auctioneer69

Sorry for the OT...it seems like you dislike the band but I'm curious if you've heard U2's last album. I thought there were several adventurous (for U2, anyway) songs on there. You can argue the album was no good, but you can't really say they weren't trying to do something different with songs like "Fez/Being Born", "Unknown Caller", etc. And to their credit, they played a huge chunk of the album live when I saw them a couple of years ago. But since the sales were relatively low, I'm sure they'll be back to the crowd-pleasing pop songs for the next album.

 

Looking forward to hearing the new REM -- I've liked their post-Berry albums (except for AROUND THE SUN) more than most. REVEAL is particularly underrated.

U2 haven't taken a real artistic chance 1997 and "Pop". "NLOTH" sounds like a compromise at best between the album they might have made and the one the thought would shift the most units. First band I saw in 1983 and one of my big early musical passions. The commercial aspect of the band which has always been important to them has dominated anything they have tried to do artistically for a long time in my opinion. Even the environmental disaster that is their current tour (three stages weighing thousands of tons scuttling all over the world - completely hypocritical when Africa will probably be the biggest victim of climate change over time) is really about getting 10-20,000 more people every night to see their 2 years of shows. It's really sad to see from the band that made "The Unforgettable Fire", "The Joshua Tree", "Acthung Baby", "Zooropa","Passengers" and "Pop" which all involved taking chances big and small. I wish they'd just come clean and admit that making money is far more important to them than trying to make anything artistically interesting. I hope to be proven wrong one day soon.

well, I think your friend is incorrect.

Meaning he's a super-cool, nice person in an industry full of a-holes.

It's funny, just about like U2, I think at this point I like the acoustic and/or slow songs better than whatever rocking songs they come up with. At least neither band is putting out albums of cover songs. And I hope they never do.

Really like the faster/loudier/rockier stuff on "Collapse Into Now". Something as good as "All The Best" or "Someone Like You" is tough to pull of this late in the game. As for U2 - can you every imagine them releasing and album and not touring.? On the contrary the have a lot more in common with the Rolling Stones now - their albums are just the launching pad for another 2 year tour designed to accrete tens of millions of euro's in their respective members pockets.

Yeah, i thought that too at the time. I will always believe that monster was just about the worst thing they could've done at the time for their US popularity. Just about any record they did after, ATS included, would have held a lot of that audience that came on board in the 90's. Yeah, monster sold a lot, but a lot of those got played once and never again. Following it up with ebow as the first single was kind of the nail in the coffin as far as US popularity. Now maybe they don't give a shit, and on some level i think they might have gotten leary of how big they were, but it's human nature, no one wants to be less popular than they once were. They thought they could do what ever they wanted and the audience would follow but that proved to not be the case.

 

As for CIN, on about listen 6 or 7 and can't get enough, that flac rip sounds great too, so much better than stream rip.

Yes it's just a really, really good record. Totally agree on R.E.M.'s career trajectory in the States. But 'eff it. At least they have stayed interesting. Someone like U2 haven't taken an artistic chance in about 15 years. Well not if you don't include the worst single of their career - the execrable "Get On Your Boots".

That's why they called Out of Time out of time, beacuse it was so different than what was popular then.

 

My problem with Monster is that they got so focused on making a loud record, the kind of forgot to write great songs. I actually like the record if I'm in the right mood for it as they did do a good job capturing a mood. Stipe just got so wrapped up in this glam personna that he turned in what is probably his weakest collection of melodies.

 

And make no mistake, the key to the band has always been him. Yes the other guys help make the sound what it is but without his amazing melodic talent, listen to their instrumental demos and then what he does to them, we aren't on this thread now.

Exactly. "New Adventures in Hi-Fi" turned on to be the album that Monster should have been. I'd love to have been an insider on the making of "Hi-Fi". Especially re: Michael Stipe. The ultimate product of their recording isn't complete until he comes up with the melody and lyrics. You get the impression that with "NAIHF" he must have been forced to be a lot quicker in producing both. Yet the results are so good.

I've met Wayne Coyne a couple of times. great guy! very friendly!

Have a friend who is journo who interviewed him. Says he is a prince amongst a lot of d-bags.

Only song I'm having trouble getting is Everyday is Yours To Win and I love the way it sounds, just not connecting. I agree, it really is a hook fest. I'm ready to stop with this hybrid, MP3 leak/stream burn and listen to the real thing. Know of any rips from Australia or Europe where it's already out floating around?

No afraid I am a luddite on this stuff. Can't wait until Tuesday. Agree on "Everyday is Yours To Win". Find the part where the lead guitar and Mill's backing vocals come in kinda clunky and clumsy relative to the rest of the song. Bot overall. far effin better than I dared imagine 15 albums and 30 years in. Really hope the positive response from fans and critics inspires a tour. Living in Seattle it would be very conceivable to see Eddie Vedder joining them for "It Happened Today".

I need to check it out some more.

Agree on the "Life's Rich Pageant" reference or parts of "NAIHF". The trouble with "Monster" is that despite its claim it rarely rocks. Absolutely loving "Collapse into Now" now I have listened to it 10 + times. Again no prizes for originality but lots of energy and more hooks than a butcher's shop

I alread had Reveal Signed by Mills and Buck so Reveal was it...not necessarily my favorite album but the cover is good for signing!

Glad you got to meet your hero. I met Michael Stipe in 1990 when REM were my favourite band by a country-mile. He was playing the Big Day Out in Glasgow (Scotland) with Natalie Merchant and Billy Bragg and I stumbled upon the three of them prior to the soundcheck the day before. I thought he was not unexpectedly somewhat guarded and very definitely an "artiste". It was also my first realisation that lead-singers are pygmies. I towered over him. Natalie Merchant was utterly charming. Very happy to chat for a few minutes and very gracious about photographs.

That was my first thought. It sounded like a laid back Monster.

 

R.E.M. Recruits James Franco, Albert Maysles to Helm 'Collapse Into Now' Videos

Here is the the link for the "It Happened Today"

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/03/pop-song-2011-the-video-for-r-e-m-s-it-happened-today/

and "Uberlin"

http://www.hennemusic.com/2011/03/new-videos-rem-uberlin-and-it-happened.html

Was pretty skeptical about this project initially but I really enjoy the results for these two songs.

Got me thinking as i never really thought of rem records by whether they were challenging or not. I would say, by and large rem records aren't challenging at all. Even the funkier ones like monster or up are still, at the core pop records, one had fuzz, the other, synth noises but stripped to their essense, they are still rem. Where they got into trouble is when they lost that governor, maybe BB, maybe a good producer to keep them focused. One record was still great (up) one was pretty damn good (reveal) and one kinda sucked (ats). Now they have 2 in a row that are great. I am actually surprised at the amount of dissing i have been reading lately about accelerate. I thought it was great when it came out and still do. It's a great collection of songs and now that i finally found a vinyl rip on the internets, I'm loving it even more. The compression is to me the only legitimate criticism of the record. While the vinyl is still compressed, it's light years better than the cd.

 

Gonna listen to CIN again.

LOL. My better-half have been chastising me for playing it too much. Time flies. First REM album I listened to when it came out was "Life's Rich Pageant". It's sweet that one of my favourite bands can still bring out the 17 year boy in me.

Agree on "Accelerate". I think a lot of fans hated the production and to some extent the focus on shorter songs. I liked it a lot when it came out but guess I'll play "Collapse Into Now" more over the course. Likewise your assessment of the other albums. "Up" might have been a classic if they were on good enough terms when it was about to be released to decide on which 2 or 3 tracks to leave off the album. I have read and you'd probably know this for sure but seemingly neither Mills or Buck would relent and allow one or two of their compositions to be axed. I don't know if you'd agree but the song "You're In the Air" is one of the most under-appreciated songs in the R.E.M. canon. The emotion in that song never fails to get me. "Reveal" is a really-good failed experiment and "Around The Sun" is just plain awful. Again - you've probably read the same thing. Peter Buck's biggest contribution to that album was to fill up 2 or 3 I-Pods with songs for Stipe and Mills while they completely over-laboured their parts in the studio for months. I also read something by Peter Buck around the time it was released saying the only reason he didn't quit was he wouldn't like to see all the people in the broader REM organisation out of a job. With "Accelerate" and "Collapse Into Now" I am really glad that didn't happen.

Gotta say, I'm pretty surprised they had this one in them. I think, even though I'm a huge fan that I can be pretty objective about them and this is a pretty great record. R.E.M. ceased being cool a long time ago so this record won't likely get the respect or recognition it deserves. At the end of the day, if you liked them back in the day , there is something here for you. It rocks as hard as LRP and Document, it has the acoustic feel of OOT and Automatic and closes with what can only be described as a tone poem with patti smith that is the child of country feedback, belong and live for today (1997 fan club single.). And through all of that, it doesn't feel stale or tired. Yes, you've heard it before, but not quite like this. Really, an amazing collection of hooks and melodies.

 

I don't feel that their post Bill Berry work has been nearly as disappointing as some do, I actually quite like most of it, but this album, at least on first impression, is of the quality of their best work. How many bands can you say that about after 30 years? I think I mentioned early in the thread that i thought it may be a good time to pack it in. If they keep up this quality, why should they?

Delighted to see that a long-time fan like me feels the same way about "Collapse Into Now". Maybe a little relieved too in case I was gushing too much myself.

I think it's really tough to be objective about R.E.M. especially this late into their career. I'd argue that they had such a consistently brilliant run from "Chronic Town" through "New Adventures in Hi-Fi" that they are definitely weighed down by that legacy.

As you correctly state it doesn't feel tired or stale. Overall, it's definitely one of their poppiest albums. With the exception of "Blue" there isn't anything remotely challenging for the casual listener. I mean that as an observation and not a criticism. It's the most Bill Berry sounding of the records that don't feature him. Why? Well Bill Rieflin really plays with a Berry-like fluidity and power on the faster/rockier tracks. There's also a succinctness married to melody that is a very definite hallmark of Bill Berry era albums especially their most commercially successful releases.

Lastly, I never tire of Michael Stipe's voice. You could argue it isn't what it was but he's definitely more successfully adapted his delivery than someone like Bono. Just a shame they aren't touring. Close your eyes and imagine the lights going down and the band opening with "Discoverer" and "All The Best"......

Sounded pretty good to me. 'Blue' really recalls 'Country Feedback' mixed with 'E-bow'.

 

The only track that I didn't really dig was 'Everyday is yours to win'. Might get better with time, but it gave me Around the Sun flashbacks.

Have to say I am loving this.....nothing startling different...but tons of energy, melody and trademark R.E.M. hooks. Likewise not too taken with "Everyday is yours to win" which is a little too sickly sweet for me. Really like the opening three tracks and "AAAA" and "That Someone is You". They seem to have got the mix between faster and slower songs just right. Also great pacing and song-order.

Stipe's singing is up there with people like Chrissy Hynde and Elvis Costello for me. Rich,distinctive and compelling but you couldn't imagine them having a chance before new wave allowed slightly less conventional voices a chance. Also, he has a great ear for a melody. Listen to something like "Walk It Back" and imagine how plain it sounded when it was just an instrumental demo.

What baffles me is that is getting a very lukewarm response in Britain. Mojo and Uncut both gave it 3 out of 5 stars and Q gave it 2 out of five. The latter seems pretty insulting especially as Q championed the band in their move from cult to major success. On this side of the pond, NPR's positive reaction is almost universal.

I love both of them as actors and I was really looking forward to loving both of them as hosts.

Sadly, you are correct (from what I saw of the show); they were terrible hosts. I think if you're gonna use a Freaks & Geeks alum, Seth Rogen would have been a more-solid choice for something like this.

James Franco was either stoned out of his gourd or giving a fantastic acting job of someone who is. I can't recall a worse host for anything.

Link

 

NPR is having a listening party on Tuesday (3/1) and they'll be streaming the album starting Wednesday.

 

Also, 'Chorus and the Ring' is the best song off Reveal.

You can go to I-Tunes (in the States at least) and preview all the songs. Can't wait for it to come out. Based on these clips and the 5 full songs that I have heard this is going to be a really enjoyable album. I don't think it'll be ranked amongst the very top tier of their catalogue but there's lot of melody and energy to enjoy. To bad they aren't touring.

Link

 

NPR is having a listening party on Tuesday (3/1) and they'll be streaming the album starting Wednesday.

 

Also, 'Chorus and the Ring' is the best song off Reveal.

You can go to I-Tunes (in the States at least) and preview all the songs. Can't wait for it to come out. Based on these clips and the 5 full songs that I have heard this is going to be a really enjoyable album. I don't think it'll be ranked amongst the very top tier of their catalogue but there's lot of melody and energy to enjoy. To bad they aren't touring.

I will be happy if Christian Bale gets best supporting actor. An amazing performance. The only shame is that he wasn't nominated in the "Best Actor" category. I wouldn't be surprised if Geoffrey Rush wins for "The King's Speech". The latter was an utterly predictable film that left me completely unmoved. One of a long-line of made-for-the-Oscars type films from Miramax. I will also be delighted but surprised if Natalie Portman doesn't win an Oscar for some of the worst acting I have had the displeasure to see in "Black Swan". For 2/3rds of the film her acting consisted 100% of the same gormless expression. It seems that all you have to do to win an Oscar sometimes for best leading lady is to be an attractive actress who plays against type. The other travesty is that Christopher Nolan isn't nominated for best director for "Inception". Again, there's a long tradition of the Oscars not recognising commercially successful films that aim for a wide audience (except for "Titanic").

Overall, I don't think I'll watch. Unlike the Golden Globes the Oscars take themselves way too seriously.

glad to hear i'm not alone on that, it's not even in my fave 10 albums of the year at this point either

 

Greg Kot has posted his review:

 

http://leisureblogs.chicagotribune.com/turn_it_up/2011/02/album-review-radiohead-king-of-limbs.html

 

2.5 outta 4 stars

That's a pretty spot on review. The references to Herbie Hancock and Miles Davis circa "Bitches Brew" are very apt. Likewise the connection to Thom Yorke's "Eraser". With a few more listens, I am really enjoying it.

(I get really tired of the rating many people feel that they have to give it in comparison to the other albums that the band have released. I know this is somewhat natural but isn't better to just enjoy or not enjoy an album on its own merits without constantly trying to rank it like there was an official league of an artist's releases.)

2 quick final points: I really think we might see another release this year. This album feel so much like it could have been a solo release for Thom Yorke and is so compact that something tells me that there were a lot more songs recorded.

Also, if you are a fan of music with strong percussive elements anyone else here a fan of German band CAN? Forget your John Bonham's - their drummer Jaki Liebezeit is a one man drum-machine. "Tago Mago" and "Future Days" are my favourites.

it's okay.

 

i don't think i'll ever gush over anything radiohead does. their music makes me feel claustrophobic and it always sounds so ...depressingly futuristic, i guess. like, if all those horrible visions of the future in 1980s sci-fi movies came true, the music would sound like this. and that's depressing as fuck.

Nicely put - I often feel this way about Radiohead. That said, I love "In Rainbows". After one listen to "King Of Limbs" I am really struck by the percussion on it - especially the first half. It's definitely a cohesive album for better or worse. Wonder if the sneaky buggers have another album they are going to release this year as well. With over 3 years since "In Rainbows" I'd guess they left a lot of stuff off to make this so cohesive.

very well put

Good comments. With names like "Artifice" and "Solace" I half expect you two to be related. They would also make great names for different sides of the same album.

The Suburbs BLOWS away Neon Bible for me... like not even close.

 

 

I would beg to differ. Of course, recognising that all opinion is subjective and personal. In addition to the overall quality, Arcade Fire haven't come close to doing something as good as "No Cars Go" and "Keep The Car Running" on the "The Suburbs". "Ready to Start" might, just might be mentioned in the same breadth. When I saw them in October, I couldn't escape the sinking feeling that all the highlights were the earlier tracks. They are still incredible live but compared to when I saw them in 2005 and 2007 they only real progress was in the stage design and lights.

I very much agree, i never liked the suburbs that much. ........., I am hoping this Grammy win will mean that the voters will start looking more into the creative output of an artist rather than their sales and marketability, hopefully this way we can avoid the "Courtesy grammy" that was bestowed upon Arcade Fire AND Wilco IMO for Ghost is born

Agree completely.

Is anyone still listening to the "Suburbs"? I don't have time to make a list of most over-rated albums of all-time but this would definitely be up there. Dull, boring and far too long. I was so excited for its release up to the point I heard a few clips. Spending time with the record when it came out left me with nothing but ennui. I don't understand why such a musically talented band (and one of the best live bands of the last twenty years) reduced their musical palette so much for this release.

This article from Stereogum is spot-on in my not-so-humble opinion:

http://stereogum.com/624351/double-take-arcade-fire-the-suburbs/top-stories/lead-story/

The songs that I have heard from this album remind me of '90's R.E.M. I was honestly underwhelmed by Accelerate and enjoyed the versions from that album that appeared on Live At The Olympia, although Accelerate was still miles ahead better than Around The Sun. I wouldn't mind seeing them again on tour as it's been 12 years since I saw them last.

To me it's strange that they aren't touring this album. I wonder if this and the fact that this is the last record for Warners Brothers are connected. Are they concerned the promotion and support of the album by WB is going to be be poor so why tour? I dunno.

In any case as a fan I am disappointed. They did an extensive tour in 2008 but that was three years ago. Seems like R.E.M. had become a very part-time thing for the members. Or maybe this might be their last record period and they might just do one more tour next year if they feel up for it.

Discoverer live in the studio on Rolling Stone. This verison beats the album IMO.

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/blogs/rolling-stone-video-blog/exclusive-r-e-m-strips-down-in-powerful-new-video-for-discoverer-20110203

Agreed. Really good version - shame there is no tour - close your ears and you have the opening song of a set.