I just found a letter I wrote to Melody Maker in 1993...

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Dear Maker

I played some of ______ to one of my friends (by and large a musical philistine) and he likened it to Road To Hell-period Chris Rea. While I don't wholeheartedley agree with this comment, it did start me thinking (not always a good thing).

Both you and your mates downstairs have heaped praise on this album til it sags in the middle: "The most important album since The Stone Roses and the best since Screamadelica"..."a dazzlingly innovative hybrid of ideas". The first of these in particular is a seriously heavy proclamation by anyone's standards. Talk like this sets off alarm bells around my head just as effectively as your (partly justified) Suede-induced fervour this time last year; I bought the CD blind anyway, figuring that there must be some grounds for this adulation.

It was pretty good, and after repeated listens, it got better. Questions, however, plagued my mind, competing for position alongside ______'s undeniably irresistable hooks. With all this talk of 'diversity', 'hybrids' and 'eclecticism', where does one draw the line? Where does 'eclectic' become 'unfocussed'? Where does 'hybrid' become 'frankly pointless amalgam of disparate styles'? It is possible to break down too much (sic) of the barriers between musical styles (to over-transcend boundaries, if you will).

Yes, ______ is a bloody good album, indeed it may well be the most important since The Stone Roses and the best since Screamadelica, but you lot, with your penchant for hype and scenes, are in grave danger of alienating your increasingly cynical readership, who may well not bother to follow up the hype, secure in the knowledge that you'll be slagging off the previously hyped band within a month or so.

Please stop giving bands so much to live up to; stop making your readers so wary that you're crying wolf. In the case of ______, you're not, but people will stop bothering to find this out if you're not careful. The music press will lose its influence. Don't let that happen. The press is important as a barometer of quality and as a means of reading opinions, but hype per se is unnecessary. Think about it, please.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:12 (twenty-two years ago)

So.

1. Are any of my criticisms still valid today?

2. Do you think they printed it? (I found my hand-written copy in a drawer)

3. Where's my passion for the press gone in the last 10 years?

and finally,

4. What's the album? (I've left it blank, just for fun)

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:16 (twenty-two years ago)

reinforced presents the definition of hardcore

― jess (dubplatestyle), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Siamese Dream?

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:30 (twenty-two years ago)

nope and nope.

mind you..."Rrrrrrrrewind! Rrrrrrrroad to hell!" Jess, maybe you're onto something ;-)

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:33 (twenty-two years ago)

the Boo Radleys album?

― M Matos (M Matos), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Jeff Buckley?

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Or...no...not friggin' Portishead?

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:38 (twenty-two years ago)

Oops. Scratch those two -- they're from 1994.

― Michael Daddino (epicharmus), Friday, 4 July 2003 18:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Oops. Scratch those two -- they're from 1994.

And I'm afraid I've been misleading you all - a little sleuthing reveals I must've written the letter in early 1994.

But you're still all way off beam thus far...

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 20:45 (twenty-two years ago)

modern life is rubbish?

― scott pl. (scott pl.), Friday, 4 July 2003 20:51 (twenty-two years ago)

"a little sleuthing reveals I must've written the letter in early 1994."

meaning the rec was released in '94? if so, i guess parklife

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 4 July 2003 20:56 (twenty-two years ago)

meaning the rec was released in '94? if so, i guess parklife

Yeah, it came out early '94. But it wasn't Parklife, or indeed any other Blur.

Anyway, Parklife might've been seen as really good in '94, but not important, y'know?

Clue? Naaah...too easy.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:18 (twenty-two years ago)

Alright, a clue: it was pretty much the first time this band had ever had any decent-sized coverage in either of the inkies at the time, let alone a cover.

Think...huge gigantic canine...sort of.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:22 (twenty-two years ago)

"it was pretty much the first time this band had ever had any decent-sized coverage..."

so, they'd released records before this? the "canine" clue only serves to puzzle me further!

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:30 (twenty-two years ago)

They've been around in various (musically pretty different) incarnations since the mid-80s.

Oh I've blown it now.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Underworld - Dubnobasswithmyheadman

― blutroniq (blutroniq), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:33 (twenty-two years ago)

...and I didn't need any hints. I still remember that claim myself and thought it was ridiculously generous.

In hindsight, it's still a great album and actually has stood the test of time quite well. However, it was nowhere near as good (or as important) as either Screamadelica, or The Stone Roses.

― blutroniq (blutroniq), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Blutroniq wins!

FWIW I reckon DNBWMHM's up there with both of the albums it was originally measured against in terms of perceived 'quality' and 'importance' - it's still my favourite Underworld album (even though I lent it, along with my now rare - I think, or at least it seems - US import compilation of a load of similar-era remixes, to somebody in 1999 and haven't seen either since), and one of my top 10 albums of the 90s, too.

So if we were to contemporise this letter and send it to NME, only changing the band names, who would we subsitute? C'mon, it'd be funny..!

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:42 (twenty-two years ago)

most of the bands NME creams itself over these days aren't really "eclectic" as such, so it's a tough one...

― weasel diesel (K1l14n), Friday, 4 July 2003 21:56 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought everyone was eclectic nowadays? Which makes non-eclectic the new eclectic, which makes The Datsuns the most innovative band in the world! DO YOU SEE?

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Friday, 4 July 2003 22:00 (twenty-two years ago)

i remember that underworld album, as kick starting increased dance coverage in Melody Maker [as in 1993 and 1992 - Melody Maker's coverage of dance music had actually shrunk to a small section less than 1/2 a page. Remember MM was dominated by grunge/ Nirvana/ US rock bands as documented by ET and Allan Jones]

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Friday, 4 July 2003 22:10 (twenty-two years ago)

got to this thread too late... i knew that it was underworld.

The interesting thing about the dance section in melody maker at this time (was it called Orbit?) was the amount of info they crammed in. Everything would be in about 4 point text - sometimed i reckon they got as many words into 4 pages as were in the rest of the mag. Of course, the only problem was that the ppl who wrote it (Ben Turner - one of the guys who them went off to start muzik) were a bit too much detroit worshippers that caused me to buy too many bad prog house and crap techno records. If only I'd have started listenign to Reynolds from the beginning - as part of the 'bing bang' issue, he was the lone voice in favour of jugle.hardcore, etc...

― Robin Goad (rgoad), Monday, 7 July 2003 07:18 (twenty-two years ago)

press hated hardcore, but dance press was actually worse than mm/nme

― gareth (gareth), Monday, 7 July 2003 09:02 (twenty-two years ago)

I remember that review. I don't think the letter was published - I'd remember (because DNBWMHM sounds precisely like Road to Hell-era Chris Rea with beats).

― Jim Eaton-Terry (Jim E-T), Monday, 7 July 2003 09:14 (twenty-two years ago)

The Big Bang! Underworld & The new Dance Explosion issue of MM featured:
Underworld, Inner City Youth, Stereo Mc's, Moby, Weatherall, One Dove, D:Ream , Orbital and The Grid. It was described as a 15 page special on club culture. Dunno who else was in it.
Maybe Stevem will know.

― Jamie Johnson, Monday, 7 July 2003 09:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmmm, 50/50 hit rate there...

― Jacob (Jacob), Monday, 7 July 2003 10:04 (twenty-two years ago)

D:Ream bwahahaha...

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Monday, 7 July 2003 10:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I thought it might have been Grant Lee Buffalo initially!

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 10:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I think I remember the letter. They may have only printed the Chris Rea comparison though, as thats the bit I remember. Guessed the band straight away, though.

― Barney, Tuesday, 8 July 2003 15:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I had a letter published in the MM and a couple in the NME, but all are far too horrible and cringeworthy to ever reprint.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 16:17 (twenty-two years ago)

I had one letter in MM. Heh heh heh.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 17:31 (twenty-two years ago)

Was it about Totoro Shields?

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 17:34 (twenty-two years ago)

That's such a wonderfully strange vision that I can't even answer the question. Oh wait I can (the answer is 'no' -- in fact it had nothing to do with shoegaze).

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 17:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Dude, if Kevin Shields isn't Totoro then I don't know who would be.

― Nicole (Nicole), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 17:36 (twenty-two years ago)

I so wanna see Nicole's nerdy letters.

― N. (nickdastoor), Tuesday, 8 July 2003 17:38 (twenty-two years ago)

eleven months pass...

Nicole, what artists did you write in about?

― Mary (Mary), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 07:22 (twenty-one years ago)

"important"

It's funny that anyone ever had such complete reverence for the Stone Roses.

― Dan I. (Dan I.), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 09:32 (twenty-one years ago)

Unfortunately people still do.

― Chewshabadoo (Chewshabadoo), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 12:06 (twenty-one years ago)

One of them was complaining about the NME's coverage of Blur being over the top, I think the one in the MM was in praise of Lush.

― El Diablo Robotico (Nicole), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 12:11 (twenty-one years ago)

The NME coverage of Blur was certainly over the top, I think they were on the cover five times in 1994 (inc. xmas issue).

― Barry Bruner (Barry Bruner), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 21:25 (twenty-one years ago)

In praise of Lush!

― AdamL :') (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 21:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Sounds like a poem!

― AdamL :') (nordicskilla), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 21:27 (twenty-one years ago)

Yesterday I was riffling through a slew of back issues of MM from 1994 to find those articles or mentions about The Day Today which first got me aware of it (Simon Price ran the TV listings page then and was pushing them bigtime). Found an interview by Price of Chris Morris which had him replicating the Kurt/gun in mouth photo shot -- this was two months after Kurt's death. Some evil part of me must have deeply approved.

Anyway, riffling through said issues was more than a little bemusing. It was all very...weird. A full page article on Paw!

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 16 June 2004 21:37 (twenty-one years ago)

one year passes...

I miss my old copies of "the Maker". They were thrown out by mistake. I had them all from 93, 94, most of 95, but I dropped off in 96 as there was too much Britpop for my liking. I moved to big old Q at that point. I also remember that issue on "dance" music, with Underworld and so on.

Is there any decent resource online that has either scanned articles or reprints from MM?

― eviltimeban, Tuesday, 2 May 2006 11:10 (nineteen years ago)

Dubnobasswith... is the only one I've kept around. I even re-bought Screamadelica at one point (load of toss, always was).

― fandango (fandango), Tuesday, 2 May 2006 11:38 (nineteen years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.