Dirty Forums

Dirty Forums (https://www.borndirty.org/forums/index.php)
-   underworld. (https://www.borndirty.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5)
-   -   Is Underworld innovative? (https://www.borndirty.org/forums/showthread.php?t=17092)

Future Proof 09-07-2010 12:15 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Fail conjecture arguement is fail! Moving on...

Future Proof 09-07-2010 12:34 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by cacophony (Post 144251)
but just to use a sacred cow as an example, STITI was innovative. yes yes yes, you can point to all kinds of musicians sharing the landscape that were moving in a similar direction, but UW crafted a sound that was distinctly different and more evolved than their previous release and they packaged it with an intelligence that superseded their contemporaries.

That's all I was saying. I don't expect every band to do that with every release but when a band has, and doesn't? It's a bit of a letdown, even though it's like trying to bottle lightning.

34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j 09-07-2010 12:40 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Future Proof (Post 144256)
I assume you wouldn't know what music sounds like when it raises the bar. Otherwise you wouldn't be claiming that dubno and stiti didn't bring something different to the table.

yes but "great" albums don't really need to be that innovative. Take the Cars first album, or maybe even Technique by New Order (to use another sacred cow) - neither of them really were terribly innovative, but they were great albums besides...

cacophony 09-07-2010 12:45 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j (Post 144263)
yes but "great" albums don't really need to be that innovative. Take the Cars first album, or maybe even Technique by New Order (to use another sacred cow) - neither of them really were terribly innovative, but they were great albums besides...

agreed. i was thinking something similar after my last post.

bands don't have to move the bar to produce great work. radiohead, as an example, has followed a gradual evolution and frequently revisits familiar territory with brilliance.

but when a group does consistently raise the bar it can make fans like us a bit greedy. we want it want it want it and we're disappointed when we don't get it. it doesn't mean the work isn't good, we just get greedy and want new and sparkley ideas.

Future Proof 09-07-2010 12:51 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 34958hq439-qjw9v5jq298v5j (Post 144263)
yes but "great" albums don't really need to be that innovative. Take the Cars first album, or maybe even Technique by New Order (to use another sacred cow) - neither of them really were terribly innovative, but they were great albums besides...

You're right, and there are more than a few albums I've listened to where I've felt that nothing new was added, but old ideas had just got polished to a point of near perfection. That said, Barking is NOT that album. It's not a bad album, but!!! It's not (IMHO) a classic, and my axe to grind came entirely from the fact that this UW album felt much more nestled in the middle of the pack than any other. I talked about OWB in my original post and how I felt that it was largely a failure. However, it was a risky, daring album with an original and unique feel... and it didn't work.

I have not listened to every album ever made myself. But I've listened to enough to know somewhat when artists are playing it safe, and when they are trying to write something completely different from both A.) their back catalog and B.) their contemporaries. And truth be told, I haven't unanimously liked anything Underworld has put out since STITI. But in spite of the fact that I've had a hard time with the rest of their releases I can feel in their music that they're always reaching and digging for something deeper. Always except for with Barking, a good album with no ambition except to (it seems) make everyone bust a move "when the lights go down".

But whatever, they've contributed enough to their scene and I'd wager that they personally had a ton of fun working with others, and enjoyed how much pressure was lifted when other people were brought in to do some of the heavy moving. This was a good record for them, and with good results in places. It's a different animal than everything else they've done however, and the samey-ness of this record compared to the modern scene is a major detraction.

BrotherLovesDub 09-07-2010 12:52 PM

Re: Thoughts on Barking (Track by Track)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by dubman (Post 144258)
BLD has listened to every record ever made

this is part of the master plan.

Dirty0900 09-07-2010 01:41 PM

Re: Is Underworld innovative?
 
Yes

starfox203 09-07-2010 01:54 PM

Re: Is Underworld innovative?
 
This album makes me happy. That's all the innovation I need.

purlieu 09-07-2010 04:26 PM

Re: Is Underworld innovative?
 
To be fair, they've come out and done an intentionally "poppy" album, collaborating with a number of varied producers. If that isn't different enough from their back catalogue (and most of their peers, especially following an album like OWB), I think people are getting picky.

BrotherLovesDub 09-07-2010 04:39 PM

Re: Is Underworld innovative?
 
Innovative by definition means 'to invent or begin to apply'. Underworld are not and have not been innovators in electronic music. This is no slight to Underworld. I don't really put much weight in being innovative. They've improved and excelled at a style but technically, they cannot take credit for being innovators of that style.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.