EXERCISES IN MUSICAL RE-EVALUATION...
...sometimes an Old Dog like me can learn new things...
-
As all 2 of my regular readers have found out here in this blog, I've been thinning out the record collection; taking records I don't care all that much about and putting 'em onto CD before I donate 'em to Goodwill. And that's what I was gonna do with my R.E.M. albums. I was in the process of putting half-a-dozen of their records onto CD, but I had to re-think my strategy. Usually, I'll go thru a box of records, and think, "keep these", "give those away", etc. And I was gonna give all my records by R.E.M. away. At first, I felt I was justified. On their early albums, they rock pretty hard, but the singer just kinda mumbles his way through the songs, and I'm a person who values lyrical content just as much as the music itself. I don't like to really have to strain to hear my music. Put the lyrics out there! And that's why albums such as this one just confounded me:
-
R.E.M.'s first album, "Murmur", issued in 1983, is murky and imposing, much like the cover photo, at left. The songs rock, but lead singer Michael Stipe's vocals pretty much sound like "awwwwwwgh mmmmeeeelllllllt booooorage yaaaaaawonk", buried deep in the mix almost all the way through. I couldn't understand a thing he sang on this record. In addition, he's got a gravelly, quavering voice that appeals in a weirdly offhand way. The album, tho, left me wondering what R.E.M.'s appeal was all about, 'cos this album, which was one of the best-ever-rock-albums, as listed by Rolling Stone Magazine, sure confused me.
-
As time went on, I bought several other of the band's albums, for really low prices at 2nd-hand stores, 'cos after all, this wasn't a band I'd pay full price for (that's how I've managed to listen to so much different music over the years). I couldn't understand the vocals on their second album, "Reckoning" or on their third album, "Life's Rich Pageant", and at the time I got these albums in the '80s, I didn't know what to make of this band. And so those albums have been in my collection, along with other R.E.M. albums, virtually unplayed, for the last 15 years...
-
I started going to Karaoke in the '90s, and I heard one of the singers doing an interesting tune I'd never heard before, something called "Losing My Religion". Though lyrically vague, it is a great, great song. I looked up the tune in the Karaoke songbook and found out that it was by R.E.M.! When I went back home, I looked thru my R.E.M. albums, and no, it wasn't on them...later on, I bought a 2nd-hand cassette of "Out Of Time" and there it was! "Losing My Religion"! And I Could Actually Understand The Singer!
-
But back to the present...as I was spinning the R.E.M. LP's, converting them to CD, the more that I dubbed, the better the group sounded, and I found myself grooving on the music even if I couldn't understand the words. And within their music, the rawness of the vocals, combined with a mostly driving backbeat and cool little guitar riffs, just somehow appealed to me. It sounds like R.E.M. was the type of band that could do whatever it wanted, and suddenly, their music just somehow sounded Real all of a sudden, and although I put the LP's onto CD's, I'm keeping their LP's too. It's a tribute to a band that Does Sound Real, even if I don't know what they're all about.
-
I have the group's first 6 albums on vinyl, and with each album, they do become more understandable in the vocal department, and especially on their 5th album, "Document", they rock with a rage that a lot of bands seldom approach. They're not a heavy band, and they're probably not even a rock band; they're more of a heavy-pop band, and the closest band to them, in terms of sound that I've heard is U2, and as I researched the group last night, I found many others have made R.E.M./U2 comparisons, so I'm not totally off base here. I think U2 are great, so being compared to them is Really Something in my book. I went onto YouTube last night and dialed up some clips of R.E.M. in concert, and there they were, doing "Losing My Religion" to a throng of dedicated fans back in the '80s, and all of a sudden I sort-of "got" the band. So even tho I'd had a lot of their music for a long time, I didn't know anything. In a way, groups like R.E.M. passed me by.
-
The computer research I did on the band pointed out that they were forerunners to the "grunge" movement, and while I don't want to shallowly categorize a band, I can sort of see that, with the group's use of jangling guitars, high energy and a sort of 'unrefined' sound. So perhaps, without an R.E.M., there may have been no Nirvana or Pearl Jam? But there is also a lot of variety in R.E.M.'s music; in one song they'll hit you with overmodulated rock, and, next-up, there might be quiet passages and slow tempos, and perhaps the song that follows will sound all ear-friendly, catchy and poppy, but they never 'sell out'; their music just sounds genuine. It Just Does. They take a lot of chances, but maybe it's better to be real and take chances rather than put out Product and become bland, like a lot of other bands which have fallen by the wayside.
-
I don't pretend to understand this band in a conceptual sense; I only know that They Sound Real, and that's what counts. I found that I've got two used cd's and a cassette of their music, that I haven't HEARD yet (when you buy stuff cheap you tend to buy a lot of it and never get around to hearing it). In the late '80s, their drummer suffered an aneurysm, and due to that, among other factors, he left the band, and from what I understand, R.E.M.'s later albums have been inconsistent, but really, when a group that's been around for over 20 years loses a founding member, changes result. So what's my 'end verdict' on R.E.M.? I honestly don't know. I'll consider this a Topic For Further Research. But they're worth researching.
-
I've heard so much music, and these days, it's so much harder to keep up with everything; there's a lot of music which was recorded in my own formative years that I still haven't heard yet, so admittedly, I don't know hardly a thing about modern-day rock bands, although I hear some newer music when listening to alternative-rock-type stations. I do know that I really have always admired U2's commitment, purpose and drive, and I'm just about ready to put R.E.M. in that category as well. Maybe it's hard for me to learn new tricks, but I'm glad I finally sat down and listened to their music All Over Again. Ah, the thrill of discovery...
-
I know I'm pathetically Stuck In My Era. I have my favorite music which I cling to. But some of the Rolling Stones' albums of the '70s irritated me as well; Mick Jagger's voice was just Buried In The Mix while the band slam-banged away. In my opinion, they regressed in the '70s, and a lot of that was due to the production of such albums as "Sticky Fingers", "Exile On Main Street", "Goat's Head Soup" and "It's Only Rock And Roll". They all contain great songs which would sound better if the singer's mike had been turned up!