|
screaden posted:How about Van Morrison? What are the essential albums? I know Astral Weeks is one of them, but reading through Wikipedia, all the albums seems to have a decent to excellent rating so I'm not sure what else to get Astral Weeks is one of the top picks, as is my personal favorite, Moondance---and I think Moondance is a little easier to get into than Weeks, which is more sonically adventurous, but not quite the pound-for-pound ultimate sonic joy machine that Moondance is. Even if you're not hugely into the guy, though, everything of his from 1967's Blowin' Your Mind (TB Sheets is absolutely devastating, and no matter how often you've heard it and turned past it on the oldies station on your car radio, Brown-Eyed Girl deserves a fresh, honest listen) up to 1971's Tupelo Honey are stone classics, with lesser, but still often rewarding material coming afterwards. In short, though, Moondance, Astral Weeks, and Blowin' Your Mind (his first three records), in that order (reverse order), would be my advice as to where to get started. Obviously someone may have a different idea, and I don't claim to be an expert on the man's work. Oh, also maybe check his work with Them, the band he fronted before going solo. I'm not hugely into them, but Gloria is the song that launched a thousand garage bands, possibly more than Louie Louie. It's a must-hear.
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2011 16:18
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
pill for your ills posted:I'd like to know what people recommend as a first Melvins album. There's a lot. Seconding this - I started with Houdini like most kids my age did, but there's certainly a lot of material of worth that I'm missing out on and could use a bit of a primer. ...weirdly, just a few months ago, I stopped by the airport to pick up a friend of mine, and I walk by the rental car counter and see a guy waiting in like and I think to myself "Goddamn that man looks like King Buzzo," and then wander over to the baggage claim to hang out and wait for the dude's flight to get in...and then I turn my head the other way and see a bunch of dudes all hanging around, staring intently at the rental car counter with road cases behind them, one of whom is fairly even more obviously Dale Crover In A Bad Mood. Aha! I say and chuckle to myself. (Yeah, I know I could have just said "Hey, I wanna know this too," but that would be lame.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2011 17:09
|
|
|
Now, here's one I'm wondering about---Lee "Scratch" Perry. I've been hearing him a lot lately, between spinning Hello Nasty for the first time in ages, running across a Gang Gang Dance remix he did, and a track from one of his recent albums where Tunde from TV on the Radio showed up. And the man puts out something like an album every four or five months, he's a machine. Where does one even begin beginning?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
Ras Het posted:Long answer: very little of what Scratch has done since the late '70s is genuinely worth listening to, at least from my perspective as a reggae head. There's a few obvious points to begin with for his earlier career: the Arkology 3CD box set compiles many of his best productions and their dub mixes, there's The Congos' album Heart of the Congos and Max Romeo & The Upsetters' War Ina Babylon, his two best album-length productions, and then there's his best Black Ark solo album, Soul Fire. Beyond that, some divergent paths to explore would be his early ska recordings (such as "Chicken Scratch", which gave him the nickname), the pre-Island Wailers stuff, the early Upsetters instrumentals, his Black Ark production history for (among others) George Faith, The Meditations, Junior Murvin, Jah Lion etc., the Upsetters dub albums (staring with 14 Dub Blackboard Jungle with King Tubby, the first dub record, Super Ape is real good too), and then his post-Black Ark work, of which the Mad Professor collabs are by far the best, and most others have little but novelty value. Genius. Appreciate the thorough reply. V- Noted. hexwren fucked around with this message at 03:28 on Sep 26, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2011 01:51
|
|
|
regulargonzalez posted:Not so much a "Where do I start with (artist)" but with a genre. As always, If I'm wrong, which is a possibility, call me on it. Other opinions are always awesome, and often more correct than mine. I don't hear that much that's jazzy going on here, but my entry point to jazz was from the fusion/free/space sounds of the 60s-70s---based on your previous post, I imagine you're finding her singing much more free than an opera singer's, whereas I was expecting some excursions to the unknown. Perspective! Vocal Jazz is the genre term for this sort of thing I've heard kicked around most often, as simple as that seems, however there's any number of approaches to the genre, as many as there are styles of instrumental jazz---they usually, in what little I know as compared to the totality of jazz itself, evolved simultaneously. As vocal jazz goes, I'm not hugely into it, but when you start talking the best of the best, it doesn't matter what genre you're into or not into, it's the stuff that'll stop you in your tracks anyway. Nina Simone would be my first suggestion, with Billie Holiday right behind---both of whom would deserve their own questions in this thread, at least. Flora Purim as well, her work with Return to Forever ("Light as a Feather" and their self-titled debut) is already in my collection. All told, you're poking into a realm I've barely had time to glance at in my time, so there's a very good chance someone more knowledgeable will come by and completely rake me over the coals. C'est la vie. edit - reading this again, apparently it's my James Brown moment. I'm talkin' loud and sayin' nothin'. Bleah, sorry. hexwren fucked around with this message at 03:55 on Sep 27, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2011 03:44
|
|
|
Ah, Tom. What a guy. There's three records that immediately shout out to me as possible moves from where you are, though, really, there's barely any records in his back catalogue that aren't worth the time. First, you can kinda round out his 70s output with what's probably one of my favorites of his, The Heart of Saturday Night, though it's generally considered one of his lesser works. Very jazzy, very much in the vein of the records he released before and after it---Closing Time and Nighthawks, respectively. The second option is what most people would suggest: Rain Dogs. It's the next record after Swordfishtrombones, and is quite probably the defining work of his 80s output. Waits hits that record with a flurry of strange sounds, songs both traditional and untraditional, and some of his tautest writing. Indie rockers are often introduced to Waits' work with this LP, which for the longest time left me in a weird position in my younger days, trying to explain why I was really into the stuff he did before that and their eyes would glaze over, bouncing the question back: "Before?" Third option, After spending the 80s getting weird and the 90s getting obscure and reclusive, Waits signed to punk label Epitaph (this was before they created their ANTI- imprint, where I believe he still is today) and out of nowhere, dropped the LP Mule Variations in 1999. The record is another career highlight from top to bottom, working as a sort of retrospective on his own body of work, from the weepiest of piano ballads (Picture in a Frame, Georgia Lee) to the weird grooves (the Primus-backed Big In Japan, Filipino Box Spring Hog), and on into even stranger areas (the mostly-spoken-word What's He Building?) EDIT - holy balls I thought I saw Small Change in that list, thanks Sloth. GET SMALL CHANGE NOW
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2011 17:00
|
|
|
ultrafilter posted:Those are both off Reign in Blood, which is pretty much the essential Slayer album. From there, skip ahead two records, not one, and check the Seasons in the Abyss LP. From there, spread out as necessary. Skip any record that does not have Dave Lombardo on it. ...okay, maybe not EVERY record without Lombo. I liked "Bloodline" okay (I forget what record that was on.)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 08:06
|
|
|
Goddammit, now I can't unhear it.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 08:19
|
|
|
Genius and Biscuit are both on the money so I won't contradict them, but I'd suggest, even if you have to get a tape of it from a friend, tracking down their third album, "Ralf und Florian." I found it on LP at a Half-Price Books some time ago, as a total luck thing---the guy working the counter remarked that he'd just put it on the shelf about five minutes prior and figured someone would snag it immediately. Dude was also from Dusseldorf originally, so. But anyway, yeah, there's a lot of sound experiments going on on the record, but it's not cold and clanking like the stuff on the back half of the first NEU! record, the sound is absolutely lush. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lCg7hPeUdvE holy crap vintage news footage of the group
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2011 21:07
|
|
|
That Guy From Pearldiver posted:Anyone that tells you to skip Diabolus in Musica and God Hates Us All is not your friend and wants you to be miserable. I'm not really into Diabolus, but GHUA was alright.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2011 02:28
|
|
|
Melvins are awesome, slower, heavy and occasionally atmospheric. They do not, however, have complex drumming. You may still like them, but you're not going to get the Danny Carey/Aaron Harris experience from Dale Crover.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2011 04:50
|
|
|
If you're looking for Jay's album that's the equivalent to Twisted Fantasy, you're probably going to want The Black Album---it was touted to be his last record before retiring permanently from the studio (which obviously didn't happen), and it basically was set up as an autobiography on a single CD. It's got hooks galore, the big singles being 99 Problems, Dirt Off Your Shoulder and Change Clothes---Encore got play as well, but more when he did it with Linkin Park a bit later on. I dunno if I'm alone in this or not, but American Gangster was super-forgettable for me. Blueprint is solid, though.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2011 08:35
|
|
|
Auditore posted:I'd say their "classic" run of albums in the late 60s to the early 70s. They consist of Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and the double album Exile on main st. I have a copy of Some Girls on LP and it's pretty good too. I'll back up Auditore here, but I would also suggest, either before or after you get your feet wet with these LPs, to consider hitting one of the vintage Stones singles collections (maybe High Tides and Green Grass, maybe Sucking in the Seventies, Hot Rocks overlaps hugely with the era that Audi mentioned)---most of their lesser albums are just as likely to contain world-shaking songs as are the big ones listed above, it's just that the rest of the material will be skippable. (biggest offender: Their Satanic Majesties Request - there's a lot of stupid on that record, but not hearing She's A Rainbow or 2000 Light Years From Home is a crime. I'll also go to bat for Citadel, but I'm a nerd like that)
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2011 13:13
|
|
|
Nick Cave has a few reasonable entry points, since his career has been incredibly long and often wildly-varying. Starting with '& The Bad Seeds' material is generally your best bet, but excursions into his work with The Birthday Party and Grinderman are rewarding as well. As far as his work with the Seeds goes, most people will point at the group's early work as the best starting point, and as deliriously unhinged and delightfully sadistic those records are, I don't personally consider them the best way to be introduced to the group---quite the opposite. The first time I listened to the Your Funeral...My Trial LP, I was quite honestly just not into it. My comments at the time were something along the lines of "Yes, Nick, I get it, heroin is a hell of a drug." To compromise, I would suggest 1988's Tender Prey LP as the best balance between the relentless sonic fury and the tighter songwriting Cave would perfect as the years went on. It's also got on it "The Mercy Seat," which was the band's signature tune, at least until the nineties meant that every movie soundtrack in existence would have "Red Right Hand" on it. Once you're through that, if the more sonically violent tracks tickle your fancy, stuff like "City of Refuge" and "Sugar Sugar Sugar", then definitely consider the louder records, earlier stuff like From Her To Eternity, but also later material, like Let Love In and Murder Ballads. If you're more in tune with the more sedate material ("Watching Alice," "New Morning", etc.), then you'll probably want to move to records like The Good Son or The Boatman's Call. There's basically no record that's all one particular sound, though, so there's always going to be some light in the darkness, some dark in the light. Boatman's Call comes closest, but even that, in the midst of Cave's reconciliation with the concepts of god and love, still has its moments of bleak despair. Basically, as I call it, these are the must-hear records, but there's worthy material on every record they've done: 1984 - From Her To Eternity (Turn it up loud---loud, desperate and violent) 1988 - Tender Prey 1990 - The Good Son (Cave gets off the horse and falls in love---beautiful desolation) 1994 - Let Love In (Amps are turned back up, the arrangements get overblown and the lyrics get nasty...) 1996 - Murder Ballads (...but not as nasty as this. Almost entirely pure excess, Nick decides to write about murder and doesn't stop until something like 70 fictional murders are committed) 1997 - The Boatman's Call (A total 180 from the last two LPs, a quiet, subtle look at matters romantic and spiritual) 2003 - Nocturama (skippable except for the ridiculously awesome 15-minute closer, "Babe, I'm On Fire") 2004 - Abbatoir Blues/The Lyre of Orpheus (The first disc is loud, the second is quiet---ignoring the two clankers that end the first disc and open the second, this might be the best thing the group's cut, though it sadly lacks that wacky German genius, Blixa Bargeld) edit - gently caress, sorry, I rambled.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2012 07:13
|
|
|
I love Henry's Dream ("Loom of the Land" is one of my favorite Seeds things ever), but I feel that the production drama that surrounded its recording (and subsequently caused Live Seeds to get recorded) made it sonically individual enough that it's not representative enough to really work as an entry point. Murder Ballads was certainly the group's zenith of popularity (partly thanks to the whole Nick Kills Kylie thing), but I personally wouldn't start there simply because of the content. "O'Malley's Bar" is almost numbing after a certain point, and that's the last big climax of the record. Cave and the Bad Seeds write about murder and madness very well, certainly, but that's not the only thing they're capable of.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
TheNintenGenius posted:A thing to keep in mind when you track down Raw Power is that there's two different masters of the album currently in circulation: David Bowie's original mix (which was finally reissued lately as part of Columbia's Legacy Edition series of releases) and Iggy's remixed version which was done in the late 90s. I'd definitely say to pay the extra money for Bowie's mix, since Iggy's version is just hilariously bad production-wise. He pushed everything so far into the red that the album's just a complete distorted mess, and not in a good way. The problem is that Bowie's mix isn't that great, either. Raw Power is, to me, one of the most disappointing records ever released, because while Iggy's attempt to rectify things sounds like you're listening to a blender on frappe, Bowie's original production is so thin and trebly that you could have the finest sound system known to man, with sensitive tweeters and woofers from floor to ceiling---you put on Raw Power and those woofers won't even twitch. There's nothing in the midrange, nothing in the bass. Bowie's mix is superior, yes, but I can't think of a way to save that record.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 13, 2012 22:55
|
|
|
Voodoofly posted:The more I read it, the more shocked I am that Bowie's mix is even listenable, let alone still a great album. Yeah, I knew things were bad, but that's a whole other level of "things were bad." Farts Domino posted:I honestly think the Iggy mix of Raw Power sounds awesome. I know I'm not totally alone considering there's a ton of garage rock bands that record the same way. But yeah, I understand why somebody wouldn't like it Well, fair enough. I'm not going to say you're wrong or anything---maybe I haven't given it a fair shake, maybe we just have differing opinions.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2012 21:07
|
|
|
Rubber Biscuit posted:Grateful Dead anyone? Shamefully, i've only heard Franklin's Tower, which is boss. The Dead are a highly schizoid group and need to be approached in two directions---the Dead in the studio and the Dead live---and even then, different lineups and eras have their own particular ins and outs. I know there are Dead scholars who will often scoff at the choices of the uninitiated---and I'm nowhere near enough initiated that I won't get scoffed at. However, I will take a crack at maybe giving you some entry points. More often than not, people will say that their live work is of more import than the studio, and I agree with this to a certain extent---sometimes hearing the studio versions of songs will let you get used to their flow and structure so that you can then follow how the band is expanding on them in the live setting. Some of my favorites don't change much moving from one setting to the other, some do. (My all-time favorite [Eyes of the World] doesn't much, beyond the solos getting longer.) Somewhere between live and the studio, your best probable starting point is Europe `72. It's sorta an obvious starting point for many, like saying to start with Floyd by listening to Dark Side, but it's still a very good one. Purportedly a live album, but subject to a number of studio overdubs, these sins of veracity can be forgiven because at that point in time the band was absolutely on fire, and the tracklisting is basically impeccable. Well, almost. I have weird tastes in Dead material, so there's actually a number of my favorites that just aren't on that record. Oh, well. It remains a good starting point, and I emphasize starting point. From there, while opinions vary as to what lineups and albums are best, they do not often vary as to what is best avoided. Reductive logic then suggests you can start anywhere else. (Okay, maybe I'm rambling now, I was filming on location all goddamn day today and I am not mentally all here.) A major thing to consider when examining live albums is that while the Grateful Dead certainly changed how live albums are viewed, shifting from studio-doctored compilations of material from the breadth of a tour to meticulous recordings of complete shows to supplement the show-focused bootlegs, their live albums can often be of either type. Before buying a record, check up on it, see if it has a particular date or dates on it. It's generally safe to start with obvious picks from the Dead; if you like what you hear there, you can start to examine material that goes farther out into space. Franklin's Tower appears on the Blues For Allah LP, which appears fairly late in what's generally considered the group's classic period (which is to say the late sixties into the seventies---the song is from 1975), so you may want to dabble with that material first, BFA and the albums just before and after (From the Mars Hotel and Terrapin Station respectively), but you'll certainly want to move backwards in time from there to the aforementioned 'obvious picks.' I imagine the Dead scholars in the thread have enough material here to skewer me on quite thoroughly, so I shall leave it at that for the moment. If I'm forgetting things, I merely beg forgiveness.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
With Mos Def, start with "Mos Def and Talib Kweli Are Black Star"---both MCs do heavy lifting on the record, but it's certainly a career highlight for both. Tribe got covered a page or two back, I think. I've not really listened to much of Common's stuff, so I won't take a risk on steering you wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2012 06:24
|
|
|
hatelull posted:You might just start with In the Court of the Crimson King and then move forward until you get bored. Disagree. Court is a great place to start, but moving forward from there means you'll be bored almost instantaneously---the next record, In the Wake of Poseidon, is meh-to-okay, Lizard is one of those underrated records that I'm not sure if it should be rated at all, and Islands kinda sucks. After that, they completely shift gears, change the lineup around and start getting interesting again. That new lineup, more or less, put out three good-to-phenomenal records, Larks' Tongues in Aspic, Starless and Bible Black and Red. Larks' and Red are both reasonable to start with in that era. Guitar-wise, the Mark 3 and later editions of the group (their work from Discipline onwards) changes up a bit, Belew takes more of the screaming weirdness and solos, Fripp gets more into textural weirdness and such. There's still plenty of material to listen to from those various lineups, but definitely start with Discipline to get a feel for Crimson after the 70s.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2012 01:45
|
|
|
That's not an unreasonable opinion to have---I haven't heard most of the live stuff, which I know can be a game-changer when they start improvising or jamming over one thing or another. I'm probably a bit of a weirdass in that, most of the time, I like my records to be studio but I'm all over live video/film. I find a lot of live albums (barring those by bands who generate more live material than studio---jam bands and such) to have really dodgy sound and the applause mixed way too loud, but I can tolerate that when it's on my TV. My concert DVD binder is larger than my movie DVD binder. Which is to say that when I finally start getting some paychecks in, I'm probably grabbing the Neal And Jack And Me DVD. I will say that, definitively, the USA live album is not worth it, though I've heard the box set of live material from that period is. I'm not sure, because I've got one of the Collectors Club CDs from that period and, again, super-dodgetastic sound ruining some great performances (I think part of it is pretty terrible audience tape, so that's where that comes from---it's the July 1 1974 show.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2012 22:33
|
|
|
FitFortDanga posted:It's only missing "She's Gone" Yeah, but only missing "She's Gone" is like only missing a kidney. Sure, you'll survive and might even do okay, but you're not the same. That song is a stone-cold killer.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
the Bunt posted:Yes? There are two generally accepted Serious Starting Places for Yes, three if you're picky. The third is probably my favorite record of theirs, but it's certainly not where to start. The first option is The Yes Album---it's their first record with guitarist Steve "the one who ends up in Asia" Howe, who is hot to show what he can do with six strings, so he plays all over the record. I mean, obviously we're talking about Yes, so everyone is putting many notes on the piece of vinyl, but Howe plays his rear end off. You've probably heard "I've Seen All Good People" off this record on the radio. "Starship Trooper" and "Yours is No Disgrace" are also standouts. The other Serious Starting Place is the album they cut immediately after, having lost their organ-focused keyboardist Tony Kaye and replaced him with session player ("Life on Mars," "Morning Has Broken") and ex-Strawbs keysman Rick "wears spangly capes" Wakeman. The record is called Fragile, and you've almost certainly heard "Roundabout" off of it on some radio station or other. The album is far less cohesive than TYA, owing to each member of the band getting one track to show off with solos and suchlike, but its high points ("Heart of the Sunrise", "Long Distance Runaround", the aforementioned "Roundabout") are arguably higher. The picky person's starting place is the album directly after that, Close to the Edge. It's quite good, but it's what you are led to fear in terms of prog-rock stereotypes. One record. Three songs, the longest taking all of side one, the other two splitting the back half. Solos, solos and more solos. I still like it though. Just start with one of the other two first. the Bunt posted:Squarepusher? I'd like to get a bit more into this guy as well. I've got two full-lengths and an EP of his. Music Is Rotted One Note was fantastic and may very well be where you'd want to start, and Ultravisitor was quite good. The Numbers Lucent EP I'm not quite as sure about, it sounds a bit more like Aphex Twin leftovers that got stuck in the back of the fridge.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2012 12:08
|
|
|
big scary monsters posted:I love Bohren und der Club of Gore but don't know of anything else quite like them. Can anyone give me pointers on where else to go in the large and popular ambient doom jazz noir genre? There's probably people who can point you at jazz outings that fit the bill, but my mind is immediately drawn to drone metal, specifically the pioneers of the genre, Earth. Their work that started the genre is way loud and metallic, but after a hiatus, their work has shifted to slower-than-slow, swampy, country-flavored....well, here's a link. It's a start. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4M_Np53-A0) On the other hand, where do I start with Gore, then? I would hear more of them.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2012 05:01
|
|
|
nadabolt posted:Southern Lord put out a 2CD comp of their first (and I think most popular?) two albums that's pretty great. I don't know much about them but that seems like the logical place to start, especially if you're listening to Earth. Sounds reasonable to me!
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2012 05:49
|
|
|
So I just had my mind blown by The Electrician again---where should I start with Scott Walker?
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2012 08:50
|
|
|
Neil Young's back catalogue is pretty densely packed, both with high-firing misses and skyrockets of unimaginable excellence. He's had various backing bands, each of which result in wholly separate sounds. I suggest, personally, that you try going at least somewhat chronologically, especially since you've got something of an idea of what the man can do in the acoustic/country-tinged vein. To say that he "started" playing electric at some point in his career is somewhat incorrect---he was known for his lead playing in both Buffalo Springfield and Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young. Springfield and CSNY's core catalogues are small enough as to be easily taken whole (avoid repackaging and any later work, basically), but for Young's solo career, I suggest starting with his second record (and first with proto-grunge stalwarts Crazy Horse) 1969's Everybody Knows This Is Nowhere. It's an absolute smash, combining elegaic country-rock tunes (Round & Round, Running Dry) and the guitar fireworks that more or less became his trademark as the years went on (Cinnamon Girl, Down By The River, Cowgirl in the Sand.) The two albums that followed, After The Gold Rush and Harvest, respectively, make up one of the most ridiculously solid three-album runs this side of anybody. Start there. Of course, proceeding thereafter requires some caveats. The three albums immediately following Harvest are informally referred to as Young's "Ditch Trilogy", after a remark about heading for an artistic ditch after Heart of Gold put him in the proverbial middle of the road. 1973's live record Time Fades Away (consisting of all new material recorded on a fairly-disastrous tour), and the two following studio records, 1974's On the Beach and `75's Tonight's The Night (recorded in `73 but shelved for two years), are relentlessly morose, dark records, surrounded by death and other gloom. They're fantastically interesting works (barring some of the lesser material on the currently out-of-print TFA record), but probably not the best starting point. The playing becomes increasingly loose, and Crazy Horse reveal themselves to be probably the single most-inspiring catalyst for Young's writing. Three increasingly schizoid records followed, with Neil throwing darts every which way and occasionally hitting the mark, albeit often in different genres. Zuma, American Stars 'n Bars and Comes A Time are all highly listenable, but by this time, Neil was recycling recordings from sessions years before (Released in 1977, ASnB was recorded in at least four sessions from `74-`77) and seemed to lack focus. 1979 got Neil back on track, cutting my two favorite records of his, the mostly-recorded-on-stage-with-the-audience-noise-scrubbed Rust Never Sleeps and the properly live follow-up Live Rust. Both records proceed from quieter acoustic work to slashing Crazy Horse wildness. Absolutely critical, in my opinion. You may, in fact, want to start with Live Rust, as it provides a fairly coherent overview of a number of non-Harvest high points of his `70s material. Unfortunately, the 80s followed the 70s, and Neil headed for the ditch again, this time with no helmet and fewer good ideas. Neil in the 80s is a contentious topic. Your mileage may vary. Suffice to say it's not where to start with Young's work. As such, it's safe to say that I've again prattled on too long. Probably long enough that someone else has already replied to the topic with a simple two-sentence answer. Oh well.
|
|
#
¿
May 20, 2012 04:34
|
|
|
Blast Fantasto posted:Howsabout Peter Gabriel era Genssis and Gabriel solo? caveat - I'm a terrible prog fan. I love prog instrumentation and structure, but I'm a sucker for a melody. I'm going to get eviscerated for what I'm writing. Peter Gabriel recorded with the group from 1969 to 1974, for six studio albums. The first, From Genesis To Revelation, is mostly forgettable 60s pop with occasional psych influences. The other five are all brutally uneven, with wonderful high points and dreadfully boring bits in between. The least uneven of these, and probably best thing to start with, would be the fifth overall album, 1973's Selling England By The Pound. At the core of the record are three tracks: More Fool Me, The Battle of Epping Forest, and After The Ordeal. If these songs bore you to death, it's okay. They do it to me, as well---and two of them don't even have Gabriel singing (one's instrumental, one's Phil) so they wouldn't help you much anyway. However, the remaining tracks are all top picks from me any day, especially The Cinema Show, goofy as the lyrics might be, I cannot deny that melody or that synth solo. Firth of Fifth is also an all-time classic. Beyond Selling England, check out the albums immediately following and preceding, and don't be afraid to skip the boring bits. On the album before Selling, Foxtrot (`72), you've got another instance of the good stuff bookending the record---opener Watcher of the Skies is phenomenal, as is everything on side two. Side two consists of a brief instrumental (some would say it's an overture) and then their big long-form piece of the time, Supper's Ready. Supper is a singular experience, with great weirdness on Gabriel's part throughout. After Selling, you have the over- and underrated concept record The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (1974), which is another instance where skipping some bits is not unreasonable. It's loving LONG. However, there's no real way to point out the useless bits, since the record really needed an editor. There's great stuff all the way through, it just sometimes goes away for a little while. The remaining records show the band just beginning to develop their writing chops, with The Musical Box (from `71's Nursery Cryme) and The Knife (from `70's Trespass) being the only songs to survive much beyond their initial runs. With Peter Gabriel's solo career, there's some problems. His first four solo records are confusingly enough, all named "Peter Gabriel." They go in this order: The one where he's in the car on the cover, the one where he's scraping his fingers through reality or something on the cover, the one where his face is melting on the cover, and the one where he's not on the cover. Start with the facemelter, it's pretty solidly the high point of his early solo outings. From there, you're safest if it's self-titled or if it was released in the 80s. The remainder of his records may not hit those earlier highs, but there's worthy material on all of them. I can only think of one single PG ever cut that really doesn't do it for me (The Barry Williams Show.) hexwren fucked around with this message at 10:16 on May 20, 2012 |
|
#
¿
May 20, 2012 10:07
|
|
|
screenwritersblues posted:Seriously and I'm not joking here, get volume 1 of the Archives. That is really the best place to start with Neil Young. It has everything from his early stuff with The Squires to Buffalo Springfield to his early solo stuff and some stuff with Crazy Horse. It's a pretty drat good starting point. The Archives box is phenomenal, but it also costs like eight million dollars.
|
|
#
¿
May 21, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
Wilbur Swain posted:I feel like you Neil Young fans are lacking a little perspective when it comes to your recommendations. Archives is not a good starting point for someone wanting to get into Neil Young. It's really for the completists. Decade is an excellent best-of from the first ten years of his recording career; it's an incredibly solid retrospective. And it's cheap. Yeah, I admittedly forgot about Decade. I'm personally not much of a fan of best-of compilations, though, so mileage varies. Decade is certainly one of the best of that sort of record, though. I rather like Gold Rush as well, but I felt for a guy who'd already been listening to Harvest and Comes A Time, he needed a starting point with a bit more guitar, hence my suggestion of Everybody Knows. I haven't heard the Massey Hall record yet, but I have a bootleg from the same tour, with a similar track listing. I should track that down, now that I've got a few dollars in my pocket.
|
|
#
¿
May 22, 2012 11:06
|
|
|
You could do a lot better, though, too. Start with their big Silmarillion concept record, Nightfall in Middle-Earth.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2012 05:07
|
|
|
Yeah, there's not much more to say than what Ultrafilter did. Refused's other stuff is good---Rather Be Dead is a mixtape staple for me---but The Shape of Punk To Come is Capital-G Great.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2012 05:56
|
|
|
Pretty much what hatelull said---my first exposure to Aes was the Bazooka Tooth LP, but that's aged far less well than I'd hoped (The Greatest Pac-Man Victory In History's gimmick verse is a little grating now and We're Famous is just goddamn embarrassing, thanks, El), though it still does have its high points (11:35.) The main thing, sonically, is that his early records (up until the Daylight EP or so) are very much built on the foundation of producer Blockhead's soul- and jazz-sample beats, while afterwards (Bazooka Tooth onwards) even while Blockhead is still hanging out, the dominant sound becomes Aesop's own productions, which edge a bit closer to the drums-fall-down-the-stairs-while-apocalyptic-synths-wail thing that El-P does.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 4, 2012 22:39
|
|
|
That Guy From Pearldiver posted:I enjoyed what Ryan Adams did on Whiskeytown's Strangers Almanac CD, but where would I start with his solo career? gently caress the police, I say "Orion" and I'm not going to lie about it. It's utterly not what you're expecting, but gently caress it. Voivod-inspired bizarro-metal from Ryan Adams? Yes, please.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2012 05:49
|
|
|
There's basically nothing Jr put out that's not worth listening to, which is nice---my favorite song they've done to this day is probably still "I Ain't Sayin'", off of Where You Been, but I would be more inclined to suggest You're Living All Over Me as the place to start as well. Without a Sound and the other 90s records are quite literally J Mascis solo records under the Jr name. They're not bad, but there's no Barlow and almost no Murph through the 90s output. They're still good, but again, not so much the place to start. Don't be afraid to grab their post-reunion albums, as well. They may not be mind-melting classics, but they're still excellent. Farm is probably the record of theirs I spin the most these days.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
Humble Pie's Performance, Genesis' Seconds Out
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2013 23:42
|
|
|
Honestly, I'd say you about nailed it. I'd second that his work with the Spiders is the point to start. With the exception of a few singles, his material before Hunky Dory (the two self-titled albums and The Man Who Sold The World) is definitely advanced work, showing a very embryonic, muddled sound at times. His transition from glam and into other areas (the Diamond Dogs-Young Americans-Station to Station sequence) is a bit difficult at times, but definitely worthy of attention as a unit. Additionally, the new listener is probably best served by avoiding the various live albums that have been released over the years. They range from mediocre to good, but pretty much never match any of his studio work.
|
|
#
¿
May 26, 2013 19:39
|
|
|
For The Flaming Lips, for someone who's worried about their more extreme moments and is quite pleased with Yoshimi, the absolute number one record to get right loving now is The Soft Bulletin. It is fantastic.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 21:08
|
|
|
Davincie posted:Similar question to a kitten, but for Nick Cave. I have Tender Prey which I love and he's coming to a festival I'll be at soon so I want to listen to more of his songs. Which are the best albums to pick and which ones are most often played live by him? Allen Wren posted:Nick Cave has a few reasonable entry points, since his career has been incredibly long and often wildly-varying. Starting with '& The Bad Seeds' material is generally your best bet, but excursions into his work with The Birthday Party and Grinderman are rewarding as well. The only thing to add is that Henry's Dream, from 1992-3 or thereabouts, loving rules. If you're looking for specific songs that are going to be big in his set, you'll probably also want to grab the new record he just put out this year, Push The Sky Away. The singles from that thus far have been "We No Who U R" and "Jubilee Street."
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 21:47
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 03:01 |
|
|
Live Seeds is also fantastic, yes.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2013 01:19
|
|