Vinyl Vs. CD

Music purists and audiophiles claim that vinyl sounds far better than CD. Others claim that CDs are far cleaner than vinyl and avoid the annoyance of pops and unavoidable skips. Recently, Rolling Stone had an article that discussed the return of vinyl as well as asking master engineers which sounds better. It is interesting to note that Neilsen Soundscan have reported that in 2007 nearly one million new vinyl records were purchased, and that by the end of 2008, it could be around 1.6 million, nearly doubling the amount of vinyl sold in 2006. CD sales continue to drop as online downloading (both legal and illegal) progressively and almost aggressively becomes more popular.

So, is vinyl on its way back in? Among two small crowds, yes, it will maintain its power, and probably among the masses it may become a fad amongst "cool" kids. As for making a full-fledged comeback, it's not likely. Vinyl can cost nearly twice as much (or more) as a new CD. It's more expensive to make and is more expensive to ship, not to mention the labor is more difficult, resulting in hiked prices. Now, CDs don't need to be nearly as expensive as they are, as the production and shipping are far, far less than that of vinyl (and relatively cheap anyway, as a CD is estimated to cost about $2 US). In that sense, the music industry is screwing itself when it asks for $14 to $16 for a new album. The two pockets that are genuinely interested in vinyl are the older crowd, generally baby boomers who hold vinyl with nostalgia. The other are younger, mainly high school through college who listen to a good deal of music and enjoy sharing it with their friends. Album art and detailed liner notes interest them and add to the experience.

In hindsight, it's almost pointless to discuss whether CD sales will ever pick back up or if vinyl will ever surpass CDs as the second most popular medium (over downloads). What is worth discussing is the quality of each medium, and if one is truly better than the other.

Rolling Stone asked Bob Ludwig about three recent albums, concerned about which format was superior. The albums were Evil Urges by My Morning Jacket, Beggars Banquet (reissue) by the Rolling Stones, and Magic by Bruce Springsteen. Ludwig recommended vinyl for Evil Urges and Beggars Banquet, but went with CD for Magic. But only one one did he comment about the quality of the sound system, and that was for Magic. He said of it, "... On a really good sound system, it sounds a little bit warmer on vinyl."

I think that is the main thing that should be considered on the debate of vinyl vs. CD. How good is your sound system? I personally have a fairly mediocre system. My father picked up the equipment at a garage sale for $25, it included all Kenwood products; tuner, amp, pre-amp, and CD player. Before I moved into my apartment I snatched some of his old equipment, a Kenwood cassette player and surround sound setup. I have a turntable as well, an old Dual 1229. My speakers are two old KLH speakers, I do not know what model they are. In that respect, my system - depending on medium and quality of the release - can only sometimes audibly display one version as superior to the other.

I own somewhere between 150 and 200 albums, of which over 100 are CDs, the remaining being vinyl. This is another thing to take into account; the quality of the originals. Think about it this way, in 1967 the album Vanilla Fudge was released by Atco Records. I own both vinyl and CD. The original pressing from 1967 (or subsequent years, it is definitely very old) is in remarkably good condition considering its age. However, it seems to be slightly muffled and doesn't sound quite as good as the CD. One of the band's following albums, Near the Beginning, sounds even worse on vinyl. Yet, my Led Zeppelin records sound just as good as any CD of theirs that I have. My point being that the quality of the recording may vary from band to band based on the popularity of the band and quality of producers and engineers. Likewise, early CDs suffer the same problem. Take Slowhand by Eric Clapton. I own a CD from pressed in 1994, and compared to vinyl it sounds like a tinny FM rendition.

Finally, how much money do you have to spend and what do you want out of it? For those who want a complete musical experience, both audibly and visually, vinyl takes it, hands down. The sound of new 180 gram vinyl is just as good or better than a CD, and the gatefold albums with blown-up album art and liner note inserts make the experience all the more enjoyable. Plus, many modern artists include free online downloads so you can have the music on your iPod. For those who want a tangible copy for home entertainment or for the car, CD is the way to go. It is fairly cheaper than vinyl and can be burned to computers and therefore to iPods. Tracks can be mixed to make playlists, etc. For those who just want an album on their iPod or only a few tracks off an album, downloading from the iTunes store is the road to take. It's even cheaper than a CD and you get exactly the tracks you want.

It basically comes down to a few factors. 1) The quality of your sound system. The better it is, the better you'll be able to differentiate superior formats. 2) The quality of the format (vinyl or CD). Early CDs tend to sound very bad compared to remasters in the late 1990's to the present. Equally, old vinyl - especially those that have been passed down or bought in record stores - aren't always quality, as they can be over forty years old with unknown amounts of plays. 3) What do you want to get out of it? For an experience that can be shared with friends, vinyl is it. For the sake of having it, CD. Only need a few tracks? Download off of iTunes.

Not everyone is an audiophile, so the eternal debate is useless for most of us. What people need to think about is what they want, as that greatly dominates what they should purchase. Downloading music illegally is, well, illegal. While artists do make money off of tours, many need to prove to their labels (either major or independent) that they're worth keeping. Unfortunately, the artist doesn't see much money from a CD sale. I won't condone or condemn illegal downloading, but think about it this way; using torrents for getting albums and then putting them on your iPod is the equivalent to walking into a Best Buy and grabbing Highway 61 Revisited and then strolling out.

Is there a verdict in all this? What format is better? For me, I have begun to get back into vinyl. I prefer the experience, and since most new vinyl includes a free and legal download, I don't mind shelling out a few extra bucks. Does it sound better? Depends on my state of mind if you catch my drift, but that's not always what it's about. I enjoy listening to music with friends much more than walking around with headphone in my ears.

References: Rolling Stone - Vinyl Returns in the Age of MP3

The Return of Disco

After a long period of people completely disowning disco - not just the music, but everything that it touched - it seems as if it has finally managed to creep back into modern music. Disco isn't necessarily something that will see a revival; perhaps Saturday Night Fever will get more playtime on cable TV, but things like males wearing platform shoes are most definitely gone. Although disco may not have the power that it had in the late 70's, modern spins on it now offer people an alternative to cruddy rap that you can hear at any nightclub. So how did this even happen? How can something that has been readily mocked for twenty years suddenly be cool again? The evolution isn't all that surprising.

When disco seemingly died in the 80's, it actually just split itself into two factions; house and hip-hop. The hip-hop side of it was still danceable, and its own evolution into various incarnations of rap music is another story in itself. Although a branch of rap itself, hip-hop has always been more music-oriented than rap-oriented, and its danceability eventually turned a certain genre of rap to appeal to clubs the way house did; deep, heavy beats, loud bass, and a catchy - albeit in most cases mindless - chorus. House was far less popular in the mainstream than hip-hop, as it was purely made for dancing, not the radio. It was characterized by its constant beat and random placement of other instruments, sometimes accompanied by vocals (which, in most cases, was not only rare, but when it did happen, was completely repetitive). It, too, branched off into various genres, and it was artists in the late 90's who varied its sound that made it popular to wider audiences.

Among those artists were the French duo Daft Punk, whose revelatory 1997 album Homework redefined techno. By breaking into the mainstream, their influence was direct on countless artists and spun incalculable experimental techno and electronica artists, and in many cases even rock artists who were interested in incorporating electronic elements in their music. And then, in the early 2000's, plenty of artists began to pay attention to what was driving the electronica movement, and blending of moods came together. For instance, Daft Punk and Moby were moreso on the techno side, known for thick beats and, in the case of DP, harsh, robotic vocals. On the other side of the coin was ambient electronica, and arguably the most influential among modern artists is Boards of Canada. The only thing that their music held to electronica was that it was made with computers, as it was completely and utterly removed from dance elements. Their classic 1998 album Music Has the Right to Children helped to seal what would come.

A great (unknown) example of mixing ambience and harsh techno was Royksopp's 2001 debut Melody A.M., categorized as downbeat electronica. No, it wasn't the first of its kind, but it was an exceptional album that, while not energetic enough to be dance music, kept the warm nature of ambience while adding toe-tapping beats. Soon after, James Murphy created the identity of LCD Soundsystem, a force that would majorly influential in the return of disco. He - unknowingly or not - upped what bands like Royksopp were doing; he made the beats a little louder, the music more intense and intricate, yet shyed away from the easy and overused tempoes that characterized house. His 2007 masterpiece Sound of Silver introduced songs like "Get Innocuous!" that were heavily influenced by disco. And even before then, random bits were found sporadically. Even Feist covered a Bee Gees' song on her 2004 debut Let It Die.

2008, however, has proven a powerhouse for true disco to stage a comeback. While some artists only dabble in it (MGMT's "Electric Feel," for example), other artists are engulfing themselves. Hot Chip's release earlier this year, Made in the Dark, is characterized by its lead single "Ready for the Floor," a heavily disco-inspired groove. And while other artists last year like Midnight Juggernauts flaunted with it on tracks like "Into the Galaxy," bands like Hercules and Love Affair are blatantly calling their music disco. And it's not like this stuff is being disowned, critics are eating it up. Why? It may have been labeled as stupid shortly after it went out of style, but the truth of the matter is that while its lyrics may be coded to mean dirty things, it is in no way as outwardly trashy as club rap today. Disco is good dance music, infectious and entertaining, and it will up the experimentation for electronica in the twenty-first century.

Disco songs of the twenty-first century:
MGMT - Electric Feel
Feist - Inside and Out
Hot Chip - Ready for the Floor
Midnight Juggernauts - Into the Galaxy
Brazilian Girls - Losing Myself
LCD Soundsystem - Get Innocuous!
Hercules and Love Affair - Blind
Sebastien Tellier - Divine
Cut Copy - Far Away

SIDE ARTICLE: Blondie's "Heart of Glass" Vs. Feist's "Inside and Out"

Although it's possible that it is completely unintentional, Feist's video of the disco song "Inside and Out" by the Bee Gees contains many similarities to the video for Blondie's 1979 hit "Heart of Glass." Yes, they may seem arbitrary, but it is noteworthy.

Blondie - Heart of Glass


Feist - Inside and Out


Blondie's video is characterized by simplicity; it's almost completely focused on her, and she keeps her attention solely focused on the camera. Also, her movement is slight but important; although I wouldn't call it dancing, you can see that she is moving to the music, bouncing up and down. Feist's video isn't all that different. No, she's not with her band performing the song, but she is the target of the video. Most of the shots are of Feist up close, and she, too, is only looking at the camera. This is interesting because unlike in the late 70's, many videos today feature idiotic side stories and/or intersperse shots with the artist. Feist's video, whenever focused on her, always shows her lip syncing, just like Blondie does in her video. And Feist's movement, simple walking, gives her the same slight bounce that Blondie has.

Feist's other music videos also tend to focus on her, but if you look at her two most popular, "1234" and "Mushaboom," they contain hordes of extras, but "Inside and Out" does not. However, it should be noted that "Inside and Out" was not directed by Patrick Daughters, the director who Feist usually works with and who directed "1234" and "Mushaboom" among others.

Has Rolling Stone Lost Its Touch?

People have been making the claim that Rolling Stone has been losing its touch essentially since their inception. At first it was easy for them to praise bands that were already established as greats since their slate was clean. But time has shown that they are capable at making horrific miscalculations as to the direction of music. The most infamous blunder was the scathing reviews that Led Zeppelin received. However, it should be noted that Jeff Beck's first album Truth was met with a certain amount of praise. Perhaps they believed that Led Zeppelin was nothing more than a ripoff of Beck's work. Is that the case? Well, kinda. Read for yourself. They are definitely deserving of some criticism to fail to see the differences between Truth and Led Zeppelin I, because even though they seemed minor, they were colossal.

The 90's then showed disdain for Nirvana, another band that would become a worldwide sensation and change the face of music. Again, Rolling Stone was called upon to answer for their mistake. Honestly, I personally don't blame them for dismissing Nirvana, as they were nothing more than a glorified version of the Pixies. Besides, grunge went on to inspire some really terrible music, and that's basically why there isn't any grunge left. Regardless, I'm not a professional critic, so my points are moot. In the end, Rolling Stone decided to recognize the "mistake" and include Nirvana's catalog in their list of the greatest 500 albums.

They also gave a lukewarm response to Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs, refused to put Rush on a cover for years because they weren't "cool" enough, bashed Wheels of Fire, and attempted to adopt hip-hop (which they previously dismissed) and criticized Jay-Z. But all of that was a while ago, surely Rolling Stone has gotten better in the past few years, right? Well, not exactly. The purpose of this article to to examine Rolling Stone reviews in the twenty-first century to see what they're getting right and, perhaps even more importantly, wrong. Considering the editors oversee the final rating of all albums, I won't hold the actual reviewer as solely responsible.

What they've been getting right:

Beck - Rolling Stone review of Modern Guilt

Since Beck's inception RS have been hitting the mark right. They give Beck his due credit without flattering him. Yes, Beck is a very good artist of our day, but it would be rather risky to call any album besides Odelay a classic.

Cat Power - Rolling Stone review of You Are Free

Chan Marshall has the ability to stray critics. Many see her as a cheap female imiation of Bob Dylan, but she's not. She's her own singer-songwriter, and a unique one at that. Her ability to compose and interpret music is impressive, and Rolling Stone have shown that they fully recognize that.

Death Cab For Cutie - Rolling Stone review of Narrow Stairs

A quirky group who has a catalog of hit-and-miss entries. Accordingly, Rolling Stone have either praised or scolded them, and they get it right.

M.I.A. - Rolling Stone review of Kala

On his own site, Robert Christgau gave Kala a perfect rating. Why RS didn't is odd, but either way, they gave it four-and-a-half and called it the best album of 2007. I'm not sure if I would say the same; I would have said it's a five-star album, but I also think it has fierce competition for album of the year from Neon Bible and In Rainbows. Still, they figured out M.I.A. is brilliant.

Other notable right calls:

Against Me! - New Wave

Band of Horses - Cease to Begin

Fleet Foxes - Fleet Foxes

LCD Soundsystem - Sound of Silver

The White Stripes - Elephant

Questionable ratings:

Arcade Fire - Rolling Stone review of Neon Bible

I understand that three-and-a-half stars is a good rating, but Neon Bible is beyond excellent. It's perfect; a classic album easily. However, they believe that not all the tunes work, and that maybe Funeral was better. Do the Springsteen influences shine through too hard? No, I think it's exaggerated.

My rating of Neon Bible - *****

Feist - Rolling Stone review of Let It Die and The Reminder

These are iffy. RS has nothing against Feist, but then again, each review seems to be a little low for what they should actually be rated. Let It Die is more acceptable than The Reminder, which is tough to break at first, but reveals itself after several listens, all of which are well deserved.

My rating of Let It Die - ****1/2

My rating of The Reminder - ***1/2

Gnarls Barkley - Rolling Stone review of St. Elsewhere

I wouldn't have picked on RS for this one had they given it even just a slightly higher rating. It's obvious to everyone that St. Elsewhere was better than The Odd Couple, even though the latter was still a close second.

My rating of St. Elsewhere - ****

Other notable questionable calls:

Lily Allen - Alright, Still

The Raconteurs - Consolers of the Lonely

Thom Yorke - The Eraser

The White Stripes - De Stijl

What they got wrong:

Amy Winehouse - Rolling Stone review of Back to Black

Christian Hoard, in an otherwise positive review, ends by saying "the tunes don't always hold up." Certainly he listened to it more than once, as Back to Black is an absolutely gorgeous album. There are few albums now - or in history, for that matter - that are as genuine in emotion as this one. And considering she's the only artist who is mixing 60's Motown with neo-soul and R&B - actual R&B - is incredible. Know why? Because she understands soul and jazz, she was brought up on it. If she doesn't die, she'll be a legend. A three-star review pitiful on their part.

My rating of Back to Black - ****1/2

Ben Folds - Rolling Stone review of Rockin' the Suburbs

Another three-star review of a near-classic album. Ben Folds used to be someone I almost couldn't listen to, but thankfully I got over myself and realized how brilliant he really is. He's the next step in piano rock, as John and Joel are practically retired. This release is Folds' magnum opus (as of now) and is far better than anything he did in Ben Folds Five.

My rating of Rockin' the Suburbs - ****1/2

The Black Keys - Rolling Stone review of Thickfreakness and Rubber Factory

Once again, three-star reviews all around. In all actuality, the first review isn't that bad, but Hoard's review of Rubber Factory again has completely missed the mark. It's missing tunes? I think you're missing ears, Mr. Hoard. Along with the White Stripes, the Black Keys are the only band that are true masters of the blues, music that is the foundation for everything we have today.

My rating of Thickfreakness - ****1/2

My rating of Rubber Factory - ****

Daft Punk - Rolling Stone review of Discovery

While they have no problem giving accolades to Moby, Rolling Stone have repeatedly given the middle finger to this French duo. We may have Robert Christgau to thank for that, who gave Homework a rather scalding review as well. Still, Christgau has come around to liking them, being very positive in response to Alive 2007. So why is Rolling Stone lagging?

My rating of Discovery - ****

The Mars Volta - Rolling Stone review of De-Loused in the Comatorium

Even I was scared of the Mars Volta after my first listen. I had never really heard anything like it before. But instead of putting it out of my mind I set a goal to understand it. I haven't done that yet, there are still several elements within the music of the Mars Volta that I don't grasp, but I can tell that they are geniuses at work. Who else but Mr. Hoard gave De-Loused a crap review.

My rating of De-Loused in the Comatorium - ****1/2

Other notable wrong calls:

Broken Social Scene - Broken Social Scene

Clinic - Internal Wrangler

The Kooks - Inside In/Inside Out

The Last Shadow Puppets - The Age of the Understatement

These are only a handful of ratings that Rolling Stone has made in the twenty-first century, and there are loads of grades that are correct, off by only a half-star, or completely wrong, far too many for me to post here. Either way, it's clear that for every correct thing that RS says, they have another that's way off. That wouldn't be so bad if they were able to justify themselves, but they don't. When asked to defend reviews after years gone by, they either admit the mistake and suddenly embrace the artist or keep completely silent. I'd rather they follow what one of their own writers, Robert Christgau, does. If he doesn't like something, he says why, even if the reason isn't that good. Christgau, while frustrating, at least sticks with what he believes. The same cannot be said about Rolling Stone. Writers for that magazine must ask themselves, do they really want their reviews read back to them fifteen years from now?

The Problem of the Katy Perrys

Out of nowhere a singer named Katy Perry has grabbed much attention in the music community. Most of it, thankfully, is negative, as her debut album One of the Boys has proved to be another generic teen pop entry that will soon be forgotten. The feedback has been, for the most part, pretty terrible, as most critics are in agreement to say that she has trapped herself in the corporate studio, surrounded by highbrow producers who are focused on what sounds good now, and not what is important later. However, the Katy Perrys of today aren't annoying merely because they're terrible; rather, it's because they're absolutely useless. Soulja Boy Tell Em is in the music industry to make money. That is his only goal; to sell ringtones of his ridiculously terrible "Crank That," to be featured on VH1 so people buy his album, to perform that one song for people to buy it off iTunes. Capitol Records hopes the same as well with Katy Perry, to make a great fortune off her back while she spits out awful tunes. The reason that Katy Perry is worse, though, is because of the audience that she attracts.

While Soulja Boy can easily target a mass of college and high school students to learn his stupid dance, Katy Perry is not as blessed. Sure, there will be people of that age who are so oblivious to what they listen to that they might download "I Kissed A Girl," but chances are the audience is younger - much younger - than that. Her music is so blatantly terrible that even the high school crowd - of which the subject matter is obviously disguised as - would reject it as completely idiotic. Instead, the middle school girl can relate to the lyrics. This is unfortunate, because she's not a role model like Miley Cyrus, whose lyrics consist of mindless yet harmless scenarios; "If We Were a Movie," for example, or the duet with her father, "I Learned From You." Instead, Katy Perry sings about bicurious behavior, underage drinking, mindless sex with undesireable partners, about it being necessary to fit into some kind of clique, to discourage individuality or to have relationshipswith those different than you. It is an album for the easily suckered, simple-minded members of the One Tree Hill generation.

Even when she talks about these things, it's not even done cleverly, as her lyrics are beyond awful. "One of the Boys" is about a tomboy wanting to be looked at as a girl... should we then assume from Miss Perry that the narrator wanted to change or actually has? It's simplistic high school mentality and overly stereotypical. The lines "It felt so wrong/It felt so right" appear in the chorus of "I Kissed a Girl," and it gets worse; "I kissed a girl just to try it/I hope my boyfriend don't mind it." These are unbelievably easy lines, and it is an easy single because of the annoying and catchy chorus. Keep in mind that "catchy" can mean horrific.

The lyrics even become too obvious as on "Thinking of You;" "When I'm with him, I'm thinking of you" is so literal that it's maddening. There is absolutely no imagination, no original thoughts whatsoever as to how to go about addressing a very overdone situation. And the beat goes on; "You're like an Indian summer in the middle of winter..." what the fuck does that even mean? The whole song is so ridiculously idealistic that it can only appeal to those incapable of thinking in the realms of reality, those who are so stupid that they could use this song as a sort of escapism.

It continues; the lines "You're just a toy/Could you ever be a real boy?" appears on "Mannequin," a song about a guy who - as you may have already guessed - has a cold heart, completey rejecting the love of the singer. God forbid he doesn't want to be with her, but can we really blame him? "If You Can Afford Me" offers little in the way of improvement with lines such as "Don't make the bet if you can't write the check," and "Hot N Cold" offers a long-winded chorus of magnificently overused cliches; "You're hot then you're cold/You're yes then you're no/You're in then you're out/You're up then you're down" and so on and so on and so on.

The worst moment, though, is on the first single which was released in 2007, a taste of the terrors that would arise in mid-2008, a song entitled "Ur So Gay." This song is bad because of the way that it fails to be funny, and not simply just because it isn't funny at all. It fails on so many levels because it's not nearly as radical as it wants to be, it's not nearly as shocking as it presents itself. It turns out to be a very strange and embarrassing number, with lyrics like "You're so sad you should buy a happy meal." The problem is, it's so bad that it's not even funny, it's just bad. And the reasons she thinks the male is gay are beyond idiotic, as I don't know how listening to indie rock or reading Hemingway qualifies one as "gay."

Complete with the random "tonight!" and "oh-ohs," she's always looking for something "real," yet it's clear that she determines what is real: real is without problems, where the male is completely submissive, ultra-romantic, yet not a pussy. One of the Boys is a collection of everything that seventh-grade girls dreams of, all wrapped into one fantastically terrible album now available at Wal-Mart. What's saddening is that Perry sounds as if she's sincere about what she's singing. Her voice is certainly in it, but she's twenty-three years old, and she wrote most of these songs. She is the type that fits into the plague of talentless artists who stumble into the music industry, as record labels turn to teen pop when album sales are down. It happened in the late 90's with Spears and Aguilera, with N*Sync and the Backstreet Boys, and now as Katy Perry comes up on the scene, it is a sign that perhaps again, with album sales plummeting as online sharing increases, that another wave of no-talent hacks will be signed for multi-million dollar contracts, sold-out tour dates, and albums that don't deserve to be spit on were they on fire filling up the shelves at Best Buy. She and the rest of ultra-horrible teen pop are the ideal matches for chicks who still watch their OC DVD's religiously, for those who appear on My Super Sweet Sixteen, or who generally like unnecessarily bad music.

Katy Perry - coming to a One Tree Hill episode soon.

Great Singles of 2008

It never fails to amaze me how the best songs that come out in a year rarely make it to the radio. I'm no supporter of the underground movement nor am I obsessed with 'indie' bands, whatever the term 'indie' might mean, but it is true that the Top 40 radio is, for the most part, dominated by garbage club rap. Either way, good music tends to find its audience, even if it's via YouTube. Here are some great singles from this year, some with great videos.

M.I.A. - Paper Planes

M.I.A. was the critic's darling of 2007, and she very much deserved it. Kala was an incredible album, full of absurdities and unorthodox beats. The best cut by far and the best of three singles released is "Paper Planes," which is unique in having a chorus composed nearly entirely of gunshots and cash register sounds. It's one hell of a song, not to be missed, even by those who don't like hip-hop.

Radiohead - Nude


Radiohead's In Rainbows is already considered one of the greatest albums of all time. Rob Sheffield - for once in his career - hit the mark when he said that In Rainbows contained "No wasted moments, no weak tracks; just primo Radiohead." One of those great moments was the slow and lamenting "Nude," the great Chili Peppers-esque song that they are not talented enough to write. What makes "Nude" and In Rainbows so fantastic is while there are no outstanding and obvious influences, the subtleties are there, and while it sounds nothing like Radiohead has ever attempted, it is unmistakably them.

R.E.M. - Supernatural Superserious


The return of the R.E.M. we know and love was a triumphant one, and early reports of their just-starting tour have been incredibly good. That being said, it is hard to imagine a sonic song like "Supernatural Superserious" being any better than it is, but I've yet to see R.E.M. live, so I refuse to say it's impossible.

Hot Chip - Ready For the Floor


Although Made In the Dark is not a perfect album, it still has incredible works. For a while "Shake A Fist" was my favorite from the batch, but the disco-influenced electronica song "Ready For the Floor" is such a beautiful song that I've already changed my mind.

The Raconteurs - Salute Your Salution


The Raconteurs have before them the opportunity to be the greatest rock band on the planet. With Consolers of the Lonely they took one step closer, but they're not quite to that point. They have already shown a great ability to hone their craft, and with their third release we hope that it becomes even more evident. The first single was "Salute Your Salution," a rollicking song with a simple video; scenes from the studio.

Other notables:

Feist - I Feel It All
Feist hit it big with "1234," which exposed her to everyone who has a TV thanks to an Apple iPod commercial. As good as that song is - actually, it's classic - she has several other songs that are absolutely amazing (Mushaboom, Now at Last, My Moon My Man, etc.), and one of them happens to be "I Feel It All." The video is cute, nothing mind-blowing, but at least the song is great.

Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds - Dig!!! Lazarus, Dig!!!
These guys have been around forever, and still it's almost like they're unknowns. Anyway, this is, simply put, a track that Beck would wish he had thought of first, because it'd be a smash if it was by someone Americans instantly recognized.

The Black Keys - Strange Times
The video is a bit idiotic. Funny, yes, but idiotic. The song, however, is beautifully mixed by the Keys' new producer, "Danger Mouse" Burton. It's an experiment for sure, but what a thrilling experiment it is.

Death Cab For Cutie - I Will Possess Your Heart
Nerdy is in, and that's a good thing for Death Cab, who may have already written the best song of 2008. Overdrawn at eight minutes, once Ben Gibbard's vocals come in, the song kicks into gear, making it an irresistable song to sing to in the car.