is Beck's Sea Change this year's masterpiece?

Doesn't suck. It's a grower. Not his best album either. Maybe his second best acoustic album, but who really cares about Beck's acoustic albums? Has anybody in this bitch heard "Dirty Dirty"?? Gimme that Beck back!

'Sea Change, for those of you who don't know, is supposed to be the follow-up to Mutations. Mutations was all right; I really liked some of the songs, and didn't dislike the others. And having noted the obvious contrast between Mutations and Odelay/Midnite Vultures (although those two are quite different from each other as well), I had a vague idea of what the general atmosphere of the new album was going to be like.

'Dear Beck:
Have I changed? Have you changed? These songs don't hit me the way your older records did. Perhaps we've both gotten more jaded, you and I; I'm not as enthusiastic or passionate about music, and you seem to have lost your particular sense of humor. I understand you must be heartbroken, but so am I.
xoxo, Ellie'

There's nothing worse than an ironist born again sincere. For Beck, the Dylan of the 90s, it's been a slow train coming.

*yawn*

Well, at least she didn't bring up the Scientology issue.

Who could honestly get excited about songs like Lost Cause or Guess I'm Doing Fine, though? I don't get that.

The article wasn't really meant to link the two -- it just uses the Beck/Scientology issue as a launching point.

Jody's article details the hostility that greeted Dylan's Christian episode. (Considerably less venomous than his self-righteous rebuttals of it, it must be said.) This happened because, for many of the people in the 70s music industry, Dylan incarnated the left-humanist values of a generation. His Christian rebirth was a clear rightward swing. And, as Ellie says of Beck, there was also a sad sense of someone being deserted by his sense of humour and his spirit of play.

Now Beck is a canny man. He may feel that irony and genre-fuck are 90s tropes. (They're as 90s as Bill Clinton, in fact.) He may have noticed a swing to the right in America in general, and tailored his current sound and image to that. Or he may just be miserable because his girlfriend dumped him and then Winona didn't stick around either. Whatever his reasons, just like those coke snorting liberal CBS execs back in the 70s, some of us decadents wish he would keep pushing at the art boundaries instead of twanging morosely on his own heart strings. More innovation, bastardisation, and ostentatiously fake falsetto songs about filth in the back of a Mercedes Benz, please, Mr Beck!

Away from all that though, I think it's important to remember this is Beck, and whether sincere and teary or ironic and goofy, nothing will last. This album isn't a sign of new directions or changed attitudes. It's just his release and focusing on a small two week period of his life. As he's shown by hiring the Flaming Lips as his backing band, he's already moved on. Hopefully towards something even trippier. Pure psychedelic Beck would be great.

But, to be fair, this had been happening since he "went electric." And it's been said that his protest music only existed as a way for him to align himself with other early '60s folksingers. So was his Christian music more honest than "Blowin' in the Wind"?

The so-called "rightward swing," that is.

Sea Change IS a genre-fuck, though. It sounds like nothing else he's done (yes, Mutations was acoustic, but it sounded like Syd Barrett and Canterbury prog-folk, and One Foot in the Grave was drunken slacker blues). I see it as Beck's challenge to himself (and his audience).

To complicate matters, it would be much more accurate to call pop music the 'folk music' of our time, since it's much more in the trad. anon. mold of folk. That whole culture of remixes and rip offs is very folk. It's a corporate version of community music, marking the festivals of the calendar of the year (Christmas singles, etc). Rock, on the other hand, insists on the auteur and on 'meaning it'. So I'd say 'Sea Change' is a rock album, made with a rock producer (Mr Radiohead himself), and that we should be looking forward to Beck's pop album, because that will be his real 'folk' album.

Anyway, Sea Change is awful.

This whole post had no point.

i dont really care for beck's acoustic albums, so i just skip them, knowing something new (or mewish) will be coming up next. i got mutations but sold it. who cares who the "real beck" is, or if there are two of them, all we know is that oscillation is the constant, so we needn't get too fond or disappointed with whatever style he's currently evoking, as its bound to change, as sean o said. to keep expecting variations, its kind of simple

"some of us decadents wish he would keep pushing at the art boundaries instead of twanging morosely on his own heart strings."

hey, the guy's long-time girlfriend (and fiance?) of 9-years just cheated on him and dumped his ass, so give him a lil' break to be morose for a while (or maybe decadents wiouldn't understand what that feels like :). surely he's entitled to it for at least an album or too, no? he can't parcel out and keep pandering to the tastes of capricious 19-year old californians every time - he's too capricious himself

BTW, Mutations is fucking great. And Momus is OTM.

Interestingly enough though, I think this (Debra excepted), is the first time I've heard Beck hold notes for a while, as if he's attempting some sort of croon, which seems to completely change his voice - he sounds far less laconic, but more disconcerting at the same time. Anyone agree?

If he would genre-fuck all the time it wouldn't be anything special. where is the ground to that? His new album is such a genre-fuck of the genre which is the genre-fucking from his last album. (does that make sense?) It may seem on the surface that this album is not innovative at all, but just by the juxtapostion of this style of folk and the style of production it is breaking new ground. So, I think some of the praise has to be laid at the feet of producer Nigel Goodrich.

I also think Ellie gave her review too quickly and I bet it will grow on her just like it did on me. (upon first listen I disliked it.)

They're obviously not defiantly traditional, but loosely speaking, I think of Radiohead as a rock band. I also think of Travis and Pavement as rock bands, so I'd have to say Godrich probably is a rock producer.

I haven't listened to the album again. There is something here as in many Beck (except Mutations) records which doesn't make me want to listen to it again at home. Though I am sure I would love listening to it by chance in a pub or shop. It is rather nice but it definitely does not stand up to Harvest which must have been a very strong influence. It sounds like a pale clone of Harvest to my ears.

Might I bring up what may be a contentious point...but really, was he ever? To be honest, his supposed 'innovation' never felt like that to my ears, and on that level I've never understood exactly why there was all this praise being levelled on his from that angle rather than simply from the angle of whether or not it was enjoyable music to listen to or not. Quite obviously one can like something because it is innovative, of course! But I just never sensed that about him, that he was actually pushing boundaries, and all the claims otherwise felt like, well, red herrings to an extent. A musical magpie, yes, but on that front Prince has him beat without even having to try.

When Beck works best for me, he sounds like he was just fucking around rather than pushing any edges or the like. I was listening to Stereopathetic Soulmanure last night for the first time in a long while on the way to see the Super Furry Animals, and that actually felt, right at that point, like the most entertaining album he had ever done. It wasn't going to satisfy mainstream KROQ audiences, it wasn't a particular 'move' one way or another, it wasn't woodshedding up in Olympia or the like -- it was just a mess of songs by a guy who liked to wear Star Wars helmets, and he called a song "Rollins Power Sauce" at that. I think I like that part of him the best, regardless of who he works with, who's working him, whatever.

It's all down hill now.......

As do Ween. However, I think there are moments of Beck that are innovative - Odelay has bits that sound like nothing before, although much since. I really liked Midnight Vultures, but I the faux-soul thing had actually been done better four years earlier on Chocolate and Cheese.

Notwithstanding all that, I don't care that the Nigel Goodrich production is so warm and wonderful or that the one-time 'ironist' now drips sincerity. What I care about is that this is the first album I've bought based solely on reputation in moons, and said reputation is largely bullshit. This album is not fun to listen to, it's not engrossing enough to drag you in despite its lack of fun, it's not . . . anything, really. It's just there, like a thousand other faceless L.A. singer-songwriter breakup records. Mark my words--everyone screaming the praises of this record today will forget that it ever existed in a year. But they'll still break out Mutations once in a while.

Well, here's a question -- I have no opinion on this either way, but I've heard more than a few people say that Paul's Boutique essentially was everything Odelay was some years beforehand. But by the same token I've heard that Odelay actually improved on the predecessor. Obviously there's the Dust Brothers connection between the two and Beck never denied that to my knowledge, but is there anything to either argument, d'you think?

Cos he's best known for his work with the rock band Radiohead, I suppose.

I was of the opinion that the reviews for "Sea Change" were a little underwhelming?

Personally, I don't see it, and I say that as a chump who listened to nothing but Paul's Boutique for about six months. I still like it, but I don't think it's aged that well. The sample source material is almost exclusively 1968 - 1978, and that limits the album's texture somewhat for me now. I actually think that Odelay sounds more like bits of the Dream Warriors' And Now, the Legacy Begins, although I still think it goes to different places.

that's one of the reasons i like it a lot.
old man vocals are in.

that leads me to the assumption that at least part of the appeal has to do with beck's trajectory and the nature of his past work. it's like: *hushed, pitying breath* : "oh, he's sad now."

so is it getting the plaudits because it really is better than the records made by those who've played in this park all their lives? or is it perhaps that general critical perception dictates that something *sad* is more genuine if it's believed not to be the norm for any particular artist?

and if so, isn't that pretty fucking boring?

Nor mine (cf. "Steven Stills" comment above). I guess that makes me consistent! I don't think I've ever been consistent in my life!

Isn't that what he's always done though? SeaChange excepted, that is...

He wouldn't have talked about this if he wasn't asked. And then completely misrepresented.

Speaking of lack of innovation, are you all slaves to what you read? And you think you have critical capabilities.

Beyond those three things though, I just like messing with pretentious people.

It just surprises me how people miss the plot. I mean, here's a guy who's risked falling on his face with every album, and now he's on tour with the Flaming Lips--I mean, if that fails, it's all on him, and still he took that chance. I can't think of any other pop musician, right now, who's that brave.

But instead of addressing that, all most people here seem to be interested in is boasting about how they know he ripped off this artist or that artist, how he's overrated, how band x is better, how religion is determining what he does.

I mean, what a waste of time.

Well, if he's risking that, we can address whether he has or not.

This has nothing to do with whether you've decided to "like" these artists ahead of time. What would impress you more, if he worked with Ween? Kronos Quartet? Sonic Youth? Beck could go on the road and just work with the same people he always has. The fact that he's shaking it up with this crew is a big chance. He could alienate their fans, and his own as well.

Look, in my opinion, the "Beck is overrated" rap is getting old. That's all. You all have your opinions, and they strike me as a little self-congratulatory. I have mine. No, Beck doesn't strike me as the second coming. But I've certainly seen him more objectively evaluated elsewhere.

But y'know,

I just want them to be exciting or interesting or moce me in some mysterious way. Anything other than boring and unfortunately Beck hasn't been anything other than boring for most of his career. I haven't heard his new record, but I'm getting a copy next week. I don't have high hopes for it however but I'm an optimist and i hope to be proved wrong.

Well, if he's "boring," I'd like to know what you find exciting. Really. I think every album Beck has released has teetered on the edge of musical disaster. I don't consider that boring.

(this is exactly what melissa said, but it still puts a hole in the single point philo has now made about 43 times)

is this jeff beck we're talking about?

I always thought Jackson Browne sounded like an eighth grade poetry teacher trying "really" hard. But I have heard almost all his work. "Pretender=ice cream vendor?" Quite the pungent rhyme, not--in my opinion.

And Mark, thanks for illustrating my "single point."

FYI, I felt Melissa treated me dismissively. Whether it was true or not. And I do think a number of points have been harped on over and over around here. I've kinda been playing with that.

And as far as name-calling goes, it takes one to know one, right? Thanks for taking confrontation so well.

Philo is it not the case that you were pretty well convinced that Sea Change was going to be a masterpiece before you'd even heard it?

Perhaps boring is the wrong word as I like plenty of stuff which could be considered dull too, smug would be more accurate. I understand he bears his soul on his new record, well good I look forward to hearing it. Hopefully it'll be rather more engaging than the irritating faux beatnik persona I'm used to.

What would be interesting would be if he made a record with Max Martin or Diane Warren or someone of that ilk, as for all his supposed boundary pushing I just hear a rather mediocre singer songwriter who's sprinkling some hipster fairydust on his records.

i'm not saying it's not an interesting union, philo. to a certain extent, i'm a fan of both. but from a critical standpoint, there's absolutely ZERO risk involved for beck here. there's no chance that anyone's going to look back on his career and go "oh, it fell off the rails when he worked with the flaming lips..."

i think sea change is one of the best albums of the year, but its NOTHING like the musical "disaster" that you seem to think beck is teetering on the verge of. there's nothing WRONG with that, either, so i don't see why you're being so confrontational about this.

This has nothing to do with whether you've decided to "like" these artists ahead of time. What would impress you more, if he worked with Ween? Kronos Quartet? Sonic Youth? Beck could go on the road and just work with the same people he always has. The fact that he's shaking it up with this crew is a big chance. He could alienate their fans, and his own as well.

do you REALLY think that? when was the last time a mainstream artist with substantial indie cred "alienated" their audience by working with an indie band with substantial mainstream cred? it's INTERESTING but it's not particularly risky. the fact that you're tossing off silly media-pressed phrases like "alienate their fans" makes me wonder who among us has actually fallen for the pr speak...

>>To like Beck's rhyming on "Sea Change," though, you have to have made your mind up before listening to the record, because those are some weak, weak lyrics.<<
Well, I'm sorry, I disagree. There are a couple of lyrics that I find conventional--"Guess I'm Doing Fine" is almost a satire of a hardcore country lament. But to dismiss them all as weak suggests that they haven't been given a fair hearing. You may call Jackson Browne underrated, but I play his classic albums these days about as often as I play Donna Summer's. I still say he was the most strained lyricist of the '70s, outside of Paul Simon. Perhaps that's why he's so underrated.

But as far as my anticipation goes, I'd like you to point out where in this thread I called "Sea Change" a masterpiece. I think most Beck fans were fearing a mess, just as they did with Midnite Vultures. And as I said somewhere here, I don't think Beck is the second coming. Some of you obviously think his genre-hopping is lame and smug, all I'm saying is, to me it's far more exhilarating to me than a 1,000 Jeff Beck guitar riffs taken together. I'm sorry if anyone sees this as a "faux-beatnik" persona. Given the guy's background, I'm pretty sure there's nothing "faux" about it.

I don't really understand this ad hominem evaluation of artists, anyway. Y'all are not exclusively guilty of it, but to bring in references to Beck's background or alleged religion as an explanation for his art is a totally lazy and inappropriate critical diss reflex. It would be just as sensible for me to cite Jeff Beck's onetime (and perhaps continuing) connections to the Mafia and Jackson Browne's reputation as a wife-beater.

>>i'm not saying it's not an interesting union, philo. to a certain extent, i'm a fan of both. but from a critical standpoint, there's absolutely ZERO risk involved for beck here. there's no chance that anyone's going to look back on his career and go "oh, it fell off the rails when he worked with the flaming lips..."

i think sea change is one of the best albums of the year, but its NOTHING like the musical "disaster" that you seem to think beck is teetering on the verge of. there's nothing WRONG with that, either, so i don't see why you're being so confrontational about this.<<

Oh, yeah? Then tell me why fans of both the FLips and Beck are questioning the wisdom of this tour. I'm seeing some comments that suggest they think it was a totally wrong decision on both acts' parts, and that they're incompatible. You can say that's "an incorrect assumption," but at least admit that you're speaking theoretically.

I've also seen plenty of people who liked "Midnite Vultures" become totally turned off by "Sea Change." That hardly suggests an artist who's smug or boring to me, but I guess I'm being silly. My point is simply that Beck has challenged his fan's loyalty with all his shape-shifting. When did Beck or Browne ever do that? I call it flirting with disaster, myself. If Beck were smug, he'd release 16 versions of Odelay, as that was his biggest seller. But if you're not a fan, you're not gonna appreciate this anyway.

But anyone who would call both acts "mainstream with substantial indie cred" has a PR sheet in his own head. Beck has had two or three radio "hits," the last five or six years ago. Since then, he's pretty much fallen off the radar for most people. The FLips had one radio hit, "She Don't Use Jelly," I believe about 10 years ago. The average person on the street doesn't know either of them. How does that consititute mainstream?

>>I like most of Beck's previous stuff, but I haven't heard this one yet. I think Anthony's posts are the only ones in this whole thread that are giving me any specific ideas at all, about what this album is actually like.<<

Hopefully this will help a little more. "Sea Change" is much like "Mutations" in that it was produced by Nigel Godrich and is more subdued than say, either Odelay or Vultures, but SC is more monochromatic musically. It takes off from a different set of models than Mutations, too, owing a debt to classic country and American folk as well as Serge Gainsbourg and British folk, a la Nick Drake. It's heavily string orchestrated in spots (courtesy of David Campbell, Beck's father)--I guess that's the hippie "fairy-dust." And yes, thematically it's focused on the question of a lost love affair and the impact that has on one's state of mind. Of course, some songs are more effective than others, as with all of Beck's discs. As usual, it requires an open mind.

Melissa, my point was that I was no more dismissive than you, that's all. And Mark, apologize all you want. I don't care.

both artists are on major labels and have a reputation for 'studio experimentation'. Flaming lips have had their good moments and beck hasn't (apart from mutations, which i think its OK, a bearable imitation of folk/country sounds).

''I've also seen plenty of people who liked "Midnite Vultures" become totally turned off by "Sea Change." That hardly suggests an artist who's smug or boring to me, but I guess I'm being silly. My point is simply that Beck has challenged his fan's loyalty with all his shape-shifting.''

he sounds like everyone else but he is afraid to sound like Beck. that is the problem. and yes, you are VERY silly.

Philo, I think the reason you're encountering so much difficulty here is 1) you characterize any disagreement with you as ad-hominem, which clearly isn't the case and 2) you don't seem to think that discussing music ought to include negative reactions. That someone heard Sea Change as a '70s AM AOR pastiche doesn't mean they didn't actually listen; that someone doesn't share your opinion doesn't mean that they weren't listening correctly. Welcome to ILM! Let's discuss what we think about Sea Change, but let's not insist that if somebody doesn't think it's very good, they must be off their nut!

As to why "you're classic rock people" is funny...clearly you haven't read a lot of the other threads here. Nothing takes the steady beating that classic rock does. Just because many of us are very familiar with a genre doesn't mean it's our main thing. I don't like America or Bread, but I do know exactly what they sound like because I've listened to their stuff. And Sea Change sounds a lot like Bread. Whom Beck happens to like a lot, as I've pointed out before.

Finally, Beck gets Rolling Stone covers = he is about as mainstream as you can get. There's nothing wrong with being mainstream, and nobody here thinks that there is. You seem to think that Beck's being mainstream is construed as a mark against him. It isn't.

"Mutations" is not a country/folk album per se, unless you classify "Tropicalia" (which is bossa nova) or "Diamond Bollocks" (fairly clearly classic rock style) that way. It covers a wider range of styles than you imply.

>>he sounds like everyone else but he is afraid to sound like Beck. that is the problem. and yes, you are VERY silly.<<

So Beck would be better if he had one or two styles he always stuck to, huh? I think that's very silly, myself. You're thinking small. And as far as "sounding like" everyone else, I think you're talking about someone like Lenny Kravitz--the biggest no talent ripoff artist of all time.

And for that matter, "Sea Change" is more consistent than "Mutations." If that's your standard, you should eat it up.

And I'm sorry John, but personally, I think there are very good songs on "Sea Change," just as good as "Mutations." If you disagree, go ahead. But if you're gonna judge any song strictly by it's lyrics, you're missing more than half the point, anyway. IMO, Beck is a better composer than Jackson Browne, too.

I think beck would be better to invent his own style rather than doing cheap parodies of other styles. you are correct that he is into a bossa nova trip in mutations but i haven't heard that record in a while. but still, country and folk are very much in there.

when i heard midnite vultures i did think of lenny kravitz in fact. both go well with each other.

You needn't be sorry for thinking there are very good songs on Sea Change -- I do too! So do lots of people on this thread! It's just that we don't worry about whether what we're saying might sound a little mean or petty or whatever, and we don't preface every observation by saying "let's first say that this is an artist who's done some really great things, and certainly he's worked hard on this," etc.

What seems to underlie your posts, though, is this idea that nobody here gave Sea Change a fair listen. Certainly that's not true for me: I bought it, lived with it for a while, thought it seemed pretty phoned-in. The music was pretty nice, altogether, but the overall effect wasn't particularly memorable. Knowing how diligent most of the regulars on this board are, I suspect they're also giving opinions that they formed after listening hard -- not dismissing Beck out-of-hand for not making Midnite Vultures II, as you seem to be accusing them of doing.

Finally, just how much Jackson Browne have you actually listened to?

Really? I asked people here who they find exciting, and the first name that pops up here is Jeff Beck. Kinda telling, isn't it?

>>you characterize any disagreement with you as ad-hominem, which clearly isn't the case<<

I used the expression once.

>>you don't seem to think that discussing music ought to include negative reactions.<<

Bull. I've already been very negative about a lot of artists. You can't handle the fact that I strongly disagree with you about Beck. That's the real issue here.

You keep misquoting and misrepresenting me, which is really annoying. I have a different attitude about Beck, and I have a right to argue it any way I see fit. I didn't come here to make friends, I came here to stir stuff up. And I think any board on which people feel free to call others "pricks" shouldn't be one where people get huffy about how someone structures an argument.

I didn't say anyone was off their nut. I said I strongly believe certain people are off the mark on this CD, and I'll say it any way I want.

I've listened to as much Bread as you have, by the way. And I want to see this quote where Beck says he likes them so much. Because I've read pretty much every interview with Beck, and I've yet to see it.

>>Finally, Beck gets Rolling Stone covers = he is about as mainstream as you can get. There's nothing wrong with being mainstream, and nobody here thinks that there is. You seem to think that Beck's being mainstream is construed as a mark against him. It isn't.<<

Beck got ONE RS cover in 1997. Yes, he's gotten other magazine covers. So has George Clinton and the White Stripes--how mainstream are they? Mainstream is *sales* and *radio play*, not photographs. Find someone who works in a factory 9-9 and ask them if they've heard of Beck. Now, ask them if they've heard of Michael Jackson, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, or even Jeff Beck. That's your mainstream.

I have no problem with people being mainstream; I have a problem with them being called this when they really ain't.

And as far as people listening or not listening, for someone to hop on here and say that "Mutations" is more consistent than "Sea Change"--well, I'm sorry. You haven't listened, you're just mouthing off.

And BTW John, how much Jackson Browne have I listened to? All the stuff he made his rep on. ALL of it. No, I haven't listened in the last 10 years, but it seems like a lot of others haven't, either.

judging the whole board on that = pretty much of a piece w.yr entire attitude

to say to a person who has heard both recs and then to say that one is better (morte consistent in songwriting terms) than another is a perfectly reasonable arg philo.

I asked a question, and I got an answer. First impressions, right? No one tried to counter it right away--and they still really haven't. So, you're not into classic rock? Great. Who are you into?

But y'know, first impressions probably are mistaken. Look at you. You've insulted me repeatedly as a prick, and you don't know the first thing about me. Yeah, you're the last reasonable man on Earth.

Well then, Julio, I think you're wrong. "Sea Change" is the more stylistically consistent record to my ears. Sorry.

John--you go on ignoring what I say, and think what you want. Easier than dealing with the arguments I brought up in my last post, right?

Philo, I say this without animosity: I don't see how the arguments you've brought up are really arguments at all: more defensive strikes against people at whom you seem angry.

don't be sorry becuz that was good. if you say x is bettah the y it might stop you from talking shit really.

>>as to Bread, it's not an interview response, it's something he mentioned when we played a show together in Holland<<

Well, great. How was I supposed to gather that from your previous threads? He still doesn't sound remotely like them to me.

>>Philo, I say this without animosity: I don't see how the arguments you've brought up are really arguments at all: more defensive strikes against people at whom you seem angry.<<

Yes, when all else fails, let's turn to psychoanalysis. The thing I find funny is, it's so easy to pull your chains. I made up my mind to be affrontive, and it's worked. A group of you really can't stand that I don't accept the "brilliance" of your arguments about Beck. You take yourselves sooo seriously.

My arguments are just as valid as yours. Or anyone else's here. And they're not stated any more bogusly. I said a few posts ago, I think certain statements are off the mark. Way off. I have yet to hear anyone acknowledge that you could possibly be, that's all.

Again, I'm sorry. My definition of mainstream is different from yours. There are plenty of bands on mainstream labels who no one knows at all.

What band were you in, John? I might have heard of you.

Oh, I've been reading the whole thing! ;-) What I've heard of the album I thought was quietly enjoyable enough musically and no, wasn't caring about the lyrics much. Big surprise!

I made up my mind to be affrontive, and it's worked.

And you wanted to do this because...

One need not psychoanalyze to find plenty of anger in here. The only chain you're yanking seems to be your own.

A group of you really can't stand that I don't accept the "brilliance" of your arguments about Beck.
Honest - you don't seem to have actually heard anybody's criticisms of Sea Change. That's not an attack, just an observation. I don't think anybody here thinks his or her argument is brilliant or terrifically insightful or crucial for the purposes of world peace or anything. But certainly, given your insistence on the subjectivity of opinion, the opinion "Sea Change is dull" is qualitatively every bit as valid as "Sea Change is great." It's not psychoanalysis to notice that you seem a lot more interesting in trying to take everybody down a peg than in discussing the music on Sea Change.

My band doesn't matter, we're on a mid-indie. Only our album will come out next month and then we will TAKE OVER THE ENTIRE WORLD >:->

I would amend my "nobody thinks his/her argument is terrifically insightful" to say that I do think Honda's estimation seems spot-on to me: Beck's "Heartland Feeling" being a song that's simultaneously funny & heartrendingly sad & serious & playful - which was his great strength, early on, this melding of moods

Sounds like my kind of band, actually.

>>It's not psychoanalysis to notice that you seem a lot more interesting in trying to take everybody down a peg than in discussing the music on Sea Change.<<

Lighten up, John. You can lecture me all you want on my personal behavior, but I have yet to see anything sterling in response. And I think maybe some of you need to be. Your pettiness and haughtiness is unattractive, as well.

>>But certainly, given your insistence on the subjectivity of opinion, the opinion "Sea Change is dull" is qualitatively every bit as valid as "Sea Change is great."<<

Well, I'll say this once more only. I didn't say "Sea Change" is great. I did say, I think it's a better album than you, John, painted it as, and that it's certainly not dull. Maybe the problem I'm having is that I take umbrage when people state opinions as if it's fact and they know best. I try to present opinions in that way--like here--and find it very unattractive.

But I'm sorry--I still don't think calling an album "dull" says much, any more than saying it's "great" or "lovely" or "unforgettable."

>>Beck's "Heartland Feeling" being a song that's simultaneously funny & heartrendingly sad & serious & playful - which was his great strength, early on, this melding of moods.<<

I don't think he's lost that. I agree that this album has more uniformity of mood, but that doesn't mean he's abandoned it overall. I don't really agree that "Heartland Feeling" is the best example of that, anyway. I'd go with "Pay No Mind" for starters.

Right but "Sea Change" is the album about which we're talking here: see thread title. We're not discussing whether Beck will go on to make Sea Change II: the Sequel, and I don't suppose anybody thinks he will. But Sea Change itself has some rather hackneyed lyrics (hackneyed because unsurprising, hackneyed not because they're direct but because in their directness they don't seem to really communicate a whole lot) and some pleasant arrangments that seem like they're aiming for a sort of transcendent resignation but which fall short of the mark.

but of course all that's only my opinion and everybody else's opinion is equally valid and all discussion is utterly pointless and we have to respect Beck as an artist etc etc etc

(do you honestly think a discussion is enriched if every assertion is couched in scarequotes like this? isn't it more fun to just have at it?)

Right but "Sea Change" is the album about which we're talking here: see thread title. We're not discussing whether Beck will go on to make Sea Change II: the Sequel, and I don't suppose anybody thinks he will. But Sea Change itself has some rather hackneyed lyrics (hackneyed because unsurprising, hackneyed not because they're direct but because in their directness they don't seem to really communicate a whole lot) and some pleasant arrangments that seem like they're aiming for a sort of transcendent resignation but which fall short of the mark.

but of course all that's only my opinion and everybody else's opinion is equally valid and all discussion is utterly pointless and we have to respect Beck as an artist etc etc etc

(do you honestly think a discussion is enriched if every assertion is couched in scarequotes like this? isn't it more fun to just have at it?)

(finally I didn't say "Heartland Feeling" was the best example of anything, just an example -- though as a lyrics-focused guy I'd say "HF" trumps "Pay No Mind" because of the brilliant "burned all the money in the kitchen sink/while his wife fixed him a drink" line)

Would somebody please make a mashup of this ASAP? I have a feeling that 1,000 Jeff Beck guitar riffs heard simultaneously would actually be pretty tremendous. :=)

Presumably, a good bit of Philo's early comments were pointed at me, since I was one of the ones who slagged "Sea Change" off. And I'll do it again: I bought the damn thing on its 'masterpiece' rep, and the fact that I have previously found Beck consistently interesting. And I hate it. Absolutely hate it. John's right -- it does sound like Bread and America and Jackson Browne and all that other seventies singer-songwriter stuff. But I like Bread (they're funny!), so why don't I like "Sea Change"?

Ans. - Because I find it boring. And I don't care, Philo, if you think that's not a good enough reason. I find it boring. THWWWT. I don't like this new post-Sept.11 / post-breakup serious-guy-with-personal-message Beck. I like my Beck with a dash of absurdity, a bit of quirky, a snort of cheek and a healthy disregard for 'what it all means, man.' "Sea Change" got none 'o that, swapping it all for shimmering guitars, overwraught string arrangements, sludgy tempos, meandering melodies and what sounds to these ears like a bit too much self-interest. If I need to hear such stuff--although I usually don't--I'll listen to "Harvest," or "All is Dream" for that matter.

I like Beck because he's fun. "Sea Change" is not fun. 'Cold Brains' is fun. The difference between the two is very obvious to me.

Oh, spare me. I'm not more a troll than any of you.

>>What I've heard of the album I thought was quietly enjoyable enough musically and no, wasn't caring about the lyrics much. Big surprise!<<

Sorry. They're so eager to diss me they can't be bothered listening to you.

>>But Sea Change itself has some rather hackneyed lyrics (hackneyed because unsurprising, hackneyed not because they're direct but because in their directness they don't seem to really communicate a whole lot) and some pleasant arrangments that seem like they're aiming for a sort of transcendent resignation but which fall short of the mark.<<

In your opinion, you mean.

>>but of course all that's only my opinion and everybody else's opinion is equally valid and all discussion is utterly pointless and we have to respect Beck as an artist etc etc etc (do you honestly think a discussion is enriched if every assertion is couched in scarequotes like this? isn't it more fun to just have at it?)<<

No, frankly. When I have at it I'm a troll whose ideas are not valid. When you have at it, you're obviously correct.

>>I don't like this new post-Sept.11 / post-breakup serious-guy-with-personal-message Beck. I like my Beck with a dash of absurdity, a bit of quirky, a snort of cheek and a healthy disregard for 'what it all means, man.' "Sea Change" got none 'o that, swapping it all for shimmering guitars, overwraught string arrangements, sludgy tempos, meandering melodies and what sounds to these ears like a bit too much self-interest.<<

Well, believe it or not, my comments were not directed exclusively (or even particularly at you. Had they been, I would have directed them at you. Sorry all you can appreciate is "absurd" Beck. Just because that's true doesn't mean serious Beck should go in the dumpster, in my opinion. And by the way, this record is not a Sept. 11 disc, like Springsteen's. And if you believe something is a masterpiece based on what *other* people say, don't be surprised if you're disappointed.

>>And you wanted to do this because...<<

Are you kidding? Because people are sooooo outraged. If no one touches this, I'll be pleasantly surprised.

violent chap
a hip tv clone
oh pelvic tan

i just bought sea change, and as a beck fan, i was at first slightly disappointed. it didn't take long for me to change my mind (by track three)... the album is something wholly different from anything he's done... it's no more similar to mutations than it is to odelay or midnite vultures... the sound he's created on the album is beautiful... granted, it's not funky or quirky or weird in the fashion that i've come to expect from beck... but it's no less of a (po-mo) artistic creation... the aesthetic is different, but part of the brilliance i see in this album comes from the juxtaposition of this aesthetic with the rest of his recent output...

mainly what i like in the album is an attempt to explore/create beautiful music in way previously foreign to him and most musicians with whom i'm familiar...

"And as far as people listening or not listening, for someone to hop on here and say that "Mutations" is more consistent than "Sea Change"--well, I'm sorry. You haven't listened, you're just mouthing off"

Ah, but you're wrong here, see. I've given Sea Change numerous listens in the past few days (since this thread started up, in fact, I've really made a concerted effort to get into it). I thought it sounded a bit lifeless the first couple of times, and I can't say my opinion has turned around too much. It's all a bit thin, in the melodic sense. Mutations DOES tail off a weensy bit, at the end, but for the most part it's stunning. I'd def take it over the consistently ok Sea Change. Philo - you clearly prefer Sea Change, and that's fine with me. Your opinion is just as valid as mine, and I won't accuse you of mouthing off.

"I like my Beck with a dash of absurdity, a bit of quirky, a snort of cheek and a healthy disregard for 'what it all means, man"

Like music to my ears, this is so OTM. Why does every album have to present you with a piece of the artist's soul? Can't there be more than one way of working. I like some soulful, emotional music, but I also like a bit of vacuous fun.

Incidentally, Beachwood Sparks have already taken care of providing this year's masterpiece.

Uh . . .

J liked Beck before. Other people who also liked Beck before said new Beck album is good. J buys new Beck album. J is pissed, because he thinks new Beck album sucks.

And this is objectionable exactly how?

Philo is a mentalist.

I have no opinion on "Sea Change" one way or the other by the way - my moderator's eye caught the big jump in posts to this thread. I haven't been impressed enough by Beck's genre-switching in the past to want to listen to an album of more direct songwriting, but maybe it's fantastic. Meanwhile I'll stick to classic rock - anyone heard the new Knopfler?

Philo: In your opinion, you mean.

OK everybody please forgive a brief tirade but is it just me or does anybody else find this sort of response uniquely annoying? Do people who use this knee-jerk response really think it'd be a better world if every evaluation of any endeavor were prefaced by a formulaic "in my opinion"? And would such people actually be willing to debate a point as long as everything all concerned parties said began "in my opinion"? Would an ideal discussion for them go like this:

"In my opinion, Beck's 'Sea Change' has some pretty poor songwriting"

"Oh! In my opinion, Beck's 'Sea Change' is very well-written!"

[silence]

How come the "in my opinion" brigade is completely incapable of understanding that when the subjectivity of opinion is a commonly understood assumption, the need to qualify one's statements with "in my opinion" vanishes? Why do they imagine that "that's your opinion, though" settles anything? Are they as sincere as they seem in their conviction that the people whose arguments they're attempting to defer haven't actually thought this whole matter through?

Is there a class these people could take that would explain this shit to them so they won't make themselves look so stupid?

Is this post the single most pointless thing I've ever undertaken?

subjectively speaking your objectivity is fucking with my subjectivity.

Well, speaking intersubjectively, my subjectivity allows me to objectively rationalize Julio's position in relation to my intentionality, which in my opinion is an distanced but subject-centered attitude toward John's disguised subjective opinion and Ned's outside faux-objective criteria-laden judgments.

Your neverending, spluttering ire over words on a discussion board is funny in itself. Really.

And Tom, yeah, as I tried to point out earlier, this was kind of an Internet bar bet. Not that I didn't express certain things I certainly believe. (I don't think I denied I was "trolling" at all; I just made the point that certain people who were insulting me personally were no better.) Messing with people is so unlike me that I really did it on a dare.

Personally, I think alex in manhattan says it best. You're never gonna get people to agree on which Beck is the best kind of Beck--the "vacuous funster" or the emotionally straightforward artist--and the fact that he doesn't seem to be wedded to any role in particular makes that point moot. So you either appreciate him for all of his changes, or you don't. I still think, however, that there's some suggestion here that if Beck doesn't come across as the Beck you like on "Sea Change," he's made a mistake. That seems off the mark to me.

Anyway, you all were very satisfying, in a defensive sort of way. I'm sure you'll continue to be. I'm a moderator on another board, and I'm sorry, but we kind of insist on saying "in my opinion" and "this is what I think" over there. It's just courtesy, and an acknowledgement that we don't know everything.

Dunno where you see that, Philo. Beck is entitled to do whatever the hell he wants, and we as listeners are just as entitled to think what he wants to do is either brilliant or crap. You are entitled to disagree with me, and John is entitled to disagree with you. And I am entitled to agree with John that prefacing everything with "in my opinion" is just fucking redundant.

Oldest person on said board=16

Ahh. Now if only I could figure out whether "I'm sorry" means "I apologize" or is a rhetorical device subbing for "I would like to assert that I'm right without actually saying so."

Keep going, John.

*DISCLAIMER: This is a statement of opinion, not of fact. This opinion is being provided as a convenience and for informational purposes only; it does not constitute an endorsement or an approval of any other products, services or opinions. We bear no responsibility for the accuracy, legality or content of the opinion.

*The term "you" is a general term and does not imply or determine that you, the reader, are the individual actually grows on.
**Depending on mood, personal tastes, number of times having heard the album, tolerance for atypical and somewhat cliche**** lyrics, and whether or not you actually like Beck in the first place.
***Or Mutations or whatever.
****Compared to Beck's other work.

''Don't you just hate all that crap about "It's not a proper album, I just wanted to sneak it out on a little indie label".''

yeah, you're right. I didn't like it. it was a debacle because he put it on geffen anyway.

QED.

That said, i do like Sea Change - refer to my feature review in upcoming issue of Yr Flesh.

wocka wocka wocka!

it's cool that people don't like it, but what just makes me laugh are the claims by some people that it is somehow profoundly retrograde and dishonest, that it's last year's record, or 1974's record, or whatever

seriously, its almost perverse levelheadedness is something i appreciate about it

Paper Tiger, End Of The Day, Sunday Sun, Little One

which were, neverthless, performed far too sluggishly.

unless his new record is gonna sound the same

I haven't heard much of the bands that are cited as rip-off victims (Bread etc) but, you know, is there something fundamentally worse about making a Bread pastiche than a Prince one? At least the Bread pastiche I can relate to. There's drama, maaan! I can dig it.

Also, it's not as samey as I (and certainly others) thought of it. There may be only a few songs that deviate from the general mode, but they're worth it - "Sunday Sun" in particular has to be about the best production Beck's ever put forth in terms of uniting the recording studio behind the song.

Surely at least some of those who slagged on Sea Change have to be ready to give it another chance after Guero, right?

fuck this album

except "little one" which is ok

man, this album makes me feel like shit...

And no fucking shit about "relevance". Good music is always relevant!