OFF: Better popular bands??

[Dave Berry]

At 18:54 28/07/98 -0400, Keith Henderson wrote:
>Folks here and on PT-trans indicated that they had grown fantastically
>since, and to try out the newest, OK Computer.
>
>there is one thing about this band that makes it impossible for me to
>recommend....the singer just plain sucks.  His voice is awful, and he sings
>in a whiny style that reminds me of the projected ghouls in (the original)
>Star Trek episode 'Catspaw.'
>
>So anyway, there are more names that I see pop up from time to time in
>newsgroups and various mailing lists.  By no means am I against supporting a
>popular band (I'm all for Monster Magnet, etc. making a name for themselves
>in pop culture), so are any of these artists *really* any damn good, and in
>what way...
>
>Spiritualized (as mentioned before)
>The Verve (or is it Verve Pipe??  why do I see it both ways??)
>Gov't Mule
>Perfume Tree (I'm not sure if they're well known or not??)

Radiohead don't do it for me, either.  Nor do the Verve's last two singles
("The Drugs Don't Work", and "BitterSweet Symphony").  Spiritualised are a
completely different kettle of fish -- "Ladies and Gentlemen..." is
magnificent.  It's the best rock album I've heard for several years.

The singer?  He's kind of flat (flat in tone, I mean, not out of tune); in
a weird way he reminds me of Nico.  But then, large parts of this album
scream "Velvet Underground" to me, if you can imagine an "indie" version of
the Velvets.  Or "indie" space-rock... with elements of gospel, minimalism
(especially Michael Nyman), and various other influences.  The music
reminds me of Hawkwind in that it's fairly simple, but wonderfully
multi-layered, spacey and non-generic.  The mood is downbeat; it's mainly
about how being dumped hurts, and it manages to convey that misery pretty
effectively.  It's one of those albums where the emotion is wrung out of
you, even as you enjoy the experience.

Dave.

Harlequin Ltd., Lismore House, 127 George St, Edinburgh, EH2 4JN, UK.
Tel: +44 131 240 6106.