Luomo's "The Present Lover" (impressions a month or so after its release)

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

is anybody else kinda dissapointed by it? it's been sitting on my desk for about 2 weeks now and every time I'm fishing around for CDs and I see it I'm like 'eeh, nah...'; vocalcity is still tops, imo...and I'm puzzled as to why Diskonize Me wasn't included in TPL, given that it was the best tune Delay put out between full-lenghts...i still prefer the Digital Disco version of The Present Lover too...

― manuel, Monday, 4 August 2003 00:07 (twenty-two years ago)

aww come on I haven't even recieved it int the mail yet.

― hector (hector), Monday, 4 August 2003 00:23 (twenty-two years ago)

its shit hector!

just kiddin...

― gaz (gaz), Monday, 4 August 2003 00:26 (twenty-two years ago)

crap!

― hector (hector), Monday, 4 August 2003 00:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Still sucks and I hold to my previous statement:

I heard a promo and I can't fathom what the big deal is. It's the most over-produced piece of cheese ever and makes me just cringe when those vocals come in.

There were a couple of smoking tracks on "VocalCity," but all the hoopla is just unfounded. It sounds like Blaze except Blaze is actually good. There's plenty of other better vocal house out there, this is just crossover marketing synergy for people who are ashamed to delve into other house or tech-house music.

― direct_program, Monday, 4 August 2003 01:33 (twenty-two years ago)

seriously, I just dont 'get it'...it just sounds dull to me

― Michael B, Monday, 4 August 2003 01:38 (twenty-two years ago)

and yeah I do like Blaze actually

― Michael B, Monday, 4 August 2003 01:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Luomo and Blaze sound nothing alike. Unless you mean Blaze on Playhouse, and even then...

― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Monday, 4 August 2003 01:45 (twenty-two years ago)

well yeah thats true Blaze and Luomo don't really sound similar, true. I was just listening to the new Luomo album over the last two days (I mean I really did give it a chance)and with the exception of "Body speaking" it's just not grabbing me neither the sonics nor the vocals nor the lyrics ("I'm cleaning up black coffee and feta cheese"...I'm extremely anti-yuppie what can i say)..... I guess it goes back to a DJ friend of mine who probably *loves* this album who used to say shit like "I don't play music for the arms-in-the-air brigade blah blah" and then proceed to play the blandest gournmet-house imaginable. And that's what I classify Luomo as inoffensive, bland gourmet house.

― Michael B, Monday, 4 August 2003 01:55 (twenty-two years ago)

i'll admit to not loving it as wholeheartedly as vocalcity. i even feel manuel's I'm fishing around for CDs and I see it I'm like 'eeh, nah'
but i certainly don't hear bland gourmet house. As Tim has pointed out elsewhere this version of Luomo uses techniques to disrupt that surface. and creates "holes big enough to fit your dick in" as, ah, maybe Stephen Heath once said...

― gaz (gaz), Monday, 4 August 2003 02:06 (twenty-two years ago)

well I like it. especially "Could Be Like This", "What Good", "So You" and "Shelter" ("Talk In Danger" is interesting for the drifty slower tempo too). not as interested in tracks/remixes repeated from earlier releases.

true, I haven't listened to it properly as an album (I only have the LP and a cobbled-together mp3s CD version) but I expect it's a bit much to take since the tracks are so long - better to play as background, or relaxing with headphones, than -say- active listening. however, the best tracks definitely work well in mixes...!

― Paul (scifisoul), Monday, 4 August 2003 11:56 (twenty-two years ago)

this is just crossover marketing synergy for people who are ashamed to delve into other house or tech-house music.

Though I agree with Paul that the tracks are generally too long to take all in one sitting, I actually think one of the strengths of the CD is that it could appeal to people not otherwise into house -- it did me. Wouldn't go so far as to be ashamed about it though, mostly just not it clubs often enough to be familiar.

― dleone (dleone), Monday, 4 August 2003 12:25 (twenty-two years ago)

I can't exactly use myself as the exception which disproves the rule, but I sure as hell know that my love for the album isn't based on not liking/being afraid of/being ashamed of other house music. It's *because* I love house unashamedly that I think this album appeals to me so much.

Some of the discussion here reminds me of the disagreement between TWANBOC and Heronbone re production values - the glorious hi-tech lushness of The Present Lover might be mistaken as a bad thing (ie. "coffeetable") in and of itself, whereas I tend to think it's a great thing. High production values are only bad insofar as they're often connected to dull music, but I am in love with this album for much the same reason that I love The Blue Nile's "Hats" - the gauzy surface shimmer actually *intensifies* the emotional content.

― Tim Finney (Tim Finney), Monday, 4 August 2003 23:32 (twenty-two years ago)

haha "synergy for people et al"--most of those people don't even KNOW what tech-house is to begin with, fer chrissakes. and ditto all of Tim and Paul K's comments

― M Matos (M Matos), Monday, 4 August 2003 23:37 (twenty-two years ago)

the gauzy surface shimmer actually *intensifies* the emotional content.

I am stealing that phrase then killing you so I can make it my own. Damn you. (I love Tim.)

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 5 August 2003 00:01 (twenty-two years ago)

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