Reviews by x-minor_miracle-x

Heard Before?
Yes. I've tried and failed multiple times to go through the whole Zappa discography.

Notes:
- "Peaches en Regalia" is still my top favorite Zappa song. It's got almost everything I like about him (endlessly clever composition, counter-intuitive hooks, horns, synths, acrobatic basslines, powerful drums) and nothing I hate (unfunny lyrics, stupid dialogue, meandering too-long solos, jokey genre-parody).
- "Little Umbrellas" is a gem. I could just as pleasurably sit down and study the score, get up and dance, or just let it wash over me.
- all the bass and drum parts on the whole album are thrilling, so even when i lose the plot of a guitar solo, they carry the day successfully, except maybe on the samey and endless "Willie the Pimp".

Verdict:
An iconic fusion album featuring all lot of the best (and a bit of the worst) of both rock and jazz. Thank goodness it's almost entirely instrumental.

Listen Again?
Most likely. I can imagine a future where I try to make my way through the dozen or so Zappa albums I have left and just spin this instead.

Heard Before?
No, although Sarah Vaughan is my mother's favorite singer, so I'm familiar with her.

Notes:
- the recording (or at least the version I heard) is not good. tape hiss, often inaudible bass and kick drum, various weird inconsistencies. audience banter during a piano solo is funny, but doesn't help appreciation of the music. on the other hand, the whole thing is almost uncomfortably intimate, which is fascinating.
- i love a piano trio, even one as restrained and tasteful as this. the comping in the piano is especially noteworthy - light and full of motion. much better than having her backed by a giant orchestra.
- the drums are played with such precision and care that i didn't notice on the first listen.
- song selection is near-perfect, especially on the twenty track extended version.
- obviously the main draw is the voice, and what a voice. wow. still amazes me to this day. her pitch control, vibrato, rhythmic sense, and emotional range are unparalleled. wonderfully versatile.
- still i feel like this is more jazz tokenism on this list. perhaps Dimery didn't actually listen to any jazz, but relied on other sources. Or maybe he just ran out of third-rate rock albums and thought he would cram in just a few random jazz recordings to make it look more comprehensive.

Verdict:
Marvelous performances of great standards in an intimate setting by one of the most intuitive and thrilling jazz singers of the era.

Listen Again:
Probably not this recording, but it was wonderful to be reminded again of her amazing voice. I'll be back for more Sarah Vaughan.

Heard Before?
Nope.

Notes:
- yet another case where this list would be instantly and vastly improved by having a two-albums-per-artist limit.
- live-sounding reverb-y production works great on the sparser numbers, but gets a bit claustrophobic as the arrangements get busy.
- performances ebb and flow in exciting ways.
- vocals lack the variation in delivery of his later work, here it is all stentorian pronouncements.
- some clever interesting stories in the lyrics, while never leaving the Nick Cave wheelhouse.

Verdict:
Few surprises here for fans, but a solid effort from all involved.

Listen Again?
I'll pass. There's still plenty more Nick Cave to be heard, though.

Heard Before?
i went through a very brief KLF phase.

Notes:
- typically i avoid discussing the context of albums, but i should mention that i find the KLF's performance art antics far more interesting than any music they ever produced.
- i have a low tolerance for certain types of irony, and here all the lyrics strike me as mockingly vapid, especially given the empty, anonymous vocal performances. not interesting.
- drum programming and sample selection have decent variety.
- songs are carefully structured, with great builds and interludes.
- i could potentially groove to an instrumental version of several of these songs.

Verdict:
Sneakily snarky, deliberately blank, fan-trolling but thoroughly competent dance music. The KLF dares you to enjoy this so they can despise you.

Listen Again?
Not a chance. I don't even enjoy hating it.

Early in my teens, my terminally boring parents decided to grow up and "get into jazz". Spotting a chance for me to secure more time with certain albums than I could get just borrowing them from the library, I hastily made a list of excellent, historically significant recordings that I thought they would be able to tolerate. No Cecil Taylor, then. Of course "Kind of Blue" was one of their first and favorite purchases, and I've now heard it hundreds of times.

So yes, the mix is ridiculously crisp, spacious and balanced, the songs are mind-melting, and the performances are so well-considered yet forcefully restrained that it still boggles me.

Perhaps there are some people on earth with an interest in jazz that still haven't heard this. By all means, indulge. Let it soak in. But please don't let the awful tokenism of this list infect you. If you get anything out of this, let it be a springboard to a world of wonders.

All this is to say that this album is indeed a masterpiece, but I never need to hear it again.

Heard Before?
Yes, many times.

Notes:
- the mix is crisp, with lots of space.
- arrangements are ideal, with the right parts given just the right attention.
- the writing is powerful and the lyrics spot-on.
- picking a two track album for this list is insulting to Fela. c'mon!

Verdict:
Hugely significant and undeniably powerful songs. But still just two songs. Skip directly to "Best of the Black President".

Listen Again?
Of course, but in context with more Fela.

Heard Before?
Many times.

Notes:
- i can live without interludes on any album, although these aren't particularly egregious, and "Why Hiphop Sucks in 96" gets a giggle from me every time.
- extremely bass-heavy mix is great for cars or huge stereos, but sounds a bit odd in headphones.
- drums drums drums. my favorite part of the album is the frequent and unpredictable beat slicing. "Organ Donor" forever.
- the platonic ideal of sample selection and arrangement.
- this album put me on to David Axelrod, which dimmed the magic a bit (Shadow took more than a little inspiration), but my goodness, those are wonderful records. if you have yet to hear "Song of Innocence", drop everything and spin it right now.

Verdict:
The archetypal cratedigging album, and still exciting.

Listen Again:
A good one to revisit every few years.

Heard Before?
Just the title track.

Notes:
- one of the oddest categories in this list is "albums famous for only one song".
- I feel like our pal Dimery took a "Hip-Hop for Beginners" course and just barely passed.
- this is where electro-rap started. as fun as it is, I'm glad it didn't stay here.

Verdict:
i love drum machines. i love synths. i love samplers. i love rapping. my tolerance for cheese is high. but this might be a bridge too far.

Listen Again?
Interesting, but not worth it.

Heard Before?
Yes, indeed. One of my top albums of that year.

Notes:
- a double album of late work from someone who coasted through the 90s on thinning goodwill? a tough sell, but then i put it on.
- the mix can be a little muddy, but mashing things together for the most exciting parts works for me. burying key details also rewards multiple listens.
- the arrangements are stellar. so many wonderful sounds, with surprises in every song. special mention should be given to the organ parts, the backing vocals and (especially) the auxiliary percussion.
- performances are absolutely committed throughout. everyone sounds thrilled with these songs.
- vocals especially - Cave manages to sell even his clunkiest couplets with verve. no lyric is too cringe for him not to lean into.
- structurally, this is a songwriting masterclass. so much variety, so many nifty change-ups and choices.
- sequencing is perfect, and I'm totally sold on the two halves approach, although for subsequent listens I have started with "Lyre of Orpheus" and then looped back to the start.

Verdict:
My favorite Nick Cave album. Over the top in all the best ways.

Listen Again:
Certainly.

Heard Before?
Nope. Although I've heard at least a dozen other Fall albums.

Notes:
- The Fall is too much. too many albums, too many songs, too many words, too many notes, too much repetition, too much Mark E Smith, too many musicians playing with too few ideas.
- but that's the whole modus operandi. it's like hating cats for scratching your furniture. all this is just part of the deal.
- hard to know what to do with an essential band that has never released an essential album.

Verdict:
Is this better or worse than any other Fall album? I neither know nor care. I just put it on and let it take over, another visit to a singular world.

Listen Again?
Well, there's always more Fall, so why repeat? Maybe if I make it through the whole discography I'll come back to this.

Heard Before?
Not at all.

Notes:
- impressive variety of sounds and ideas. most post-punk and synth pop of the era tends to zero in on a narrow idea.
- accordion always gets me.
- somehow i guessed before reading the credits that this is a solo album. not sure if that is good or bad.
- some songs lose steam, running out of ideas before they actually end.
- vocals sound like a guy complaining. relateable, perhaps.

Verdict:
Almost danceable, but little in the way of real hooks, it's an album that can't quite make up its mind, and one I can't easily characterize.

Listen Again?
There were pleasant surprises here, but I'd rather hear Mind Bomb again. I should really give it another try, though

Heard Before?
Yes, but not for many years.

Notes:
- drum programming, sample selection and turntable work among the most interesting of the era. lots of variety between and inside every track. every song has a hook, which is a feature for us non-heads.
- posse cuts are intrinsically more exciting for me than solo raps. bring it on.
- wordplay is minimal, but the rhymes are tight. flows are innovative for the era - at least things are always changing up.
- lyrics are too much for me. unpleasant, not entertaining. but THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. they do exactly what they set out to do. "we make hardcore jams / so fuck respect". mission accomplished.

Verdict:
The iconic gangsta rap album, repulsive and fascinating in equal measure.

Listen Again?
Maybe. It's not my jam but it's awfully effective.

Heard Before?
Sad but true.

Notes:
- thankfully this isn't as obscenely overplayed as "The Color and the Shape".
- my initial impression (when i first heard this at 14) was these are watered-down versions of better songs from the underground scene that birthed them. I wasn't wrong.
- and yet, what's so wrong with a clear mix? with hooks? with conventional pop structures? nothing, really. listening again, these are fine songs.
- everything just sounds so tired. tempos are all the same. these guitar tones were stale by '95 and even more so now. the vocals sound unintentionally bored and phoned in.
- only the drums are an exception. yes, he's hitting too hard and frequently rushing, but he at least sounds alive.
- none of the lyrics stood out in any way, which is fine by me.

Verdict:
Competent edgeless normcore. There are worse things.

Listen Again?
Glad I tried it one more time, but no.

Heard Before?
No. I listened to "Cast of Thousands" when it came out, then ignored them.

Notes:
- mallet percussion, layered background vocals and sudden horn stabs had me right from the intro.
- dense, complex and subtle production with near-constant little tweaks to the arrangements. someone in the booth really cares about how these songs sound.
- lots of 6/8, which makes me happy.
- personally I'd rather not have pretty-crooning-guy lead vocals so far forward in the mix, but maybe that's just my singer's envy.
- front-loaded, too long and at least half the songs, while lovely, go absolutely nowhere.

Verdict:
While obviously a member of the Radiohead-Coldplay axis of excess, they lack the preening pretentiousness of the former and the starry-eyed sentimentality of the latter. Cause for some celebration.

Listen Again?
Just maybe. I really wasn't expecting to enjoy this. I'm even interested in hearing more of them. Thanks, 1001!

Heard Before?
Yes, although I prefer the "New Amerykah" albums because I'm a weird snob.

Notes:
- like most every album from 1991-2002, it's too long. the CD era was a bad idea.
- like many r&b/neosoul albums, it's a love letter to vocal multi-tracking. bold choice to sing through a phaser on the opening track.
- give me this era of neosoul production anytime. the drums are pristine, the mix is spacious and balanced.
- arrangements are subtly varied, with nifty surprises in nearly every song. clever restraint rewards careful listening.
- more or less devoid of hooks. not a pop album. but the lyrics are mostly worth your time.

Verdict:
At low volumes, it risks being background mood-fodder. Pay attention and the whole thing comes to life vividly.

Listen Again?
I'm not opposed, but an Erykah 'best-of' would suit me better.

Heard Before?
Duh.

Notes:
- I'm not surprised that the least interesting band of the 00s dance-punk revival became the most popular. What does surprise me is that anyone is still choosing to listen to this 22 years later.
- worst possible production. everything too slick, too loud and hyper compressed. I would much rather listen to something actually incompetent.
- someone forgot to tell the keyboard player that the whole point of a synthesizer is to make interesting sounds.
- yet underneath all the posturing, embarrassing lyrics, rookie songwriting and sanded-down performances, there are some undeniable hooks. somehow that makes it worse.

Verdict:
Trite, fill-in-the-blanks dance-rock where the big sell is a douchebag frontman. Yuck. The only fascinating part of this album is how it is a populist slap in the face to elitists like me. The people have spoken, and they love polished slop.

Listen Again?
No one on earth ever needs to hear this again, but that doesn't seem to stop them. Oh well. There's always tomorrow's album.

Heard Before?
Nope.

Notes:
- Slick production would work better if the arrangements weren't so crowded. So many instrumental parts that add nothing to the songs, it feels claustrophobic.
- the ballads kill what little momentum the album has, but I did like the beach sounds hidden deep in the mix of "Deckchairs and Cigarettes".
- Breathy, nasal lead vocals sound out of place.
- only Mumford and Sons could make the banjo sound less earthy.
- the lyrics are California-postcard, but the song structures are tight and well-considered.
- performances are so competent as to be unnoticeable.

Verdict:
Overproduced ersatz Americana. For the person in your life who pretends to enjoy things they don't understand.

Listen Again?
No, thank you.

THE THREE TYPES OF JAZZ REVIEWS ON THIS SITE:

1. "I know nothing about jazz, but I know I hate this."

2. "I know nothing about jazz, but I kinda like this."

3. "I know everything about jazz, and I'm going to teach you fools whether you like it or not."

Heard Before:
No. For whatever reason I stopped following YYYs after "Fever to Tell".

Notes:
- I kept waiting for the interesting part of every song. Mostly it didn't arrive, despite some nifty sounds here and there.
- monstrously talented and emotive vocal work, especially given the limited melodies and filler lyrics.
- the mix was fine. it did exactly what it was supposed to do. I'm just not crazy about this 'everything loud and hyper compressed' thing.
- it seems like the only way they know how to move a song forward is with a big swell, which becomes a game of diminishing returns.

Verdict:
No-surprises dance-rock with fantastic vocals. Oddly reminds me of Coldplay. Maybe this is just what happens when buzz bands run out of ideas as they start playing stadiums.

Listen Again?
I'd rather hear their first EP, or just "Maps" on repeat.

Heard Before?
Nope.

Notes:
- the awkward and ridiculous intro narration got me instantly.
- production very typical of its time, with strong stereo separation, muddy drums, weird low end and vocals so loud they peak. the studio must have just bought a big expensive plate reverb, because they use it on EVERYTHING. i choose to find this all charming rather than irritating.
- arrangements are simple and effective. they unequivocally sound like a dance band hustled from the nearest honky-tonk into the studio to capitalize on recent success.
- for better and worse, an extremely narrow songwriting formula. but with certain genre conventions i feel if you are going to lean in, you may as well fall in.
- songs and album are the perfect length.

Verdict:
I've never wanted a Nudie suit more than I do right at this moment.

Listen Again?
Maybe? Or maybe I'll listen to yet another of the many very similar country albums of the era. I love this, but it's not exactly a singular achievement.