Failing to see the difference

I miss the days when buying a single was an easy affair. Generally you looked at the tracks on the 12” to check if it had everything the 7” did. I always bought the 12” and then the 7” if it had a different mix or b-side.

With the release of ‘Together’ the Pet Shop Boys have confused me somewhat. Once I got my head around the myriad of mixes and formats both digital and physical I made my choices and paid my money. However, I am failing to understand the difference between the 3:30 Radio Mix of the title track and the 3:31 Ultimate mix. I consider myself to have quite good ears and especially for Pet Shop Boys tracks but I am left baffled as to the difference between these two uniquely labelled mixes.

Is there a difference? Does anyone know? Is it a typo? The web seems to give me no answers and nobody else seems to asking the question. Am I going mad or are my ears defunct?

a-ha are gone........

A recent trip to see Goldfrapp was so unengaging and frankly, boring, that I don’t even have the strength to write about it here. Last night I needed ‘a-ha’ to banish my memories of their insipid ‘Lifelines’ tour and renew my passion for the live concert.

I wasn’t that hopeful as I entered the Sheffield Arena, I knew this gig was set as a ‘half-house’ with 50 to 75% of the seating curtained off (a very curious affair that I have only ever seen in that arena).

Once inside the arena I headed for the merchandise stall. £15 for a program isn’t that unusual today. The phrase ‘value for money’ is not in the lexicon of bands, tour managers or program vendors, 99% of the time it is about ripping fans off with unscrupulous zeal. Happily, a-ha are marking their farewell tour with a tour book. And it really is a book!

Once the band took the stage I simply forgot any concerns or niggles about the arena and simply marvelled at the show unfolding in front of me. One of the most impressive live spectacles I have seen in many years. If you missed this tour then tough. They are finished. Over. a-ha will be no more by the end of the year.

Until they get short on cash or bored and then the reunion tour will winging its way to a city near you in 2015. But don’t get me started on band splitting up and reforming……..

Time to support the support

Everyone knows support bands are crap. Nobody pays them much attention and invariably they don’t deserve it. Everyone knows that. Right?

Well no.

Invariably I don’t turn up to gigs until a few minutes before the headline act are due to take to the stage, too much shit like “Où Est Le Swimming Pool” or “I Blame Coco” is not good for my ears. On a recent trip to Birmingham to see “Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark” a happy mix of bad timing and pure coincidence meant that we arrived in time to see most of the support act “Villa Nah”. Despite only catching ¾ of their set I was very impressed. Very impressed indeed. In fact I have spent more time since the gig listening to and thinking about “Villa Nah” than I have OMD.

Tracks such as “Daylight” and “Running On” are nothing short of genius. Hints of their skills were apparent in their remix of OMD’s “If You Want It” which was the only decent remix made available (indeed some of the others are amongst the worst I have head in a long time). There is a real craft and care taken in the work of “Villa Nah”. Nothing happens by accident; every note, snare drum, opening filter or vocal intonation sounds part of a wider aesthetic that is both familiar and new. Brilliant stuff and likeable guys.

So will I go to see support acts now? No. Absolutely not, but I am very glad I did this time. It must have been fate.

Don't judge a book by its cover

Artwork is important to me. Yes one shouldn't judge a book by its cover, but when it comes to new music, the front cover has the ability to repulse or draw me in.

Recently I have seen an album cover which really drew me in. As a vintage synthesizer geek, I was immediately drawn to Arnaud Rebotini's "Music components" album. It's downloading at the moment; the music could well be tosh, it could be great, but I'm trying it because the cover intrigued me.

The instruments featured on the cover represent a list of old analogue gear any electronic musician would kill to own. You can keep the Juno 2 and the TR-707 wouldn't see much action when you've got an 808 surely? But otherwise I want the lot. Now has that download completed yet?

Later..........

Yes, it has downloaded. Yes, it's everything I hoped it would be. It's quite brilliant. judge some books by their cover by all means.

Pet Shop Boys get it "Together"

Yes, there is a new Pet Shop Boys release on the horizon. “Together” is culled from another pointless ‘Greatest Hits’ collection due to be released next month. Happily, “Together” is a quite brilliant track that justifies the existence of “Ultimate” by itself.

Possibly best described (or probably not), as a ¾ techno pop stomper, “Together” is just the sort of track I have been longing for. “Miracles” was another great single designed to promote a greatest hits which sounded contemporary and yet rich in Pet Shop Boys DNA. Yet following on from this Trevor Horn was handed the production reigns and everything went a bit conventional (I mean - drums and bass guitar! for god’s sake!). As a primarily electronic band, I have always liked Neil and Chris’s music when it was raw and driven by the pulse of the dance floor. OK, so dancing to something in ¾ isn’t easy (unless you want to waltz) but “Together” is just the sort of record I want to hear them making in 2010 and is instantly a favourite in this house.

Don't belive the reviews. or me.......

Reviews. Do they mean anything? Can you actually judge anything by the opinion of others on something as subjective as music? I no longer think you can.

Reading reviews has helped me discover some great music in the past. Albums such as “Attack, Decay, Sustain, Release” by Simian Mobile Disco and “Happiness” by Hurts were completely unknown to me until I read favourable reviews and decided to purchase them. There have been multiple times when music has been recommended to me and I have loved it. I now begin to wonder how many times I have missed out on hidden gems by reading negative comments.

 

These thoughts have come into my head because of the Underworld album “Barking”. Underworld are one of a few bands that I like but do not necessarily buy everything they release and their last two albums left me decidedly under whelmed. So, on deciding whether to buy “Barking”, I read a few reviews first. Admittedly I started in one of the worst places possible: Amazon. These are a few comments that struck me immediately:

Former creative giants lose their way – 1/5

Oh No! This is just not good – 2/5

I don’t know what to say to this – 2/5

Underwhelming underworld – 2/5

Meow, to me it seems such a lame collection of lightweight pieces with no real substance or elegance -1/5

Worst underworld album easily! – 1/5

Bore to the floor – 2/5

Thus, I immediately moved on to something else. A few days later I decided to google for some more opinions on “Barking”. I found some real contradictions to the notorious amazon reviews:

“this is the sound of musicians with nothing to prove and everything to give” BBC
“Barking, then, is a return to form not because it's the best album Karl Hyde and Rick Smith have put out in a while (and it is), but because this record sees the duo returning to the more beat-intensive, complicatedly beatific realm of everything from "Pearl's Girl" to "Two Months Off." RA Reviews

Hell, I thought. I’m ordering it and will make up my own mind. I am so glad I did. The naysayers are simply wrong. This is a rejuvenated Underworld, and Underworld who have found their mojo, their best album since “secondtoughestintheinfants”.

But don’t take my word for it.

The future of the Past (or something like that)

When a band re-forms and releases new material it is always a tricky affair. No matter what new music a band produces, they are fighting a losing battle. Winning over your ‘loyal’ fans is a huge challenge. It’s like re-releasing ‘Star Wars’ with lots of nasty computer generated effects and cut scenes reinstated. You’re meddling with people’s most cherished memories. Knocking off their rose tinted spectacles and sticking in a sharp stick in their eye is not advised.

So why have Orchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark reformed and released the horrendously titled ‘History of Modern’? Is it a sharp stick for a fans ear or is it a band reborn? Well, in truth it’s a bit of both.

The tracks included here are a mixture of previously discarded material which has been dusted down and re-polished, coupled with some album fillers of varying merit. Tracks come and go and leave little impression. A bit of Kraftwerk peeks through in some tracks; other tracks are a direct homage, others an undeviating rip off (not a bad thing you understand). ‘Sister Marie Says’ sounds just like a discarded ‘Sugar Tax’ track (it’s not but ‘The Future, The Past and Forever After’ is) and ‘New babies: New Toys’ is akin to their seminal ‘Architecture and Morality’ album.

Essentially there is a mixture of styles with a few individual moments of excellence (‘The Right Side?’), but taken as a whole, the album sounds inconsistent and rushed. Personally, I feel it sounds too much like McCluskey was sat in front of the computer holding the mouse and Paul Humphreys only got to make a contribution when McCluskey went to the loo. Given the excellence of the work of ‘OneTwo’ maybe Paul should be allowed to sit in front of the computer next time.

Yet, you can’t help but admire the fact that that they have released a new album rather than just release another ‘greatest hits’ and toured with the same old material (no matter how good it might be, Kraftwerk take note). They didn’t need to make this album. They didn’t need to spend all their time and energy finding a new label, releasing, promoting and touring new material. Rather than moan or criticise, fans should just be grateful. Ahem…..