My good friend and bandmate from college wrote a 4-star John Mayer review in this week's Rolling Stone. I am not sure how I feel about that.

You think that's bad: how to explain allmusic.com's love of - and I'm not making this up - Tony Orlando & Dawn? Including, yes, 4 star reviews. From this review:
[www.allmusic.com]

"If anyone doubts the creativity and huge collection of talent that made up the Dawn phenomenon, this stylish and classy album is Exhibit A that this artist and crew had much more depth than what critics of the day may have thought. Sure, Tony Orlando & Dawn played to an audience that was the antithesis of those who were embracing Mott the Hoople, Lou Reed, and David Bowie at this point in time, but that doesn't mean there wasn't something very special going on here. Historically speaking, 'New Ragtime Follies' deserves attention for its ambitious and fully realized craftsmanship."

Anyone wanna listen to that album to confirm?

Quote

You think that's bad: how to explain allmusic.com's love of - and I'm not making this up - Tony Orlando & Dawn?

It may not be the reason (or the only reason) but being totally full of shit has got to help.

If Tony Orlando wasn't terrible, than nothing is terrible.

You might remember me from such telethons as Out with Gout '88 and Let's Save Tony Orlando's House

"Dawn, I Want You Back!

(Performed in Springfield, no less)



Post Edited (05-15-12 18:54)

MrFab wrote:

> You think that's bad: how to explain allmusic.com's love of -
> and I'm not making this up - Tony Orlando & Dawn? Including,
> yes, 4 star reviews. From this review:
> [www.allmusic.com]
>
Since allmusic.com is supposed to review all music, I've always treated the reviews as for fans of the artist. So, if I was looking at Tony Orlando record reviews, I would assume that the reviewer is going to be a fan of Orlando and review his albums in order of greatness (not so greatness?) compared to his other albums. Rolling Stone, Pitchfork, TP and other niche music reviewers, are supposed to review music that falls into that niche unless something outside the category appeals to the reviewer.

I've always liked the way allmusic reviews their albums. I know that Tony Orlando isn't most likely going to appeal to me but if I just had to get something by him, the reviews should point me to the best album.

MrFab wrote:

> Anyone wanna listen to that album to confirm?

Hell no!

It's worth checking out "Shadow Days," the lead single on Soundcloud, if only to read the comments ("sounds countryey"):

[soundcloud.com]

Very soothing. Horrible, awful lyrics. Don Was produced it.

BTW, I'm about 2/3 through Dawn's New Ragtime Follies featuring Tony Orlando, which is their 4th album, as well as their top-selling LP, and thus far I'd take this over Squirrel Nut Zippers any day of the week. Admittedly, the big hit, "Say, Has Anybody Seen My Sweet Gypsy Rose," sounds like it targeted early-70s pop fans who found Elton John's Honky Château too challenging, but the rest of it's not bad...don't know about 4/5 stars.

Well, remember that a couple of years ago when Jann Wenner was on The Colbert Report and was asked to prove he wasn't stuck in the '60s by naming some current artists doing good work, his list consisted of "John Mayer, Prince, Red Hot Chili Peppers..."

In other words, Mayer is the only musician who debuted after the year 2000 that Jann Wenner can name off the top of his head. So I'm sure the editorial mandate at the magazine is to treat the odious little fart like he's the second coming of Bruuuuuuuuuuce. Can't have the only halfway current artist that Wenner actually bothered learning the name of not be treated like a genius.

I don't get too worked up by the critical hyperbole at RS anymore--that is, ever since Jan Wenner gave Mick Jagger's horrible Goddess in the Doorway album the "instant classic" five-star rating.

It was as if he had pushed my credulity so far that he actually broke it. An effective strategy if you think of it. . . It makes a 4-star John Mayer seem almost level-headed by comparison.



Post Edited (05-15-12 20:37)

John Mayer is is the epitome of competent and inoffensive. While his music is completely unchallenging, it is well-performed and pleasing to the ears of the average listener. That would translate to 2.5 stars in my book, but I can see where it warrants 4 stars in the minds of many. I suppose anybody playing guitar solos in this day and age must seem like a boundary pusher...which is why a guy like Joe Bonamassa should get a lot more love. But then again, he actually rocks, which I suppose is even more of a no-no to the average Mayer fan.

"Rush is one of those bands about whom it's pointless to write reviews (at least from a consumer guide perspective)."

This could be said about a good portion of RS's album reviews. How much I can glean from a 150 word, 3-star blurb about a band I don't know much about but may be interested in is questionable. But, hey, it's something to fill space and sell advertising against.

Unfortunately 150 words is about standard in print these days, no matter what the publication. It's a challenge to fit much meaningful info in such a short span. (I speak from experience.) If you want in-depth analysis, you need to go to the web...somewhere other than Pitchfork, that is.

I don't understand what's supposed to be enjoyable about his music, but I'd still take Mayer over Jack Johnson.

Mayer (and Johnson, for that matter) is one of those artists whose music doesn't have a shred of innovation or even ambition (beyond selling units), but feels familiar to an audience that complains about electropop and hip-hop top 40 stuff but also doesn't "get" anything experimental in the indie rock realm. He reaffirms certain values for that audience, but they also convince themselves they're "hip" because he's young. Perfect for Rolling Stone readers, in other words. He's the very definition of safe.

I agree with you, though. He's a supposedly great guitar player, but all he's really doing is imitating Stevie Ray Vaughan and Clapton, without bringing anything of his own to the table. His songs get the job done, I suppose, but sound like they've had the life smoothed out of them with a dough roller. (And I blame not only his producers but also his own sense of craft.) His belief in his own talent and that he's bringing something needed to the world of music has led him to make stupid statements on race in the press and generally project an air of smug sexism and arrogance, apparently under the impression that he's bulletproof.

It's possible there's a producer out there who could challenge him and bring out whatever major talent he supposedly possesses, but I have my doubts.

Mayer is not a competent singer. He is an awful singer.

For me, the epitome of gutless, pointless, weak-assed reviewing was reached with RS's review of the most recent studio album from Rush. It got three stars. The review began with: "If you're already a Rush fan, add two stars. If not, subtract two."

That Rush review was a Rob Sheffield review. I remember that one. He must have been too busy talking to girls about Duran Duran to listen too carefully to Rush.

I see his point, though. Rush is one of those bands about whom it's pointless to write reviews (at least from a consumer guide perspective). Fans will buy it no matter what it sounds like, even if it's awful, and the unconverted are likely to remain that way, even if it's brilliant. Seems like Sheffield could've saved time by not bothering.

I'd argue Mayer is also in that category. There's likely nothing he can do that would induce non-fans to buy one of his albums, while a gazillion people who are already fans will grab it (or illegally download it) within the week of release even if it's nothing but imitations of bear farts.

Now, if you want to do it from a cultural perspective, that's different. You could do a fairly substantial essay on what Mayer's popularity means, especially in terms of supposedly hip taste-arbiters like Jann Wenner signing off on his blanded-out blues rock. Or on why Rush still sells out arenas around the world and means so much to so many despite being long past their multi-platinum days. (Of course, nearly everybody's past those days in a filesharing world.) But that's neither Sheffield's nor Rolling Stone's field of vision, especially since they decided to be Blender II.

Still trying to figure out why RS gave Kanye West's Beautiful Twisted Fantasy five stars. I can barely get through one song. Each note is as painful as needles injected into toe bones, so I take it one millisecond at a time.

Zoo, your definition of "inoffensive" and mine vary widely, but I take your point being that you mean that is the viewpoint of the public in general and not a statement of your personal belief. For me, there is nothing about Mayer - his music, his persona, his appearance, his bizarre attempts to make racism cool and sexism sexy, his continued existence on Earth - that does not offend me to the very marrow of my bones.

I can't think of a pop culture figure of the last dozen years who I loathe more deeply than Mayer. Hell, I'd rather be stuck in an elevator for three weeks with Seth McFarlane, Charlie Sheen, Simon Cowell and Whitney Matheson with the muzak stuck on a rotation of "I Wish I Was a Punk Rocker (with Flowers in My Hair" by Sandi Thom, "You're Beautiful" by James Blunt and that pretty good day song and then be killed by wolves immediately upon my rescue than listen to a single note of "Daughters" or "Your Body Is a Wonderland" ever again.

If I were given the opportunity to expunge the catalog of John Mayer from all past, present and future existence but in exchange would be allowed to listen to only Toto for the rest of my life, I would make that trade without a second thought. Sometimes one has to make a painful personal sacrifice for the greater good of all mankind. People would ask me why "Roseanna" was playing in endless rotation on my car stereo and I would respond with a sad, knowing smile.



Post Edited (05-17-12 09:35)

By inoffensive, I mean "safe" in a musical sense: nothing weird or experimental going on, no attempt to push any boundary, and certainly nothing "dark." In other words, nothing that would offend someone who loves his or his style of music (I believe I married such a person, come to think of it).

BTW, Breno, you've obviously analyzed the Mayer and his music a lot closer than I have. I simply find him to be a softy with a pretty face who thinks he's tough because he's a guitar "slinger" who can imitate every riff Clapton ever played. That's the extent of it...which really is pretty harmless in the grand scheme of things. Misogyny? Sexism? I hadn't dug that deep to notice...I stopped at poseur.

Quote

"You're Beautiful" by James Blunt

What is the exact distance between James "You're Beautiful" Blunt and that British band Tram?

No need to show your work and no need to go metric.

...

And is Blunt the new Dan Fogelberg?

"And is Blunt the new Dan Fogelberg?"

Not in America, where Fogelburp (as Opus called him in Bloom County) had numerous hits, many of which became soft rock standards (for better or worse). Blunt is, fortunately, a one-hit wonder.

I loved when Noel Gallagher said he sold his house in Ibiza because James Blunt moved in next door. He said the mere idea that Blunt was writing shit music so close by prompted him to move.

jack johnson vs john mayer

seafood music to choke on.

Near as I can tell, Jack Johnson is just Jimmy Buffett for the Gen Y crowd, only instead of encouraging sad Midwestern doofs to fantasize about laying around doing nothing in the Florida Keys, he encourages them to fantasize about doing so in Hawaii but is so mellow from living there that he can't even be bothered with making it sound fun.

I can't stand him, but he doesn't inspire the supernova of loathing in my soul the way Mayer does. I've mellowed with age and am fine with taking a live and live attitude towards Johnson. I'm content to just ignore him and be clueless about any actual song he's recorded anytime someone asks me if I like him.

At least Jimmy Buffett had a sense of humor, something I've never detected a whiff of in the handful of crap songs of Jack Johnson's that I've heard. I always love it when I find "Cheeseburger In Paradise" on a dive bar's jukebox.

This week Rolling Stone shrunk their album reviews by about 50% of their previous word count. Can you say "death knell" ?

"Captain, the musical universe ... both musical universes ... are safe."

"For you and me, Spock ... for you and me. But what of Reno ... and, what of Reno ..."