the voice is an instrument like any other. Sometimes to the forefront sometimes in the background. Calling it an 'accompaniment' almost suggests its off to the side when in fact mostly it's a fundamental part.Nicely put. Not specifically relating to this album, but that's exactly how I feel about music. This should be number #2 or #3 in my "Ten Commandments of Music" ...... and yet some voices are so irritating that they put you off the music (probably rule #4).
I've said before that if I take the songs I love from Copper Blue and those I love from FUEL and mash them together, it's a top 10 lifetime record for me. The left-them-off ones are still pretty good, but the best ones are straight up top-of-the-heap in terms of melding punk and pop effectively perfectly. And the lyrics are nasty, ironic, open-hearted and clever.
Bob Mould is a fucking genius. I picked "If I Can't Change Your Mind" on that "perfect song" thread we had a while back. When he sings "If I can't change your mind / Then no one will" . . . is he just sad? Or is that a threat to kill the lover that jilted him? Such a great tune.
In fact there do seem to be a few.’ve really gone down the rabbit hole here but I suspect there are very few in this thread that could possibly appreciate let alone enjoy Sugar.
the voice is an instrument like any other. Sometimes to the forefront sometimes in the background. Calling it an 'accompaniment' almost suggests its off to the side when in fact mostly it's a fundamental part.
Yes accompanied by John Anderson just ain't right ;-)
I'd go further and say it's a unique instrument in that it that it can articulate itself in more ways than any other instrument. Like all other instruments it has the tools of melody, rhythm, timbre etc but it also has the tool of language. It's by far the most complex and sophisticated instrument (even more than the synth, sorry Bimb!!!). For this reason I couldn't disagree with Rob and Fog more.
Exactly. The voice also delivers the lyrics, a fundamental part of each song and a critical engagement with the listener.I'd go further and say it's a unique instrument in that it that it can articulate itself in more ways than any other instrument. Like all other instruments it has the tools of melody, rhythm, timbre etc but it also has the tool of language. It's by far the most complex and sophisticated instrument (even more than the synth, sorry Bimb!!!). For this reason I couldn't disagree with Rob and Fog more.
The problem with leaving it so late, pretty much everything has already been said. I always liked Portishead, and this album amongst that. This revisiting has made me realise, I maybe liked it, for predominantly the wrong reasons.
And that is, because it was something different, quirky and original. It did what others since did, but more naturally and effortlessly. It was Bjork, without the grimmacing, Garbage without the style, even wu-tang and Limp bizkit to some odd extent, and Gorillaz later on. I'm assuming thise are spelt with Zs, can't be botehred checking. And that still stands, the album still has good production, tries something unique and it feels like it really suits them.
What this revisit has revealed beyond that, is an emotional layer that I never quite reached. That was nice to connect with this time in a lot of it.
The biggeat problem with it though is, it is just very skippable. Halfway or two thirds of the way through a song, I feel I have heard it all, there is nowhere left for it to go. And the mood is not strong enough to indulge in imo, so it moves from all of the above, into 'background music' territory. I felt that before, and I annoyingly felt it again, and now it is 100 times easier to skip, and we as a culture have kind of been contitioned into it. Shave a minute off each track and it is maybe a masterpiece, but that unfortunate exta bit of length to each song is letting it down, to my own experience of it. It is better than a 6, that's for sure, but it is a somewhat reluctant 7 from me. If only you could rate write-ups!
Now it’s been mentioned I get the Bjork analogy. On more than one occasion I also got some Skin (Skunk Anansie) vibes. As mentioned above the voice is indeed an amazing multi faceted instrumentAs someone who is always last to review I have the same dilemma and I've been waiting all week to see if anyone else would mention Bjork.. and here it is! surprised more reviews haven't mentioned the comparison.
Yes but the point, for me, is that it doesn't have to be spectacular - just not annoying.I'd go further and say it's a unique instrument in that it that it can articulate itself in more ways than any other instrument. Like all other instruments it has the tools of melody, rhythm, timbre etc but it also has the tool of language. It's by far the most complex and sophisticated instrument (even more than the synth, sorry Bimb!!!). For this reason I couldn't disagree with Rob and Fog more.
The voice does deliver the lyrics but I tend to separate the two. As long as the singer has an average voice, it's good enough for me.Exactly. The voice also delivers the lyrics, a fundamental part of each song and a critical engagement with the listener.