The Album Review Club - Week #196 (page 1316) - Aja - Steely Dan

Bruce Springsteen - The Wild, The Innocent & The E Street Shuffle

Not many artists make me really sit and listen to lyrics , but Springsteen joins Dylan for me in that category.

It’s great to hear this and turning back the clock to when he was just about to really explode on the scene and a knife edge time for his career , for me it’s a warm up for ‘Born To Run’ and you can hear the makings in so many parts of tracks but definitely with ‘Rosalita’ it’s shares so many similarities with ‘Born To Run’ (single) the way it builds and builds, the joyous outpouring delivery of the chorus. That tracks stands out the most.

Others could do with shortened by a couple minutes but are still fine , particularly liked ‘Incident on 57th Street’ and ‘New York Serenade’ again a blue print for so many of his later albums. Great pick. Long live the boss.

7/10
 
Coatigan said:
I pretty much set the record for the lowest engagement nomination. And the longest spent on page 3.

I was almost considering requesting a re-set button and binning this and trying again. Thought a chance at a bit of dual experience here might have been a bit different and interesting, but hey ho.
Click to expand...

It might be that some people are like me and are still not quite sure what they make of it. I've struggled to compose my thoughts on this possibly more than any other nomination not because I think it's awful or anything but because I can't fully decide what I do or don't think. In fairness I haven't helped myself by randomly bouncing around their (quite confusing) discography.

As for the genre, again I'm still a bit nonplussed what it is that makes something emo - I'm assuming it's basically the lyrical content and focus because melodically it doesn't sound like a separate genre to me? But even then when does a lyric stop simply being a bit introspective and become emo? Is it more the vocal style in which the lyric is delivered?

Melodically I like much of it, it's easy on the ear. If I wanted to be harsh about the lyrical direction on some of this it feels a bit self-absorbed and all over the shop, they'll be a decent line or two and then it's messed up by some clunky imagery.

Anyway my brain is still in churning it so I will be back with some more, maybe, coherent thoughts.

Edit: One thing I can't reconcile is why my reaction to seemingly quite thematically similar songs is very different.
 
Last edited:
Coatigan said:
I pretty much set the record for the lowest engagement nomination. And the longest spent on page 3.

I was almost considering requesting a re-set button and binning this and trying again. Thought a chance at a bit of dual experience here might have been a bit different and interesting, but hey ho.
Click to expand...
I only got back from Florida early Friday, but I have been listening to both acoustic EPs. I was able to post quickly with my Bruce review because it’s an album I’m familiar with, but I feel your pain: it can be a bit annoying when it feels like everybody is ignoring your choice. I’m sure that’s not the case and the core posters will come up with the goods.

I’ve been trying to work out who’s voice Dan Campbell reminds me of and the closet I can get (from my collection) is Counting Crows’ Adam Duritz. Their lyrics are not dissimilar and their angsts delivery is quite close at times.
 
threespires said:
Melodically I like much of it, it's easy on the ear. If I wanted to be harsh about the lyrical direction on some of this it feels a bit self-absorbed and all over the shop, they'll be a decent line or two and then it's messed up by some clunky imagery.
Click to expand...

You have pretry much nailed 'emo' in a nutshell. That's it, or what a lot of it was meant to try. To be free from convention, from style, maybe even definition by genre ironically. Half baked poetic thoughts that may or may not go anywhere, abstract lines and lyrical content, music however you feel it. As long as it is driven by emotion.

The big part of it came in the late 90s and early teenies, as a sobering of grunge, rejecting some of the growing macho-ism that had crept in. A more 'vulnerable' punk. And often much more melodic and calmer feel, occasionally burst wit some rawness.

Unfortunately MTV saw it as highly marketable to a teenage audience, and kind of ruined by giving it a recognisable 'brand' and image, and churning out too many same sounding bands over a quick period, that led to many bands rejecting the lable. A bit hypocritical that I have put forward a later band that partly falls into that association trap. But I also wanted it to be a bit more accessible here, than some of the even more abstract and carefree. Plus, I really did think the contrast here between this as an acoustic vs the originals would be interesting to at least one.
 
denislawsbackheel said:
I will sit this one out. I don’t think EPs should count.
Click to expand...

That's fair. I did offer up vol 2 to make up the length, and did ask here beforehand. But (said with respect) it wouldn't be your thing anyway so wouldn't want you needlessly persevering with no real enjoyment, no point in that.
 
Coatigan said:
You have pretry much nailed 'emo' in a nutshell. That's it, or what a lot of it was meant to try. To be free from convention, from style, maybe even definition by genre ironically. Half baked poetic thoughts that may or may not go anywhere, abstract lines and lyrical content, music however you feel it. As long as it is driven by emotion.

The big part of it came in the late 90s and early teenies, as a sobering of grunge, rejecting some of the growing macho-ism that had crept in. A more 'vulnerable' punk. And often much more melodic and calmer feel, occasionally burst wit some rawness.

Unfortunately MTV saw it as highly marketable to a teenage audience, and kind of ruined by giving it a recognisable 'brand' and image, and churning out too many same sounding bands over a quick period, that led to many bands rejecting the lable. A bit hypocritical that I have put forward a later band that partly falls into that association trap. But I also wanted it to be a bit more accessible here, than some of the even more abstract and carefree. Plus, I really did think the contrast here between this as an acoustic vs the originals would be interesting to at least one.
Click to expand...

Ok that makes a lot of sense and possibly explains some of my response to it. MTV trying to package an attitude or approach into a marketable entity also probably explains my confusion too.

On the acoustic v the originals I have listened to both versions of a few of the tracks and again it varies in that for example I prefer the acoustic version of There, There but the original of Cardinals. I think I have a theory for that.
 
threespires said:
Ok that makes a lot of sense and possibly explains some of my response to it. MTV trying to package an attitude or approach into a marketable entity also probably explains my confusion too.

On the acoustic v the originals I have listened to both versions of a few of the tracks and again it varies in that for example I prefer the acoustic version of There, There but the original of Cardinals. I think I have a theory for that.
Click to expand...

What's your theory?
 
I found myself confused by these EPs, simply because I had very different reactions to what were essentially quite similar songs in tone and style.

However, with my new-found understanding of what emo is, I can say I don’t think I am an emo person by nature and that is part of it. Aside from never really having been a big fan of expositional angst I also like my thoughts to be neatly packaged and articulated rather than, to use Coatigans phrase, being half-baked or not fully formed ideas. This runs counter to the general ethos here and the valid argument that the world is already full of men who are completely underbaked when it comes to expressing their emotions.

So that probably explains why some parts of it didn’t land with me and I found it quite a confusing listen at times. There’s a fine line between confessional songs that open up and are honest about some of the struggles of the human experience and descending into cliched semi-nihilism and self-pity. Sometimes I felt they went back and forth across that line within the same song let alone across the album! Passing Through A Screen Door is a good example of a song that has some fantastic simple direct lyrics about fears and insecurities side by side with lines that made me roll my eyes.

All that’s not to say I didn’t like significant aspects of it. Overall, I enjoyed much of the music and thought melodically they were pretty strong, I thought the additional instrumentation particularly on Volume 2 was well done too.

In terms of the acoustic versus the originals, sometimes they worked better and other times I preferred the original. Examples of acoustic versions that I thought were very successful were There, There and Washington Park Square (arguably the most successful recasting). Songs like Cardinals I thought were better in their original form.

My initial hypothesis is that the more intimate/individual relationship driven the song is, the better (perhaps unsurprisingly) the acoustic rearrangements work. Once the theme becomes a bit more universal the energy of the originals works better. Not sure that theory holds up to scrutiny but within the scope of a few listens that’s where I got to.

Also, IMO, the slower tempos and quieter dynamics on the Burst and Decay versions help the vocal performances. My appetite for the archetypal vocal delivery that’s prevalent on the originals, extends to about 3 or 4 songs at a time. The restraint required on the acoustic versions actually makes them more rather than less emotionally engaging to me.

I could discuss other songs I liked or didn't but you probably get my general view.

Maybe I am just an archetype of an emotionally distant Brit Englishman but with a bit of explanation I did appreciate what was being attempted. Emo is just a corner of the music world I had never really had cause to think about or visit so for me this was a well worthwhile nomination and I’m giving it 7/10.
 
Last edited:
threespires said:
I found myself confused by these EPs, simply because I had very different reactions to what were essentially quite similar songs in tone and style.

However, with my new-found understanding of what emo is, I can say I don’t think I am an emo person by nature and that is part of it. Aside from never really having been a big fan of expositional angst I also like my thoughts to be neatly packaged and articulated rather than, to use Coatigans phrase, being half-baked or not fully formed ideas. This runs counter to the general ethos here and the valid argument that the world is already full of men who are completely underbaked when it comes to expressing their emotions.

So that probably explains why some parts of it didn’t land with me and I found it quite a confusing listen at times. There’s a fine line between confessional songs that open up and are honest about some of the struggles of the human experience and descending into cliched semi-nihilism and self-pity. Sometimes I felt they went back and forth across that line within the same song let alone across the album! Passing Through A Screen Door is a good example of a song that has some fantastic simple direct lyrics about fears and insecurities side by side with lines that made me roll my eyes.

All that’s not to say I didn’t like significant aspects of it. Overall, I enjoyed much of the music and thought melodically they were pretty strong, I thought the additional instrumentation particularly on Volume 2 was well done too.

In terms of the acoustic versus the originals, sometimes they worked better and other times I preferred the original. Examples of acoustic versions that I thought were very successful were There, There and Washington Park Square (arguably the most successful recasting). Songs like Cardinals I thought were better in their original form.

My initial hypothesis is that the more intimate/individual relationship driven the song is, the better (perhaps unsurprisingly) the acoustic rearrangements work. Once the theme becomes a bit more universal the energy of the originals works better. Not sure that theory holds up to scrutiny but within the scope of a few listens that’s where I got to.

Also, IMO, the slower tempos and quieter dynamics on the Burst and Decay versions help the vocal performances. My appetite for the archetypal vocal delivery that’s prevalent on the originals, extends to about 3 or 4 songs at a time. The restraint required on the acoustic versions actually makes them more rather than less emotionally engaging to me.

I could discuss other songs I liked or didn't but you probably get my general view.

Maybe I am just an archetype of an emotionally distant Brit Englishman but with a bit of explanation I did appreciate what was being attempted. Emo is just a corner of the music world I had never really had cause to think about or visit so for me this was a well worthwhile nomination and I’m giving it 7/10.
Click to expand...

That is an excellent review that I think really 'gets it' for lack of a better term, and really makes the discussion interesting. There are songs by other bands, where I would for example dislike the beginning and end, but rhe middle section could be one of may favourite passages of music. And have friends not fussed about the middle but like either end. And yes at times I'd feel man I wish they just made that into a song on its own and kept it simple, but then,,would it really work the same, would it even have come about through that type of process? Really enjoyed reading that, and probably could branch off into separate examples and chats with a lot of what you said.
 
I've listened to both versions now, and I think I prefer the originals. I'm not a big fan of acoustic sets, they seen to trickle along, with no real sense of purpose. They also lose any semblance of original anger/ angst etc and replace it with mellow soothing nothingness. In my opinion anyway.

I'll take Washington Square Garden as an example. It's full of drums, guitars and singing in a suspiciously high voice. It's very generic of whatever it's "pigeon hole" is. I still have no idea. Kiddie rock? It washes over me with a sense of "been there, heard that before, a thousand times, maybe more"...great lyric right there...

Neither versions resonate with me unfortunately. I think I prefer the originals. Just.

4/10 for the acoustic.
 
Burst and Decay – The Wonder Years

I thought that The Wonder Years was a TV series – it is, but it turns out that they are also a band that I’d not heard of.

I think this was a good selection because it was pretty much different than everything that has come before. I listened to both volumes and whilst, once again, it’s not 100% up my street, I did find quite a lot to admire.

First up are the arrangements – it may be a cliché to say that the acoustic presentation allows the songs space to breathe – but this is one of the albums where it’s so true. The acoustic instruments are complemented by some other instruments that are placed tastefully in the mix – the organ in “A Song For Ernest Hemingway”, the clarinet (or sax? or oboe?) on “Coffee Eyes”, and the strings on several tracks including “Cardinals” and “We Look Like Lightning”.

On “I Wanted So badly to be Brave”, there some delicate fingerpicking, a few nice changes and the backing vocals work really well.

Dan “Soupy” Campbell (great name) has a decent voice, and I quite like what he does on these songs: the emotionally fragile delivery (where he sounds like he’s trying to sing without waking up people in his house), then switching to Mr Angry (where he sounds like he’s trying to wake up the whole street!) It sounds like a lot of effort has gone into the lyrics. I agree with threespires when he says that “Passing Through A Screen Door” features some fantastic lyrics that lay bare Campbell’s insecurities. This was the song that I thought worked best on first listen and it remained so on subsequent listens.

I think I prefer the 2nd EP overall, but there are also some decent performances on the first, particularly “A Song For Ernest Hemingway”, “Coffee Eyes”, “Cardinals” and “Dismantling Summer”.

It’s interesting listening to everybody’s selections on this thread and comparing the songs to those that I like, seeing what works for me and what doesn’t. It helps give you an appreciation of the different approaches to songcraft. I could say that the songs here don’t have any middle 8s, crafty bridges or singalong choruses, but that’s not the point. This album demonstrates that some well thought-out lyrics, with verses and choruses that seem to blur, is an approach that can work for songs where the vocalist is baring his soul.

The acoustic arrangements, the vocals and the lyrics combine to make for an engaging listen, and this is worth a 7/10.
 
This band is quite a bit like Blink-182, but less sex-obsessed, with less of a sense of humo(u)r (though early on in their days some of their song titles suggest they have one) and with fewer hooks. I went back and listened to the original versions of these songs and think that would have been a better way to introduce myself to the band. There’s a lot of fireworks (though some misfires too) and energy, and sometimes noise and crunch can do at least a reasonable job of covering up lack of melody, or enhancing an inferior one. I disagree with Rob pointedly on this topic — acoustically, the thinness of the melodies has no place to hide, so you’re left with the arrangement (pleasant enough) and the vocalist, who sounds less nasal but enough like my boy Tom DeLonge to think that maybe this was a rip-off (listen to the not-on-this-record “Dynamite Shovel” or “You Made and Want To Be A Saint” and tell me otherwise).

Of the acoustic numbers, “Cardinals” was really the only one that grabbed me on its own first time through. After listening to the original versions, the acoustic ones began to open up, like a good cabernet does after a bit. Generally the tunes fare better electrified, especially “There There” — I’m a sucker for the chorus and the bridge(s) on that one — and “Don’t Cave Me In”, yet another Blink-y one.

So I gave this an above-average effort on my own to get to know the band beyond this acoustic context, and I came away feeling they’re basically okay. Were this the electrified versions and on a single release it’s a 6. As they are, I wouldn’t miss them if I never heard them again, but I would happily hear a few of these songs again if I chanced upon them. That’s a 5 but — again, my apologies, all — I also docked a point (like a live record) for being a collection of previously-released songs. 4/10.

Incidentally to me this is not emo but an east coast facsimile of SoCal 90s surf post-punk, just darker.
 
Last edited:
BURST AND DECAY

Another band I’ve never heard of before, that after listening to both EPS I really like.I’m not sure I’ll like the loud ‘shouty stuff ‘ on their other recordings as much ,but I’m really enjoy this.I get Robs comparison with Adam Duritz vocals ,CC are a band I really like,
I think the lead singer sounds like Dan RIchmond the lead singer of the Ashtray Hearts.Musically I think they’re a bit like more like Blink 182 and Jimmy Eats World and a bit like one of your previous nominations Everclear.But certainly on these EPs a lot more melodic, lyrically they sound a bit all over the place but I like my melancholy so this is right up my street.
Cardinals was obviously influenced by early REM and is one my favourites on here along with ‘Don’t Let me Cave in’ on the first EP and ‘Washington Square Park’ on the second.

Good choice



8/10
 
Well I consider myself a bit more knowledgeable about EMO but not that much to be honest. It feels like you can make a case for any number of bands to be EMOish and there would seem to be a thin line between some of the more delicate indie pop and EMO. I had googled it and found a list of bands on wikipedia who are considered emo, most of whom I'd never heard of and almost completely never heard. I was looking for certain bands names who I thought were emo but then weren't on the list, Manchester Orchestra spring to mind and I had to check and found references elsewhere to them being part of the genre. And then others saying they weren't.

It's a label that can feel a bit negative in my view, and my visualisations probably get it totally mixed up with goth kids and over emotional types. But then I wonder wouldn't the Smiths be the ultimate emo band? Luckily I'm not expected to write a thesis on this.

I listened mainly to the acoustic EP, the other one once and maybe that isn't enough but it wasn't as much to my taste. I found the vocal so so, definitely better when not pushed to his limits but liked some of the songs. A Song For Ernest Hemingway is a solid opener and then that bit at the end which has you wondering is this the band saying this is what we are really about. If so, don't be. There, There was OK but I loved the start to Coffee Eyes and although it seemed to lose it's way a little it found it again and set us up nicely for Cardinals which is a great song, maybe I should listen to the fuller version of that.

I didn't like Don't Let Me Cave In so much with the lyrics getting a bit mopey, and that is going to be the criticism of emo isn't it? Next two songs OK and overall not a bad listen but isn't going to stick in my memory. I suspect as well that if I explored them further I wouldn't find too much to get excited about but I'll probably do the lazy spotify top tracks thing later just to make sure.

Are Blink182 the kings of emo? I agree with the comparison that @Mancitydoogle makes. I'm familiar with them from the phase my then teenage son went through and when he got himself his first guitar it was Blink songs he taught himself. Nowadays his musical tastes have matured into country, some of which if emo is for the young mopers is certainly for the old mopers isn't it? That probably totally unfair generalisation out of the way I go 6 for this, occupying that not great but not awful territory, fine if it comes up randomly but unlikely to be turned to.
 
The Wonder Years - Burst & Decay

+++

Finally I’m caught up! Managed to give this a good few listens (Acoustic EP) although could argue it’s far from acoustic with so many additional sounds.

It’s a nice album, shares alot of similarities with my nominated soundtrack album ‘Once’ (If anyone wondering where they’ve heard vocals like this or even songs) - nice harmonies, melodies and often building to a rapturous crescendo especially in ‘Cardinals’, ‘Dismantling Summer’ and ‘Coffee Eyes’ - love songs that do this.

Emo to me is Indie with more self deprecating lyrics or just lame lyrics. This avoids that just I feel.

A couple of average jangles that don’t really go anywhere . But not much else to be critical of. I enjoyed, and if I had the time in my life I’d give this and the Wonder Years in general more of a listen.

7/10
 
Last edited:
BlueHammer85 said:
The Wonder Years - Burst & Decay

+++

Finally I’m caught up! Managed to give this a good few listens (Acoustic EP) although could argue it’s far from acoustic with so many additional sounds.

It’s a nice album, shares alot of similarities with my nominated soundtrack album ‘Once’ (If anyone wondering where they’ve heard vocals like this) - nice harmonies, melodies and often building to a rapturous crescendo especially in ‘Cardinals’, ‘Dismantling Summer’ and ‘Coffee Eyes’ - love songs that do this.

Emo to me is Indie with more self deprecating lyrics or just lame lyrics. This avoids that just I feel.

A couple of average jangles that don’t really go anywhere . But not much else to be critical of. I enjoyed, and if I had the time in my life I’d give this and the Wonder Years in general more of a listen.

7/10
Click to expand...
As I've been catching up with the scores myself, I have included your recent scores in the totals for the last few albums.
 
Think this has been quite an interesting pick in the sense that often, ignoring scores, there is consensus on what the relative strengths and weaknesses are in terms of songs and other aspects. Whereas here there's quite a bit of divergence on which are the better tracks, if the melodies hold up enough, which songs translate to the acoustic and whether the acoustic works versus the originals.

As for the emo piece I think it's interesting that there's clearly no simple demarcation line which is fine by me because the only people who probably really care about that are people trying to flog you stuff.
The general trend to sub-genre the hell out of things does my head in. My 15 year drew me into a conversation about the 'shoegaze' piece he's working on, after luring me into some interesting discussion about Robin Guthrie, it becomes clear this 'shoegaze' discussion is simply a pretext to explaining why one flanger or chorus isn't enough and can he borrow some cash please.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top