{"id":8119,"date":"2010-03-07T15:08:28","date_gmt":"2010-03-07T19:08:28","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/?p=8119"},"modified":"2010-03-07T15:08:28","modified_gmt":"2010-03-07T19:08:28","slug":"the-list-2010-30-21","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/?p=8119","title":{"rendered":"The List 2010, #30-21"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n\n\n
\n 30<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Elliott Smith<\/td>\n\n 1998<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n XO\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nHe was the king of bittersweet-(or just bitter, sometimes)-but-beautiful pop songs, and this album is full of them. It's a bigger and richer album than his previous ones - with more of a full band sound and fewer numbers with just Smith and his guitar. And normally, I prefer records where the musician has abandoned the band, and is delivering the songs as minimally and directly as possible (ex. Robyn Hitckcock, Joni Mitchell, Nick Drake, etc.). But I think Smith's songs benefit from the added depth. His solo-acoustic stuff is a bit repetitive; he falls back on steady eighth-note strumming a bit too often, for my tastes - giving him the benefit of the doubt, I assume he's playing rhythm guitar behind a melodic lead that only he can hear. But with the band, all of those spots get filled in. And he, or his producer, was smart enough to not over-fill the arrangements. They're big enough to stay interesting, but not so big that they overrun the song. Plus, \"Waltz #2\" is the most tenacious earworm I've ever come across.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 29<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Liz Phair<\/td>\n\n 1993<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Exile In Guyville\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nThis is yet anther of those that I'll go for years without listening to, maybe even thinking it probably wasn't as good as I remembered, that it was just a phase. But once I get around to listening to it again, I can't deny how great it is. The intervals between listens are getting longer, however. But, the strange song structures, the dissonance, the sharp, smart, dark and sarcastic lyrics, the spacey guitars - it was all odd then, and it's still odd today, but it's a smart and charming odd.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 28<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Nick Drake<\/td>\n\n 1972<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Pink Moon\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nUnlike many of the records here, this is a final album. He finally got tired of the strings and horns that had weighed-down his earlier records (an opinion we share), and, except for a single piano overdub on one song, did this one without accompaniment of any kind - and he recorded it in less than four hours. Sadly, he died of an overdose of anti-depressants before he could finish another record, so this was his last. It's dark, raw, melancholy but beautiful. It's just his sleepy voice, his incredible guitar playing, 11 haunted folk-ish songs, 28 minutes. What a way to go out.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 27<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Pink Floyd<\/td>\n\n 1971<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Meddle\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nA relaxed and, at times, playful, record from Mr Floyd. It doesn't try to be big, as all subsequent Floyd records do. There's no central theme or concept tying it all together. It's just a bunch of nicely done Floyd songs - in which, you can hear the seeds of things that would show up on \"Dark Side Of The Moon\", sure. So, you can tell in hindsight where they were going. But, it's nice on its own. Ah.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 26<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n My Bloody Valentine<\/td>\n\n 1991<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Loveless\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nThere's no theme here, either. It's just looped drums and a guitar haze with voices floating around inside it all. Well, that's not all it is. It's also loud with beautiful psychedelic melodies and sheets of screeching dissonance, and it's intentional<\/i> - you can tell that there's nothing accidental about any of the noises swirling around inside this. This is a well-crafted, finely de-tuned, mess.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 25<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Peter Gabriel<\/td>\n\n 1986<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n So\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nNow here's a nostalgic one. I don't know if I've listened to this all the way through in a decade. But, just hearing one or two of the songs is enough to remind me of 1986, and of how amazing this record was to me (and everyone else, it seemed), at the time. And how cool were the videos for \"Sledgehammer\" and \"Big Time\" ?! Very cool, is how cool. Since I was really into King Crimson, at the time, it was also very cool for me hearing that distinct Tony Levin bass\/stick<\/a> sound in the bottom-end.\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 24<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n The Shins<\/td>\n\n 2003<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Chutes Too Narrow\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nOf all the The Shins records, this is the shortest, and the punchiest. It has their catchiest songs, and their fastest songs. It's their least-cluttered, and their sharpest. It's their best.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 23<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Pink Floyd<\/td>\n\n 1977<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Animals\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nThis one is the sound of riding the Greyhound bus from Rochester to Albany, winter 1988, looking out the window, watching the Mohawk river slide by. Cold, dark, lonely. <\/p>\n

Your mileage may vary.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 22<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Bob Dylan<\/td>\n\n 1965<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Highway 61 Revisited\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nIt's wild and exuberant, swirling with Dylan's surreal free-association lyrics and spiked with Mike Bloomfield's raw electric guitar licks. Most of it sounds like a party.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n\n\n
\n 21<\/span><\/td>\n\n <\/td>\n\n\n\n\n\n
\n Pink Floyd<\/td>\n\n 1973<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\n Dark Side Of The Moon\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n\n<\/a><\/a><\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
\nI started out thinking \"The more I listen to this, the more I find myself liking the second side better because that's where most of the songs<\/i> are.\" Then, I went to verify that, and realized that the sound collages - the clocks, airplanes, running, twiddling synthesizers, etc. - don't really take up much of the record. They're interstitial, intros, etc.. And they're only extraneous if you're thinking about the first side as a collection of separate songs, and not as parts of the great tapestry Pink Floyd wove them into. And if I was to discount the entire first side because it's not as song-oriented, I'd miss out on the actual songs: \"Breathe\", \"Time\", and perhaps my favorite Floyd song ever, \"That Great Gig In The Sky\". So, yes, side two is great - \"Money\", \"Us And Them\", \"Brain Damage\", etc. - but, so is side one. Maybe side one's even better.\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n

Every histo tells a story, don't it:
\n<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

30 Elliott Smith 1998 XO He was the king of bittersweet-(or just bitter, sometimes)-but-beautiful pop songs, and this album is full of them. It's a bigger and richer album than his previous ones - with more of a full band sound and fewer numbers with just Smith and his guitar. And normally, I prefer records […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-8119","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-the-list-2010"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8119","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=8119"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8119\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=8119"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=8119"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ok-cleek.com\/blogs\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=8119"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}