A gripe...
So I bought Margot and the Nuclear So-and-So's The Dust of Retreat this weekend at Borders, because A) it's one of the better albums I've heard in the past six months or so and B) it was $9.99.
However, I cannot recommend it.
Why? Because the version I bought was the 2006 version of the album, rereleased on Artemis Records less than a year after its first release on Standard Records. For this new release, the band re-sequenced the album. Okay, I thought, The Scotland Yard Gospel Choir did this with their debut, and arguably improved it. I liked the sequencing of Margot's album, but I figured they'd know what they were doing. But! On top of that, they re-recorded "A Light on a Hill" and had someone do new mixes of "Skeleton Key," ""Quiet as a Mouse" and "Talking in Code."
And "Skeleton Key," which was the best song on the original album, now sucks. It loses the immediacy of the original, as well as much of the original version's charm and appeal. The only parallel I can think of for this is from years back, when I was a fan of Chicago-based band Allister: a song of theirs was released on a label sampler, and I thought it was very good, but the version which ended up on the album had similarly been rendered lifeless by pointless MOR radio production. And that's what the new "Skeleton Key" sounds like: ProTool filtering and dullness.
"Skeleton Key" is now the second track on the album, and I haven't even been able to listen past it - that's how bad this newtered version of the song is. So, should you see this album somewhere and be tempted to buy it, I urge you to resist. I wish I didn't have to. Though you can, apparently, buy the Standard Records version here. That, at least, is worth a purchase (and highly recommended!)
Maybe later I'll post the mp3s of both "Skeleton Key"s for comparison purposes. Right now I'm trying to decide whether I can afford to buy the Standard Records version of the album in addition to the one I already have.
...And a plan
This summer, I've decided to write extensively on Pulp. This is both to clarify my own thoughts on their work and to stop myself from drunkenly elaborating to/annoying people around me on a weekly basis. I plan to analyze, at length, their final three albums (incorporating His 'n' Hers into my discussion of Different Class, discussing how they can be viewed as, essentially, a single narrative - sort of the equivalent of a three-act play.
Pulp is a singular band, I believe, because Jarvis Cocker writes very "literary" lyrics - that is, lyrics that tell stories about characters who are informed by his experiences, yet distinct (and, often, ironically distanced from the singer). They're a very intelligent band, to an extent that I'm not sure any other really equals. Anyone who procrastinated by reading my post on the song "This Is Hardcore" will have an idea where I'm coming from with this.
I don't expect it'll be as interesting to anyone else as it is to me, but like I said: it's mostly for my benefit, and partially for the benefit of people who've had to hear me formulating my theories over the past months. And I figure I'll at least give the random people linked here from Jeff's blog or Mat's or wherever a chance to read them. Because hey, Pulp's totally awesome.
So I bought Margot and the Nuclear So-and-So's The Dust of Retreat this weekend at Borders, because A) it's one of the better albums I've heard in the past six months or so and B) it was $9.99.
However, I cannot recommend it.
Why? Because the version I bought was the 2006 version of the album, rereleased on Artemis Records less than a year after its first release on Standard Records. For this new release, the band re-sequenced the album. Okay, I thought, The Scotland Yard Gospel Choir did this with their debut, and arguably improved it. I liked the sequencing of Margot's album, but I figured they'd know what they were doing. But! On top of that, they re-recorded "A Light on a Hill" and had someone do new mixes of "Skeleton Key," ""Quiet as a Mouse" and "Talking in Code."
And "Skeleton Key," which was the best song on the original album, now sucks. It loses the immediacy of the original, as well as much of the original version's charm and appeal. The only parallel I can think of for this is from years back, when I was a fan of Chicago-based band Allister: a song of theirs was released on a label sampler, and I thought it was very good, but the version which ended up on the album had similarly been rendered lifeless by pointless MOR radio production. And that's what the new "Skeleton Key" sounds like: ProTool filtering and dullness.
"Skeleton Key" is now the second track on the album, and I haven't even been able to listen past it - that's how bad this newtered version of the song is. So, should you see this album somewhere and be tempted to buy it, I urge you to resist. I wish I didn't have to. Though you can, apparently, buy the Standard Records version here. That, at least, is worth a purchase (and highly recommended!)
Maybe later I'll post the mp3s of both "Skeleton Key"s for comparison purposes. Right now I'm trying to decide whether I can afford to buy the Standard Records version of the album in addition to the one I already have.
...And a plan
This summer, I've decided to write extensively on Pulp. This is both to clarify my own thoughts on their work and to stop myself from drunkenly elaborating to/annoying people around me on a weekly basis. I plan to analyze, at length, their final three albums (incorporating His 'n' Hers into my discussion of Different Class, discussing how they can be viewed as, essentially, a single narrative - sort of the equivalent of a three-act play.
Pulp is a singular band, I believe, because Jarvis Cocker writes very "literary" lyrics - that is, lyrics that tell stories about characters who are informed by his experiences, yet distinct (and, often, ironically distanced from the singer). They're a very intelligent band, to an extent that I'm not sure any other really equals. Anyone who procrastinated by reading my post on the song "This Is Hardcore" will have an idea where I'm coming from with this.
I don't expect it'll be as interesting to anyone else as it is to me, but like I said: it's mostly for my benefit, and partially for the benefit of people who've had to hear me formulating my theories over the past months. And I figure I'll at least give the random people linked here from Jeff's blog or Mat's or wherever a chance to read them. Because hey, Pulp's totally awesome.
posted by Odorless Boatman at 12:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home