I was originally writing this as part of the second instalment of the My Bloody Valentine: EPs 1988-91 review but decided it would make sense to spin it out as it is more of an artistic profile than a part of the track by track review. I decided I wanted to break away from the dynamics of gender and sex for a moment when describing My Bloody Valentine, because despite the theory often sounding reasonable it just does not seem pertinent half the time. This came up in conversation yesterday when I was watching footage of one of Primal Scream's Screamadelica gigs. For all the rock'n'roll clichés, gender seemed the last thing worth discussing. Certainly not from the standpoint of diagnosing patriarchal societies or something like that. Reading this blog post about Oneohtrix Point Never inspired me a little. More after the jump.
Wednesday, 30 May 2012
Review: My Bloody Valentine – EP’s 1988-1991 (Part Two)
Friday, 25 May 2012
Review: My Bloody Valentine -- EPs 1988-1991 (Part One)
Rhapsodising after the jump.
Friday, 18 May 2012
Cracking HDCDs
Second, it means that on your disc or lossless file there may be features which have remained hidden. The most notable of these features is Peak Extension: a way of increasing the dynamic range of the recording by making the bulk of it quieter, increasing the bit depth (so that there is more room for different gradations of loudness), and then reversing the compression of some of the music's peaks.
More after the jump.
Friday, 11 May 2012
Comics and the Graphic Music Thing
Thursday, 10 May 2012
My Bloody Valentine: Review of Critical Coverage and the Issue of Product Errors
While of course many CDs have already sold, buyers have the right to know that there are major errors in this release that have now been identified. The two critical problems are widely reported mislabelling of the CDs (as they each represent different tapes of exactly the same sessions and music it's almost farcical) and a clearly identifiable digital transfer glitch sound on one of the versions of 'What You Want.'
It was Analog Loyalist's blog that made the comprehensive case with good analysis, so all credit to him for breaking the story. Here is the litany of woes:
details: My Bloody Valentine Loveless 2012 remasters - manufacturing errors
Pursuant to my other post on critics: notice that no critics until this blog have identified that the CDs were mislabelled, or found this glitch, or indeed attempted to figure out which of the tracks Kevin Shields had digitally limited as alluded to in his interview with Pitchfork.
Pitchfork in their review have now pointed to Analog Loyalist's blog. I have to take issue with some elements of Mark Richardson's review. As lovely as the prose and the history lesson are, I genuinely feel that today's music writers are doing their readers a disservice by not properly holding record labels to account over the quality of remasters they release. Reissuing old material with a new master is often more profitable than releasing new material, and yet the business aspect is hardly ever mentioned. This is at the expense of fans who are seemingly told by a unanimous chorus of voices that the reissue heralds a bold new opportunity to really appraise the artist. Based upon the real level of difference that a remaster brings this is often false.
More after the jump.