|
Post by quaco on Jan 14, 2020 8:08:52 GMT
Not as good as Bowie all told (IMO), but then Bowie wasn't a tenth the player that Wonder is. People are good at different things. Some people try to do the write-it-and-play-it-all thing. Roy Wood used more instruments than anybody else, Rundgren always gets mentioned though I'm not sure why (his best were when others were helping him a lot, only Something/Anything? is the only classic that's all him), there's McCartney for a couple patchy albums. Uh, Stewart Copeland? Wonder did a number of albums like this, and, unlike the others, didn't piece it together because he was weak in some area; he completely rages through the drum performances, keyboards, and bass lines, is a master harmonica player, and oh, is easily the best singer of the bunch too. So, of that crowd, he towers over the rest.
Bowie maybe had a bit better perspective or more diverse interests, so got more classic albums made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2020 16:52:15 GMT
Bowie maybe had a bit better perspective or more diverse interests, so got more classic albums made. Wonder always stuck me as musical polyglot in a number of ways, including influences. I always thought of Bowie as a borrower and Wonder as a thief, with possession being 9/10ths of the law.
|
|
|
Post by osgood on Jan 15, 2020 8:30:20 GMT
I have declared my love for the album run from Music of my MInd to Hotter than July before. I can't think right now of a six album run* as good as that from any artist. I think the best is Songs in the Key of Life, but I might play more often Fulfillingness or Innervisions.
Albums in the 60s are patchy but the highs are very high. The triple LP comp Looking Back is probably the place to go. You can get it at reasonable prices in Discogs, but it is also available as a playlist on Spotify. Highly recommendable.
*I am consciously skipping the soundtrack of Journey through the Secret Life of Plants. Haven't heard it in decades, but I remember it extremely dull. Any thoughts on that?
|
|
|
Post by quaco on Jan 16, 2020 5:50:25 GMT
Bowie maybe had a bit better perspective or more diverse interests, so got more classic albums made. Wonder always stuck me as musical polyglot in a number of ways, including influences. I always thought of Bowie as a borrower and Wonder as a thief, with possession being 9/10ths of the law. I think I get what you are saying, but Bowie did successfully thieve a few things. He is certainly very much associated with -- bordering on owning -- glitter rock, cold Euro pop, '80s suave crooning, and androgyny in general.
|
|
|
Post by quaco on Jan 16, 2020 7:04:22 GMT
"Too High" is insane. Love it. And not a zillion light years from something Steely Dan might have done vocal-wise.
|
|
loveless
god
Bringing ballet to the masses. Sticking to the funk.
Posts: 2,796
|
Post by loveless on Jan 17, 2020 15:01:48 GMT
he completely rages through the drum performances, keyboards, and bass lines, is a master harmonica player, and oh, is easily the best singer of the bunch too. There's a thing here that I respond to. You get this a lot when people talk about Hendrix, how - within the abundant talent - there was some very pipeline from his soul to what went through the fingers, the instrument, the amp, the tape, the home hi fi. You hear stories about how "Hendrix had the engineer flip the tape over and played this blinding backwards guitar solo which, on tape-flipped- back-over-for-playback, sounded like an intricately sculpted symphonic howl from the soul", and while the nature of Wonder's work is slightly less wild and abstract sounding, there's a similar "first take magic" to his own one man band masterpieces - something like putting down an electric piano, moving over to the drums and adding the most quirky, deep pocketed groove as if it WEREN'T an overdub, and so on through the backing vocals. The point I'm making is that a lot of the traditional filters are being bypassed, and - as Quaco says - everything has this very hyper-kinetic, aggressive, without-a-net confidence, cause...well, why the fuck not? It's very different thing from the Wrecking Crew or the first call guys you hear on all the Steely Dan and Joni Mitchell records. It's not so much "sturdy and reliable" as it is "straight from his soul to your ears". I don't admire it so much for the gift of aptitude (cause this is where you get into prog and Zappa and tubs), but more for the bypassing of so much traditionally required "scaffolding". McCartney tells a story about working with (the chronically impunctual) Wonder, where they were overdubbing handclaps on a track and Wonder was VERY much like "What the FUCK are you doing?" - very demanding and specific about the handclaps falling into a certain satisfying groove. I think Paul was probably taken aback, because he'd been in a roundly successful band who'd made a whole career of "records with very pleasing handclaps" and probably never expected that type of scolding in a million years. I mean, if you don't dig the artist, that's all really irrelevant, but...in explaining the appeal of certain works, I think it's a meaningful quality that separates the artist and the art from "people who - at best - sound like they are desperately trying not to make a mistake" or "artists who are glued to the click track/the grid/etc.".
|
|
|
Post by Mr. FOLLARD on May 13, 2020 12:28:21 GMT
Stevie turns 70 today.
|
|
|
Post by sloopjohnc on May 13, 2020 15:18:29 GMT
I was having this conversation with a friend, Neil, I made in jr. high who really likes music too. I remember liking songs on the radio and playing some stuff on the phonograph before jr. high, but jr. high is when I kinda up to music and started playing stuff over and over again - it started being a compulsion. His sister had Talking Book and we used to play that album over and over again at his little house on Lowell St. in Redwood City. She also had War and Ohio Players and it just made me think that I was lucky enough to have a musical revelation when artists and groups like that were popular.
|
|
~ / % ? *
god
disambiguating goat herder
Posts: 5,532
|
Post by ~ / % ? * on May 13, 2020 15:28:06 GMT
I think he and Bowie are evenly met for their 70s period. Like Bowie he was collaborator dependent, the TONTO team is allover the classic albums, which were a few years ahead of Bowie's Berlin period. Like Bowie the 80s hailed a drop in quality, Stevie had a spectacular fall in pop dreck. It's crazy, but like Bowie he's late GenX -Millennial catnip, unlike Bowie during the 70s (in the US) he was a massive pop/soul presence he got pretty broad radio airplay (AM/FM, Top 40, freeform, AOR, Urban, etc.,) Seen somewhat as an inheritor to Sly, he was a big star that may not have had the credibility (white rock audiences) that Bowie had at this time of his greatest amount of costume changes. But Stevie was probably the biggest 70s black star which meant he had tons of black street cred at the time of soul's transition into overt commercial funk, the rise of PFunk, Isleys, War, Ohio Players, EWF, etc., (all US Gold-Platinum acts).
|
|