sherburne on underworld

[mmm skyscraper]

Originally Posted by potatobroth

There is no worse way to stunt your progression than to take 5 year old, unreleased tracks, and call them new.

I wouldn't mind a 12" of Mofo b/w Laughing Tortoise.

[King of Snake]

Originally Posted by patrick

well a counter point to this is that i am 24 and i don't know new orders old stuff as good as their new stuff. i was exposed to their new stuff first/more (other than the 5 or so common classics). I think their last 2 albumns are the best, even now, that i have had exposure to a lot of their earlier albumns...

I was gonna say the same thing. I think NO's last album was great and not can hold it's own against most of the older stuff. I too only got into NO quite recently so I don't have the same emotional realtion to the earlier stuff that someone might have that grew up with those songs.
Same for Underworld, hearing STITI for the first time was a revelation to me and it just clicked with the point I was at in my life and the feelings and emotions I had. So that will always be the "best" album. But as the article illustrates, someone like Sherburne who probably did not have the kind of relation to that album actually thinks it's the weakest! So who's right? Obviously no one, he's as entitled to his opinion as I am, although I disagree with the argumentation he uses.
If the first album of UW someone would hear now was AHDO, they may have a lesser opinion of the other albums, or at least they won't have the added experience of listening to the old stuff to influence their opinion.

btw I realise my first reaction in the thread came across as kinda knee-jerk, but I didn't mean to imply "omg this guy is slagging off UW, what a dick! Everything they do is amazing!" or anything like that. I just thought it sounded like he was pulling out all kinds of arguments and assumptions that didn't make much sense from my point of view and trying to draw parralels with other music instead of taking it at face value. As a general evaluation of UW's career and their future direction it was inadequately researched by disregarding anything they've done since AHDO in 2002, making his conclusions pretty pointless. (anyway this all has been said more clearly and eloquently by others in this thread)

[Sean]

It just keeps on going and going and going, huh? Impressive thread!

Anyway, I've never read anything else by this guy, but I'm inclined to think that he's a bit full of it. He seems to be offering nothing more than his personal opinions and taste in music as some sort of proof of Underworld's success or lack thereof. Commercial success is, of course, easy to track, but his analysis of individual songs and albums seems to be a purely subjective attempt at outlining their artistic success as well. Personally, I feel basically the opposite of how he does. While I loved Dubnobass in it's day, it has dropped to my least favorite of the Underworld LP's while BF has remained at #1 for many years. And Second Toughest is a great album in my opinion, in large part because of phenomenal tracks like Pearl's Girl, not in spite of them as he seems to think. As for AHDO, it does seem like a transition album to me, but I personally see it as a step down from their preceding albums, and the Riverrun series as an artistic step back up to form.

It's just one reviewer's opinion, and it doesn't figure one iota into how I feel about Underworld and the music they make. As long as they keep making more, I'm happy.

[holden]

Originally Posted by Sean

He seems to be offering nothing more than his personal opinions and taste in music as some sort of proof of Underworld's success or lack thereof. Commercial success is, of course, easy to track, but his analysis of individual songs and albums seems to be a purely subjective attempt at outlining their artistic success as well. ...

It's just one reviewer's opinion, and it doesn't figure one iota into how I feel about Underworld and the music they make. As long as they keep making more, I'm happy.

You said it, sir!
I re-read this article and it's telling that the phrase "sounds like" and "seems to" are used a lot. Purely opinion, as most criticism is, although he probably has listened to more tracks from the LPs than most reviewers do.
"With the benefit of a whole lot of hindsight"...sure! I don't agree with his reassessment of Dubno as "accidental" or STITI as boring or thin on ideas. Maybe a decade or more on, they don't have the freshness of sound, but i think each LP and Beacoup Fish included, generated considerable excitement upon release. This reassessment is akin to saying Sgt Pepper or The Wall could've been better or had too many unfinished ideas. Whatever! But at least he has at least a better than average understanding of the band's history and electronic music in general as a dj or producer.

Good discussion generator nonetheless. But like Sean said above, it doesn't bother me what he thinks or anyone else about the band. At least the reviewer tries (maybe unsuccessfully) to support his case. The sales as indicator of relevance is a dirty trick, especiaqlly for the U.S., since electronic doesn't sell well here in general (except maybe Moby or Fatboy) and in all cases less than in the late 90's electronica craze.
i actually prefer UW to be more underground and niche than the dance juggernaut they were poised to become in the mid 90's. If the people buying and listening are liking what they hear, the band is doing something right. When folks on the dirty forums are unsatisfied, then perhaps the gears need oiled. That's clearly not the case.

[kid cue]

Originally Posted by BrotherLovesDub

as for their working process. i'd say it's working better than ever. it's just that what they're getting out of that process isn't to your liking now.

by 'getting out of a process that doesn't work' i meant the album-to-album thing, not this online release thing. i'm down with the online releases if it works for them, even if i'm not so into the music.

*wouldn't mind hearing an UW dubstep mix, tbh*

!!!

Originally Posted by Dirty0900

Underworld themselves dont want to churn out the same kind of stuff.

i thought this was why lots of people weren't into AHDO. Dinosaur Adventure 3D was King of Snake part deux, yeah? and, er ... i guess that was the only glaring rehash.

...was Beaucoup Fish really a big deal when it was released?

also, i don't understand this constant need to emphasize that the article is full of 'just' the author's opinions. one minute people are saying this makes the article useless, the next minute it's that he's trying too hard to make his opinions sound definitive, when they should clearly just be his opinions. it's like you're trying to find a reason to discount the value of criticism or something.

[holden]

Originally Posted by kid cue

...was Beaucoup Fish really a big deal when it was released?

It was. The buzz was palpable. I'm also pretty sure that it was a successful record!

Originally Posted by kid cue

...
also, i don't understand this constant need to emphasize that the article is full of 'just' the author's opinions. one minute people are saying this makes the article useless, the next minute it's that he's trying too hard to make his opinions sound definitive, when they should clearly just be his opinions. it's like you're trying to find a reason to discount the value of criticism or something.

That's our opinion and we're entitled to it!
He raised points worth discussing, and that's a significant value of critiquing. Another value is what i was alluding to in my post above: If UW are doing something wrong, the real fans will let them know right here. Sherburne seems to feel their career has been a mixed bag, but his argument runs out of steam because he doesn't substantiate with facts other than quoting sales figures as a measure of musical worth and "proof" of a fall from grace. Naming tracks that work or don't isn't a compelling argument. Tell us why!

If i can quote him freely, tell me how this is constructive:
"In retrospect, though, Dubnobass begins to look something like an accident: a band-in-transition nailing the sweet spot purely by chance." - but that's all he has to say on this. Purely his opinion, unsupported.

"Second Toughest feels more like a cut-and-paste job, a collage of pieces that don't really have anything to do with one another. "Confusion the Waitress" is the only track that retains the restraint of the earlier album" - but he just praised Dubno for being better than the sum of its parts and drawing on various genres. And since when is the mark of a successful album whether the songs relate with one another? To me, STITI sounds very restrained and taught, but i'd have to give you a lot of words on why to explain. Sherburne doesn't, so i let his statement drop.

"...the album's big singles — "Push Upstairs," "King of Snake," "Moaner" — clang uncomfortably, exercises in strident excess" - what's unconfortable? The drumm pattern? The lyrics? The melody? What's excessive?

"Reduced to facilitating the indefinite buildup of adrenaline and the unbridled release of serotonin, the group ends up flailing in its very pursuit of transcendence" - unless he was in Underworld, this statement has no weight because he cannot possibly know what their intent or situation was.

"At Underworld's worst, it seems to be aping the noxious monotony of the burgeoning progressive house scene — piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents, the music in lockstep with the crowd's drug experience" -- blahhhh. Sez him, obviously not into that scene! Even playing Born Slippy to a festival audience off their ass on whatever, UW has never constructed a song like he claims.

Now, in fairness, when discussing AHDO, at least he mentions musical elements:
"The swirling keyboards, conga and standup bass of "Twist" shows that Hyde and Smith still remember how to create a space of sonic possibility, as overdriven guitar and increasingly frantic Latin percussion turn a somber meditation into a smoldering workout. "Trim" is a fetching little fusion of blues guitar and 808"
but even there, it's couched in broad terms, comparisons, name dropping and buzz adjectives that so often pass as being well educated and "getting it" in music reviews.

So yeah, a nice lil discussion-generator, but not without some coaxing from around these parts!

[kid cue]

errgh i was feeling the short version of yr post, but this...!

Originally Posted by holden

If i can quote him freely, tell me how this is constructive:
"In retrospect, though, Dubnobass begins to look something like an accident: a band-in-transition nailing the sweet spot purely by chance." - but that's all he has to say on this. Purely his opinion, unsupported.

Sherburne justifies his idea that Dubno was a fluke by talking about why he doesn't think the next two albums are as good. and, he clearly goes on in that same paragraph to describe what was good about Dubno (elaborating on the already lucid descriptions in the preceding paragraph) and lacking in STITI:

"Second Toughest feels more like a cut-and-paste job, a collage of pieces that don't really have anything to do with one another. "Confusion the Waitress" is the only track that retains the restraint of the earlier album" - but he just praised Dubno for being better than the sum of its parts and drawing on various genres. And since when is the mark of a successful album whether the songs relate with one another? To me, STITI sounds very restrained and taught, but i'd have to give you a lot of words on why to explain. Sherburne doesn't, so i let his statement drop.

i also would've liked to hear more about why he thinks STITI grasps at straws. this is the weakest part of the article IMO. still, your criticism doesn't read him correctly: he was saying that the individual tracks on Dubno each add up to more than their multiple influences, not that the album itself is more than its individual tracks. and, praising Dubno for drawing on various genres doesn't mean that he can't criticize STITI for doing the same, less successfully. he's saying that the tracks seem to jump around, to more extremes, and also don't sound unified as an album, implying that UW were trying to incorporate lots of different influences for the sake of doing so--or that they simply took on more than they could handle.

"...the album's big singles — "Push Upstairs," "King of Snake," "Moaner" — clang uncomfortably, exercises in strident excess" - what's unconfortable? The drumm pattern? The lyrics? The melody? What's excessive?

this is probably his minimal bias speaking, but i thought these comments made enough sense in the article, given that they follow his comments on how atmosphere and restraint were key successes on the past LPs. and i don't see why he has to go into detail on what specific instruments he doesn't like: it's perfectly feasible to take these statements at face value, given that he's spent the last two paragraphs talking about what he DOES like about UW's music.

i maintain that if this were some other band, people wouldn't feel the need to hold up every last sentence to this level of dissection. it's easy enough to see the broad curve of his argument, and IMO there are enough justifications for it. i think the most viable criticism that's been brought up is that he doesn't talk about any of the recent work (although i feel like the the remixes and online releases would only reinforce his closing statements.)

"Reduced to facilitating the indefinite buildup of adrenaline and the unbridled release of serotonin, the group ends up flailing in its very pursuit of transcendence"

- unless he was in Underworld, this statement has no weight because he cannot possibly know what their intent or situation was.

NO criticism can presume to "know" what any artist's intent was. the point of ALL criticism is to present arguments, ways of thinking, about the work in front of us, from a single perspective, that other people can agree or disagree with. is that not the nature of how audiences interpret art? the rest of the article leads naturally to the conclusions you quoted. and the preceding sentence ("Listening, it's easy to envision Underworld as a casualty of its own success: a main-stage act grown accustomed to playing enormous, amphetamine-fueled festival crowds, where altitude becomes not a luxury but an imperative.") makes it rather clear that this is conjecture--which the reader can either choose to buy or ignore.

"At Underworld's worst, it seems to be aping the noxious monotony of the burgeoning progressive house scene — piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents, the music in lockstep with the crowd's drug experience

" -- blahhhh. Sez him, obviously not into that scene! Even playing Born Slippy to a festival audience off their ass on whatever, UW has never constructed a song like he claims.

you don't think UW live performances use piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents? are you kidding??

Now, in fairness, when discussing AHDO, at least he mentions musical elements:
"The swirling keyboards, conga and standup bass of "Twist" shows that Hyde and Smith still remember how to create a space of sonic possibility, as overdriven guitar and increasingly frantic Latin percussion turn a somber meditation into a smoldering workout. "Trim" is a fetching little fusion of blues guitar and 808"
but even there, it's couched in broad terms, comparisons, name dropping and buzz adjectives that so often pass as being well educated and "getting it" in music reviews.

it's written broadly for a general audience, not the UW connoisseur. and again, i highly doubt this author is trying to prove that he knows a lot. these don't seem any different from music writing at large: there are only so many different ways to say you like a piece of music.

[dubman]

er yeah.
i absolutely love underworld live and all, but hearing a collage for every snare roll they pull would be as funny as the caruso one-liners for CSI miami.
they're all over the place and a pretty definitive part of their live shows.

[stimpee]

Originally Posted by kid cue

you don't think UW live performances use piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents? are you kidding??

i certainly dont... ive seen them almost 20 times live and as a contributor to rtsr i've heard a lot of bootlegs too. they go through lots of musical styles, sometimes with long improvised jams and other times with short and punchy singles. It depends on whether youre seeing them at a festival or not I suppose.

Its possible to criticise a band for making all their songs sounding too samey on an album or and also criticise them for too many musical styles. These are Sherburne's opinions and he's entitled to them. I disagree with them as is my wont. I would say that we have heard the albums and the songs more than Sherburne has and we know them better than he does.

I'm wondering why he has chosen now to write about Underworld. Since AHDO they have diversified a lot and experimented much more. If you thought AHDO was Underworld going through the motions then what has happened since is a backlash to that. Now that UW are free agents they have been able to explore what they want to do, releasing 4 online EPs, a live album and (soon to be) 2 soundtracks.

Originally Posted by kid cue

given that the releases are only made available on underworldlive.com (and publicized on dirty's front page), which is a fairly esoteric website that only long-term / die-hard UW fans are going to check with any regularity, and that their premise is for Rick to experiment wildly with production & structure, it seems like sort of a critic-proof outlet.

I can see where youre coming from with this, but the releases have been given a big online push and every online dance music website and print magazine have given these releases column inches. Also, the releases were not only made available via Underworldlive.com but remixed on 12" available in the shops internationally and via iTunes/beatport etc.

Obviously this wont get the coverage that a CD album would get because they are not available on CD in your average shop but things are changing and its hard for dance artists to get shelf space in the big CD stores and small independents are feeling the squeeze due to the purchasing power of giants like Wal-Mart.

Anyway, just my tuppence worth, for what its worth.

[Sean]

Originally Posted by kid cue

you don't think UW live performances use piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents? are you kidding??

There's REZ, but generally speaking, they've pretty successfully avoided the Norman Cooke school of music, and instead deliver a pretty broad variety of approaches to their tracks, both on their albums and live. Certainly nothing I'd ever define as "piled-up snare rolls and endless ascents". Do you have specific examples in mind that I could check out?