artists whose first album was more polished/lushly-produced/expensive-sounding than much of their later output

Sure, lots of artists put out a radio-ready album or two so that they can afford to expore less commercial territory later in their careers (hi, mark hollis!). But if anything, this late-career experimentation tends to be even more ambitious, in terms of production values, than the artist's early work.

Can you think of any artists who obviously shelled out a lot of money on their debut before veering into more lo-fi territory (due to budget constraints or aesthetic choice) on later efforts?

first thought is definitely GbV

GbV's a good call -- though I'd say they started out as a standard indie act, messed around with a 4-track for half a decade or so, and returned to a fairly polished studio sound by the mid-'90s. Pretty weird career arc at any rate.

Ministry

The only ones I can think of are Norwegians Tre Små Kinesere.

Phoenix did become more low fi on their third effort though.

In the case of Talk Talk it would be wrong to say that they were extremely "radio friendly" or "sellout" on their first albums. Surely they weren't as "out there" as the last two, but already on the debut - and definitely on "It's My Life", they did some harmonic stuff that was considerably more complicated than most synthpop acts. A lot of really interesting modulations in there, for instance. Personally, I found that the mix on "It's My Life" was just perfect, and it was downhill from there as they would get too experimental for their own good.

The Fall maybe?

Neil Young

Goldfrapp.

Nico.

Lambchop, to a point

scott walker?

No

Frank Black owns this (not that the first two records are especially lush, but they're shiny and got hammered on the radio)

Jimi Hendrix. Much of Electric Ladyland sounds like ass next to Are You Experienced?

Tom Waits.

Antony and the Johnsons

Much of Electric Ladyland sounds like ass next to Are You Experienced?

With today's ears maybe. "Electric Ladyland" has a lot more phasing and stereo panning effects, though, which was very much state of the art in 1968.

Townes Van Zandt

Oh yeah, Laurie Nyro

Randy Newman... sort of

Frank Zappa/MOI - Freak Out! was a very expensive flop and his budget was scaled back considerably for a while after that.

Didn't sound that polished to me

Paul Westerburg as a solo artist.

Del the Funkee Homosapien

Nirvana, if you don't count Bleach

ex models, sorta

With today's ears maybe. "Electric Ladyland" has a lot more phasing and stereo panning effects, though, which was very much state of the art in 1968.

"Third Stone From The Sun", "Purple Haze," "I Don't Live Today," and "Are You Experienced?" (the song) both heavily feature those effects, in addition to crisply-recorded bass, drum and vocal tracks (which are indifferently recorded, to be charitable, on Ladyland).

The High Llamas, sorta. While Hawaii is their most lush, the first self-titled Sean O'Hagan album was a fully produced pub-rock album.

Pearl Jam

didn't prince's "for you" have a pretty big budget, compared to the self-produced follow-ups?

no

i don't know how much inflation occurred between 1978 and 1984, but if you're adjusting for inflation, I still can't see how Purple Rain has less expensive production than For You

If it weren't for the sophomore Bryter Later, I would have mentioned Nick Drake.

i don't mean his whole career, just maybe "prince" and "dirty mind"

Wasn't Dirty Mind a set of demos that ended up being an album?

Shelby Lynne, post C&W (I Am Shelby Lynne vs. everything after)

"Soft and wet" had a co-write and producer, but that's an anomaly. Overall, For You was still cheaper sounding and likely cheaper than either S/T or Dirty Mind.

Wasn't Dirty Mind a set of demos that ended up being an album?

News to me if it was. But the first Time album sounded as sparse as Dirty Mind, or at least sounded like the recording approach was the same. And Prince had secured his WB contract from the get-go. If they were demos, they were pricier demos than For You, the album, was.

Fish in a barrel, but

The Stone Roses

Prince’s debut album took five months to complete, being recorded in three months at the Record Plant, Sausalito, from early October to late December 1977, and mixed during January and February 1978 at Sound Labs, Los Angeles. “I was a physical wreck when I finished the record,” Prince would later remark. The album sessions accumulated a studio bill of $170,000, nearly exceeding the $180,000 budget Prince had received for three albums. For You was billed as a true one-man show, with Prince taking credit for the production, arrangements, performances, and songwriting, with the exception of “Soft And Wet,” which was listed as a collaboration with Chris Moon. Tommy Vicari was titled executive producer. Despite the credits, there were a few outside contributions. David Rivkin helped Prince with the recording of his vocals, while Patrice Rushen aided with the programming of synths and actually played on a few songs, including “Baby.” Rushen’s boyfriend, Charles Veal, also contributed by arranging the strings on “Baby.” André Anderson, renamed André Cymone (after his middle name Simon), has said that he assisted in the recording of the album, but Owen Husney and the other people involved in the sessions tend to contradict him.

so maybe the $$$ was because he didn't have a home studio together yet, and wasn't as quick about recording all the parts himself.

yup. $$$ != polished, necessarily.

Morrissey's solo output to a certain extent

Darkthrone.

wow, these housequake.com prince write-ups are interesting but weird and geir-like at times.

“Mountains” is a vibrant funk offering, driven by a propulsive drum machine beat. The song boasts a peppy Earth, Wind & Fire-flavoured horn riff. However, staying on one basic chord, with a sitar-like drone permeating the whole track, there is little harmonic or rhythmic variety throughout. Towards the end, the song turns into a confusing polyrhythmic experiment as Prince adds a second drum pattern on top of the main beat.

Dylan's early albums are hardly ZTT, but I remember reading that he deliberately skimped on production values on his late 60s output solely to avoid spending money - John Wesley Harding was recorded in two days or something, with a session band hired for peanuts, probably inside one of those booths you see in old movies

De La Soul

(De La Soul Is Dead might be a minor expection though.)

Big Star is the obvious answer here guys

I suppose this has to be a matter of artist choice? There are plenty of people who got dropped from a major label after their first album and soldiered on recording with tinier budgets.

'Movement' compared to the rest of New Order's output before the late '80s, perhaps.

Actually, the correct answer here is "Matthew Sweet". Dunno how many of you guys have actually heard his self titled 1986 debut, but it was a very polished (and very 80s sounding) effort with lots of drum machines, lots of gate effects, well... you know...

Huh, I was gonna say Matthew Sweet - even though I've never even heard that debut, if that makes any sense.

As far as Hendrix goes, there's no question that ELL was intended to be the big shiny multilayered post-Pepper's production-masterpiece, in terms of time/money/effort spent on its creation, that the debut wasn't. That AYE? may have been ultimately sonically superior is due to factors other than intent.

Gillian Welch.

Dylan's early albums are hardly ZTT, but I remember reading that he deliberately skimped on production values on his late 60s output solely to avoid spending money - John Wesley Harding was recorded in two days or something, with a session band hired for peanuts, probably inside one of those booths you see in old movies

haha, reminds me of a story a friend once told me (no idea if it's true or not) about a violinist he knew who lived in nyc. she bumped into dylan once, she was carrying her violin case, they got to talking about music and he invited her to come down to the studio where he was working on some tracks. she was completely freaked out by her incredible luck. working with DYLAN!

however, by the 5th or 6th time he invited her down, she started to feel like she was getting taken advantage of. not knowing how to broach the subject with him, as she was leaving she stammered something about cab fare and I don't want to be a jerk but y'know, costs + stuff. no problem he said. he dug in his pocket and handed a crumpled wad of bills to her. she didn't want to count them in front of him, so she stuffed them in her pocket and thanked him profusely. when she got down to the street, she uncrumpled the bills - a fiver and two ones.

Townes Van Zandt

― The Wild Shirtless Lyrics of Mark Farner (C. Grisso/McCain), Tuesday, October 21, 2008 2:59 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark

^^ came to thread to post this.

and that's a GREAT dylan story. i totally believe it. that guy was a total dick to a lot of people, the way i hear it.

how was it dylan's obligation to pay her cab fare?

hahaha it's not, but usually professional musicians are paid for their time.

I'd crawl to NYC every morning and PAY seven dollars (plus cab fare) to work with Dylan. Dick or no.

But I'm fucking lame, I guess.

Yeah, great story. Would that have been Scarlet Rivera, I wonder? (How many female violinists has he recorded with during his career?)

darkthrone