"Variety is the spice of life", said some poet. Whilst true, he potentially wouldn't have considered "variety" eating 2 different flavours of Pringles in the same bowl or taking some time away from collecting dusty records to shoot virtual prostitutes in the face. But that's just the way life is now, isn't it? Here we are, taking a break from vinyl to discuss the big entertainment release, Grand Theft Auto 5.
What about midnight releases? Sure queuing up in the cold with a bunch of nerds to buy a video game you will be too tired to play sounds like fun, but what is it really like? To be perfectly honest, I'm not 100% sure why I was actually there, other than it beat sitting at home doing something more worthwhile in the Tuesday evening showdown. I enjoy videogames, less so now than I used to, but still very much so, but I couldn't really qualify as a "gamer" or even a huge Grand Theft Auto fan. I highly enjoyed "The Last of Us", but that was several months ago. I sometimes play Fifa (it's not even a gamer game). My PC can't run anything but Minecraft and Football Manager, as of now both abandoned due to my all round uselessness. Max Payne 3 was pretty awesome. Got halfway through Far Cry 3 before my brother decided he was finished with it and just sold it. Gran Turismo 5 is fun every now and then. That's pretty much since January I think. My claim to fame is one hundred percenting Red Dead Redemption (but not the expansion, "Undead Nightmare"), a game all round deserving of universal acclaim, and a level of art that surpasses many films. But GTA? I enjoyed IV and found it too was a (for the most part) gripping and praiseworthy game, but a didn't even own the previous iterations. I've the same number of GTA titles as I have copies of GT5 (2 copies, for reasons I could not discuss here. But I will consider speculation.). Regardless of my lack of credentials, I queued for ages out in the cold. Would I recommend it? Yeah, why not. Would I go again? Think I'll just wait for the postman next time.
What of the game everyone loves to discuss. It has rightly achieved universal acclaim among gaming publications. Even backlash has been minimal. The general consensus is that most of those who care find it acceptable, and very small minority have a problem with it. Even these guys are getting to the stage that they are being shouted down (see BBC comment section here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-24066068). Rightly? I personal don't think so, as that isn't a debate. Regardless of that most people just don't care.
If I can add anything, it would be only to reinforce that everything you have heard is probably correct, in that the game is awesome, on a technical level, on a narrative level (to a point) and in terms of gameplay. The game is also crude, tasteless and nasty in many cases. But what else is there to expect? However, I find it loses some of it's edge in favour of a crassness in a few cases. The murder of an irritating figure of culture via explosion to the face on live TV is intended to be an us against "the shit they give us" joke, but it comes across as immature and more importantly lacking in any substance. Like those photoshopped images of Justin Bieber being slapped by a fish (or something) that often give the sense the creator has an intense love-hate relationship. Like when teenage boys think the way to impress a girl is to lob pencils at them. A lack of substance defines some of the games humour outside of the narrative.
The game has also come under minor covering fire for it's portrayal of women, particularly in a Gamespot review. Since the reviewer was a woman, and so could only be a militant feminist, the internet has again shouted her down. Personally, given the substance of the story is male orientated life, for example the father/son running theme, the reduction of women to supporting roles (and not a playable character) is justified. However, in many cases women are the subject of ridicule (new age fitness coaches, promiscuous LA women, stay at home mothers). Men are just as much the subject of ridicule, but in such a male orientated game it seems cheap. It's not sexist as such, but a fairly cheap shot considering female Grand Theft Auto players are in the minority. Especially as men deserve far more of the GTA parody than women, having made the dominant cock ups of the past however many years. Culturally, women are not yet afforded the same rights as men. Rockstar maybe being bold by taking women as equal for stick and so equal in everything, but I suspect not. Particularity as (so far) only one woman has been not the subject of ridicule (a hacker who I haven't yet heard speak and is a very minor character). Further, (again so far) not a single character has reacted to the satirical misogyny. This was the key point of the Gamespot review. The parody is far more effective if it is responded to in game and shown up for what it is. However, I have a theory that the mass appeal of the game means that Rockstar were hoping those who noticed appreciated its satirical nature and those who didn't could get a cheap laugh at the expense of a woman. Whilst I get how in actual fact the humour makes a genuine point against perceived cultural misogyny. Yet for Rockstar to climb onto that pedestal they could have made more of an effort.
The above might suggest I dislike the game. I should re-emphasise that it's a dicussion of quality, not taste and that the criticisms are in the main leveled at the surrounding "satire" of LA and modern US life, rather than the narrative. Personally it's one of the best games I have ever played. But critical appraisal drives quality. There's no point just saying how wonderful it is. And as a male gamer, I'd quite like to show it's not just lesbian militant feminists who agree.
Back to records next time. But it's nice to try and cash in on some passing internet traffic.
"You can't repo the assets of a dead man, bitch sitting chief asshole."
There's no points for that.
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Sunday, 15 September 2013
[EMOTIONAL FLASHBACK!] Summer 2011 - The Kinks - The Kinks Are The Village Green Preservation Society (otherwise known as the greatest album ever made)
Some albums have a strong capacity for emotional connection. You won't notice the bond is forming as you listen in the past. It's only once you reach the future you hear the album as a little time capsule, one that encapsulates a feeling like no other medium can.
The Kinks Are The Village Green Preservation Society is often described a Ray Davies capsule of a long gone English way of life, however to say this is to not fully appreciate it's resonance. The album is more like a box in which you can place your own version of the past. Tracks like "Do You Remember Walter", "Picture Book" and "People Take Pictures of Each Other" have a spaciousness in which the listener can store their own recollections and emotions. The album stores memory in a way that nothing else does. Playing it is like opening a picture book. Whilst the past seems intangible, it's as vivid as any print. It's in your head.
Village Green is rather like the key and the instructions to open up a memory. Go down the hall, take the second left and it's the third draw down. Yeah the one labelled "blissful memories". Davies even makes the comparison, the song "People Take Pictures of each Other" takes the whole purpose of the album and runs with it. Actual physical objects are proof, but not the feeling. For me, this album holds inside it the summer of 2011, and a lot that preceded it. Revisiting it is like looking into a personal picture book.
All of this talk barely scratches the surface of the album itself, and the differing interpretations. But that quickly gets boring. Life is a lot simpler when it's kept simple. We haven't even without discussing the fact that the album is a thoroughly enjoyable listen; one could easily get lost inside it. The middle of side two, containing some of the most interesting cuts on the album, provides the feeling that only a good book can match.
My copy of the vinyl is fittingly awesome. It's a gate-fold that features both the mono and stereo mix on disc one and two respectively. It's on translucent green splattered vinyl, that when held up to the sun, mimics an art of the sun shining through summer trees. It's quite something, and is limited to 1000 copies (mine is number 166). However, this does mean that it has now sold out, and so the used route is the way to go. As ever, condition is of the utmost priority given the nature of the pressing. A note as to whether digital masters were used, I have no idea. The sleeve states that contained is the original mono vinyl and the original stereo album, which suggests it's as close as you can get. It's sounds great to my ears. I'm fairly discerning.
Which is better, mono or stereo? I find the mono brings the best out of many of the tracks, in particular "Wicked Annabella" which packs far more punch. However, I often find myself playing the stereo edition, which is relatively softer and spacious. Given the quality of most stereo 1968 albums, it holds up well.
The original mono pressing will find you reaching far into your pockets (the depth of £300.00 to be precise). You'll probably find the stereo goes even higher. I find cheaper copies of this album in the UK are notoriously difficult to get hold of, but I would recommend avoiding paying £25.00 plus for a none limited/early press copy. Trawling eBay may be your best bet.
And there you have it. Have a great day.
"DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUUUUUHHHH"
3 points for that. It's an little easier.
The Kinks Are The Village Green Preservation Society is often described a Ray Davies capsule of a long gone English way of life, however to say this is to not fully appreciate it's resonance. The album is more like a box in which you can place your own version of the past. Tracks like "Do You Remember Walter", "Picture Book" and "People Take Pictures of Each Other" have a spaciousness in which the listener can store their own recollections and emotions. The album stores memory in a way that nothing else does. Playing it is like opening a picture book. Whilst the past seems intangible, it's as vivid as any print. It's in your head.
Village Green is rather like the key and the instructions to open up a memory. Go down the hall, take the second left and it's the third draw down. Yeah the one labelled "blissful memories". Davies even makes the comparison, the song "People Take Pictures of each Other" takes the whole purpose of the album and runs with it. Actual physical objects are proof, but not the feeling. For me, this album holds inside it the summer of 2011, and a lot that preceded it. Revisiting it is like looking into a personal picture book.
All of this talk barely scratches the surface of the album itself, and the differing interpretations. But that quickly gets boring. Life is a lot simpler when it's kept simple. We haven't even without discussing the fact that the album is a thoroughly enjoyable listen; one could easily get lost inside it. The middle of side two, containing some of the most interesting cuts on the album, provides the feeling that only a good book can match.
My copy of the vinyl is fittingly awesome. It's a gate-fold that features both the mono and stereo mix on disc one and two respectively. It's on translucent green splattered vinyl, that when held up to the sun, mimics an art of the sun shining through summer trees. It's quite something, and is limited to 1000 copies (mine is number 166). However, this does mean that it has now sold out, and so the used route is the way to go. As ever, condition is of the utmost priority given the nature of the pressing. A note as to whether digital masters were used, I have no idea. The sleeve states that contained is the original mono vinyl and the original stereo album, which suggests it's as close as you can get. It's sounds great to my ears. I'm fairly discerning.
Which is better, mono or stereo? I find the mono brings the best out of many of the tracks, in particular "Wicked Annabella" which packs far more punch. However, I often find myself playing the stereo edition, which is relatively softer and spacious. Given the quality of most stereo 1968 albums, it holds up well.
The original mono pressing will find you reaching far into your pockets (the depth of £300.00 to be precise). You'll probably find the stereo goes even higher. I find cheaper copies of this album in the UK are notoriously difficult to get hold of, but I would recommend avoiding paying £25.00 plus for a none limited/early press copy. Trawling eBay may be your best bet.
And there you have it. Have a great day.
"DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUUUUUHHHH"
3 points for that. It's an little easier.
Mid-January 2012 - The Libertines - Up The Bracket and The Libertines
I've just come back from being out.
I have been round and about.
Just when you think you have seen it all.
Your gonna walk into a wall.
Well that's what I think.
From my position above the kitchen sink.
Looking down on those below.
Even if although
I don't know
what time it is.
Or was.
Life doesn't ever work out quite as nicely as you'd like. Ideally, things would fit in place in a cohesive storyline, detailing your life from the present to know. Decisions were rational, magical moments were appreciated and everything had a slant that, viewed from the angle of the future, could be appreciated. Clearly it doesn't and it never will. Once you work out that, oddly enough everything looks nice and thought out. You just consider the jagged edges personal charm. Even if, in some cases, they are deeply irritating.
Not to trample over what could be potentially profound with vinyl records, but I do have a deeply irritating jagged edge. Having been very thoughtfully bought my (joint with The Stone Roses) favourite album of the current period for my brand new record player to kick start my life in vinyl, The Libertines Up The Bracket, I was very pleased. Until it skipped right at the end, which was very much confusing for someone new to vinyl. So rather than investigate (and inevitably clean some dust), I just took it back and waited for another one to arrive in the shop. It never did. As it turns out, that copy was a first press that would currently cost me at least £25.00 ( the copy I owned was £15.00). Deeply irritating? Now it's in formed and functional words, it would seem not. Yet it still is a little. That's just how life is. I'll always have that story to tell. Even if it is a pretty shit story.
Fortunately, I currently own a first press of the second self titled Libertines album (I replaced a repress I purchased in mid January with the first press purchased some months later. That's the only thing that links this to mid January). It sounds alright, it's in decent condition and is probably worth the "up to £20" I paid for it. I don't think the mastering is all that awesome, it sounds roughly similar to the CD, but it does have a nice printed inner. Otherwise there's the 2008 repress which is decent enough, although the printed inner is reduced to a sheet of printed laminated paper, and the vinyl sits in the white inner. From then on it depends on what you want from the album. I've also heard of a thicker pressing (or gatefold or something) limited edition pressing of this album, you may want to track down one of those if you are up for something to jazz up your collections indie section.
Up the Bracket is a little more complicated. For a start, the UK pressing does NOT feature the track "What a Waster" in either original issue or repress, but the 2002 US pressing does. Be careful people selling sealed represses - they are unlikely to contain the track. Only buy from those who know, if that is what you want. Otherwise the UK Rough Trade first press is nice, the repress follows the same format as the second album.There is also a red vinyl edition I know very little about. The track "Mockingbird" is also not featured on any 12" vinyl. The track "What a Waster" can be obtained on single (which I think may include "Mockingbird B-Side") but it is fairly pricey in decent enough condition for a single. One to look after if purchased.
And there we go. You may be able to guess. This is fresh off the press. Of my brain. Have a nice day.
"Duh duh duh duh de duh duhhhhh.... duhduhduhduh duh duh duh duh *wupdupdeewoop*"
As usual, 5 points for the correct source of the quote.
I have been round and about.
Just when you think you have seen it all.
Your gonna walk into a wall.
Well that's what I think.
From my position above the kitchen sink.
Looking down on those below.
Even if although
I don't know
what time it is.
Or was.
Life doesn't ever work out quite as nicely as you'd like. Ideally, things would fit in place in a cohesive storyline, detailing your life from the present to know. Decisions were rational, magical moments were appreciated and everything had a slant that, viewed from the angle of the future, could be appreciated. Clearly it doesn't and it never will. Once you work out that, oddly enough everything looks nice and thought out. You just consider the jagged edges personal charm. Even if, in some cases, they are deeply irritating.
Not to trample over what could be potentially profound with vinyl records, but I do have a deeply irritating jagged edge. Having been very thoughtfully bought my (joint with The Stone Roses) favourite album of the current period for my brand new record player to kick start my life in vinyl, The Libertines Up The Bracket, I was very pleased. Until it skipped right at the end, which was very much confusing for someone new to vinyl. So rather than investigate (and inevitably clean some dust), I just took it back and waited for another one to arrive in the shop. It never did. As it turns out, that copy was a first press that would currently cost me at least £25.00 ( the copy I owned was £15.00). Deeply irritating? Now it's in formed and functional words, it would seem not. Yet it still is a little. That's just how life is. I'll always have that story to tell. Even if it is a pretty shit story.
Fortunately, I currently own a first press of the second self titled Libertines album (I replaced a repress I purchased in mid January with the first press purchased some months later. That's the only thing that links this to mid January). It sounds alright, it's in decent condition and is probably worth the "up to £20" I paid for it. I don't think the mastering is all that awesome, it sounds roughly similar to the CD, but it does have a nice printed inner. Otherwise there's the 2008 repress which is decent enough, although the printed inner is reduced to a sheet of printed laminated paper, and the vinyl sits in the white inner. From then on it depends on what you want from the album. I've also heard of a thicker pressing (or gatefold or something) limited edition pressing of this album, you may want to track down one of those if you are up for something to jazz up your collections indie section.
Up the Bracket is a little more complicated. For a start, the UK pressing does NOT feature the track "What a Waster" in either original issue or repress, but the 2002 US pressing does. Be careful people selling sealed represses - they are unlikely to contain the track. Only buy from those who know, if that is what you want. Otherwise the UK Rough Trade first press is nice, the repress follows the same format as the second album.There is also a red vinyl edition I know very little about. The track "Mockingbird" is also not featured on any 12" vinyl. The track "What a Waster" can be obtained on single (which I think may include "Mockingbird B-Side") but it is fairly pricey in decent enough condition for a single. One to look after if purchased.
And there we go. You may be able to guess. This is fresh off the press. Of my brain. Have a nice day.
"Duh duh duh duh de duh duhhhhh.... duhduhduhduh duh duh duh duh *wupdupdeewoop*"
As usual, 5 points for the correct source of the quote.
Friday, 13 September 2013
New Year 2011 - Radiohead - The Bends
If you've ever played a 45 followed by a 33, I guarantee you have at either stage (or both) forgotten to set the speed. And as someone who played Beggars Banquet by the Rolling Stones all the way through 13.6% faster than it was designed to play, I can tell you it's kind of infuriating.
Whilst I can't link the previous rant to New Year or Radiohead, I will continue regardless. The Bends is distinctly personal album - to Thom Yorke maybe - but actually to the listener. It's therefore one that I, although have moved on from, as often happens, will always have a spot for and will often return to. It's also got brilliant acoustics going on inside, so best of both worlds if you like.
Personal comfort zone and high fidelity. What more is there?
(P.S. don't say "OK Computer").
If you are interested in whether The Bends is an all analog release (recorded, mastered and pressed to vinyl) you will probably not be pleased to know that I haven't got a clue. It certainly is has a warm, acoustic-cy vibe going on. That's all that matters really. I've assumed it was recorded to tape and that's done me well so far.
As happens with beginning a record collection, there is always a period of crossover. You have CD's, or even MP3's from a previous existence, some you may want to renew in flat black disk format, some can wait. Maybe you want to start afresh. Having begun some kind of music journey prior to my turntable, there were plenty of albums I wanted own in vinyl. The Bends represented an album I was really into around this time, and it was quite possibly the first album I ordered online. It was the first album I received in the post, and at the cost of about £13.00 I had it in my hands New Years eve.
My pressing is the 2008 Parlophone reissue which can be got hold of new for about £15.00. The first press has minor distinctions (Parlophone "£" on the record label for example), and can be obtained for about £25.00. Potentially this is not a bad investment, although I cannot verify whether the sound quality or pressing quality is any different. Records are sold in such few numbers nowadays (since the CD) that there is very little degradation in quality over continued issues, as is often claimed of Beatles albums for example. However, there is a minor distinction between the CD issue and the vinyl in terms of loudness, suggesting a different mastering technique and therefore making the vinyl a desirable acquisition. Check the DR Database for more information regarding this :http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/index.php?search_artist=radiohead&search_album=the+bends .
The other question is the latest Capitol issues. I have owned the Capitol repress of OK Computer, and I can verify that it sounds very similar to the Parlophone issue with a slightly different label and matrix gubbins. Thicker vinyl may make that issue more your thing but I wouldn't get caught up the 180 g debate. I am fully unable to discern the difference: my favorite pressings were pressed in the 1960's not on 180 g vinyl. Some say it is more sustainable in terms of wear and tear. Other people say Paul McCartney died in 1966. Who knows? However, word of mouth (and forum) often regards the Capitol issues in poorly (a Google search could verify this). Your best bet is the UK Parlophone 2008 reissue that sounds awesome and is nicely packaged - it has a proper picture inner sleeve for example (VG+ is fairly easy to obtain). Unless obviously you go for the first press, and you can't go wrong. But stick to EX or above with this one, being collectible is it's major selling point.
And there you have it. Have a nice day.
[*faaaaadddeee oouuutttt* du dud dud udh du dahhh dahhh dahh dehhh daahh deh daah dahhh ....]
[1 point for that one. It's quite easy]
P.S.S. I actually love OK Computer. It was a top five album for a period.
P.S.S.S. I know Paul McCartney wasn't killed in a car accident. He was hired by the FBI to fight intergalactic space wars in a double team with a notable US historical-political figure. New Paul McCartney is actually a daytime television personality who is Paul in his spare time.
Whilst I can't link the previous rant to New Year or Radiohead, I will continue regardless. The Bends is distinctly personal album - to Thom Yorke maybe - but actually to the listener. It's therefore one that I, although have moved on from, as often happens, will always have a spot for and will often return to. It's also got brilliant acoustics going on inside, so best of both worlds if you like.
Personal comfort zone and high fidelity. What more is there?
(P.S. don't say "OK Computer").
If you are interested in whether The Bends is an all analog release (recorded, mastered and pressed to vinyl) you will probably not be pleased to know that I haven't got a clue. It certainly is has a warm, acoustic-cy vibe going on. That's all that matters really. I've assumed it was recorded to tape and that's done me well so far.
As happens with beginning a record collection, there is always a period of crossover. You have CD's, or even MP3's from a previous existence, some you may want to renew in flat black disk format, some can wait. Maybe you want to start afresh. Having begun some kind of music journey prior to my turntable, there were plenty of albums I wanted own in vinyl. The Bends represented an album I was really into around this time, and it was quite possibly the first album I ordered online. It was the first album I received in the post, and at the cost of about £13.00 I had it in my hands New Years eve.
My pressing is the 2008 Parlophone reissue which can be got hold of new for about £15.00. The first press has minor distinctions (Parlophone "£" on the record label for example), and can be obtained for about £25.00. Potentially this is not a bad investment, although I cannot verify whether the sound quality or pressing quality is any different. Records are sold in such few numbers nowadays (since the CD) that there is very little degradation in quality over continued issues, as is often claimed of Beatles albums for example. However, there is a minor distinction between the CD issue and the vinyl in terms of loudness, suggesting a different mastering technique and therefore making the vinyl a desirable acquisition. Check the DR Database for more information regarding this :http://www.dr.loudness-war.info/index.php?search_artist=radiohead&search_album=the+bends .
The other question is the latest Capitol issues. I have owned the Capitol repress of OK Computer, and I can verify that it sounds very similar to the Parlophone issue with a slightly different label and matrix gubbins. Thicker vinyl may make that issue more your thing but I wouldn't get caught up the 180 g debate. I am fully unable to discern the difference: my favorite pressings were pressed in the 1960's not on 180 g vinyl. Some say it is more sustainable in terms of wear and tear. Other people say Paul McCartney died in 1966. Who knows? However, word of mouth (and forum) often regards the Capitol issues in poorly (a Google search could verify this). Your best bet is the UK Parlophone 2008 reissue that sounds awesome and is nicely packaged - it has a proper picture inner sleeve for example (VG+ is fairly easy to obtain). Unless obviously you go for the first press, and you can't go wrong. But stick to EX or above with this one, being collectible is it's major selling point.
And there you have it. Have a nice day.
[*faaaaadddeee oouuutttt* du dud dud udh du dahhh dahhh dahh dehhh daahh deh daah dahhh ....]
[1 point for that one. It's quite easy]
P.S.S. I actually love OK Computer. It was a top five album for a period.
P.S.S.S. I know Paul McCartney wasn't killed in a car accident. He was hired by the FBI to fight intergalactic space wars in a double team with a notable US historical-political figure. New Paul McCartney is actually a daytime television personality who is Paul in his spare time.
28/12/2011 - The Stone Roses 45 RPM Limited Edition
You do suffer from hangovers. You can't just *not* get them. You are not one of those people who "just don't suffer woopedy doo". Pretty obvious, I know, but I feel it is something that must be discussed. It plants a false sense of security in the mind of the night before, that ultimately leads to an "under normal circumstances" capable human brain taking the executive decision to drink a pint with a picture of a goat on it because of the goat.
As you can probably tell, I'm mildly hungover. Post Christmas is hangover like, yet a pleasant hangover. And in my opinion these exist (goat beer fueled hangovers are explicitly in the unpleasant category). Quiet days of sleep, double albums, nice food - a comfortable drowsiness (not a splitting headache). And barring the unfortunate 4 hour shift at *a high profile budget clothing chain* it was quite pleasant.
As with any hangover, there are golden rules:
1) No whinging. The silent sufferer garners the most sympathy.
2) Don't wimp out on paracetamol. It's wimpy.
3) Contrary to popular "medical advice" black coffee is a necessity (just have a glass of water as well).
But most importantly:
4) Don't go shopping. Just don't do it.
Post-Christmas sales. Oh.
As with any rule, there are exceptions, trawling through the tranquility of the record store is the exception, especially when you consider everyone else is hanging also. There's a level of mutual respect not found in *a high profile budget clothing chain*. Taking the canal route to avoid the general unpleasantness of town is recommended. It was here I purchased my first album: "The Stone Roses", for the reason being that it was my all time favorite album at the time, of which listening to brought previously unparalleled levels of ecstasy (funny that) and wonder to my relatively inexperienced ears. I have a mental top five that continually evolves that normally features somewhere between 5 and 10 albums that I could classify as in my current "Top Five". For a long time this was undisputed in it's position, unsinkable by anything. How could anything be better than "I am the Resurrection"? It was quite uncomprehending to even consider.
The the past is history and things change, and yet it is still testimony to the album that it could inspire in such away, even if in the future I was to learn more about the magicians behind the speakers, discover Ian "fuckin'" Brown and watch them drag their arses onto stage to karaoke to their greatest hits. I like to think of the album as a separate entity - it couldn't have been created by mere mortals. In that sense it's still one of the greatest albums ever made.
It's here also I learned by first big vinyl lesson. Coloured vinyl in plastic cover and white paper sleeve? It's probably fake. I picked it up on marble red vinyl, and it looked actually pretty cool. It was only later I would find it to be an unofficial release (via Discogs), recorded presumably from the original or the CD. How could I build a collection on such dubious foundations. I sat up late at night thinking, tossing and turning, stewing, until I established my position. With a heavy heart, it would have to be replaced.
(Got decent money on eBay for it though, some people have the sense not to care).
Trawling through eBay at some point in the future, I happened to stumble upon The Stone Roses as a gatefold double album just about to end. About £15.00 made it mine. This was almost the next mistake I made, having failed to completely understand the importance of condition. The sleeve is a conservative VG, the records themselves VG to VG+ so I was not badly stung, yet it could have been worse. The general rule is VG+ (maybe VG) or higher vinyl condition if you want to appreciate it (as ever, there are exceptions). And it turned out to be probably the most interesting album in my collection so far (I was yet to discover my grandad's first press Beatles albums, stolen by my dad and in turn stolen by me).
The catalogue number ORE ZLP 502 makes this a 1991 limited edition 45 RPM double album edition of the album - sure enough mine is number 00316 (of at least 20,000 as far as I can tell, maybe more) making it in some sense, kind of collectible. To my inexperienced record collection, it was essentially royalty. I spent a lot of time carefully looking at it, considering it and of course listening to it.
The sound quality itself is very bright. Like bright like a big bright blinding light slapping you in the face to an uptempo bass drum. It's down to preference and setup whether this makes it the best sounding album ever or just a little too much. With the right mood, time and outlook, it's downright hypnotic. Just closing your eyes and feeling the sounds swoop around the room and your head is quite unparalleled, and it was obviously a world away from the red copy I owned. For me then, and even now - it's fantastic. I don't think you could go wrong if you got it for a decent price.
With enough scouring you could pick this up in decent nick for £15.00 to £20.00, otherwise it's £30.00 plus. The first press of the album ORE LP 502 is similarly pricey, currently £30.00 plus for a worthwhile condition. As ever, stay away from coloured vinyl copies if you want a legitimate one. And steer clear of remasters and picture disks (unless they are your thing). It's not a rare album, yet you might be hard pushed to play less than £20.00. If you are up for spending money, go with a first press in as decent a condition as you can (EX is recommended) even if this takes you well above £30.00. Looked after and carefully played they hold value, and this album has a definite first press edition separate from the standard with raised gold lettering on the cover. It's a great way to give your collection some life. Aside from that, I recommend trawling eBay. Look for used, and the older the better (keep vinyl condition above VG+, the sleeve can be whatever really) - see if you can get lucky.
And there you have it. The Stone Roses. Album of the late 1980's. Start of the early 1990's. On vinyl.
How's that for a slice of fried blog.
In the words of John Squire's guitar: "dur dur dur dur durh durh duhrrr duh duh duh duh der"
5 points for the correct source of the above quote.
As you can probably tell, I'm mildly hungover. Post Christmas is hangover like, yet a pleasant hangover. And in my opinion these exist (goat beer fueled hangovers are explicitly in the unpleasant category). Quiet days of sleep, double albums, nice food - a comfortable drowsiness (not a splitting headache). And barring the unfortunate 4 hour shift at *a high profile budget clothing chain* it was quite pleasant.
As with any hangover, there are golden rules:
1) No whinging. The silent sufferer garners the most sympathy.
2) Don't wimp out on paracetamol. It's wimpy.
3) Contrary to popular "medical advice" black coffee is a necessity (just have a glass of water as well).
But most importantly:
4) Don't go shopping. Just don't do it.
Post-Christmas sales. Oh.
As with any rule, there are exceptions, trawling through the tranquility of the record store is the exception, especially when you consider everyone else is hanging also. There's a level of mutual respect not found in *a high profile budget clothing chain*. Taking the canal route to avoid the general unpleasantness of town is recommended. It was here I purchased my first album: "The Stone Roses", for the reason being that it was my all time favorite album at the time, of which listening to brought previously unparalleled levels of ecstasy (funny that) and wonder to my relatively inexperienced ears. I have a mental top five that continually evolves that normally features somewhere between 5 and 10 albums that I could classify as in my current "Top Five". For a long time this was undisputed in it's position, unsinkable by anything. How could anything be better than "I am the Resurrection"? It was quite uncomprehending to even consider.
The the past is history and things change, and yet it is still testimony to the album that it could inspire in such away, even if in the future I was to learn more about the magicians behind the speakers, discover Ian "fuckin'" Brown and watch them drag their arses onto stage to karaoke to their greatest hits. I like to think of the album as a separate entity - it couldn't have been created by mere mortals. In that sense it's still one of the greatest albums ever made.
It's here also I learned by first big vinyl lesson. Coloured vinyl in plastic cover and white paper sleeve? It's probably fake. I picked it up on marble red vinyl, and it looked actually pretty cool. It was only later I would find it to be an unofficial release (via Discogs), recorded presumably from the original or the CD. How could I build a collection on such dubious foundations. I sat up late at night thinking, tossing and turning, stewing, until I established my position. With a heavy heart, it would have to be replaced.
(Got decent money on eBay for it though, some people have the sense not to care).
Trawling through eBay at some point in the future, I happened to stumble upon The Stone Roses as a gatefold double album just about to end. About £15.00 made it mine. This was almost the next mistake I made, having failed to completely understand the importance of condition. The sleeve is a conservative VG, the records themselves VG to VG+ so I was not badly stung, yet it could have been worse. The general rule is VG+ (maybe VG) or higher vinyl condition if you want to appreciate it (as ever, there are exceptions). And it turned out to be probably the most interesting album in my collection so far (I was yet to discover my grandad's first press Beatles albums, stolen by my dad and in turn stolen by me).
The catalogue number ORE ZLP 502 makes this a 1991 limited edition 45 RPM double album edition of the album - sure enough mine is number 00316 (of at least 20,000 as far as I can tell, maybe more) making it in some sense, kind of collectible. To my inexperienced record collection, it was essentially royalty. I spent a lot of time carefully looking at it, considering it and of course listening to it.
The sound quality itself is very bright. Like bright like a big bright blinding light slapping you in the face to an uptempo bass drum. It's down to preference and setup whether this makes it the best sounding album ever or just a little too much. With the right mood, time and outlook, it's downright hypnotic. Just closing your eyes and feeling the sounds swoop around the room and your head is quite unparalleled, and it was obviously a world away from the red copy I owned. For me then, and even now - it's fantastic. I don't think you could go wrong if you got it for a decent price.
With enough scouring you could pick this up in decent nick for £15.00 to £20.00, otherwise it's £30.00 plus. The first press of the album ORE LP 502 is similarly pricey, currently £30.00 plus for a worthwhile condition. As ever, stay away from coloured vinyl copies if you want a legitimate one. And steer clear of remasters and picture disks (unless they are your thing). It's not a rare album, yet you might be hard pushed to play less than £20.00. If you are up for spending money, go with a first press in as decent a condition as you can (EX is recommended) even if this takes you well above £30.00. Looked after and carefully played they hold value, and this album has a definite first press edition separate from the standard with raised gold lettering on the cover. It's a great way to give your collection some life. Aside from that, I recommend trawling eBay. Look for used, and the older the better (keep vinyl condition above VG+, the sleeve can be whatever really) - see if you can get lucky.
And there you have it. The Stone Roses. Album of the late 1980's. Start of the early 1990's. On vinyl.
How's that for a slice of fried blog.
In the words of John Squire's guitar: "dur dur dur dur durh durh duhrrr duh duh duh duh der"
5 points for the correct source of the above quote.
Wednesday, 11 September 2013
Christmas 2011 - Pink Floyd - The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
The date is the 25th of December, 2011. The thundering of tiny feet can be heard down the stairs. Sqeals of delight.
Now, at this point I was far too old the thunder down the stairs on Christmas morning (I did have tiny feet mind) but I didn't care. Luckily the sherry and mince pie had gone, been taken presumably by a mystical and unseen entity (probably my gran) and in return lay presents piled to the sky (ahem). As a shooting star flew past, and a reindeer could faintly be heard against the silent glory of a snowy Christmas morning, I received my first ever turntable.
If I'm honest, it was far less magical than that. After being woken at the unchrismassy hour of about 5 by a younger brother, and having my coffee spiked with cold water by my gran, not to mention feeling un-refreshed due to my previous days shift at a *high profile budget clothing chain* and unappealed by the thought of a Boxing Day shift, I lumbered down the stairs. But the prospect of a new Rega RP1 put all that out of my mind (even the coldwater coffee taste in my mouth).
As a budget turntable, the Rega RP1 is ultimately unparalleled. At £230 it isn't cheap mind, yet you might as well properly appreciate your records, even if you are just getting started. It is musical, reliable and straightforward and a LOT of fun. I couldn't recommend it higher. Within 10 minutes of beginning the set up it is singing, and sounding pretty awesome, despite the need for a fairly lengthy run in required. If you are a beginner, it's perfect. You'll need an amp and speakers (any HiFi dealer will help you match them) and you need to make sure you have a pre-amp (or phono stage) either built in or as a separate to your amplifier (a CD player doesn't need one of these, but a turntable does. They're built in most modern quality amplifiers).
As it turns out, within 10 minutes my RP1 was singing the opening static of "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" the debut album by a little known psychedelic rock outfit Pink Floyd. It's quite frankly a masterpiece in funny noises, garden gnomes and is the only album I know of that concludes with a bunch of quacking ducks. I knew of the album prior to discovering it in the garage, and whilst my dad had mentioned he did have it, the buzz of excitement gained when finding something desirable in amongst a load of shit was still there. This is quite a magical feeling, yet as elusive as it is beautiful.
My copy was purchased (I think) in the mid-eighties by my dad and quite frankly I don't give him enough credit for it, the problem being that he has a pretty awesome taste anyway so I can't let anything out that might give him the upper hand. It's on the Fame label and is a UK stereo reissue from 1983. It sounds pretty awesome and is available at about £15.00 to £20.00 in great condition (this is recommended). I wouldn't pay too much for condition, VG+ is acceptable for a 1983 reissue of a 1967 album. Most desirable will be the 1967 UK press with the flip back cover in either mono or stereo fetching well into excess of £200. The stereo is presumably rarer yet I tend to find the mono might be more desirable due the the wide panning in the album (my copy open features hard panned left/right vocals and drums etc. in some places. Comparable to the 1966-67 stereo Beatles albums in this respect). They are the copies I would consider - suited to your preference. Steer clear of coloured copies, they are most likely (if not even definitely) unofficial "fakes". Also stay away from the 2011 (or 2010, I forget) remaster. This is not an exception to the general rule "remasters are kind of shite".
And there you have it. A great oak grows from a tiny acorn. An average oak also grows from a tiny acorn. A rather expensive, time consuming, infuriating yet beautiful and under appreciated oak also grows from a tiny acorn (presumably some kind of genetically modified acorn).
In the words of Pink Floyd:
"DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DE DUH DE DUH DUHHHHHHHHHHH *wewewewe wooo shhhhhmtp"
Questions or queries? Leave a comment! 5 points also for obtaining the correct source of the above quote.
Have a great day
Now, at this point I was far too old the thunder down the stairs on Christmas morning (I did have tiny feet mind) but I didn't care. Luckily the sherry and mince pie had gone, been taken presumably by a mystical and unseen entity (probably my gran) and in return lay presents piled to the sky (ahem). As a shooting star flew past, and a reindeer could faintly be heard against the silent glory of a snowy Christmas morning, I received my first ever turntable.
If I'm honest, it was far less magical than that. After being woken at the unchrismassy hour of about 5 by a younger brother, and having my coffee spiked with cold water by my gran, not to mention feeling un-refreshed due to my previous days shift at a *high profile budget clothing chain* and unappealed by the thought of a Boxing Day shift, I lumbered down the stairs. But the prospect of a new Rega RP1 put all that out of my mind (even the coldwater coffee taste in my mouth).
As a budget turntable, the Rega RP1 is ultimately unparalleled. At £230 it isn't cheap mind, yet you might as well properly appreciate your records, even if you are just getting started. It is musical, reliable and straightforward and a LOT of fun. I couldn't recommend it higher. Within 10 minutes of beginning the set up it is singing, and sounding pretty awesome, despite the need for a fairly lengthy run in required. If you are a beginner, it's perfect. You'll need an amp and speakers (any HiFi dealer will help you match them) and you need to make sure you have a pre-amp (or phono stage) either built in or as a separate to your amplifier (a CD player doesn't need one of these, but a turntable does. They're built in most modern quality amplifiers).
As it turns out, within 10 minutes my RP1 was singing the opening static of "The Piper at the Gates of Dawn" the debut album by a little known psychedelic rock outfit Pink Floyd. It's quite frankly a masterpiece in funny noises, garden gnomes and is the only album I know of that concludes with a bunch of quacking ducks. I knew of the album prior to discovering it in the garage, and whilst my dad had mentioned he did have it, the buzz of excitement gained when finding something desirable in amongst a load of shit was still there. This is quite a magical feeling, yet as elusive as it is beautiful.
My copy was purchased (I think) in the mid-eighties by my dad and quite frankly I don't give him enough credit for it, the problem being that he has a pretty awesome taste anyway so I can't let anything out that might give him the upper hand. It's on the Fame label and is a UK stereo reissue from 1983. It sounds pretty awesome and is available at about £15.00 to £20.00 in great condition (this is recommended). I wouldn't pay too much for condition, VG+ is acceptable for a 1983 reissue of a 1967 album. Most desirable will be the 1967 UK press with the flip back cover in either mono or stereo fetching well into excess of £200. The stereo is presumably rarer yet I tend to find the mono might be more desirable due the the wide panning in the album (my copy open features hard panned left/right vocals and drums etc. in some places. Comparable to the 1966-67 stereo Beatles albums in this respect). They are the copies I would consider - suited to your preference. Steer clear of coloured copies, they are most likely (if not even definitely) unofficial "fakes". Also stay away from the 2011 (or 2010, I forget) remaster. This is not an exception to the general rule "remasters are kind of shite".
And there you have it. A great oak grows from a tiny acorn. An average oak also grows from a tiny acorn. A rather expensive, time consuming, infuriating yet beautiful and under appreciated oak also grows from a tiny acorn (presumably some kind of genetically modified acorn).
In the words of Pink Floyd:
"DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DUH DE DUH DE DUH DUHHHHHHHHHHH *wewewewe wooo shhhhhmtp"
Questions or queries? Leave a comment! 5 points also for obtaining the correct source of the above quote.
Have a great day
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)