Musical Gigantism: Classic or Dud?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

So here I sit at the beginning of my mass conversion of pretty much all my CDs into MP3s and MP3-discs, talking about giant box sets (Stax/Volt, Atlantic Rhythm & Blues), watching you all make your MP3-CD one-year mixes, trading for and burning other peoples' discographical completism, and I'm beginning to wonder--where does it end? How much do we actually learn from all of this bulk? Is bulk a means or an end in itself?

Obviously I don't think there's one answer and one answer only here. Sometimes sheer size equals sheer weight. There's no way I could have understaood that James Brown was the greatest musician ever from the number of samples et al alone: it took Star Time to make that case for me. The variety of American Pop: An Audio History (a 9CD box covering 1890-1946) was catnip aplenty by itself, but its endless entertainment value helped make me realize just how fertile pre-rock pop music was. There's others, of course, but those are the two that pop to mind most immediately.

Thing is, if I want to become cognizant of how great something really, truly is--even if it's really, truly great--do I need to spend five and a half hours listening to every little bit of it? At what point does this kind of thing become enervating? I'm asking because I think the question has value by itself, but also because (a) I'm trying to justify buying the three new Proper UK box sets I saw the other day at the shop (a honking-and-shouting sax box, plus boxes on Slim Gaillard and the Hoosier Hot Shots, both of whom I love) and (b) in converting my CDs I'm contemplating some single-year mixes of my own. But something I've put forth a few times is coming back to haunt me--namely, the notion that a complete or near-complete Motown A-sides compilation spanning the 60s up to say 1971 would be the greatest album of all time. Would it really? Or would it just get enervating after awhile? I mean, I gave Boom Selection_Issue 01 30 points in Pazz & Jop but that doesn't mean I've gone back to it all that often!

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Obviously the answer is in how this stuff is curated et al--how it's selected, the order the tracks are in, pacing et al. A subquestion, then: what makes a good very-very-long disc/compilation/listening experience? And is there a semi-scientific way of telling when truncating rather than expanding an artist's/label's/scene's/genre's ouvre is the way to go? (Meaning answers other than "because I like it" or its equivalents please)

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:20 (twenty-one years ago)

I disapprove of gigantism as a listener - my patience is quite low and I rarely have the urge to listen to 70 minutes in a single style or by a single artist, let alone 270. The yearmix things are quite fun because you can skip across so many different styles and cross-currents, but I agree that a Motown Box would be a beautiful, beautiful, but also exhausting thing. I'd end up doing what I do with Bob Dylan's Bootleg Series, and just listening to one disc of it predominantly, I expect.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Other than "because I like it," I'm afraid you ask an impossible question, Matos.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:24 (twenty-one years ago)

The point of boxed sets is obviosly not so you can listen to them all in one sitting. It's so you can have, and say you have, all this music. And you can listen to it in sections, and you can mix it, and you can put it in your ass and twist it... whatever.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:27 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't think it's impossible--just not in any possible way definitive.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Exactly... that why you buy it all, and then listen to it however you want. Your task now is figuring out what you want to keep and what you want to throw away, perhaps track-by-track. No one here can help you with that.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:31 (twenty-one years ago)

As a rule I think dud. I'm really quite a fan of allowing my taste to develop slowly and following my nose. To use MM's James Brown example: I don't need a big old box to make the case for JB being great: one great 7" single can do that and then I can investigate further with time. Comps work well in giving us clues and hints; vast encyclopedic boxes of stuff are stifling. (CF: Dynamite series of mixed up terrific sounds rubbing up against each other vs Tougher Than Tough box of terrific sounds in starchy order for canon-building purposes).

LESS ORDER!

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:32 (twenty-one years ago)

I know Kenan, but even having it feels oppressive somehow - too much duty too little fun.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:32 (twenty-one years ago)

It's the having to sort through it thing that Kenan mentions - I finished my history degree in '95, thanks. And I'm generally sorting through to find the one or two revelatory tracks that scream something out to me - I'd much prefer to just find a track or two like that by itself.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:34 (twenty-one years ago)

I like how a collection builds up over time though, Kenan, and draws context from what else is happening in my life. I quite like not having a career overview booklet to reference, know what I mean?

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:35 (twenty-one years ago)

Why didn't I get the cross post message? Odd.

Tom I thought you were a boxset demon.

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:36 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah but Disky don't count.

Lovingly compiled box-sets with a history booklet and comprehensive production notes = a guilty displeasure.

8CDs "Best of the 70s" for eleven quid made up of anything a bunch of cash-happy Dutchmen can get their hands on = CLASSICEST OF ANYTHING!

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Sorry, Tim, but Tougher Than Tough out-funs any random Dynamite! comp or all of them put together, I'm sorry. There isn't one second of that box that doesn't float my boat in every conceivable way, up to and including the sequencing. Nothing about it is stodgy. And I'm not saying you can't get JB from one single, I'm saying the box can give you something that the 7" can't--not bulk, but achievement, meaning it's as coherent and makes a statement equal to the single. THAT'S what I'm asking about here. It's the difference between a list that's comprehensive and one that's a great piece of writing.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:40 (twenty-one years ago)

(Not that I didn't think you got my question, nor that your opinions are being dismissed, just wanted to sharpen my original query some.)

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:41 (twenty-one years ago)

To use MM's James Brown example: I don't need a big old box to make the case for JB being great: one great 7" single can do that

I think Matos' example is exactly why a boxed set can be great. Star Time flows beautifully, highlights the highlights, cuts a lot to be sure, but it knows its subject and sticks to it. And its subject is James Brown's greatness.

On the other hand, the nine discs of the Stax/Volt boxed set have more great songs than Star Time does, but way way more not great songs. But they leave it to you to decide. I don't mind having a set that I don't really "get" until four years after I buy it, because it takes me that long to listen to all of it enough times to decide what I like and what I don't. That process feels natural to me. I mean, we're playing catch-up with these boxes, right? Why bitch about how long it takes to absorb? We're 30 years late as it is.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:42 (twenty-one years ago)

hmm, i'm not antithetical to "gigantism" (i.e., box sets) at all, because i have a tendency to really get into an artist or style for a period of time. for instance, i've acquired the echo & the bunnymen boxset in the recent past and have spent a good time listening to it and their studio albums.

but to each their own.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:43 (twenty-one years ago)

good deal of time, i meant.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Kenan's latest post makes eloquently a point I was about to make - what box sets are good at often is leaving in the crap.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:44 (twenty-one years ago)

But don't you think that the job of a box-set-putter-together is to weed out the not-great? If we're playing catch-up 30-plus years after the fact shouldn't it be contingent upon them that puts this stuff together that we've got precious little time to waste on flotsam because not only are we trying to learn our history but we need to live in the present, too? Your attitude seems way apologist to me here.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:44 (twenty-one years ago)

on the other hand, i also recently acquired the philly sound gamble/huff 3-cd set and i find myself skipping over big chunks of it (except the second disc, which i listen to from beginning to end). i think that in my case, it depends on the artist or the style more so than it being a general tendency of mine.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:45 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah MM, I picked TTT because I know you're a big fan. And it's great music but I looked at the tracklisting and it was that classic "meh..." feeling. Not stodgy: starchy!

I'm saying I get a *better* sense of wonder and achievement by learning slowly and perhaps in a haphazard way than I do by buying the guidebook. And I'm never very attracted by coherent statements (as I'm so amply proving).

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:46 (twenty-one years ago)

i guess i am an apologist -- i prefer to weed out the good and the bad myself, and not rely on some third party to do that for me. sure, it can be overwhelming. but it's something i prefer to do on my own, and not have it left to someone that i don't know from adam.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:47 (twenty-one years ago)

'I rarely have the urge to listen to 70 minutes in a single style'

Thomas my soon-to-be-enlightened friend - have you ever heard of MARIJUANA

― dave q, Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:49 (twenty-one years ago)

haha now I've decided I like boxsets because it seems they allow me to be all "I like the concerted short blasts of energy" about my LP collection!

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:49 (twenty-one years ago)

Tad, I'm not just asking about box sets. The recent ILx trend of single-year MP3 mixes (which I love!) is also part of it.

Tim: of course, fair enough. My sensibilities are pretty informed by "coherent statements" but I'm also attracted to the haphazard as well. Which probably, haha, means I'm a rockist and a popist.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:50 (twenty-one years ago)

I think it depends on what the box set is MM - box sets dealing with an artist should weed out the rubbish unless they're trying to be super-completist. But box sets which purport to be 'historical documents' shouldn't spare the blemishes - if I want to know about Stax I want some idea of what it was bad at as well as what it was great at. And this especially goes for an era - my only beef with your 1981 discs (which have lots of wonderful music) is that it has almost nothing to do with 1981 as it might actually have taken place. This is why I love "Wow That Was The 70s" (the upthread-mentioned Disky set) - because it filters so little it gives me an impression of what the 70s pop charts might actually have been like.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:51 (twenty-one years ago)

I didn't make the '81 disc, Andy K did. I think my ideal on something like the Stax box would be to include a handful of examples of why it was meh but not the 30-40% or so (I'm guessing) that was.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:52 (twenty-one years ago)

you know, five songs of 100 that are meh, but are the most illustrative examples of said meh.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:53 (twenty-one years ago)

the box sets for british artists are especially urgent and key AFAIC, because of the differences in music distribution in the UK and the US. again, the echo & the bunnymen box-set was good for that because it gathered the oddities, the b-sides, or the singles that didn't make it over here.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:54 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah that's a good ratio I think - sorry for misattribution of 81-ness.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:55 (twenty-one years ago)

cor blimey that Bunnymentalist set sounds like torture

And what about the fun to be had actually locating those longed-for records? This is supposed to be hard work, you know! You kids have it too easy.

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:56 (twenty-one years ago)

One trend I don't like - not about box sets but tying into gigantism in a way - is the current reissue trend of turning single albums into two-disc sets, as is happening with Elvis Costello and happened with the Pet Shop Boys. The second disc will have a few crackers on but it means the album stays at full price and doesn't enter that zone of glorious mid-price cheapness where the curious can have a flutter on an artist with very little outlay.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:58 (twenty-one years ago)

well, i'm just using it as an example based on my tastes. substitute any act more to yer liking!

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:58 (twenty-one years ago)

I will say that Andy's '81 and Nate's '72 discs work for me (the former in theory, haven't heard it yet) PRECISELY because they're fantasy versions of those years--they're ideals, put together with a sensibility that says "this stuff didn't happen together but they COULD HAVE." it's also why I totally fucking adore both American Pop: An Audio History and Anthology of American Folk Music--they're constructs not rigorous documents. I'd say the same about Nate's 2002 disc, but it would be false because for him it DID happen that way--mostly in his head/on his computer/in his stereo, but it did happen. and that's the reality that the others reflect, and that interest me about them.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 08:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Tom, a really good Douglas Wolk article that relates to your post above: http://12.11.184.13/boston/music/other%5Fstories/documents/01709064.htm

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:01 (twenty-one years ago)

they did that with the beggar's banquet-era gary numan stuff, too -- and did a stupid job because they stuck "tubeway army" together with "i, assassin" which made absolutely no sense. i like the newer reissues where they take the b-sides and outtakes.

but i'm not necessarily against the 2-cds thing, as long as it makes aesthetic sense. i.e., it's my aim is true and this year's model, not my aim is true and imperial bedroom.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:03 (twenty-one years ago)

not following your logic there, Tad--why TYM and not IB?

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:04 (twenty-one years ago)

Hey Tad I like bits of the Bunnymen well enough, which is why yours was a good example and why it still sounds like torture!

Less aesthetic sense please.

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:05 (twenty-one years ago)

Douglas Wolk is a wise man.

Tad I'm not talking about 2-for-1s which are fine as the Beach Boys reissues testify. I'm talking about the second CD full of demo shite tactic. It would be fine if it meant no extra cost but it doesn't.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:06 (twenty-one years ago)

because tym is closer to MAIT's stripped-down rock and ib is more elaborate than MAIT. or maybe it's just my tastes -- some people might like being jarred by that sort of contrast.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:06 (twenty-one years ago)

do you have an option to not get the 2d disc full of demos and shit?

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:07 (twenty-one years ago)

No :(

(Well you do - it's called going to a 2nd hand shop and getting the single album old versions cheap. But basically no.)

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:08 (twenty-one years ago)

ok ... i agree that that sucks then.

― Tad (llamasfur), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:09 (twenty-one years ago)

actually Tom maybe it's a US-vs-UK thing but I've never seen the Costello doubles retail for anymore than the single discs--they may be full price but Rhino US isn't charging extra for the second disc, meaning it really is a bonus disc. is it different there?

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:10 (twenty-one years ago)

They're full price, MM, while the previous reissues (also replete with difft outtakes) were available for dice-buy friendly mid-price.

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:11 (twenty-one years ago)

ok, same as here, then. the previous midline prices had something to do with Columbia thinking Costello didn't sell enough records to justify pricing them higher, I think; when Ryko did the catalogue and now Rhino, they recognized his cult value and acted upon it.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:13 (twenty-one years ago)

Well over here there's basically a system whereby

i. full price albums are very expensive (10-15 pounds).
ii. after a while they go to mid-price and you can then get them discounted for 5 or 6 quid in a lot of places. Dylan and Beach Boys and Steely Dan and Nas etc etc albums are all like this, so is pretty much anything back catalogue other than the Beatles.
iii. But with a 2 Disc set this discounting very rarely happens - I've never seen the 2-disc PSB sets for less than a tenner anywhere, ditto Costello.

― Tom (Groke), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:14 (twenty-one years ago)

The two-dics Costello sets are bullshit -- I've had the misfortune to buy one of them. The Rykodisc sets, which were mid-priced and had good extras (but not ALL the extras, for pity's sake!) were much better. There's an art to compiling these things. I will agree with Matos there.

But then again, that's one album with b-sides and outtakes. With the Stax box (which seems as good an example of gigantism as any), no expense was spared, no single was too insignificant. And that's ok. They don't mislead you into thinking it's some boiled-down version of Stax. It says right on the box, Stax. Singles. Nine Discs. Buy it, or don't. Now how are the people who put this huge archival grammy-worthy thing together falling down on the job?

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:21 (twenty-one years ago)

because they're ripping you off by putting out a 9CD box where (I'm guessing) a 5CD one would have done

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 09:24 (twenty-one years ago)

Skipping 45 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

surely Tim the best
way to do it is: choose both!
boxes AND used discs

but you just can't find
all stax singles & LPs:
hence the NEED for set

― Haikunym, Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

god I can't wait to hear that Jack Johnson thing.

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:13 (twenty-one years ago)

The Bitches Brew sessions box is great all the way through. The extras really are extras, not endless alternate takes (The Fun House Sessions, anyone?), the sequencing is natural and unobtrusive, and the music is top-fucking-notch. I recommend that box even to people who would otherwise be wary of "complete sessions."

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:20 (twenty-one years ago)

the Jack Johnson thing = zzzzz

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:26 (twenty-one years ago)

That's why you're going to send it to me free of charge.

― dleone (dleone), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:28 (twenty-one years ago)

"become cognizant of how great something really, truly is"

I agree with the Pinefox that a single 7" can apprise you of this, too. Part of what I love about finding some great 7" by someone I've never heard before is imagining a world of music out there that sounds like it. I might be disappointed to actually hear it.

I prefer the serial approach to box sets, like the "Tiffany Transcriptions" set of ten individual discs by Bob Wills and the Texas Playboys. It's a bit more "try before you buy."

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:29 (twenty-one years ago)

no shit a 7-inch can apprise you of this! Jesus, was my writing in Sanskrit or something? (if it was as scare-words "Joycean" as was noted above then the answer is probably yes, huh?) (note: I realize "Joycean" was a compliment, and I thank you for it, but it frightened me when I saw it, too.) the whole point of this thread is that MOST OF THE TIME a 7-inch is all you need to get that point across, but SOMETIMES (e.g. Star Time) you can get something more or else equally as vital across in bulk fashion.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:34 (twenty-one years ago)

Haik I haven't time to hear it all. I wish I had. The need I feel to hear the whole set of Stax stuff is less than the thrill I get from a new set of horizons or (better still) some unexpected connection which throws new non-academic light...

MM (and I know you're a good song-at-a-time lad): sure there's lots to be got from boxes: I've no doubt at all of that. I just get more from non-boxset behaviour.

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:38 (twenty-one years ago)

I was thinking those Bitches Brew sessions was the raw tracks and finished versions, didn't realize it was just other recordings not released. I was under the impression from an interview with Macero at Perfect Sound Forever that they remixed and didn't use the original mixes on the box set, at least from the Allmusic write up this isn't the case.

Are any of these the bonus tracks on the reissued records? I have the old Columbia Cds on most of them except "Big Fun", "Get Up With It", both of which have a couple of bonus tracks.

― earlnash, Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:39 (twenty-one years ago)

Tim, I love you, but you've made your point a dozen times already. So have I (mine = almost the same as yours, but with a handful of exceptions). I was answering Tracer.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:44 (twenty-one years ago)

I just wonder what is this distinct type of appreciation that one gets, the "more" and "else"—apart from "more great music"? I can't come up with a single answer. Maybe it's specific to the artist you're talking about. For instance, "The Tiffany Transcriptions," recorded from live radio shows they did, shows you just how loose and wild the Bib Wills band could get and how far over the map their music ranged, none of which really comes across in their studio recordings, except as palimpsests, or a background attitude. When I go back and listen to the "normal" stuff it's still there in my mind, I can see the imprints and outlines of all that wildness; I'm imagining Wills suppressing about ten more grins than he actually lets on. But I could have gotten this feeling from just a single disc of that set, so.

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:50 (twenty-one years ago)

Is this a question about reputation, or "rightful place"?

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:51 (twenty-one years ago)

earlnash, I know Double Image/Gemini is on Live-Evil, and I think one (or more) of the tracks will be on the Jack Johnson set (Big Green Serpent? Little Blue Frog? Guinnevere?) -- the rest are only on that BB set.

― dleone (dleone), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:55 (twenty-one years ago)

>Are any of these the bonus tracks on the reissued records? I have the old Columbia Cds on most of them except "Big Fun", "Get Up With It", both of which have a couple of bonus tracks.

There are no bonus tracks on the reissued "Get Up With It." The reissue of "Big Fun" has four extra tracks, all of which are on the "Complete Bitches Brew" box. The reissue of "Water Babies" has one extra track, from the "Complete In A Silent Way" box, and the reissued "Miles In The Sky" also has two tracks from the same "Silent Way" box.

I think I remember reading that when they did the "Bitches Brew" box, they couldn't find the masters, so had to take the original raw tapes and re-construct the album versions the way Macero originally did 'em. But I could be wrong.

And Matos is totally wrong; the "Jack Johnson" box is fantastic. Worth it just for the tracks on Disc 1 that have Sonny Sharrock in the band.

― Phil Freeman (Phil Freeman), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:55 (twenty-one years ago)

Specifically, Star Time swallowed whole gives you not just the breadth of JB's career--lots of compilations do that with lots of artists or styles or whatever--but each song enriches the other, it feels completely unified and not like a clearinghouse (here's everything JB ever did that was important etc.) the way a 10CD JB box might. It's a GREAT ALBUM, not a bunch of great songs.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:56 (twenty-one years ago)

and that's the problem with box sets generally: they're storehouses, not albums. one thing I like about the single-year MP3 mixes that are popping up is that they were made to flow, to get something across that merely dumping a bunch of shit together won't. I want art objects, damn it, not the contents of an art supply store.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 18:58 (twenty-one years ago)

and yet I have this overwhelming desire to pick up lots of contents-of-art-supply-store-type things! (as Andy K's recent Kompaktmania and Daddino's Gen Ecstasy things--thanks guys again!--have shown.) so I'm as guilty of apologism as anyone, really

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:00 (twenty-one years ago)

and here's a better question: OK, you get yer Stax box set so that you can skim the cream your own damn self and put together the ultimate minibox. how many of you actually do it? I'm guessing almost none--I certainly don't, and I'm coming into this kind of thing with exactly the same mindset. (see Kompaktmania and Gen X above.) (sorry to be obscure: Andy made me a brilliant MP3 set of German minimalist stuff, and Daddino has a similar set of stuff from the Generation Ecstasy/Energy Flash discography, both of which I now have.)

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:02 (twenty-one years ago)

or more to the point, "I'm going to SOMEDAY but haven't gotten around to it yet (hem, haw, hem, haw)"

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:03 (twenty-one years ago)

What I love about listening to that first disc of Star Time is knowing in advance that the long "Papa's Got A Brand New Bag" is on there! Like the thing is building, and you're moving through all this great R&B, and then right at the end BAM!! Papa's got a brand new bag! And you know you've still got those wonderful, perfect 2nd and 3rd discs ahead of you..

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:05 (twenty-one years ago)

I made one quickie disc out of the "Beg Scream and Shout" box. So I won't have to rifle through the packaging just to hear "Expressway To Your Heart" for the jillionth time.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:12 (twenty-one years ago)

The "20 Greatest hits" that miniaturizes Star Time is nothing for the bargain bin, either. Sometimes, in the car maybe, you just want HITS.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:14 (twenty-one years ago)

fuck "hits," JB is about grooves.

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Diamond otm

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:18 (twenty-one years ago)

The James Brown thing I bust out most often is Funk Power 1970: A Brand New Thang, the compilation of stuff from when Bootsy Collins was in the band. It's 78 minutes long, and only has 10 tracks, and two of those are a short and long version of "Sex Machine," but it's still the one Brown record everyone in the world should own. (That and Love Power Peace, just for "Brother Rapp/Ain't It Funky Now.")

― Phil Freeman (Phil Freeman), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:22 (twenty-one years ago)

fuck "hits," JB is about grooves.

Same thing, in this case.

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:26 (twenty-one years ago)

Although on the 20 greatest, I do miss "Funky Drummer."

― Kenan Hebert (kenan), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:26 (twenty-one years ago)

The motivation behind the 1981 disc was strictly of a personal nature -- I had intended it to be only for me (after all, I did rank them like a fake countdown). Okay, maybe it will be useful for my wife as well; she can just avoid some of the ugly post-punk. Roughly half of it is my recollection of that hazy period; the remainder is stuff I've come around to liking long since then. I found putting the two together to be really fascinating. I posted the tracklisting primarily 'cause Nate had posted his '72 one and figured what the hell; I also wanted to find out if anything had been forgotten, and who better to float it by than this board?

― Andy K (Andy K), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:33 (twenty-one years ago)

Startime is a good collection, but James Brown is one of those rare artists that has ALOT of good music. Even some of his lesser known records like the "Hell" 2LP and the JB's Funky People collections are great and as good as about everything else.

That being said, if someone could pull off a tight four CD best of Parliament/Funkadelic with a killer book, that could be just as tight.

I made a CDR comp a couple of weeks ago of 1993 for kicks.

― earlnash, Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:38 (twenty-one years ago)

what's on it?! [panting]

― M Matos (M Matos), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:41 (twenty-one years ago)

Haha oops sorry MM

― Tim (Tim), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 19:47 (twenty-one years ago)

This is why I like the radio, it's more gigantic than the hugest box set ever, every time you dip in it's different, AND it's absolutely free! Does everyone know about this remarkable invention?

A much better option these days, since there's this thing called ClearChannel = dump a huge random load of songs onto an iPod or whatever, completely randomize somehow, play them all through.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 20:05 (twenty-one years ago)

My 1994 (not 93) compilation that I made a couple of months back for a road trip is pretty much a indie rock greatest hits, but that is is what I was listening to at the time. I had cleaned up my laptop and my CDR burner was working well, so I made three discs for a five hour drive.

Shellac- Crow
GvsB- Cruise Your New Fly Self
The Grifters- Black Fuel Incinerator
Guided by Voices- Gold Star for Robot Boy
Sebadoh- Careful
Engine Kid- Windshield
Jesus Lizard- Fly on the Wall
JSBX- Bellbottoms
Mule- Hayride
Silkworm- The Cigarette Lighters
Pavement- Range Life
Superchunk- Driveway to Driveway
The Melvins- Road Bull
Jawbox- Savory
Swans- Mother/Father
Sonic Youth- Tokyo Eye
Tortoise- Spiderwebbed
Palace- No More Workhorse Blues

For the same road trip, I made a prepunk/punk/postpunk CDR that went like this one:

Pere Ubu- Heart of Darkness
The Damned- New Rose
The Dead Boys- All This and More
Wire- Ex Lion Tamer
Richard Hell- Love Comes in Spurts
Gary Numan- My Shadow in Vain
The Buzzcocks- I Don't Mind
Modern Lovers- She Cracked
The Ramones- Gimme Gimme Shock Treatment
The Clash- Brand New Cadillac
Captain Beefheart- Ashtray Heart
Bauhaus- In A Flat Field
Patti Smith- Pissing in a River
Joy Division- Dead Souls
The Germs- Lexicon Devil
Gang of Four- Natural's Not In It
Television- Marquee Moon
PIL- Careering
Iggy Pop- The Passenger

and another CDR comp with just the idea that I wanted all long epic rock songs (7 to 10 minutes) of various makes from the late 60s to mid70s that I thought would go together well at 70mph.

Can- Pinch
The Doors- LA Woman
MC 5- Sister Anne
Rolling Stones- Can You Hear Me Knocking
The Stooges- 1970
Hawkwind- Master of the Universe
Black Sabbath- Wheels of Confusion
Led Zeppelin- Achilles Last Stand
Neil Young- Cortez the Killer

I like some NPR shows on the weekend, especially some of the blues shows. The one out of New Orleans called American Roots and another one made in Indy that they play around here are sometimes interesting listens if they have a good topic they base the show upon. There is another one that is on late night on Saturday out of Chicago that plays some real obscuro blues, some quite old from the 20s.

― earlnash, Wednesday, 30 July 2003 22:09 (twenty-one years ago)

There is another one that is on late night on Saturday out of Chicago that plays some real obscuro blues, some quite old from the 20s.

Blues Before Sunrise hosted by Steve Cushing! Yeah, it's fantastic. Changed my life as a wee lad when I heard it through syndication, totally got me hooked on old country blues stuff. I dunno if it's online now, but it should be.

― Mr. Diamond (diamond), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 22:14 (twenty-one years ago)

http://www.bluesbeforesunrise.com/

― amateurist (amateurist), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 22:16 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah but Ned i still OWN those things, even if i stole em. I like the feeling that the music itself is a bandit, passing in the night - "who was that masked man??"

― Tracer Hand (tracerhand), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 23:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Ya gotta point, of course, but the thing is that we're both idealizing real world situations. I'd love it if there was some actual real variety in programming, but is there? What recent random encounters I've had with local radio -- and this is in various places across the country, north, south, east, west -- are fundamentally depressing.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 23:35 (twenty-one years ago)

That being said, if someone could pull off a tight four CD best of Parliament/Funkadelic with a killer book, that could be just as tight.

I am imagining this and now I feel as though I am on the brink of catatonic bliss.

It's funny how the 1972 thing worked out for me. The 2002 thing stemmed from the fact that, this spring, I eventually learned that it was borderline-classic as music years go (though I could easily come to that same conclusion about 2000 and 2001 if I wanted to). The '72 thing followed because it seems to be a comparatively uncanonized year (compared to, say 1967, 1977, 1982 and 1991) and I wanted to see if I could patch together a context that filled in my own personal blanks.

I might actually get back to these shortly. I'm tempted to jump on 1993 just to bust out one of my favorite links ever -- "C.R.E.A.M." into "'93 'Til Infinity" into "Come Clean" -- which I enjoy in terms of both historical and musical-flow narrative, the cement being poured in underground hip-hop's foundation. (The bittersweet thing is, I only heard these songs last year. Shame, etc.)

― Nate Patrin (Nate Patrin), Wednesday, 30 July 2003 23:43 (twenty-one years ago)

haha - I wish this thread weren't so damn gigantic so I could post to it!

― nnnh oh oh nnnh nnnh oh (James Blount), Thursday, 31 July 2003 23:45 (twenty-one years ago)

nine months pass...

So it turns out that iTunes is now offering the first 45 Motown singles as 99-cent downloads! "Delve into the iTunes-exclusive first installment of The Complete Motown Singles, the first 45 cuts spanning the label's formative years of 1959 to 1961."

And of course I'm going, "Holy shit--do I *really* wanna pay $45 for this thing? Is it worth it? Do I get a cookie? And most importantly, is it coming out as a physical box set? Am I jumping the gun to get this early?"

Help me decide!

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Friday, 30 April 2004 22:44 (twenty-one years ago)

haha the other night I decided I was gonna try to get all of the Motown A-sides as MP3s for a long-term project but HOLY SHIT!

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Friday, 30 April 2004 22:44 (twenty-one years ago)

TS: "I really really want all of them, and can afford it, why not" vs. "Come on, they're not THAT good (are they?)"

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Friday, 30 April 2004 22:47 (twenty-one years ago)

Buy two or three and see if they're good. And then go for broke.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 30 April 2004 23:08 (twenty-one years ago)

I know a few of them are good, I'm just trying to justify the expense. $45 for what amounts to two audio CDs isn't a particularly good price.

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Friday, 30 April 2004 23:14 (twenty-one years ago)

then again, I get so many records free that I should probably pony up on occasion. which I do anyway, but still.

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Friday, 30 April 2004 23:14 (twenty-one years ago)

OK, I did it . . . and most of 'em suck! Of course!

― Matos W.K. (M Matos), Saturday, 1 May 2004 04:22 (twenty-one years ago)

ten months pass...

Wow, I'm more fascinated than even before what you'll think of my 1981 box, Matos. I suppose it qualifies as suffering audio "giganticism," but at the same time I never intended it to be considered a "historical document;" to be listened to in a single pass; or to be completist. Moreover, I spent an absurd amount of time attempting to make the individual mixes the best possible single-sitting listens I could. That's partly why I included multiple tracks by individual bands/artists (over the course of the set)--while quantity was a concern, quality was foremost. While I managed to squeeze on 366 bands (and I'm about to add another couple), I also intentionally left quite a bit off. I'd say perhaps 20-40 tracks out of the 411 qualify as "for historical context only" in my opinion, and none of them is so dire that other people might not like them as much as any others; and those tracks are all relegated to the mp3-CD "Briefcase" that served as my means to focus on highest quality on the mixes, but not leave out the just-slightly-lesser stuff that deserved a listen.

― I.M. (I.M.), Wednesday, 16 March 2005 01:15 (twenty years ago)

three months pass...

Haha, so Matos, about tthose new Motown boxes...

― Daniel_Rf (Daniel_Rf), Monday, 4 July 2005 17:25 (nineteen years ago)

I just received the first one last week. Still haven't made my way through more than the first disc yet. But I had to get it. What a great idea. God bless Hip-O Select.

― Stormy Davis (diamond), Monday, 4 July 2005 17:30 (nineteen years ago)

eight months pass...

With the Stax box (which seems as good an example of gigantism as any), no expense was spared, no single was too insignificant. And that's ok. They don't mislead you into thinking it's some boiled-down version of Stax. It says right on the box, Stax. Singles. Nine Discs. Buy it, or don't. Now how are the people who put this huge archival grammy-worthy thing together falling down on the job?
-- Kenan Hebert (khebert...) (webmail), July 30th, 2003 11:21 AM. (kenan) (link)
because they're ripping you off by putting out a 9CD box where (I'm guessing) a 5CD one would have done

-- M Matos (michaelangelomato...) (webmail), July 30th, 2003 11:24 AM. (M Matos) (link)

i'm guessing this has already been stated... but for me, exhaustive box sets like the Stax Singles box succeed because they let *me decide what's the great stuff, and what sucks. that's what i want from a box set - the stuff about an artist that the greatest hits (or even all the recorded output) doesn't tell you. some of my favourite supremes stuff is just weird oddball shit from their box set, like 'buttered popcorn' or 'bill when are you coming back' - outside of tracking down all their albums and seven inches i'd have never heard these absolutely marginal (according to the canon) songs, but the box set offers this access. they're not for everyone, true. but like someone already said, you don't have to buy them.

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Wednesday, 29 March 2006 13:46 (nineteen years ago)

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