
3. Nirvana – Nevermind (1991). I remember taking a road trip with a girlfriend when this was just hitting. She was gushing over it, I dismissed it as a “flash in the pan” and derivative. OK, I was wrong. But I still don’t really dig it at all. I understand how, after the plastic 80’s (and I love the plastic 80’s, which perhaps is my problem), this was a breath of fresh, authentic, rock and roll air. I get it. But I don’t get Kurt Cobain’s alleged genius. Somebody please explain it to me.
I figure I should now flip this. Here are three records that are critically disliked or dismissed, yet I love them…
1. The Rolling Stones – Undercover (1983). I will defend this record all day (and night) long. Generally considered one of their worst (esteemed critic Charles Christgau, in fact, considers it their worst record. Yet he loves Dirty Work, which actually was their worst record). Christgau and others attack this record as mean, brutish, and violent. To which I answer, “and the problem is?” I mean, this is the Rolling Stones. Keith and Mick’s relationship was nearing its nadir (one more record and both would embark on solo careers for awhile, and they were already sniping in the press), and this was one of the few records that they never toured for. All that tension comes out in the music, though. “Undercover of the Night” is one of their greatest singles, in my opinion. Harnessing the same modern energy as “Miss You” yet remaining Stones. “Too Much Blood,” “Pretty Beat Up,” “It Must Be Hell” all seethe with anger and aggression. And Mick’s Texas Chainsaw Massacre spoken interlude in “Too Much Blood” is really funny.
2. Bryan Adams – Reckless (1984). Not that this record is considered bad, but it is generally dismissed as middle of the road, glossy 80's, non-edgy pop/rock and not taken that seriously. And maybe it is all of that. But it is also one of my favorite records of that entire decade. It is nothing more than pop/rock, but masterfully crafted pop/rock. It is all inviting rhythm guitars, soaring pop hook choruses. “Run To You,” “One Night Love Affair,” “Somebody,” kick ass duet with Tina Turner “It’s Only Love,” even cheeseball power ballad “Heaven” and silly nostalgic “Summer of ‘69”…I dig it all. So this is not so much a record that I am supposed to hate (although in many serious music fan circles I would be expected to), but it is more one that I am not supposed to like nearly as much as I do.
3. Thomas Dolby – The Golden Age of Wireless (1982). Similar to The Bryan Adams case, where this record is not considered bad, but for many it is probably seen as an 80’s novelty (as it contains his one big hit, “She Blinded Me With Science,” and is filled with other science/technologically themed tunes). Although, amongst listeners who really like 80’s synth-pop, it is a very respected record. Anyway, as with the selection above, I love this record way more than I’m supposed to. I think Dolby is incredibly talented. If he had stayed the course with this debut (and the even better sophomore effort, The Flat Earth), he would have a large, impressive catalogue. But after those two records, the discography becomes spotty (although I highly recommend the live, solo performance CD The Sole Inhabitant, that is excellent). At least here and on Flat Earth, Dolby is an underrated songwriter, crafting smart, catchy, complex, witty synthpop that was perfect for his time, and if you like that style, stands the test of time. Everyone knows the hit, but check out the so great Cold War tune “One of Our Submarines.” (NOTE: get the U.S. version of the album, it is much better than the UK version).
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
This Is Bullsh*t
Last night I posted about a new Tragically Hip record coming out. A band I have loyally followed for decades. I read today that Gord Downie, the lead singer and guiding force, has terminal brain cancer. They plan on touring this summer anyway. See 'em while you can. I have vivid memories of a small club show by the Hip I saw circa 1990-91. Not to be missed. Looking forward to the record even more now. Although, don't look for a Bowie-like goodbye on this one. The record was written and recorded prior to his diagnosis. This is actually big news in Canada. The Hip are still a huge band there. His doctor held a press conference to discuss the diagnosis. Apparently the mean lifespan for people after diagnosis with this type of brain cancer is about 2 years. Downie claims that he plans to keep making music. Should interesting stuff.
Monday, May 23, 2016
New Hip
One of the only bands that still gets me excited about a coming release is Canada's own Tragically Hip. They've been putting out great stuff for over 25 years now. Granted, their records are often hit and miss (the only perfect one from start to finish is Road Apples), but when they hit, they can still hit me hard. It is difficult to explain these things, where a certain band has a certain sound or turn of melody or style or chords they use that just hits your emotional sweet spot. I like the new song "In a World Possessed By the Human Mind," from Man Machine Poem, out in mid-June. Here's the video, I like the mood it creates quite a bit. But perhaps that's because I'm listening and watching late tonight while the wife is out of town and the kids are long asleep...it's like getting a phone call from an old friend...thank God for the Hip.
Fun question for those reading: what bands/artists still putting out new material hit that sweet spot for you? Not every song, but consistently enough to where you are still excited when you hear of a new release on the horizon. this is especially an interesting question for those 40 or over, since I think it is harder for anything new to emotionally penetrate us like it used to.
Fun question for those reading: what bands/artists still putting out new material hit that sweet spot for you? Not every song, but consistently enough to where you are still excited when you hear of a new release on the horizon. this is especially an interesting question for those 40 or over, since I think it is harder for anything new to emotionally penetrate us like it used to.
Tuesday, April 26, 2016
RIP Prince, 1958-2016
I'm sure a lot of you have seen this, but this has to be the greatest performance at a Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony. Prince and George Harrison (as a solo artist) were inducted in the same year, and this is one of those All Star jams during the ceremony. Harrison was already dead by his induction, so this is a tribute performance of "While My Guitar Gently Weeps." Many of the usual suspects are there, like Tom Petty, Steve Winwood, Jeff Lynne, etc. It is a nice but unremarkable performance until about 3:30, when Prince tears into his guitar solo. On a totally different plane of existence from these other guys. And you can tell he knows it. He isn't usually associated with classic rock, but it is like he is saying, "if I feel like it, I can do this better than any of you." He is having so much fun. Notice the look of surprise and awe on Dhani Harrison's face at about 4:48 (Dhani is George's son, can't you tell?) The best part may be the end. He tosses the guitar to the heavens (where the hell does it go??) and struts off the stage while the other guys are still on the last chord. Like "yeah, bitches!" I read an interview with Dhani Harrison that was great, talking about this performance. Harrison said that he wasn't too excited about Prince performing on the song, he just wasn't that familiar with his music beyond hits like "Kiss," and didn't think he would fit in musically. These other guys had been friends of his Dad's, Dhani had grown up knowing them, etc. Also, at rehearsal Prince didn't show his cards, he played a rather routine solo. Harrison said that he ran around frantically backstage looking for Prince after the performance, shouting wildly "where's Prince! Where's Prince!" Apparently when Prince strutted off the stage, he never stopped and just walked out of the building into the night without saying a word to anyone.
Thursday, January 14, 2016
RIP David Bowie, 1947-2016 and a Review of 'Blackstar,' 2016
David Bowie managed to turn even his death into an artistic act. He last toured in 2003, when he had to cut the Reality tour short due to health issues. He subsequently disappeared from the music scene until 2012’s surprise release of a new record. That record (The Next Day) was good, but not great. Critics and fans were just happy that he was making music again. January 8th of this year he released what we now know was his final record, the daring Blackstar. Bowie then died two days later. He had kept his 18 month struggle with liver cancer a secret from the public (and even many of his close associaties, apparently), so the excitement of a new Bowie record was followed by shock, as most fans like myself were looking forward to yet another career renaissance. He knew that this would be his last record, so a close listen to the lyrics and themes take on new importance with Blackstar. It seems rare (I can’t think of any parallels) that a musical artist gets to make a record knowing that this is his last chance to say what he wants to say. It is probably even rarer that it is done so successfully and so gracefully.
I probably don’t need to write the standard obituary for David Bowie here, as most of you know the important touchstones. If I had a dollar for every time he was called a “chameleon” in a review or article, I would have no need to buy any Powerball tickets. But, the name fits. Bowie was on the vanguard of many different musical trends in his almost five decades in music (I think the mid-80’s through the 90’s was probably the only period where he was more a follower of trends than leader, although even then he still made some worthwhile music). For many artists, Bowie was more influential on them than The Beatles. Duran Duran said that was the case for them.
Bowie is one of the few artists where you can become obsessed with various periods of his career. Most artists would be lucky to have an entire career worthy of fan obsession, but you can dive into Bowie’s glam period, or his Berlin Trilogy, or his pop excursions, or his work in electronic music…and be rewarded just focusing on one of those periods.
Something else rare was that through the vast majority of his career (maybe except for the late 80’s), Bowie was always cool. You never had to apologize for being a Bowie fan. Even when he was in his 50’s, he was making music that younger generations of musicians and fans were following. He knew how to manage his image masterfully. He even knew when (and how) to disappear.
I got onboard with 1983’s Let’s Dance. Blame my age, it was when I was becoming aware of pop music. I still love that record, although by many it is seen as one of his more uncool, least experimental efforts. The five core songs on it (title track, “Modern Love,” “China Girl,” “Cat People,” and “Criminal World”) still stand up as fantastic, varied pop/rock songs in my book. (Also fun that a very out of place Stevie Ray Vaughan plays on them). It was Bowie's commercial peak, which may explain the lack of critical fawning for the album. But the same guy who made Let’s Dance made 1977’s krautrock-loving experimental masterpiece Low? Or the glam touchstone The Rise and Fall of Ziggy Stardust and the Spiders from Mars? Or quirky folk of Hunky Dory? Or the plastic soul of Young Americans? Or the electronic-drenched Earthling? Yep. Same guy. Or how about releasing Low and ‘Heroes,’ two unquestionable masterpieces, in the same freaking year?!
And with Bowie it was never clear how much of it was sincere or how much of it was a put-on. “It” being whatever genre he happened to be creating or revolutionizing or diving into at the time. To some that has been a turn-off. But I think a certain distance Bowie kept from whatever world he was exploring also allowed him to quickly move on to other exciting musical planets without lingering for too long in one place.
My favorite period? Probably the Berlin Trilogy (especially if you can extend it to the one record previous and the one right after to make it five records: Station to Station, Low, ‘Heroes,’ Lodger, and Scary Monsters).
Anyway, I could go on about remembering Bowie, but I want to talk about his final record, Blackstar. I loved it when I heard it on the day it was released. But his death makes it more significant than just the next Bowie record. It is the last Bowie record. (Although I have no doubt the vaults will be raided for some posthumous releases).
He put together a new band for this last record. Mostly they were young jazz players, and Donny McCaslin’s exciting saxophone playing is all over it. It is a return to his more experimental tendencies, doggedly uncommercial (the title track was released as the first single, and it is ten minutes long, a complex labyrinth of sounds that still holds together, but obviously much too complex and lengthy for radio). Longtime Bowie producer Tony Visconti stated that the band were unaware of Bowie’s declining health as they were recording, but that Bowie always intended this record to be his swansong, his “parting gift” to his fans. What a rich gift it is. Knowing it to be his last, he had no reason to compromise at all for commercial considerations. No tour to plan. No follow-up to set up or work on. This was it. Some might fold under that type of pressure (how do you cap off a career spanning four decades? While knowing you are dying while doing it?) But it is also liberating, I imagine.
ABOVE: Check out Bowie's fascinating video for the title track to his new record, "Blackstar"
These lyrics, while typically not exactly straightfoward, contemplate his mortality, saying goodbye and his legacy. The gorgeous Cure-like dirge “Lazarus”: “Look up here, I’m in heaven / Got scars that can’t be seen / I’ve got drama, can’t be stolen / Everybody knows me now” and “just like that bluebird / oh, I’ll be free / Ain’t that just like me.” Or from “Dollar Days”: “If I never see the English evergreens I’m running to / It’s nothing to me” and “Don’t believe for just one second I’m forgetting you / I’m trying to, I’m dying to” (or is it “too”?) What a lovely goodbye the final two tracks are, where “Dollar Days” and “I Can’t Give Everything Away” segue together. Both are lush, flowing ballads, and the repeated refrain of the last song – “I can’t give everything / I can’t give everything / Away” – could stand as the epitaph for his entire career. Bowie produced thrilling, daring, yet still accessible music, but there was always a bit of mystery, a bit of the opaque. As much as he gave to his music and fans, he still held something back. That for some reason made it even more intriguing. By the way, that is not to say that it is all moody. "Sue (or a Season of Crime)" and "'Tis a Pity She Was a Whore" rock out a bit.
As a final gift, a final artistic statement where he incorporated his own death into the work (and it must be added that the final two videos for "Blackstar" and "Lazarus" are essential for the entire package as well)…I can’t think of a more enigmatic yet satisfying, from an artistic perspective, way to bow out. I read a great article recently on Bowie’s passing where the author said, only slightly tongue in cheek and I’m paraphrasing, “I can say that the human race was fortunate to share the planet at the same time that Bowie was here.” RIP David Bowie.
Blackstar: **** out of *****
Sunday, October 11, 2015
Rock and Roll Hall of Fame Nominees For the Class of 2016
Part of the fun of breaking down each year’s crop of nominees for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is to bash the boneheaded decisions made by the Nominating Committee. I can’t really do that this year. I would not be upset if any of these fifteen nominees were inducted for the Class of 2016. I guess the shake-up/purge of the Committee earlier this year did some positive good.
Here are the nominees, and then I will tell you who I voted for on the fan poll and then predict who will actually be inducted…
The Cars
Finally! Those who know me well know that I have been a huge booster of The Cars since I started following the Hall. To me, they’ve got all of the criteria. One of the biggest New Wave bands of the late 70’s/early 80’s with a boatload of memorable hits, top charting records, and music that stands the test of time yet is also definitely of its time. Ric Ocasek’s sardonic, witty songs have influenced a generation of power pop songwriters.
Chic
Get it over with already! This is their 10th nomination. The voting body has spoken over and over again, but the Nominating Committee will not give up. They should just cook the books and get them in regardless of the vote tally. I’m with the Committee on this one, Nile Rodgers and Bernard Edwards should be in the Hall of Fame, no question. Disco backlash? But Donna Summers, The Bee Gees and ABBA are all in. I don’t get it. Maybe just get Rodgers in for his production work with the Ahmet Ertugen award, bypassing the voting body altogether, since they clearly don’t get it?
Chicago
A big snub for a lot of people for years (not for me, not a big fan), this is their first nomination. I think their Peter Cetera dominated 80’s schmaltz have hurt them over the years. The jazz-rock of the 70’s was pretty pioneering, although never a critical favorite.
Cheap Trick
First time nomination for this power pop juggernaut as well. No complaint from me, although I was never a huge fan. To me, they have a Greatest Hits worth of power pop classics.
Deep Purple
Again, not a huge fan personally, but it is absurd that Purple is still not in the Hall of Fame. The Holy Trinity of 70’s hard rock is Black Sabbath (inducted after about 8 nominations), Led Zeppelin (inducted) and Deep Purple. Get them in there, and then start getting in all of the snubbed metal groups influenced by these three: Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Motorhead, Anthrax, Pantera, Motley Crue, Ozzy Osbourne (solo), Megadeath, etc.
Janet Jackson
There has been a grass roots effort for years to get Ms. Jackson on the ballot, and she finally gets her shot. I agree, with her track record, it is pretty ridiculous that she is not already in. The fact that she was able to step out of the shadow of her older brother and establish her own identity is impressive in and of itself.
The J.B.’s
I had to look this one up. A funk group that James Brown put together to back him at some point that then released some funk music of their own. I listened to some of it, fantastic stuff. Bootsy Collins, Bobby Byrd and Maceo Parker all went through their ranks. The Hall recently inducted some other backing bands through the backdoor (deservedly), I bet when the J.B.’s don’t get enough votes this year, they will get in that way too. Fine with me.
Chaka Khan
It is a little strange that she was previously nominated with/as Rufus and Chaka Khan but this time she is being nominated purely for her solo work. She is fantastic.
Los Lobos
What a pleasant surprise. I did not see this coming at all. Casual music fans probably just remember “La Bamba,” but they have a catalogue both rich and deep. They have fused Mexican styles of music seamlessly with American rock and roll, and also released some quite experimental albums (Kiko is one of my all time favorite records). They are a dark horse, but not as much of a longshot as you might think. First, they are very respected in the industry, and that is who votes. Secondly, they have worked with many other artists, many of whom are voters as well. (Paul Simon won’t be voting for them, I imagine. Los Lobos played on a song on Simon’s Graceland. When Simon did not give them a songwriting credit, that launched a decades long war of words, with Los Lobos claiming that Simon ripped them off).
Steve Miller
Another “finally,” shockingly this is his first nomination. Another case of casual listeners being familiar with a handful of radio hits, but an artist with a deep and rich catalogue. His late 60’s work was very interesting, and he was a hits machine in the 70’s. Like with last year’s initial nomination of Stevie Ray Vaughan without Double Trouble (they later amended it), it is odd that Miller is nominated alone and not as Steve Miller Band, which is how all but one of his albums is branded. Perhaps there was too much of a revolving door with Steve Miller Band personnel, I’m not sure.
Nine Inch Nails
Definitely not a fan, definitely deserves induction. Trent Reznor was influential on annoying trends in music during the 90’s and beyond. But the key word there is influential.
N.W.A.
The Hall (or voters) have an issue here. And it is not whether rap belongs in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. That decision has already been made with Run DMC, Grandmaster Flash and Public Enemy already getting inducted. Do you recognize and honor a group that is so steeped in violence and misogyny, yet one of the most important groups of the last 25 years? (I guess they already decided misogyny was OK when they inducted The Rolling Stones). This is their best chance with the ‘Straight Outta Compton’ film doing so well this year. It would be a fun ceremony with them there, for sure.
The Smiths
Love to see them here again. The fact that they (and The Cure, Joy Divison/New Order, Depeche Mode, The Cars, Devo, The Replacements, Duran Duran, Sonic Youth, The Pixies, Morrissey as a solo artist, etc.) are still not in reveals a real problem with the structure of voting. Many of the voters are steeped in 50s, 60s and 70s rock and are dismissive or don’t really understand the 80s. Steven Van Zandt has said that “the 80s were a musical wasteland,” and he is one of the most influential members of the Nominating Committee. And Jerry Lee Lewis is a voter. How much Moz does Jerry Lee really listen to?
The Spinners
Great Philly Soul group from the 70s. Love to see them get in, but they don’t have much of a chance in this field. Their only hope is that there is not much competition to split votes with such a classic rock-heavy ballot.
Yes
And we come to the most egregious snub still on the outside. However you feel about their music or the progressive rock genre in general, the fact that you have the most important band of a major genre of rock still not in the Rockhall is by definition absurd. They should have gotten in on their first nomination two years ago (actually, they should have gotten in when became eligible in 1994), but hopefully this is the year we rectify this crime. Too bad Chris Squire is no longer alive to enjoy the induction.
Again, it would be hard to come up with a list of 15 nominees more deserving of induction. On the fan poll you can vote for five, but they have been inducting 6-7 in recent years. So…
My votes:
The Cars
Yes
The Smiths
Los Lobos
Steve Miller
My predictions:
The Cars
Chicago
Deep Purple
Janet Jackson
N.W.A.
Nine Inch Nails
If they induct seven: Steve Miller
And I predict they will backdoor the J.B.’s with the Musical Excellence category
Thoughts? Your favorites? Predictions?
Here are the nominees, and then I will tell you who I voted for on the fan poll and then predict who will actually be inducted…
The Cars
Finally! Those who know me well know that I have been a huge booster of The Cars since I started following the Hall. To me, they’ve got all of the criteria. One of the biggest New Wave bands of the late 70’s/early 80’s with a boatload of memorable hits, top charting records, and music that stands the test of time yet is also definitely of its time. Ric Ocasek’s sardonic, witty songs have influenced a generation of power pop songwriters.
Chic
Get it over with already! This is their 10th nomination. The voting body has spoken over and over again, but the Nominating Committee will not give up. They should just cook the books and get them in regardless of the vote tally. I’m with the Committee on this one, Nile Rodgers and Bernard Edwards should be in the Hall of Fame, no question. Disco backlash? But Donna Summers, The Bee Gees and ABBA are all in. I don’t get it. Maybe just get Rodgers in for his production work with the Ahmet Ertugen award, bypassing the voting body altogether, since they clearly don’t get it?
Chicago
A big snub for a lot of people for years (not for me, not a big fan), this is their first nomination. I think their Peter Cetera dominated 80’s schmaltz have hurt them over the years. The jazz-rock of the 70’s was pretty pioneering, although never a critical favorite.
Cheap Trick
First time nomination for this power pop juggernaut as well. No complaint from me, although I was never a huge fan. To me, they have a Greatest Hits worth of power pop classics.
Deep Purple
Again, not a huge fan personally, but it is absurd that Purple is still not in the Hall of Fame. The Holy Trinity of 70’s hard rock is Black Sabbath (inducted after about 8 nominations), Led Zeppelin (inducted) and Deep Purple. Get them in there, and then start getting in all of the snubbed metal groups influenced by these three: Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Motorhead, Anthrax, Pantera, Motley Crue, Ozzy Osbourne (solo), Megadeath, etc.
Janet Jackson
There has been a grass roots effort for years to get Ms. Jackson on the ballot, and she finally gets her shot. I agree, with her track record, it is pretty ridiculous that she is not already in. The fact that she was able to step out of the shadow of her older brother and establish her own identity is impressive in and of itself.
The J.B.’s
I had to look this one up. A funk group that James Brown put together to back him at some point that then released some funk music of their own. I listened to some of it, fantastic stuff. Bootsy Collins, Bobby Byrd and Maceo Parker all went through their ranks. The Hall recently inducted some other backing bands through the backdoor (deservedly), I bet when the J.B.’s don’t get enough votes this year, they will get in that way too. Fine with me.
Chaka Khan
It is a little strange that she was previously nominated with/as Rufus and Chaka Khan but this time she is being nominated purely for her solo work. She is fantastic.
Los Lobos
What a pleasant surprise. I did not see this coming at all. Casual music fans probably just remember “La Bamba,” but they have a catalogue both rich and deep. They have fused Mexican styles of music seamlessly with American rock and roll, and also released some quite experimental albums (Kiko is one of my all time favorite records). They are a dark horse, but not as much of a longshot as you might think. First, they are very respected in the industry, and that is who votes. Secondly, they have worked with many other artists, many of whom are voters as well. (Paul Simon won’t be voting for them, I imagine. Los Lobos played on a song on Simon’s Graceland. When Simon did not give them a songwriting credit, that launched a decades long war of words, with Los Lobos claiming that Simon ripped them off).
Steve Miller
Another “finally,” shockingly this is his first nomination. Another case of casual listeners being familiar with a handful of radio hits, but an artist with a deep and rich catalogue. His late 60’s work was very interesting, and he was a hits machine in the 70’s. Like with last year’s initial nomination of Stevie Ray Vaughan without Double Trouble (they later amended it), it is odd that Miller is nominated alone and not as Steve Miller Band, which is how all but one of his albums is branded. Perhaps there was too much of a revolving door with Steve Miller Band personnel, I’m not sure.
Nine Inch Nails
Definitely not a fan, definitely deserves induction. Trent Reznor was influential on annoying trends in music during the 90’s and beyond. But the key word there is influential.
N.W.A.
The Hall (or voters) have an issue here. And it is not whether rap belongs in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. That decision has already been made with Run DMC, Grandmaster Flash and Public Enemy already getting inducted. Do you recognize and honor a group that is so steeped in violence and misogyny, yet one of the most important groups of the last 25 years? (I guess they already decided misogyny was OK when they inducted The Rolling Stones). This is their best chance with the ‘Straight Outta Compton’ film doing so well this year. It would be a fun ceremony with them there, for sure.
The Smiths
Love to see them here again. The fact that they (and The Cure, Joy Divison/New Order, Depeche Mode, The Cars, Devo, The Replacements, Duran Duran, Sonic Youth, The Pixies, Morrissey as a solo artist, etc.) are still not in reveals a real problem with the structure of voting. Many of the voters are steeped in 50s, 60s and 70s rock and are dismissive or don’t really understand the 80s. Steven Van Zandt has said that “the 80s were a musical wasteland,” and he is one of the most influential members of the Nominating Committee. And Jerry Lee Lewis is a voter. How much Moz does Jerry Lee really listen to?
The Spinners
Great Philly Soul group from the 70s. Love to see them get in, but they don’t have much of a chance in this field. Their only hope is that there is not much competition to split votes with such a classic rock-heavy ballot.
Yes
And we come to the most egregious snub still on the outside. However you feel about their music or the progressive rock genre in general, the fact that you have the most important band of a major genre of rock still not in the Rockhall is by definition absurd. They should have gotten in on their first nomination two years ago (actually, they should have gotten in when became eligible in 1994), but hopefully this is the year we rectify this crime. Too bad Chris Squire is no longer alive to enjoy the induction.
Again, it would be hard to come up with a list of 15 nominees more deserving of induction. On the fan poll you can vote for five, but they have been inducting 6-7 in recent years. So…
My votes:
The Cars
Yes
The Smiths
Los Lobos
Steve Miller
My predictions:
The Cars
Chicago
Deep Purple
Janet Jackson
N.W.A.
Nine Inch Nails
If they induct seven: Steve Miller
And I predict they will backdoor the J.B.’s with the Musical Excellence category
Thoughts? Your favorites? Predictions?
Sunday, September 27, 2015
Rockhall Matters
It is that time of year again in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame cycle, when the nominees for the Class of 2016 will be announced. Brief review of rules and criteria: an artist is eligible 25 years after the release of their first album or single. They have changed the wording slightly regarding the criteria, but as it stands here is what they say: The artist must “…have demonstrated unquestionable musical excellence. We shall consider factors such as an artist's musical influence on other artists, length and depth of career and the body of work, innovation and superiority in style and technique, but musical excellence shall be the essential qualification of induction.” (emphasis added).
So, breaking that down, the only real qualification after the time limit is “musical excellence.” Therein, of course, lies the perpetual problem when you have a Nominating Committee that meets in secret once a year to put the nominees out there. Of late, there have been a list of approximately 15 nominees per year, where about 5-6 end up getting inducted. Once the nominees are determined, voting goes out to a larger group. Nobody knows the exact number, but about 500 artists, critics and industry insiders make up the voting body. Each current inductee gets a vote (therein lies another problem, what does Jerry Lee Lewis really know about The Smiths or The Replacements?) They have thrown the fans a bone, mostly symbolic but appreciated, with a poll that fans can participate in and then the results of that poll will be one ballot. Which is about how much they respect fan opinion in this whole process, 1 out of 500, although statistics show that whichever artist tops the fan ballot almost always is inducted. To make things more intriguing, there was a purge this year on the Nominating Committee where a decent number of members were booted, so the Committee is smaller now.
On the Committee, to try and make up for their alleged deficiencies in certain genres, they have created some sub-committees to specialize in those genres. The category that is most paid attention to is the “Performer” category, but there are some other categories that avoid the mass voting stage and people can be inducted directly by the Committee, like Early Influence, the Ahment Ertugen Award (formerly Non-Performer, meant to honor important non-musicians in the industry like producers, record execs, journalists, etc.) and Musical Excellence (which from what I can tell, is primarily used by the Committee to shoe in artists they know won’t be voted in by the voters, most notoriously used last year to inexplicably give Ringo Starr his second induction). Here is the most up to date list of who we know is on the Committee.
Jon Landau and Steve Van Zandt are considered two of the biggest power players, although Questlove and Tom Morello have been throwing their weight around too. Several of Questlove’s pet projects have gotten in during the past few cycles (like Hall & Oates, for instance), and Morello is credited for finally getting KISS nominated a second time (and then inducted, despite former Committee Member Dave Marsh’s famous pronouncement that as long as he was on the Committee, he would make sure that KISS never got in). Through Van Zandt, it is believed that Bruce Springsteen makes his opinions known, and for the conspiracy theorists out there, the shadowy puppet master orchestrator is believed to be former Committee member (and inductee) Jan Wenner, publisher of Rolling Stone magazine.
Back to the problems of the process. “Musical Excellence” is fairly meaningless because it is almost entirely subjective. While all Halls of Fame have some if this problem, the RRHOF seems to have the worst. So I guess you can only really turn to the factors that they list for guidance, although we do not know how much Landau, et al. actually pay attention to them vs. just trying to get in their favorites. (When Ahmet Ertugen was alive and was the Chairman of the Committee, an unusually high number of artists who had recorded on Atlantic Records were getting in, which was the label Ertugen founded and ran).
Notice one factor missing is any mention of sales. They have rather proudly stated several times that record sales are not an important factor. Which I find odd. Granted, it should not be the major factor, but for a Hall of Fame that honors what is a “popular” music, perhaps what has been “popular” over time (measured by record sales) ought to be considered? But the more concrete factors that I can discern from their statement are: Influence, Length and Depth, Innovation and Technical/Stylistic Superiority. Influence I am absolutely on board with, as well as Innovation. Technical/Stylistic Superiority can be problematic. There are many obscure guitar players sitting around smoking a doobie in their suburban garage with great technique. Stylistic Superiority I take as leaders within genres, which I agree with, but you will see there are many genre leaders who have been snubbed thus far. Length and Depth are decent factors, but longevity alone does not necessarily make great rock and roll. And if you look at some inductees, they have had very short careers. Velvet Underground released four records, and the Sex Pistols really only released one of note. (Both are deserving, by the way).
Soon I will post my list/commentary on the most glaring snubs in my view, and then hopefully will be evaluating the actual nominees for 2016 soon thereafter. This post started as the snub post, but the intro became so lengthy that it became a post itself.
So, breaking that down, the only real qualification after the time limit is “musical excellence.” Therein, of course, lies the perpetual problem when you have a Nominating Committee that meets in secret once a year to put the nominees out there. Of late, there have been a list of approximately 15 nominees per year, where about 5-6 end up getting inducted. Once the nominees are determined, voting goes out to a larger group. Nobody knows the exact number, but about 500 artists, critics and industry insiders make up the voting body. Each current inductee gets a vote (therein lies another problem, what does Jerry Lee Lewis really know about The Smiths or The Replacements?) They have thrown the fans a bone, mostly symbolic but appreciated, with a poll that fans can participate in and then the results of that poll will be one ballot. Which is about how much they respect fan opinion in this whole process, 1 out of 500, although statistics show that whichever artist tops the fan ballot almost always is inducted. To make things more intriguing, there was a purge this year on the Nominating Committee where a decent number of members were booted, so the Committee is smaller now.
On the Committee, to try and make up for their alleged deficiencies in certain genres, they have created some sub-committees to specialize in those genres. The category that is most paid attention to is the “Performer” category, but there are some other categories that avoid the mass voting stage and people can be inducted directly by the Committee, like Early Influence, the Ahment Ertugen Award (formerly Non-Performer, meant to honor important non-musicians in the industry like producers, record execs, journalists, etc.) and Musical Excellence (which from what I can tell, is primarily used by the Committee to shoe in artists they know won’t be voted in by the voters, most notoriously used last year to inexplicably give Ringo Starr his second induction). Here is the most up to date list of who we know is on the Committee.
Jon Landau and Steve Van Zandt are considered two of the biggest power players, although Questlove and Tom Morello have been throwing their weight around too. Several of Questlove’s pet projects have gotten in during the past few cycles (like Hall & Oates, for instance), and Morello is credited for finally getting KISS nominated a second time (and then inducted, despite former Committee Member Dave Marsh’s famous pronouncement that as long as he was on the Committee, he would make sure that KISS never got in). Through Van Zandt, it is believed that Bruce Springsteen makes his opinions known, and for the conspiracy theorists out there, the shadowy puppet master orchestrator is believed to be former Committee member (and inductee) Jan Wenner, publisher of Rolling Stone magazine.
Back to the problems of the process. “Musical Excellence” is fairly meaningless because it is almost entirely subjective. While all Halls of Fame have some if this problem, the RRHOF seems to have the worst. So I guess you can only really turn to the factors that they list for guidance, although we do not know how much Landau, et al. actually pay attention to them vs. just trying to get in their favorites. (When Ahmet Ertugen was alive and was the Chairman of the Committee, an unusually high number of artists who had recorded on Atlantic Records were getting in, which was the label Ertugen founded and ran).
Notice one factor missing is any mention of sales. They have rather proudly stated several times that record sales are not an important factor. Which I find odd. Granted, it should not be the major factor, but for a Hall of Fame that honors what is a “popular” music, perhaps what has been “popular” over time (measured by record sales) ought to be considered? But the more concrete factors that I can discern from their statement are: Influence, Length and Depth, Innovation and Technical/Stylistic Superiority. Influence I am absolutely on board with, as well as Innovation. Technical/Stylistic Superiority can be problematic. There are many obscure guitar players sitting around smoking a doobie in their suburban garage with great technique. Stylistic Superiority I take as leaders within genres, which I agree with, but you will see there are many genre leaders who have been snubbed thus far. Length and Depth are decent factors, but longevity alone does not necessarily make great rock and roll. And if you look at some inductees, they have had very short careers. Velvet Underground released four records, and the Sex Pistols really only released one of note. (Both are deserving, by the way).
Soon I will post my list/commentary on the most glaring snubs in my view, and then hopefully will be evaluating the actual nominees for 2016 soon thereafter. This post started as the snub post, but the intro became so lengthy that it became a post itself.
Tuesday, June 30, 2015
Dez Reviews Neil Young + Promise of the Real's 'The Monsanto Years,' 2015
This isn't the first time that Neil Young has become obsessed with some issue and decided to toss off an entire record about it, something I called "record as blog post" when I reviewed his Fork in the Road back in 2009. Recall that I gave that record a **** review. Every song was about his electric car, but it was a brilliantly loose, humorous, passionate, fun ride. His 2006 tirade against the War in Iraq Living With War is the other side of that coin. One of his worst records, it was obvious, simplistic, and below his talents. That is not to say that Neil can't do intelligent political commentary. 1970's "Ohio" (written in the wake of the Kent State shootings) is one of the all time great protest songs. It is angry, but also has a memorable hook and fantastic, less-is-more lyrics that still have interesting turn of phrase. So where does his latest political screed stand in all of this? At the bottom. This sucks.
Neil has been a passionate environmentalist and supporter of farmers for decades, which is fine. He has decided to take on the Monsanto mega-corporation and their production of GMOs, and how they are tied to big money politics, other mega-corporations (he also frequently attacks Wal-Mart and Starbucks by name on this record) and how they screw the farmer. All noble causes, but his execution is piss poor. These are some of the worst lyrics I've ever heard. Monsanto has nothing to worry about from Neil, nobody will be able to get through these songs to hear their message and rise up against the corporate Man.
The shame is that, musically speaking, this is pretty good. It sounds like good, not great, Crazy Horse. The band is Promise of the Real, a group led by Lukas Nelson, son of Willie Nelson. They are joined by another Nelson boy, Micah. The band is very good, actually. Gritty in a Crazy Horse way but a little more polished, which is nice. This came together in typical Neil fashion, he had fun jamming with the Nelson boys at a Farm-Aid event, and so invited them to be his band on his next album. They sound great together, but I wish they had better material to work with. As good as the music is (featuring some great guitar fireworks between Neil and Lukas in spots), you just cannot get past these lyrics.
Cringe-worthy throughout. Check out this doozy from "A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop":
Yeah! Rock and roll! Oh there's more where that came from. The whole f*cking record is like this. Try this Shakespearean turn of phrase from "Workin' Man":
"This life was good and steady / Clean seeds for cash / Next year farmers were ready / Times were changing fast / Supreme Court in session / Made a new law / GMO seeds and patents / Had a fatal flaw / Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas / Once worked for Monsanto"...woo!! (cigarette lighters in the air). That's a sure way to get the fans excited, talk about Clarence Thomas.
At least Neil is a little self-aware here. In one of the only moments of wit on this entire album, Neil sarcastically acknowledges that the fans might not want to hear his political tirades in "People Want To Hear About Love," instead they want simple pop love songs. He warbles "Don't talk about Citizens United has killed democtracy / People want to hear about love / Don't say pesticides cause autistic children / People want to hear about love." No Neil. I am fine with being challenged by politically charged music. Just do it well, that is all I ask. Give me more "Ohio," less "A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop."
These lyrics come across as less songs and more like blog posts or angry "get-off-my-lawn" tirades on Facebook. Which is why I hate Facebook. Like I said, this worked very well with Fork in the Road, which was whimsical and rocking while still addressing some serious issues, not so well on the grating Living With War, and it completely fails here. There is also a Yoko Ono element here. Neil left his decades long marriage a year or two ago and ran off with mediocre actress / annoying activist Daryl Hannah. (In fact, Neil is no longer on speaking terms with longtime musical compadre David Crosby because Crosby spoke up publicly and said some very unflattering things about Hannah). This is the second record he's put out since he started his relationship with her, and it is the second seriously sh*tty record he's put out in a row, after a fairly strong hitting streak. Dump the mermaid and get back to making great music again, Neil.
ABOVE: Yeah Neil. I have the same question as The Croz. What the hell are you doin', buddy?
* out of *****
Neil has been a passionate environmentalist and supporter of farmers for decades, which is fine. He has decided to take on the Monsanto mega-corporation and their production of GMOs, and how they are tied to big money politics, other mega-corporations (he also frequently attacks Wal-Mart and Starbucks by name on this record) and how they screw the farmer. All noble causes, but his execution is piss poor. These are some of the worst lyrics I've ever heard. Monsanto has nothing to worry about from Neil, nobody will be able to get through these songs to hear their message and rise up against the corporate Man.
The shame is that, musically speaking, this is pretty good. It sounds like good, not great, Crazy Horse. The band is Promise of the Real, a group led by Lukas Nelson, son of Willie Nelson. They are joined by another Nelson boy, Micah. The band is very good, actually. Gritty in a Crazy Horse way but a little more polished, which is nice. This came together in typical Neil fashion, he had fun jamming with the Nelson boys at a Farm-Aid event, and so invited them to be his band on his next album. They sound great together, but I wish they had better material to work with. As good as the music is (featuring some great guitar fireworks between Neil and Lukas in spots), you just cannot get past these lyrics.
Cringe-worthy throughout. Check out this doozy from "A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop":
"When the people of Vermont voted to label food with GMOs / So they would know what was in it / Monsanto and Starbucks through the Grocery Manufacturers Alliance / Sued the state of Vermont to overturn the peoples' will"
Yeah! Rock and roll! Oh there's more where that came from. The whole f*cking record is like this. Try this Shakespearean turn of phrase from "Workin' Man":
"This life was good and steady / Clean seeds for cash / Next year farmers were ready / Times were changing fast / Supreme Court in session / Made a new law / GMO seeds and patents / Had a fatal flaw / Supreme Court Judge Clarence Thomas / Once worked for Monsanto"...woo!! (cigarette lighters in the air). That's a sure way to get the fans excited, talk about Clarence Thomas.
At least Neil is a little self-aware here. In one of the only moments of wit on this entire album, Neil sarcastically acknowledges that the fans might not want to hear his political tirades in "People Want To Hear About Love," instead they want simple pop love songs. He warbles "Don't talk about Citizens United has killed democtracy / People want to hear about love / Don't say pesticides cause autistic children / People want to hear about love." No Neil. I am fine with being challenged by politically charged music. Just do it well, that is all I ask. Give me more "Ohio," less "A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop."
These lyrics come across as less songs and more like blog posts or angry "get-off-my-lawn" tirades on Facebook. Which is why I hate Facebook. Like I said, this worked very well with Fork in the Road, which was whimsical and rocking while still addressing some serious issues, not so well on the grating Living With War, and it completely fails here. There is also a Yoko Ono element here. Neil left his decades long marriage a year or two ago and ran off with mediocre actress / annoying activist Daryl Hannah. (In fact, Neil is no longer on speaking terms with longtime musical compadre David Crosby because Crosby spoke up publicly and said some very unflattering things about Hannah). This is the second record he's put out since he started his relationship with her, and it is the second seriously sh*tty record he's put out in a row, after a fairly strong hitting streak. Dump the mermaid and get back to making great music again, Neil.
ABOVE: Yeah Neil. I have the same question as The Croz. What the hell are you doin', buddy?
* out of *****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


















































