Archives

Latest CD

Welcome to the website. It's been a long time coming.

This one primarily has two components. One is the recorded music in which I've been involved, from Bruno Gerussi's Medallion in 1989 to the current Lumpy. I aim to tell stories about the bands and songs.

Two is my writing. This comes in blog form and either are columns I've written for The Province that, for one reason or another, the newspaper didn't publish, pieces intended as editorials, or short examples of absurd humour I wrote on a whim. For now, these blogs are old but here, too, I aim to write more. Unless someone stops me.

Tom

My latest article

reviewing records

If, as pre­dicted, the Com­pact Disc, dies soon, this essay might be ren­dered meaningless.

Until then, though, here is a belated response to an arti­cle I read in the January/February 2011 edi­tion of B.C. Musician.

B.C. Musi­cian is based in the Okana­gan and has been pub­lish­ing about eight years. Most of the con­trib­u­tors are musi­cians, who share their expe­ri­ences and pass on advice. Fre­quently, each new issue is based on a theme, such as the list­ing of sum­mer out­door fes­ti­vals. As the Okana­gan Val­ley isn’t a hive of music indus­try  and B.C.based music pub­li­ca­tions sel­dom last more than two years, the mag deserves credit just for sur­viv­ing. With all the chal­lenges from the Inter­net fac­ing any pub­li­ca­tion, this must be tough.

The arti­cle in ques­tion was “Cri­tiquing The Hype Machine”  by Bar­bara Brued­er­lin,  which exam­ines reviews and review­ers. It seemed naive, made a few faulty assump­tions, and some of the opin­ions she solicited from var­i­ous musi­cians indi­cated she/they didn’t know any­thing about the media. Not that Brued­er­lin et al can be blamed. The media has wrapped itself in a mys­tique and uses it as protection.

When I was through the arti­cle, my first ques­tion was, Why not ask a reviewer?  Nowhere is any­body who reviews records asked about the records they review or what con­sid­er­a­tions go into choos­ing what records will get reviewed. I review records and am puz­zled myself.

Reviews don’t sell records, at least not directly. Any­body can hear any record and make up their mind them­selves. What a review serves to do now, though, is to cre­ate an aware­ness that the record exists. So much music is released in a year that even a brief recog­ni­tion of the record’s exis­tence is impor­tant. A well-written review, no mat­ter how short, can pique curios­ity, and, if the con­tent is accu­rate, help both the buyer and the maker.

The Province prints hard copy reviews on Tues­day under the name Ultra­sound. When Ultra­sound started, it was a full page and included one main review, six mid-sized reviews (called midis) and six brief reviews (minis). Now it’s a half page of six midis, about 150 words in length each. That’s not a lot. With some records, putting an album in con­text can be 150 words. With oth­ers, the record might be so ordi­nary that 150 words is a stretch.

In the past cou­ple of years, reviews have gone online. That’s offered some relief as in the­ory all reviews are printed, not just six, and they can be more than 150 words. The lat­est wrin­kle is that the records cho­sen for the hard copy have tended to have been plucked from the wire ser­vice, not writ­ten by Stu, John nor I. I’m spec­u­lat­ing that these reviews are more timely. Tues­day is the offi­cial release day of most records released by the major labels, Uni­ver­sal, Warn­ers, Capitol/EMI and Sony/RCA.

So, records arrive the week­end before release, are reviewed imme­di­ately and The Province runs them Tues­day. There is some­thing wrong with this. In the inter­est of being timely, for what is a news­pa­per if not timely, major releases might be reviewed based on a first impres­sion.  First impres­sions can be wrong, and often a record reveals itself over a period of time. What sounded great doesn’t hold up on repeated lis­ten­ing. Con­versely,  what at first seemed unre­mark­able, shows more sub­tle strength. Unfor­tu­nately, even a record that was released the week before is regarded as old news. The clas­sic exam­ple is The Rolling Stones’ Exile On Main Street. It was regarded as a sprawl­ing, sloppy, badly pro­duced record when released forty years ago, now it’s fre­quently cited as The Stones’ mas­ter­piece. News­pa­pers don’t have forty years to delib­er­ate. The empha­sis is on the now.  It might be fun to revisit such albums to see how they’ve weath­ered, though.

Another ques­tion is, what records to review?  The pri­or­ity is usu­ally given to major new releases. Thus, if Madonna has a new record, it’ll be reviewed and prob­a­bly be hard copy. Madonna doesn’t need another review as she prob­a­bly has three thou­sand of them already and her fans are going to buy her new record any­way,  but The Province has to pub­lish a review. It wouldn’t be doing its job, oth­er­wise. Madonna, then, has one of the six midis avail­able. That leaves five spaces and these might go to Kanye West or Tay­lor Swift or Lady Gaga  or any other famil­iar name. There might be one space left for a locally made inde­pen­dent album, but which one? I usu­ally review local indies and get approx­i­mately 250–300 a year, which is a small frac­tion of what’s out there. I might lis­ten to all of them, but there is no way to print a review of every record and some of them are a strug­gle to review. It’s not that these are badly made records, as every­one seems to know what a record  should sound like, but a lot of them go nowhere and are unremarkable.

Hav­ing decided what records to review, there are a few other con­sid­er­a­tions. Some time ago, I con­cluded that neg­a­tive reviews serve no pur­pose. They’re fun to write. They’re an oppor­tu­nity to show some teeth, flash the claws and pos­si­bly invest a lit­tle snide wit.  I’ve even writ­ten one word reviews, funny, I hope, but nasty. How­ever, if you’ve only got six spaces per week, it’s more pro­duc­tive to tell read­ers about  good records that they should hear. A neg­a­tive review means one less slot for records that are com­mend­able. Besides, one word reviews leave a huge hole that looks bad on a news­pa­per page.

Review­ing a local indie requires fur­ther con­sid­er­a­tion. If Madonna’s newie isn’t good, and the review says as much, there is an ele­ment of anonymity. The three thou­sandth review prob­a­bly means noth­ing to her and won’t deter the fans. The local indie record review is more per­sonal.  I strive to find some­thing pos­i­tive to say and hope the crit­i­cism is con­struc­tive. The act actu­ally can get some­thing out of this that it can use, pos­si­bly when it comes to mak­ing the next record. The local is like a neigh­bour and pos­si­bly a pos­i­tive review is the start of a blos­som­ing rela­tion­ship. The local has to live with a review, good or bad, because friends will com­ment on it and word of mouth will get around. Good words, rather than bad.

 

 

 

Copyright © 2012. All Rights Reserved.