Quote:
Originally Posted by negative1
doesn't anyone think its weird the disparity
between the artistic commercial releases,
and 'book of jams' which are amazing?
don't you think the live radio shows have bits
of brilliant tracks, creative efforts from the band?
compared to the by the numbers mixes we hear?
dont' you wonder what the disconnect between
commercial releases and online (and sometimes
free) projects are?
i stand by review 100%, for what it is, no more,
no less....do i tell people to stay away from the excellent
'book of jam' releases? (which suprisingly few people
talk about)...didn't i comment on each video
as it was released good/bad?
yeah, uw puts it stamp of approval on what gets out,
and what is released of course......
by the way holden, previous underworld releases,
had their time and place, and impact....dont you think
they would want to maintain, and keep up to the standard
they set?
|
That's your subjective opinion and you're right to stand by it. But i think you're mixing apples and oranges.
Agree that the artwork of the Books of Jam is probably more compelling that the Bells package. But it's also about format and audience. BoJ are larger format collections, which automatically look better on your larger screen than a 4.75"x4.75" CD liner (or whatevert the gatefold's page dimension is). BoJ is loaded with images, some good, some less interesting...one can clutch onto what they like from the large choice, discard the rest, whereas the comparatively few images of the gatefold are permanent and unavoidable.
BoJ is free and downloaded (i'd suppose) primarily by the hardcore fans. In them, they can do whatever they want. theBells is also a niche purchase (regional or import), but is not necessarily the format for artistic experiments.
As for the radio shows, yes, UW have unveiled some snippets of tracks that sound very interesting. They've also played some pieces which frankly sound unfinished or wouldn't appeal to some for a commercial release. And then, we all go gaa-gaa for tracks like Bamboo, ALaF, 020202...fact is these songs have been floating around for years without completion or release. Further, how can you compare the "by the numbers" mixes by DIFFERENT PRODUCERS with Underworld's own tracks? BigScreen addresses this above. Apples and oranges, my friend.
The disconnect between free and commercial output is simple: audience and intent. Some things are not ready for broad release or wouldn't appeal to the whole fan base. In the free releases, they can do whatever, shoot a lot of arrows, see which stick. Commercial releases cost money to produce (duh) and have a lot more hands on the product from labels, producers, distributors...more restrictions and more need for focusing to consumers.
As for your comment about previous releases having their time and place and impact...yeah? That's true of EVERY release by EVERY artist...it had an impact on someone. Bands change, no one likes every song a particular band made (if they say they do, they're probably lying!). If you don't dig their latest phase, fine. That's no reason to suspect that they've dipped in quality by not reaching the "standard" you've set for them. I've said it before, paraphrasing R&K...OWB is the album they wanted to make for a long while and (my opinion) it's certainly more cohesive that AHDO or perhaps even BF.
Their output in all forms since 2005 or so has been nothing short of prolific and incredibly generous. In my eyes, we've been treated to a luxury of having so much music and art to discuss and critique here, which is fun and is certainly better than having nothing new (a la 2000-AHDO, AHDO - RiverRun).