One thing I've noticed on this forum is that there are very few references to official artists' compilations. There’s a thread about DIY comps. for friends but when people refer to compilations in posts it’s usually to the effect that they don’t care for them and would rather have an artist’s album.
By and large I agree, having grown up in the era when the LP album was the main unit of musical currency. However, there are times when a comp. hits the spot nicely, to wit:
1) Compilations by artists in whom, for reasons best known only to my brain, I have no great interest but whose contents I enjoy immensely
Madonna - “The Immaculate Collection” ABBA - “The Singles. The First Ten Years” Madness - “Divine Madness” T Rex - “Solid Gold Easy Action”. Only 20 tracks, which is enough of any one-trick pony (I’d love a comp. with “Think Zinc” on it, though).
2) Compilations that bring together singles, B-sides and/or unreleased stuff
Jimi Hendrix - “Smash Hits” This is an early vinyl comp. Great to have “Stars that Play with Laughing Sam’s Dice” Undertones - “All Wrapped Up” “Julie Ocean” is one of the loveliest songs in Christendom. Richard Thompson - “Watching the Dark”. Mainly for the unreleased/live stuff. Paul Kelly & The Messengers - "Hidden Things". I'm not a big PK fan but there's some nice stuff on here.
Now for the most contentious category:
3) Compilations by great bands that, IMO, never recorded a truly consistently great album
The Go-Betweens - “1978-1990”. Whether you choose the CD or vinyl (vinyl contains 4 extra tracks), this comp. offers up a perfect overview of the G-Bs with nary a clunker.
I think the G-Bs are the greatest band Australia has produced but none of their albums does it for me. “Before Hollywood” comes closest. This comp. gets played to death.
The Beatles - “Hey Jude”. There might be one or two people who disagree with me here but as much as I love “Revolver”, “The White Album” and “Abbey Road” I reckon that they’re blighted by really annoying songs - “Yellow Sub”, “Rocky Racoon”, “Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da”, “Revolution #9”, “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer” and “Octopus’s Garden”. My choice might seem like an odd one - why not the “Blue” or “Red” comps. or “1”? Well, I own a lot of Beatles albums so the aforementioned three would duplicate a lot. “Jude” doesn’t. This comp. shouldn’t work. It looks as if someone just shoved their hand into a box of Beatles’ singles, came out with enough to fill a single LP and pushed it out to make money. However,it succeeds brilliantly by privileging some of the Beatles’ lesser-known songs, each one a pearler, and showcasing their development over almost the band's entire lifespan. What can I say? It’s the Beatles “Album” I play the most.
So what are people's comps. that would fit any or all of these categories? Just so you know, I’m allergic to tar AND feathers.
Actually, I kind of hate compilations. As in, just thoroughly despise them with my cold, black heart.
I love music, don't get me wrong, but I hate the "Singles syndrome", where a band is judged by the music you hear on the radio rather than their records. Greatest hits albums always leave me feeling as though I'm really. truly missing something, because I almost always enjoy non-single tracks off albums (if the albums are good). B-side/rarity compilations are a bit better, because you often get music you wouldn't otherwise hear, but as a whole I view compilations as a defication of art. The musicians had something to say with their album (at least, the good ones do ) and the destructuring of multiple LPs merely destroys that. Honestly, what's the point?
Dork, you're right about missing stuff if you plug into a GH collection or any collection(I don't know why marketers persist with the GH schtick. The majority of bands to which it's applied don't have that many hits). There's not a comp. around that's going to be truly representaive without becoming unwieldy. What I tried to do in my post was to set out criteria under which I consider a comp. preferable to an album. That said, I actually don't have many more comps. than the ones I listed. Of course, if you feel as strongly about compilations as you do then no criterion is sufficient justification for the practice.
However, I'm of the opinion that most albums are merely collections of songs (obvious "concept" albums are the exception) that represent where a band/artist is at creatively at that point in time. So where most albums are concerned I don't think there's anything specific to destructure".
Now, can you just help me get this tar out of my hair?
Originally posted by Pulque: 3) Compilations by great bands that, IMO, never recorded a truly consistently great album
The Go-Betweens - “1978-1990”. Whether you choose the CD or vinyl (vinyl contains 4 extra tracks), this comp. offers up a perfect overview of the G-Bs with nary a clunker.
I think the G-Bs are the greatest band Australia has produced but none of their albums does it for me. “Before Hollywood” comes closest. This comp. gets played to death.
That is a great comp. Much better than the Bellavista Terrace collection. But I have to disagree about them not putting out a 'consistently great album.' 16 Lover's Lane is easily one of my top 10 records EVER.
I wonder, now that Grant has passed, if there will be a new best-of that covers both phase one (the first six record) and the second phase of the G-Bs...
I pick up a lot of artist comps (though nowhere near the amount of v/a comps). They're great for discovering artists before deciding whether to move on to their main albums. Then again, it pays to research which comp best reflects the artist's work for certain labels or a certain era.
That is a great comp. Much better than the Bellavista Terrace collection. But I have to disagree about them not putting out a 'consistently great album.' 16 Lover's Lane is easily one of my top 10 records EVER.
I wonder, now that Grant has passed, if there will be a new best-of that covers both phase one (the first six record) and the second phase of the G-Bs...
pE, there was an earlier vinyl single LP comp. called Metal and Shells but that didn't do them justice either.
Funny thing, 16 Lover's lane is probably my least favourite Phase 1 G-Bs album although I can understand its appeal.
A combined compilation? Hmmm, wouldn't that start some debate? I'm not sure where I'd start. I love Horsebreaker Star in its entirety. I have to say I've found most of the Phase 2 G-Bs output disappointing, especially Oceans apart
I'm kinda phobic of compilations too, but I'll make a few exceptions:
when a band I think I'll like has about 30 albums, none of which stand out from the other (I'm talking about The Fall here - so I bought the John Peel Sessions 6xCD boxset and am totally loving it, onto the 5th CD now)
for a band I doubt was ever an albums band but has several tracks I enjoy - i.e. I got Greatest Hits of Booker T & The MGs. It might come back to bite me on the arse if one day I decide to go through all their albums, but I doubt it.
Film soundtracks - City of God, Royal Tenenbaums, Trainspotting - all work as coherent 'albums' in themselves, even if not the original intention of the artist, the intention of the film-makers.
I'd get a GH if I didn't know the artist, or if they didn't have a single decent album, or if they have many good albums and I want to hear some more of their stuff before purchasing.
GH I might get in the future: Pet Shop Boys, JAMC.
Artists whose GHs I won't be buying: Wire (PF and CM for me), the Associates (their post-Alan Rankine stuff wasn't that good), Elvis Costello, The Fall, Aztec Camera... I have a lot to buy in the future.
GH I might get in the future: Pet Shop Boys, JAMC.
I would say I'm normally not a comp man myself, but there are exceptions. I recently purchased the Luna comp that came out this year, and I've been listening to it constantly for the past few months. If that comp never came out, I probably would never have heard any of their stuff. The above mentioned Pet Shop Boys is another comp I'll probably buy. The only song of theirs that I'm familiar with is "West End Girls" which I've always loved, so a comp is a good start in checking them out before buying albums. But mostly I agree with Dork in that I'd much rather buy albums than comps.
1. The Essential Bob Dylan ~ Bob Dylan 2. Push Barman to Open Old Wounds ~ Belle & Sebastian
These are the best compilations I have ever heard. I dare say they are perfect albums. They avoid the cheesiness of greatest hits albums which lack cohesion, and are interesting even at about two hours each.
Originally posted by BContrat: 1. The Essential Bob Dylan ~ Bob Dylan
I sort of disagree with that one, only because Bob's made so many perfect albums and it's tough for a compilation to do him justice. He's also one of those guys that switches up his style every few albums, so listening to an album that covers 40 years of his career can be a little jarring.
----- We were wasps with new wings, now we're bugs in the jar.
"Human Amusements at Hourly Rates" by Guided By Voices is an essential GH disc. Their albums are so numerous and so patchy, as well as varying greatly in terms of recording quality...if I wanted to introduce someone to GBV, I'd definitely go with this disc. It's got 32 tracks, I believe, a stellar primer to all their periods -- lo-fi, studio sparkle, the weird and the straight-up poppy.
"Recurring Dream" by Crowded House is a great way to get to know the band...contains their handful of recognizable radio hits, as well as a dozen other songs as good or better. Has 4 songs from each album, as well as three "new" songs, which are actually pretty listenable, if nowhere near the standards set by the other songs on the album.
Originally posted by BContrat: 1. The Essential Bob Dylan ~ Bob Dylan
I sort of disagree with that one, only because Bob's made so many perfect albums and it's tough for a compilation to do him justice. He's also one of those guys that switches up his style every few albums, so listening to an album that covers 40 years of his career can be a little jarring.
I agree with you that Dylan would be a difficult artist to compile but definitely one who needs a compilation. However,as you say, a 40-year career with numerous stylistic changes...I wouldn't care to attempt it. I'm of the opinion that he's never made an entirely consistent album, John Wesley Harding coming the closest.
Originally posted by BContrat: 1. The Essential Bob Dylan ~ Bob Dylan
I sort of disagree with that one, only because Bob's made so many perfect albums and it's tough for a compilation to do him justice. He's also one of those guys that switches up his style every few albums, so listening to an album that covers 40 years of his career can be a little jarring.
I agree with you that Dylan would be a difficult artist to compile but definitely one who needs a compilation. However,as you say, a 40-year career with numerous stylistic changes...I wouldn't care to attempt it. I'm of the opinion that he's never made an entirely consistent album, John Wesley Harding coming the closest.
An "Desire", and "Blood On The Tracks" and "Freewheelin'", of course.
Originally posted by Commontone: "Human Amusements at Hourly Rates" by Guided By Voices is an essential GH disc. Their albums are so numerous and so patchy, as well as varying greatly in terms of recording quality...if I wanted to introduce someone to GBV, I'd definitely go with this disc. It's got 32 tracks, I believe, a stellar primer to all their periods -- lo-fi, studio sparkle, the weird and the straight-up poppy.
I agree with that one, and I think even if you're not new to the band, it's a great collection of songs. Pollard included virtually every gem he ever wrote, and there isn't much in the way of filler, which is pretty incredible for 32 tracks. Plus you get alternate versions (all for the better) of "Game of Pricks", "Motor Away" and "Teenage FBI".
----- We were wasps with new wings, now we're bugs in the jar.
) and the destructuring of multiple LPs merely destroys that. Honestly, what's the point?
