ARTIST: Beck
TITLE: Modern Guilt
RELEASE DATE: July 7, 2008
WEB DEBUT: June 30, 2008
ONE-LISTEN VERDICT: It seems that every time I end up doing one of these “leak of the day” posts, I end up being underwhelmed by the disc in question. Is it the nature of this “one-play review” system, or is it that today’s “biggest names” are often those artists who have seen their most vibrant, innovative days pass them by? I listen to music nearly all day, every day, and every week there’s inevitably something that I’m really excited about, something I can’t wait to listen to again. Modern Guilt is not one of them.
If you replaced Beck with Cee-Lo, Modern Guilt would be a Gnarls Barkley disc, and not really in a positive way; each song sounds promising at the start, but then drops back in the Danger Mouse sound. Which makes me wonder: Is there some point when we’re going to give up on Danger Mouse? Sure, I liked “Crazy” as much as anyone, the disc with Jemini was solid, and in retrospect The Good, The Bad, and The Queen was better than I initially thought, even if cutting up Tony Allen’s beats is nearly unforgivable. His production on Modern Guilt is dangerously close to sounding like a cliche, with big beats you can’t really dance to and moody vocals muddled somewhere in the middle. Beck obviously jumps from one interpretation of a genre to another, but this disc doesn’t really sound like a Beck album beyond the presence of his vocals, which haven’t really been his strong suit (with the possible exception of Midnite Vultures).
None of the songs are bad, and the ten tracks and 33 and a half minutes fly by. But I can’t imagine deliberately putting this disc on again, although I’ll probably leave it in my iTunes library and let the tracks pop up now and again on shuffle. What are the Dust Brothers doing these days, Beck? You might want to get out your Rolodex and give them a call.
You guys should work for Pitchfork. Say what you will about Beck but he’s still around unlike Vampire Weekend, Grizzly Bear, etc. will be in the near future.
@Cheap Shot: A) noone mentioned those bands B) your crystal ball predictions mean nothing, and C) still recording in some capacity a decade after your rise to fame really is not such a rare accomplishment in the music industry that anyone deserves a pat on the back for just that. all you have to do it not die or change careers.
I find you can only really tell if a record is REALLY BAD or POTENTIALLY REALLY GOOD on first listen. Everything in between emerges after the third or fourth listen.
Agree that it doesn’t really sound like a Beck album other than his voice, but I don’t think that’s a bad thing. The percussion on this record is great - esp. the background rattling in Volcano, and the crashing stereo drums of Chemtrails. It’s not a classic - after 2 or 3 days of intensive listening I was quite happy to file it away - but who really still expects another classic from Beck anyway?
@Dan Gibson: @Chris Molanphy: Indeed. My comment wasn’t referring to the alleged snooziness of the record (haven’t heard it yet) but just that if you’re consistently “underwhelmed” it’s probably that you haven’t listened enough.
After 3 listens you’ll be able to pull some good stuff out, or say that it definitively sucks. Underwhelmed sounds so non-committal.
“I find you can only really tell if a record is REALLY BAD or POTENTIALLY REALLY GOOD on first listen.”
That sounds about right to me.
Two of the most talented musicians of our generation spend months collaborating on an album, you spend a half hour giving it a single listen and about 15 minutes (judging by the quality and insights of your writing) dismissing it. Some albums can take months to fully grasp or warm to. You seem wonder if it’s the “nature of this ‘one-play review’ system” that has you so underwhelmed with this album. Whether that’s the case or not, I’d consider writing more than a single draft of your next record review. There’s nothing easier to dismiss than a hack music critic who’s lazy and hasn’t done his homework.
But don’t you all think that a “one-listen verdict” is, hell, more than a LOT of people give to music these days? I mean, those of you who were around when we instituted this new format for Leak Of The Day may remember this, but the reason said construct exists is because we’re basically responding to the news of a song/album being leaked. (And I’ve found that it’s actually interesting after the fact, in a “revisiting old posts” way.) But given that there are more non-music diversions out there than ever (not to mention the tight turnaround times and “one-listen” chances officially given to professional critics who are brought in for listening sessions, etc.) I think the one-listen verdict, while flawed, does reflect the way people hear music right now in a very real way.
(Also: Grizzly Bear? Huh?)
On another topic, You know what song is really annoying on first and 8,945,584th listen? That goddamn Enzyte jingle. OH MY GOD YOU GUYS.
@Bobert_B: I guess if you’d been around at all, you’d notice the nature of the “leak of the day” feature. It’s all based on a “one-listen verdict”. Hence, a judgment after ONE LISTEN. I know it’s a difficult premise to get your head around, but give it a shot. We’re not really in the business of full scale record reviews around here, but I guess you wouldn’t know that.
Also, “hack” is such a lazy attack these days, don’t you think?
Thirdly, if Danger Mouse is one of the “most talented musicians of our generation”, I really should consider finding another artform to be interested in.
@Dan Gibson: I truly think Danger Mouse is very talented and much more willing to work with artists of all genres than anybody else of his stature.
@Dan Gibson: You’re right, Mr. Gibson, this was my first trip to your website, and this will be my final comment on your ‘review.’ If you’d taken the time to read my comment, I think you’d find that I was not at all confused about the premise or format of your ‘Leak of the Day’ column. Reviews are, by they’re nature, one man’s opinion. My only point was that YOUR opinion was poorly written with no real discernable insight into the album you were reviewing. I don’t really know what to think of statements like “[Danger Mouse's] production on Modern Guilt is dangerously close to sounding like a cliche” - other than to say it sounds trite, and well, cliched (I’ll avoid using the word ‘hack’ again.) That said, Mr. Gibson, I think you have a wonderful future as a music critic in the I-Tunes era. For your next ‘Leak Of The Day’ column you should put the album on shuffle, listen to the first 15 seconds of the first song that plays, and then write your ‘review’ using only smiley faces and emoticons, LOL…. There’s no way the result could be anymore irrellevant or half-assed than this morning’s post.
Okay okay, I was playing devil’s advocate but merely just existing a decade later is one thing but actually having people write about it like IN THIS POST is another. We need more ARTISTS like him and less WHINEY INDIE DICKS that are in the millions out there.
@Bobert_B: and if YOU’D read DAN’S post, you’d know that this was not a review at all.
i think you have a wonderful future as an internet web site commenter, Bobert_B. you’re reactionary, you don’t read carefully, and you take blog posts about records more personally than, i wager, the musicians themselves would (Kanye West being the exception).
@Bobert_B: Not to get into a ridiculous battle in the comment section with someone going by Bobert_B, but I think it’s somewhat clear you misunderstood the nature of the feature (at least at first), since you made the references to it being a “record review”, which it’s definitely not intended to be. I suppose I could write 2,000 words about the disc after one listen, pulling together opinions I had developed prior to listening (after all, that’s what most early reviews of albums end up being anyway), but that’s not the point. It’s a report on the immediacy of a disc as it plays for the first time. On that basis, and that basis alone, the Beck disc doesn’t do much for me, and I blame the production. I’m not sure how that opinion is “trite” since I haven’t seen a lot of Danger Mouse backlash, nor do I think that’s so complicated or difficult to understand, but I’m certainly not in your anonymous, but obviously highly distinguished, shoes. Whether the post is irrelevant to you or not in particular isn’t terribly my concern, but I certainly hope it’s a little more interesting to some of our readership than you seem to believe. I may or may not be correct in that assumption, but (so far) the check still clears. I never claimed to be a music critic, so perhaps judging me based on that imagined set of criteria is a mistake on your part.
@Dan Gibson: “Is it the nature of this “one-play review” system, or is it that today’s “biggest names” are often those artists who have seen their most vibrant, innovative days pass them by?”
“One-play review.” Your words, Dan, not mine. Your replies to my comments have officially exceeded the length of your non-review. I know that I said that I wouldn’t comment again on your post, but I’m bored at work. What’s your excuse?
@Bobert_B: You know, although one might not know it from modern discourse, context makes up such a significant portion of how we understand language. In this case, “one-play” is a bit of a disclaimer, pointing out that the “review” isn’t the last word on whether the album is good or bad, just an impression. I know some of you people get mad sometimes that someone has a forum to express an opinion other than your own, but perhaps some healthy perspective is in order.
Oh, the classic “I have nothing better to do at work” retort! I’ve used it before, but talk about a threadbare response. Apparently, I don’t have the market cornered on trite.
@Dan Gibson: There are 20 comments to your post Dan, and almost a quarter of them are your own. It’s becoming abundantly clear what your forum really is. I’m rather enjoying our discourse, Dan, regardless of the context.
Let me just say that I like this feature. It’s nice to read someone’s initial thoughts of an album, which I will compare to my own when I listen to this tonight. I haven’t been very enthusiastic about any beck album since Sea Change.
@Bobert_B: Actually, my forum, in this case, is a part time job posting on here on Idolator (you know, the posts found here: [idolator.com]).
You might find this surprising, but I generally enjoy interacting with our readers, some of whom I’d consider friends.
Last time he worked with the Dust Brothers he made Guero, which I found pretty turgid, production-wise, even though it had good songs.
Is it the nature of this “one-play review” system
Yes.
It’s so nice to have Beck and Danger Mouse working on a project together, it’ll cut the time I usually take to avoid them in half.
@Camp Tiger Claw: Actually, it turns out it’s not just the system…listened to the Beck disc again after posting this, and it’s still boring.
@Camp Tiger Claw: I’m with you: back when I reviewed regularly, I played everything the magazines sent me at least one time through with my judge-o-meter turned off. I called it the “head-clearing exercise.” I usually couldn’t adequately judge an album until at least the third listen (sometimes hard, given my old CMJ deadlines/work schedule).
Personally I’d just like to know what it was that drove Bobert to post here in the first place.
“I’m bored at work…I’m searching the net…I’m waiting…WAITING…for the first person to attack my heroes Beck and Danger Mouse.
And then…
Then they will PAY!”
[Response from Bobert, should he not reappear: "So typical from an AMG contributor. Clearly you mistook my initial answer for this putative scenario that you dreamed up in your head after a casual glance of my initial comments to this thread concerning a review which I believe is a review of a study of a recently leaked album that I..."]
@Dan Gibson: For the record, I hate you.
@Dan Gibson: j/k