Date: May 12, 1984
Weeks: 2
I spent a year imagining what review I would do for the first anniversary of my blog. I finally decided to just note the occasion and let the random number generator carry on. But apparently the random number generator felt the need to mark the milestone, too. So for review number 201, I randomly got tasked to review my second song by the very first artist I reviewed, Lionel Richie. I couldn't have found a better review topic if I'd come up with one intentionally.
On the other hand, I don't care for this song. It's just so slow and painfully earnest that I can't quite take it seriously. I think it's mostly the combination of the really soft and gentle piano and Richie's loudly-whispered vocals that really gets me. Then factor in the synthesized flute that plays throughout and I just avoid getting a creepy vibe from this song.
Not helping the creepy vibe is the lyrics. "I've been alone with you inside my mind. And in my dreams I've kissed your lips a thousand times." This isn't about love as much as it's about obsession. And it just goes on from there. There's something about the line "I long to see the sunlight in your hair" that gets me. It sounds like something a troll or vampire or other mythical creature that literally can't go out in sunlight would say to the object of their obsession. And then, even if I ignore all that, I'm left with the chorus "I want to tell you so much, I love you." Okay, so... why don't you? Seriously, what's stopping the singer of this song from telling the other person how he feels? The song doesn't even attempt an explanation. My best guess is plain old fear of rejection. So he writes a song that explores that fear of rejection without even the self-awareness to name it. He doesn't write a song explaining why he's in love with this person specifically. He clearly doesn't even know them very well: "I wonder where you are, and I wonder what you do." I suppose exploring this kind of obsession and a crippling fear of rejection is valid material for a song, but the fact that this seems to be intended as a love song makes it comes off creepy.
Which brings me back to the music, because the minor chords and synthesized, soft instruments just amplify the creepiness. This live rendition isn't nearly as creepy, because of increased use of natural instruments. The piano isn't as quiet, and Richie's voice isn't as whispery. It feels a bit more authentic and genuine.
My verdict: Don't like it. Even if I decided to ignore the intended message and tried to enjoy it as a song about obsession, the instrumentation just makes this song a chore to listen to, rather than fun.
Showing posts with label 1984. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1984. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Song #555: "Missing You" by John Waite
Date: Sept 22, 1984
Weeks: 1
This is easily one of the greatest breakup songs there is. It expertly captures most of the complicated emotions that swirl around after a breakup and delivers them in a highly appealing package. This is good stuff, and if you have never listened to this song while wistfully thinking about that certain someone, then congratulations on having been in a continuous happy relationship since 1984.
The lyrics do a wonderful job capturing all those feelings. There's regret: "And I'm still standing here and you're miles away, and I'm wondering why you left." There's the memory of happiness: "I hear your name in certain circles and it always makes me smile." Self pity: "You don't know how desperate I've become." Raw pain: "It's my heart that's breaking down this long-distance line tonight." And then my favorite part, the weak declaration of being over it that is easily confused for the real thing: "I ain't missing you, I can lie to myself." On top of that, there's some nice poetic imagery I enjoy, especially "There's a message that I'm sending out like a telegraph to your soul." Sometimes in this situation, all you can do is beam out psychic thoughts and weakly hope that solves the problem. I like the way that captures the powerlessness of the situation.
The music plays right on the hairy edge of being a cheesy synth-heavy 80s song. There is certainly ample synthesizer use. There is also that poundy 80s drum. The song could easily have been a really weak, wimpy, sad song like so many other sad 80s songs. However, there is an admirable restraint in the use of such elements, and an admirable use of genuine guitars. The bass guitar throughout is a good thing to be sure. But the song's strongest moments come from the chorus, when the lead guitar picks up and blares. It's just retrained enough to not conflict with the sad theme, but within that limitation it's an ear-catching guitar tone. Whoever mixed this song did so very, very carefully and got it exactly right. I spent some time looking for a punk or rock cover that might amp up the guitar a bit to see how well that worked, but I guess no one out there thought it would work very well, because I couldn't find one. At any rate, the music here manages to capture that 80s sound without feeling dated and regrettable the way other 80s songs can be.
My verdict: Like it. One of the best of the decade, and a great song to have around to get through a rough patch.
Weeks: 1
This is easily one of the greatest breakup songs there is. It expertly captures most of the complicated emotions that swirl around after a breakup and delivers them in a highly appealing package. This is good stuff, and if you have never listened to this song while wistfully thinking about that certain someone, then congratulations on having been in a continuous happy relationship since 1984.
The lyrics do a wonderful job capturing all those feelings. There's regret: "And I'm still standing here and you're miles away, and I'm wondering why you left." There's the memory of happiness: "I hear your name in certain circles and it always makes me smile." Self pity: "You don't know how desperate I've become." Raw pain: "It's my heart that's breaking down this long-distance line tonight." And then my favorite part, the weak declaration of being over it that is easily confused for the real thing: "I ain't missing you, I can lie to myself." On top of that, there's some nice poetic imagery I enjoy, especially "There's a message that I'm sending out like a telegraph to your soul." Sometimes in this situation, all you can do is beam out psychic thoughts and weakly hope that solves the problem. I like the way that captures the powerlessness of the situation.
The music plays right on the hairy edge of being a cheesy synth-heavy 80s song. There is certainly ample synthesizer use. There is also that poundy 80s drum. The song could easily have been a really weak, wimpy, sad song like so many other sad 80s songs. However, there is an admirable restraint in the use of such elements, and an admirable use of genuine guitars. The bass guitar throughout is a good thing to be sure. But the song's strongest moments come from the chorus, when the lead guitar picks up and blares. It's just retrained enough to not conflict with the sad theme, but within that limitation it's an ear-catching guitar tone. Whoever mixed this song did so very, very carefully and got it exactly right. I spent some time looking for a punk or rock cover that might amp up the guitar a bit to see how well that worked, but I guess no one out there thought it would work very well, because I couldn't find one. At any rate, the music here manages to capture that 80s sound without feeling dated and regrettable the way other 80s songs can be.
My verdict: Like it. One of the best of the decade, and a great song to have around to get through a rough patch.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
Song #549: "Let's Hear It For The Boy" by Deniece Williams
Date: May 26, 1984
Weeks: 2
All right, I think I've finally found a song in the 1980s that isn't trying to sneak a synthesizer into a song where it doesn't belong. This song is all synthesizers, and the effect is clearly deliberate. The result is a kind of charming, bright sound that is sort of appealing. Certainly music eventually figured out how to use synthesizers properly, and I'm glad to find such an early example.
Unfortunately, there's a lot to dislike here, too. The overall sound is quite thin. A little heavier bass and some more sustained tones might have helped create a more compelling overall sound. The drum machine feels robotic, too, which I think is a miscalculation. It makes it feel like a karaoke song.
Deniece Williams's voice is a bit hard to take. She's very whiny. Although, there's a part at the end where she really aims for a high note and hits it, presaging Mariah Carey's signature, that suggests to me that she really can sing. Wikipedia notes that she "has a five-octave range." That seems likely, but she's not really putting it to proper use in this song. I don't know if it's that she's outside her best range or if it's just the style of music she's doing, but her voice is pretty obnoxious throughout most of this song. I'm sure she's very talented, but she's not putting her talent to good use here.
The lyrics are fine. The sentiment is that she loves the guy she's with even though he has flaws. Nothing wrong with that. I can't really find fault with the lyrics, and really, they're pretty energizing. Hooray for love that's pleasant and happy.
This is one of those songs that bugs me by continuing on well after it's actually ended. After she sings that opera note, the song really ought to start its fade out right away, but the video I linked continues on for almost a minute more. It doesn't add anything to a song that's already pretty repetitive.
My verdict: Don't like it. This is a junk food song. It's pleasing enough the first time through, but the more I listen to it, the more it starts to bother me. Insubstantial pop songs can and should be better and not make me regret them before they're over.
Weeks: 2
All right, I think I've finally found a song in the 1980s that isn't trying to sneak a synthesizer into a song where it doesn't belong. This song is all synthesizers, and the effect is clearly deliberate. The result is a kind of charming, bright sound that is sort of appealing. Certainly music eventually figured out how to use synthesizers properly, and I'm glad to find such an early example.
Unfortunately, there's a lot to dislike here, too. The overall sound is quite thin. A little heavier bass and some more sustained tones might have helped create a more compelling overall sound. The drum machine feels robotic, too, which I think is a miscalculation. It makes it feel like a karaoke song.
Deniece Williams's voice is a bit hard to take. She's very whiny. Although, there's a part at the end where she really aims for a high note and hits it, presaging Mariah Carey's signature, that suggests to me that she really can sing. Wikipedia notes that she "has a five-octave range." That seems likely, but she's not really putting it to proper use in this song. I don't know if it's that she's outside her best range or if it's just the style of music she's doing, but her voice is pretty obnoxious throughout most of this song. I'm sure she's very talented, but she's not putting her talent to good use here.
The lyrics are fine. The sentiment is that she loves the guy she's with even though he has flaws. Nothing wrong with that. I can't really find fault with the lyrics, and really, they're pretty energizing. Hooray for love that's pleasant and happy.
This is one of those songs that bugs me by continuing on well after it's actually ended. After she sings that opera note, the song really ought to start its fade out right away, but the video I linked continues on for almost a minute more. It doesn't add anything to a song that's already pretty repetitive.
My verdict: Don't like it. This is a junk food song. It's pleasing enough the first time through, but the more I listen to it, the more it starts to bother me. Insubstantial pop songs can and should be better and not make me regret them before they're over.
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Song #550: "Time After Time" by Cyndi Lauper
Date: June 9, 1984
Weeks: 2
When I reviewed Starship's "Sara," I complained about the song's inability to commit to being the soft rock song it wanted to be. Now, if you want to hear what a soft rock song in the 80s is supposed to be like, listen to "Time After Time."
The drums are clearly drum machines and most of the background music is provided by synth-keyboards, with only a little guitar in the bridge. The drum line is subtle. The artificially perfect sound of the synthesizers makes the song feel pure. And that's all there is to it. Other than some subtle accents, that's all that's going on in this song. There's no hard drum, there's no big guitar solo. This is a soft song that only wants to be a soft song, and it's great for it.
Cyndi Lauper has a really great voice for a song like this, especially during the chorus when she breaks out of the rhythm on the line "I will be waiting." It's genuinely emotional. A lot of singers try that sort of thing, but Cyndi Lauper's voice pulls it off.
The lyrics are well-matched to the music. It's about the emotional connection maintained between people who have split up. My original interpretation was that it was about people who have broken off a relationship but who sometimes still think about each other fondly. But after watching the video and researching a bit I realized it could also be about a runaway child missing their parents. The lyrics are pretty good, and I can't even find anything to nitpick.
My verdict: Like it. Now let's all celebrate with the goofy Romy and Michelle dance.
Weeks: 2
When I reviewed Starship's "Sara," I complained about the song's inability to commit to being the soft rock song it wanted to be. Now, if you want to hear what a soft rock song in the 80s is supposed to be like, listen to "Time After Time."
The drums are clearly drum machines and most of the background music is provided by synth-keyboards, with only a little guitar in the bridge. The drum line is subtle. The artificially perfect sound of the synthesizers makes the song feel pure. And that's all there is to it. Other than some subtle accents, that's all that's going on in this song. There's no hard drum, there's no big guitar solo. This is a soft song that only wants to be a soft song, and it's great for it.
Cyndi Lauper has a really great voice for a song like this, especially during the chorus when she breaks out of the rhythm on the line "I will be waiting." It's genuinely emotional. A lot of singers try that sort of thing, but Cyndi Lauper's voice pulls it off.
The lyrics are well-matched to the music. It's about the emotional connection maintained between people who have split up. My original interpretation was that it was about people who have broken off a relationship but who sometimes still think about each other fondly. But after watching the video and researching a bit I realized it could also be about a runaway child missing their parents. The lyrics are pretty good, and I can't even find anything to nitpick.
My verdict: Like it. Now let's all celebrate with the goofy Romy and Michelle dance.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Song #532: "Eat It" by "Weird Al" Yankovic
Date: April 1, 1984
Weeks: 1
"Eat It" was Weird Al's first big hit, and it's a great song. It's about a parent trying to get their kid to eat something. It's basically a funny list of things the kid could be eating. It's clever and never fails to crack me up.
The one lyric that makes me scratch my head is "Don't you know that other kids are starving in Japan?" That kind of guilt is a classic gambit by the parent trying to get their kid to eat, but was there a time when hunger was an issue in Japan? I've heard of parents using China in this argument, and Africa was popular when I was young, but Japan? I suspect he may have fudged the lyrics there to make a rhyme.
The music is uniformly excellent, with a great guitar backing the whole track. That guitar goes nuts in the bridge and then literally explodes.That's good stuff.
I do kind of take issue with the funny little hand-fart noises that pepper the song. They seem like a pretty cheap joke, and they kind of don't fit. I know earlier in his career, Weird Al had a lot of goofy sound effects backing him up, but by this time he seemed to be making more genuine music, so they're kind of an unwelcome throwback.
My verdict: Like It. This set the tone for the rest of Weird Al's career, and it's a ton of fun.
Weeks: 1
"Eat It" was Weird Al's first big hit, and it's a great song. It's about a parent trying to get their kid to eat something. It's basically a funny list of things the kid could be eating. It's clever and never fails to crack me up.
The one lyric that makes me scratch my head is "Don't you know that other kids are starving in Japan?" That kind of guilt is a classic gambit by the parent trying to get their kid to eat, but was there a time when hunger was an issue in Japan? I've heard of parents using China in this argument, and Africa was popular when I was young, but Japan? I suspect he may have fudged the lyrics there to make a rhyme.
The music is uniformly excellent, with a great guitar backing the whole track. That guitar goes nuts in the bridge and then literally explodes.That's good stuff.
I do kind of take issue with the funny little hand-fart noises that pepper the song. They seem like a pretty cheap joke, and they kind of don't fit. I know earlier in his career, Weird Al had a lot of goofy sound effects backing him up, but by this time he seemed to be making more genuine music, so they're kind of an unwelcome throwback.
My verdict: Like It. This set the tone for the rest of Weird Al's career, and it's a ton of fun.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)