Why I Will Not Buy the New Rhett Miller Album
Just call me the anti-Ayn Rand. As much as I hated group projects in high school and college, there are areas where collaborations are almost always superior to individual efforts. Blogging is one (I have no doubt whatsoever that my personal blog would be much more interesting if I added any four Kulturblog posters to the mix). Rock music is another. Sure, there are group blogs that are dull and pointless, and bands that are bland and mediocre. But a good band together rocks so much more than any individual breaking out from the good band will rock alone.
Case in point: Rhett Miller, longtime frontman for one of my favorite alt-country bands The Old 97s, has a new album out, The Believer. I won’t buy it.
I won’t buy it, despite the sexy purple suit Rhett’s wearing on the cover, and despite my respect for his songwriting abilities. The truth is, Rhett Miller has loads of talent, but he kind of — dare I say it? — sucks on his own. His last solo album, The Instigator, sounded like a half-hearted attempt to make the cover of Seventeen magazine’s special Valentine issue. Even the best songs on the album, “Things That Disappear” and “The El” sounded to me like tired imitations of Old 97s songs by a less-talented cover band (”Point Shirley” was saved, but just barely, by the welcome presence of Robin Hitchcock, and to be fair “Terrible Vision” could be seen as a respectable faux-Beatles song). It made me worry that his recent marriage may have put an end to Rhett’s ability to rock.
But after seeing him perform again with The Old 97s post-solo album, and with the release of the band’s most recent and quite excellent album, Drag It Up, I was hopeful he’d regained his rockstar mojo. (Check out the samples of the gritty “Smokers” and haunting “Adelaide” for support.)
Now I’m back to feeling pessimistic about his solo efforts, and the cause is the sample of “Singular Girl” he posted on his MySpace page. It sucks. Not the song itself, because I own a version of it he recorded live with The Old 97s as a bonus song from Satellite Ridesthat’s great (and would have made a much better single than “King of All of the World”). But his solo version, besides missing some lyrics that may or may not be necessary, lacks energy. (I’ll post both versions to the Radioblog.) In the solo version, the guitar is flat, his vocals smoothly passionless. The whole song sounds limp, insincere and wimpy. If I were his woman, and he sang it to me like that, I would return the ring.
All this just adds fuel to the theory adhered to in our household that for every good band, there’s a mediocre solo act waiting to happen. There may be a few lonely counterexamples out there. Bring ‘em on.
The two versions of “Singular Girl” are posted to the radio.blog now.
Here’s the list of solo artists I posted over at your solo blog:
Brendan Perry
Damien Rice
David Byrne
Lauren Hill
Eric Clapton
George Michael!
John Lennon
Justin Timberlake
Mark Lanegan
Neko Case
Neil Young
Nick Cave
Paul Weller
Peter Gabriel
PW Long
Ryan Adams
Roddy Frame
Stevie Nicks
Sting
Todd Rundgren (I think he was in bands before going solo)
Van Morrison
Those are just artists I have albums by, I’d have to think about it to come up with some more.
Comment by Susan M — January 28, 2006 @ 11:08 am
STING, susan? Shame on you.
Comment by Supergenius — January 28, 2006 @ 11:20 am
May as well have mentioned Phil Collins!
Comment by Supergenius — January 28, 2006 @ 11:20 am
Sting was always the best songwriter in the Police and you know it! His first few solo albums are awesome. I even like the later stuff too, it just got overplayed on the radio. (That song with the middle eastern guy was fabulous.)
Has anyone even heard Peter Gabriel-era Genesis? I haven’t, but I want to.
Comment by Susan M — January 28, 2006 @ 11:29 am
Sting was the best songwriter for sure, but he was sooo much better and more consistently so with his band than without.
And Neko Case totally shouldn’t count. New Pornographers isn’t really her band, although she’s the best vocalist they have, and she’s always had a separate solo career.
John Lennon was far, far better with the Beatles, David Byrne much better with Talking Heads. The only one on your list I really agree with is possibly Peter Gabriel (and there are others I just don’t know enough about to say either way).
Comment by Allison — January 28, 2006 @ 11:35 am
make it stop!! make the crazy talk stop! Nothing good from Sting since Dream of the Blue Turtles, and how dare you suggest otherwise.
Yes– Peter Gabriel’s Genesis is very good. Maybe not quite as good as the Genesis you know and love, but pretty good.
Comment by Supergenius — January 28, 2006 @ 11:37 am
Yeah I wasn’t sure about Neko.
I’m not saying these guys are better solo than with their bands, but they’re still very good. Some are better, and some are just as good.
Comment by Susan M — January 28, 2006 @ 11:40 am
Morrissey
Paul Simon
Roddy Frame
All excellent solo artists.
I was going to mention a few others, but noticed them on Susan’s list.
Comment by Laura — January 28, 2006 @ 11:51 am
Allison,
What are some examples of good bands/mediocre solo acts?
Comment by Laura — January 28, 2006 @ 11:52 am
Laura, Morrissey without Johnny Marr = depressing. He got in a couple of good albums before people realized that the Smiths were far, far superior.
Comment by Supergenius — January 28, 2006 @ 11:57 am
Natalie Merchant
Frank Black
Henry Rollins (k that one’s questionable–still his solo stuff isn’t completely throwaway)
Paul Simon is an excellent choice, Laura.
Steve’s gonna kill me but:
Rod Stewart
Comment by Susan M — January 28, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
I’ve got to agree with the supergenius about the relative merits of Morrissey vs. The Smiths. But then, I’m sort of anti-Morrissey that way.
Robert Plant, anyone?
Comment by Allison — January 28, 2006 @ 12:10 pm
Oops. That last one was me. Gotta remember to log Allison out.
Also, Frank Black and Natalie Merchant were both much better with their respective bands. I’m not saying their solo stuff is worthless, but it doesn’t quite measure up.
Comment by BTD Greg — January 28, 2006 @ 12:12 pm
I’d take Tigerlily over 10,000 Maniacs anyday, and I love 10,000 Maniacs.
But I’m not saying these guys are *better* solo, but very good on their own–good enough to buy their solo albums.
Comment by Susan M — January 28, 2006 @ 12:18 pm
I saw Rhett Miller live in Portland in…2001, 2? He (solo) opened for Neil Finn (who is brilliant whether solo or not). I remember being very, very underwhelmed by him and, while not being really familiar with Old 97s, hoping that his / their recordings sounded better than he did live.
Comment by gabby — January 28, 2006 @ 3:06 pm
Laura, all of them! Well, except maybe Peter Gabriel. Some soloists from good bands manage to make some decent music, but it’s almost never BETTER than the music they were making with their band (the opposite tends to be true in almost all cases):
John Lennon vs. Beatles
Paul McCartney vs. Beatles
George Harrison vs. Beatles
Mick Jagger vs. the Stones
Keith Richards vs. the Stones
John Fogerty vs. CCR
Sting vs. the Police
Morrissey vs. the Smiths
Paul Westerberg vs. the Replacements
Belinda Carlisle vs. the Go-Gos
Pete Townshend vs. the Who
David Crosby vs. the Byrds
Lou Reed vs. the Velvet Underground
David J vs. Bauhaus, or even Love and Rockets
Tanya Donnelly vs. Throwing Muses/Breeders/Belly
Chris Bell vs. Big Star
Alex Chilton vs. Big Star
Syd Barrett vs. Pink Floyd
Joe Strummer vs. the Clash
Joey Ramone vs. the Ramones
A good band mitigates the recklessly self-indulgent tendencies of the soloist ego and tends to keep rocking longer than a solo artist is able to. Let’s all pray Bono never decides it’s time to go solo.
Comment by Allison — January 28, 2006 @ 3:31 pm
Gabby, if you get a chance to see the Old 97s live, they’re awesome. Particularly if you like high-energy rock with a cow-punk vibe, it’s not to be missed. Most of their albums sound good (Too Far to Care is their classic that’s probably most representative of their live sound), but they’re a band that built their following based on their live shows.
Comment by Allison — January 28, 2006 @ 3:38 pm
It’s good to know that they are better than what he was that night. I’ll have to surmise that he was just having a bad night!
Comment by gabby — January 28, 2006 @ 8:17 pm
Susan we have Peter Gabriel era Genesis on vinyl!
Comment by chronicler — January 29, 2006 @ 11:25 am
First of all, I liked “The Instigator,” and will be buying “The Believer” because of that. It’s not the best album of all time or anything, but it’s just as good as “Satellite Rides” or “Fight Songs.” The songs “Our Love” and “Come Around” are as good as anything the Old 97s have done in their poppy phase.
And I have to quibble a bit with Allison’s take on the solo/band thing. Looking at her list, they are all _great_ bands, where one member decided to try to cash in or branch out with their own vision. Predictably, they mostly failed to live up to the level of the great band they came from. But there are many situations where great solo artists were initially held down by crappy bands that no one has ever heard of. Thus, they are counterexamples to Allison’s list that aren’t really on people’s radar screens.
For example, Heatmiser was a mediocre band, but Elliott Smith is one of the great solo artists of the last decade. Ted Leo was an unknown when he was in Chisel. Jimi Hendrix was a guitarist in several bands before he was “discovered” and recorded his own stuff. In the early 60s, Neil Young and Rick James (yes, “Superfreak” Rick James) were together in a band called “Mynah Birds.” I haven’t heard their stuff, but I’d bet anything that Neil Young solo and Rick James solo are much better than the Mynah Birds. Neil’s next band was the Buffalo Springfield, which he easily surpassed when he went solo.
Some more counterexamples: Springsteen has done fine in his albums without the E-Street Band. Bjork has done fine without the Sugarcubes. Michael Jackson did okay without his brothers and Diana Ross did okay without the Supremes (okay, those aren’t really “bands,” but still). The Stooges albums are nearly unsurpassable, but Iggy’s solo albums are pretty good too. Wilco is essentially Jeff Tweedy’s solo act, but they’ve arguably surpassed Uncle Tupelo.
Comment by Greg — January 29, 2006 @ 1:11 pm
Wilco is essentially Jeff Tweedy’s solo act, but they’ve arguably surpassed Uncle Tupelo.
No way you just said that. Wilco is as collaborative as any band with one principle singer/songwriter. Jay Bennet had a huge influence on the sound of the band from Being There through Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. All of the mad scientist keyboarding on Summerteeth was his as was the studio wizardry of YHF. In an interview somewhere John Stirrat said that Bennet leaving (okay, he was kicked out) was really significant because he was a great harmonist and an innovative writer of counter-melodies.
The only evidence I see that supports calling Wilco “essentially Jeff Tweedy solo” is the presence of the few extended guitar solos on A Ghost is Born. Until Ghost Tweedy rarely took the lead (”I’m the Man Who Loves You” is the only exception I can think of). Of course, there was never any lead to take, which is more evidence that argues against your label.
Since Ghost badass Jazz improvisationalist Nels Cline has joined Wilco and has made some stunning original contributions to the sound of the band (see Kicking Television: Live in Chicago for evidence). I can’t wait to see what he brings to the studio.
Comment by Tom — January 29, 2006 @ 5:00 pm
Tom,
Yes, Jay Bennett was a big influence on Jeff Tweedy. Same with Leroy Bach, and Glenn Kotche. But John Stirratt and Tweedy are the only band members who has been there the whole time. So while Wilco is definitely “collaborative” with respect to any particular album, the only common thread through time is Tweedy. He picks and chooses new collaborators every couple of years, and keeps the name “Wilco.” The only thing the current lineup has in common with the lineup that made “A.M.” is Jeff Tweedy’s personality.
By the way, I think “Kicking Television” is Wilco’s best album from their best lineup.
Comment by Greg — January 29, 2006 @ 5:19 pm
OK, I see what you’re saying and I agree. I’m a bit of a fanboy, so I have violent reactions sometimes. I was thinking you were suggesting that Wilco was kind of a Billy Corgan/Smashing Pumpkins thing where the sound is almost entirely the product of one imagination (although I think Smashing Pumpkins as essentially a Billy Corgan solo project might be an overstatement).
I’m with you on Kicking Television (although I really really like A Ghost is Born and I do kind of miss Bennett). There are so many moments of utter perfection. The song choice and sequence was spot-on. And Nels Cline is the man. The one weakness I found was that Tweedy’s vocals on the upbeat songs were kind of lackluster.
Add Billy Corgan to the list of mediocre solo projects coming out of great bands (that is, if you consider Smashing Pumpkins to be a great band like I do).
Comment by Tom — January 29, 2006 @ 8:14 pm
although I think Smashing Pumpkins as essentially a Billy Corgan solo project might be an overstatement
A better example would be Robert Smith and The Cure. Although he’s always recorded as The Cure, is there any question that Robert Smith is the band?
I agree with Allison’s thesis (in fact, I’ve been pushing this for so long and for so hard that I’ve got to think I’ve been an undue influence on Allison). Of course, there are exceptions, but I think the rule proves true the vast majority of the time.
Comment by BTD Greg — January 29, 2006 @ 10:35 pm
Yeah, Robert Smith is the Cure. Every band with a principal singer/songwriter frontman is defined by the frontman. Billy Corgan was Smashing Pumpkins, Eddie Vedder is Pearl Jam, Jeff Tweedy is Wilco, and Greg Wiggle is the Wiggles (okay, that might be debatable). But whether I would call a band a solo project of the frontman depends on how much the sound of the band is influenced by unique creative contributions by other band members. By this criterion the solo project label fits better on Corgan/Pumpkins and probably Smith/Cure than Tweedy/Wilco in my opinion. And because of discontinuity of band makeup the label fits better on Tweedy/Wilco than on Vedder/Pearl Jam.
By the way, I meant to say up-tempo instead of upbeat in my criticism of Tweedy’s vocals on Kicking Television.
Comment by Tom — January 30, 2006 @ 6:20 am
Allison: your theory mostly does not apply to rap music. Case in point, the Wu-Tang vs GZA or Inspectah Deck or Masta Killa or Ghostface…
You can keep Drag It Up, easily their worst album. I’ll stick with Wreck Your Life. But I think I may be the only one who thinks that WYL is their best. (Also, I have a pretty good (if I do say so myself) 2-disc comp I made of the Old 97’s, if anyone is interested in a trade.)
Solo Syd Barrett is better than Barrett-era Floyd, though I do like Piper
Wilco…[has] arguably surpassed Uncle Tupelo.
It’s a good thing the “arguably” was thrown in there, or else…
Tom: I have a few Wilco bootlegs from the pre-GiB era. They are significantly better than Kicking Television (except for tape quality). I’d be willing to trade, if you want.
Comment by Pris — January 30, 2006 @ 10:35 am
I’ll stick with Wreck Your Life. But I think I may be the only one who thinks that WYL is their best.
Actually, I think there are a lot of old-school fans that wouldn’t argue with you about that. It’s probably the fan favorite after Too Far to Care. Personally, I thought Drag It Up was a huge improvement over Satelite Rides and Fight Songs.
I also have a 2-disc Old 97s mix I burn semi-regularly. It would interesting to compare song selections.
Comment by BTD Greg — January 30, 2006 @ 10:48 am
Ho, ho, wait, back it up here. Eddie Vedder is by no means Pearl Jam. Take a look at their songwriting credits, it’s pretty evenly distributed between Eddie, Jeff and Stone. Even Matt Cameron and one of the previous drummers wrote songs.
Comment by Susan M — January 30, 2006 @ 11:30 am
I agree entirely that Pearl Jam’s sound depends heavily on creative contributions from the other members of the band. That’s why it can in no way be considered a Vedder solo project. But if Eddie Vedder left, Pearl Jam would end, whereas Pearl Jam could continue on if Gossard, McCready, or Ament had to be replaced; and they’ve already replaced the drummer three times (or twice?). So in that sense, I would say that Eddie Vedder is Pearl Jam in that without Vedder, Pearl Jam wouldn’t exist. It’s not like Van Halen or the Who where the frontman was expendible.
My point was that the Tweedy/Wilco relationship is more like Vedder/Pearl Jam than it is like Corgan/Pumpkins or Smith/The Cure.
Comment by Tom — January 30, 2006 @ 12:28 pm
Pris, I admit I’m woefully uneducated about rap music.
I don’t think Drag it Up was a bad album at all. They could have left “Coahuila” and “Bloomington” off, but for me it was gratifying to see Murry’s songwriting improve with Smokers, IMO his best yet, and there are several other winners on that album. As for their worst, I’m not very attached to Fight Songs, not that it was that bad, but it just doesn’t sound like they had much fun with that one. I’m fine with pop songs, but the dark humor and pathos of the other albums seems mostly missing from that one.
I do love Wreck Your Life, and I even think the version of “Big Brown Eyes” on that album is superior to the one on “Too Far to Care” — it rocks slightly less, but the vocals are so much more suitably wistful and heartfelt-sounding. (This is something Greg and I are in permanent disagreement over.) I also love “Doreen” (although I kind of miss the banjo on that one from Hitchhike to Rhome) and “Victoria.” My personal favorite, although really uneven and with bad vocals, is Hitchhike to Rhome.
Comment by Allison — January 30, 2006 @ 2:17 pm
Actually, I think Pearl Jam could continue just as easily without Vedder as it could Stone or Jeff, but I get what you’re saying. (I’d actually like them better without Eddie. I like their side project bands–Stone’s Brad and Matt’s Wellwater Conspiracy–as much if not more than PJ.)
Comment by Susan M — January 30, 2006 @ 2:27 pm
IMHO Eddie Vedder would not exist without Chris Cornell or the Mother Love Bone experience. And speaking of, is Chris Cornell just a wonder unto himself? Not a solo guy, but any band he amalgams into becomes him. Not complaining, mind you.
Im not arguing against Allisons thesis- she has a point, but I do want to second Susan about Peter Gabriel both solo and Genesis-era. Rollins alone doesn’t suck lemons. Paul Simon is a genius, and I’ll take Tigerlilly over 10000 M’s anyday.
What about Warren Zevon? Or Neil Young?
Comment by tracy m — January 30, 2006 @ 2:44 pm
Pris,
I’d definitely be interested in hearing those older Wilco shows. I really like Cline’s contributions on Kicking Television and I really like the AGiB material so It’ll be interesting to see if I agree with you that their older performances are better.
I couldn’t find contact info on your blogs so I’ll give you my info: tombo at jhu dot edu.
Comment by Tom — January 30, 2006 @ 4:08 pm
If anyone has ever been to a business meeting, you know committee decisions tend to be worst. Patnerships (pair) tend to be more sucessful, but in general individuals make better decisions. An individual probably takes more risk, which can result in greatness or worst faliure. take the Smiths last album - failure. take any Peter gabriel album - far surpasses anything Genesis did before or since. As for Rhett, Jon Brion has more talent than Genesis, the Smiths and the Old 97’s put together (not a dis at all). And I like the new album more. Live, it’s even better (band more talented) so don’t miss him when he comes to town. Best $15 you will ever spend. Plus he plays tons of Old 97 songs.
Comment by andy — April 17, 2006 @ 5:39 pm