Categories
Arts

Atoms for Peace Release Album

“Atoms for Peace” is variously referred to as either a supergroup ‘including’ or a side-project ‘belonging to’ its most famous and influential member, Radiohead’s Thom Yorke. Technically speaking, it might better be described as a supergroup formed as the result of a side project of a side project, considering that the band’s first and only album originated due to a string of live performances of Yorke’s 2006 solo release, which was, in itself, a foray away from Radiohead.

Courtesy of collapseboard.com
Courtesy of collapseboard.com

It was in 2009 that Flea (bassist for Red Hot Chili Peppers), Mauro Refrosco (Forro in the Dark percussionist and tour performer for Red Hot Chili Peppers), Nigel Godrich (Radiohead producer), and Joey Waronker (Beck and R.E.M percussion journeyman) joined Yorke to provide live renditions of his highly computer-generated The Eraser. The chemistry and material developed during the practice sessions for this tour period would, several years later, materialize into the group’s February 2013 Amok.

Though surely crucial to the finished product, the names of the producers and percussionists are, perhaps unsurprisingly, not nearly as eye catching as is the renowned moniker Flea. Almost always performing in some state of undress, this is the same Flea who, in the early days of RHCP, joined his bandmates on stage wearing nothing more than a single, strategically placed sock; it is also, perhaps less famously, the same Flea who voiced the feral child character of “Donnie” in the now classic cartoon show, The Wild Thornberrys.

Such a past doesn’t seem to immediately accord with Yorke’s social activism and highbrow music recognition. The seeming disparities between Yorke’s public image as the chic albeit weird British vegan and Flea’s long, and very punk American history are bridged by a single word: ability. Only a bassist with the technical skill and acumen that Flea has would stand a chance of turning anything that Yorke made on his laptop into a playable, performable track.

Flea is evident throughout Amok, making himself immediately apparent in the opening track, ”Before Your Eyes,” and particularly integral in tracks such as “Stuck Together Pieces” and “Reverse Running.” Without his invigorating line delivered starting a minute into “Dropped,” something like a sped-up version of Weezer’s “Only in the Dreams,” the track would lose both momentum and appeal.

Although neither the riffs nor the jumpy, explorative bass are completely beyond the punk and funk roots with which he is so long acquainted, Flea does, overall, settle into an uncharacteristically understated role. His consistent bouncing along underneath Yorke’s familiar “Creep” croon and varying degrees of synth inundation doesn’t so much overwhelm the Chili Peppers legend as it does sublimate him, making him more of a textural accent than a center of attention.

While playing find-the-Flea throughout Amok provides a familiar point of reference, navigating the more computerized extremities of the album is a much more nebulous task. Speaking to Rolling Stone about the sessions that produced the album, Yorke commented, ”One of the things we were most excited about was ending up with a record where you weren’t quite sure where the human starts and the machine ends.”

This certainly seems to be the effect. There are points in certain tracks that seem to occur in a realm entirely above where traditional instruments and voices can follow, such as the whole of “Ingenue” or the psychobabble interlude in “Unless.” Luckily for the group, this ethereal realm also happens to be where Yorke’s voice seems most comfortable.

Whatever the finer technicalities behind the particular indefinable noises happens to be, it is hard not to appreciate them simply for their immaculate precision. They are hard to explain and figure out, but, somehow, they “just work” and we appreciate it. Indeed, isn’t this the way we often think about and thank our machines? This, it seems, is precisely Yorke and company’s point.

While both the intriguing collaborative product of RHCP and Radiohead and the mysteriously alluring mechanization are worth considering, Amok is, as a whole, a journey to nowhere. The album lacks the energy and smart distinctions, subtle or otherwise, needed to alert the listener to progress or development. There are no maps and no landmarks; a writer for Pitchfork describes it as “giving a perpetual sense of jogging in place.” It is ironic that an album which ends with the repeated lines, “to run amok, run amok, run amok,” does, in fact, pan out like a treadmill stuck on some useless in-between speed.

Categories
Arts

The Grammys: A Broken Promise

Courtesy of http://venturebeat.com/
Courtesy of http://venturebeat.com/

Although such declamations are hardly conventional, this article had better begin with full disclosure on two accounts: I did not watch the 2013 Grammys, and, before writing this, I did not know anything about the Grammy Awards in general. This look is from a newbie. It is not my intention provide a comprehensive list of the winners and reactions; such an angle would be both stale and, from my perspective, ill-informed. I will, instead, try to bring some things that I do know to the 2013 Grammy Awards.

For those not familiar, pitchfork.com is a Chicago area music blog publication, which offers reviews, exclusives, interviews, breaking news, video releases, and
recommendations. Off the record, it is only fair to mention that Pitchfork is, in some sense, analogous with snobbery. Such criticism is neither ill deserved nor a secret. Keeping this reputation in mind, ponder this pattern: the worse the Pitchfork review, the better the Grammy reception.

After absolutely lambasting the 2010 “Sigh No More” release, nowhere does Pitchfork even utter the name of the 2013 Grammy-winning “Album of the Year,” Mumford and Son’s “Babel.” And although the winner for “Best Alternative Album,” Goyte’s “Making Mirrors,” is given time of day for a review, Pitchfork actually rated it lower than three of the four losing Grammy nominations, two of which appear on the website tagged under “best new music.” A Pitchfork search for Bonnie Raitt, the 2013 Grammy winner for “Best Americana Album” will only yield a Bon Iver cover of one of her songs. Artists take note; if Pitchfork slights you, you may be in for a golden statue.

Some readers familiar with both Pitchfork and the Grammys may take issue with the above juxtapositions: isn’t it obvious that the two are after different things? Let’s find out. The tagline to Pitchfork’s website reads, “the essential guide to independent music and beyond.” The Grammys, on the other hand, are charged with “honoring achievements in the recording arts and supporting the music community,” as “The Recording Academy” section of official website states.

If both of these claims are to be taken seriously, then the relationship between the two is actually pretty clear. Pitchfork operates within a specific, small, dry spot underneath the umbrella of “the music community;” it is within precisely this genre-niche that the three Awards discussed in the previous paragraph belong. The question, then, is should we take both claims seriously? Is one unforgiving but honest, and the other, while ostensibly broad, much less open-minded than service to the “the music community” ought to demand?
Consider the Rolling Stone’s review of “Babel” on September 10, 2012. Apart from suggesting a lot of things that I don’t pretend to understand, including the implications of the group doubling down on “the ‘ole time religion” and the complications of using ‘church flavor’ to supersize and complicate love songs,” the article does bring some interesting observations to the forefront.

The reviewer gives Mumford and Sons praise for a “shinier, punchier, more arena-scale” performance. He twice compares the new sound to U2 and suggests that the accompanying lyrics are full of “Biblical metaphors swirling like detritus in a Christopher Nolan film.” Whatever original or unique elements that, three years ago, squeaked “Sigh No More” painfully onto Pitchfork have since been completely replaced with a new, homogenized amalgamation of Batman and Bono. Music that once belonged, however tenuously, in the realm of indie is now awarded for having become something else.

This is not meant to be an indictment of the Grammys. The point is not to praise the obscure and denigrate the popular. The issue lies in addressing a broken promise. Despite its own proclamation, the Grammys are about performance and popularity. The Award Show is a reproduction of the radio punctuated by mini-Super-Bowl halftime shows. Some genres are elevated and others, such as the small and shrinking categories devoted to alternative, americana, and folk, are neglected. What should, according to its own standards, support the “music community” actually and simply reinforces the music industry.