Red Mosquito

The benefit of being a fully built beefcake is that you can rock whatever the fuck you want.

I certainly wouldn't be bagging your style choices Rangi.

How important is the cohesiveness of an album to you? This comes up a lot in music reviews.

As a digital listener, I couldn't care less. Most of the time I'll cherry pick the parts I love and discard the rest. An album is nothing without the songs, and it's rare that I'll love an album in its entirety, much less rate it based on thematic consistency or flow.

Do we owe it to the artist to appreciate their art in the context they intended? Or do you think a song should be able to stand on its own above all else?

Yeah, I respect that. I just think I'd miss out on so much enjoyment if I needed a full release to tick all of the boxes I guess.

tragabigzanda wrote:I’m an album guy these days. I want to settle into a vibe without having to skip a song or flip a record. Makes it really difficult when there’s an amazing album that has one or two songs that I hate. In those rare cases, I’ll listen digitally m, typically in my car, so I can just skip stuff. But if I’m at home or at my comp working, I’m listening to an album from track 1 onward.

Also in for the full ride. I’d rather settle in for the 45 min experience than just have a thousand playlists from a potpourri of artists. Nothing against the latter, it’s just never been how I roll.

I take my favorite songs and make my own albums. Sometimes I’ll even edit and mix the songs so they transition better it’s fun. I like to pretend the artist would appreciate my choices but they would probably be mortified.

Ello Sailor wrote:Do we owe it to the artist to appreciate their art in the context they intended?

Nah -- I'd imagine most of us fell in love with music by way of circumstantial experiences with radio, MTV, stuff we heard coming out of other people's speakers, etc., likely while we were doing something mundane or generally not artistically minded. I'm a firm believer that once something is out in the world, an artist surrenders any control over how, where, when, why, and by whom it is experienced, and artists who think that listeners "owe" them anything beyond the going compensation rate for their product are setting themselves up for a lifetime of disappointment.

Personally, I enjoy both experiences -- I love mixes, playlists, bouncing from track to track as the spirit moves me, my phone serendipitously shuffling songs in ways I'd never think to, etc. But I also love clicking play on something and just existing in its world until it's said its piece.

In general I will say that I care less about the conceptual elements of "cohesiveness" as time goes on. I just want songs to enjoy. Any aesthetic or conceptual elements that register naturally are a bonus, but I don't think about it nearly as much as I once did.

tragabigzanda wrote:KD got me thinking, so I will asterisk my original response and say that for 80s music, I have a massive 200ish song playlist that I enjoy the heck out of. So many amazing singles from that era that live on mediocre albums.

I'd love to see that playlist!

after Baby Blue popped up on Youtube, I read about Badfinger who so I learned I knew absolutely nothing about...depressing history there

Kevin Davis wrote:In general I will say that I care less about the conceptual elements of "cohesiveness" as time goes on. I just want songs to enjoy. Any aesthetic or conceptual elements that register naturally are a bonus, but I don't think about it nearly as much as I once did.

This is where I'm at. Great post, KD.

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:after Baby Blue popped up on Youtube, I read about Badfinger who so I learned I knew absolutely nothing about...depressing history there

Probably the most dramatic and depressing example of the music business destroying a band.

They were unique because they had an obvious gift for ballads, but also the ability to rock out convincingly with a dueling guitar thing, and they weren't afraid to do fucked-up funny things too. They had some excellent songs. Similar to the Beatles but in an early 70's vein.

Wendy Carlos's Twin wrote:

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:after Baby Blue popped up on Youtube, I read about Badfinger who so I learned I knew absolutely nothing about...depressing history there

Probably the most dramatic and depressing example of the music business destroying a band.

They were unique because they had an obvious gift for ballads, but also the ability to rock out convincingly with a dueling guitar thing, and they weren't afraid to do fucked-up funny things too. They had some excellent songs. Similar to the Beatles but in an early 70's vein.

yeah i didn’t realize how connected they were to the Beatles…Day After Day is a George product through and through

i haven’t heard any of the guitar heavier songs…any recs?

lennytheweedwhacker wrote:i haven’t heard any of the guitar heavier songs…any recs?

"Constitution" and "Suitcase (Original Version)" are good examples.

My personal BADFINGER playlist (though it could potentially be longer)...

01 Come And Get It
02 I Can't Take It
03 No Matter What
04 Take It All
05 Baby Blue (Single Mix)
06 I'd Die, Babe
07 Name Of The Game
08 Day After Day
09 Suitcase (Original Version)
10 Blind Owl
11 Icicles
12 Regular
13 Where Do We Go From Here
14 Lonely You
15 Just A Chance
16 Got To Get Out Of Here
17 Dennis
18 Andy Norris

i want to see them now.

they had a good run.

This thread got me thinking about how there are parts of the music industry you'd assume pay much more than they do. I used to know a guy who worked as a touring musician for a mid-level pop act playing to 5000 people a night and he'd get about $50 a show (plus a small per diem for food)