video review: 'tattoos' by jason derulo

Damn, it's late. Had to rerender and reupload after I left one of my audio cues at the beginning of the video, and now I'm exhausted. But at least it's here, and I stand by the fact that this might be one of my better ones.

And now the rest of the week will be absolutely nuts. First up is Jessie J. Stay tuned, folks!

album review: 'tattoos' by jason derulo

The year is 2009, and you're a record executive, and you're staring down at your newspaper with pictures of Rihanna's bloodied and bruised face. You later get confirmation in the day that said injuries were caused by Chris Brown, who is facing charges. You also hear through the industry grapevine that Jay-Z is infuriated by the attack on an artist he discovered and helped turn into a pop star, and has vowed to quietly torpedo Chris Brown's career, at least ensuring his new album Graffiti flops and flops hard. What do you do?

Well, in this case, you would immediately start searching for new artists to fill the niche that Chris Brown did, and you'll grab anyone who can possibly hit a note or who can dance. And that is why, throughout 2009 and 2010, we saw a surge in pop/R&B acts looking to take over Chris Brown's shoes - and there were lots of them. Taio Cruz, Jay Sean, Iyaz, Trey Songz, might as well throw Jeremih into the mix as well. And to top it all off, we have the artist who we're going to talk about today, a young man named Jason Derulo.

Now I have to be honest: throughout the summer of 2010, I really liked this guy. I have his album. By no means I thought he was a great pop star, but he had a ton of energy, he seemed genuine, and his beats (courtesy of oversampling hack JR Rotem) tended to be pretty decent. But my liking for the guy faded in record time when I started taking a look at the lyrics, and I started noticing the fact that Jason Derulo can only really sing with autotune, and that he shouts out his name at the start of every single song. In my eyes, he very quickly went from a pop star I could say I liked to one I definitely said I loathed. To me, the second album struck as the low point, with Jason Derulo hitching his fortunes to the dying club boom and his opening single 'Don't Wanna Go Home' being a nauseating open theft from multiple songs I really liked. 'Don't Wanna Go Home' ended up topping my list of the worst hit songs of 2011 (yes, even beating out LMFAO's 'Sexy And I Know It'), and to this day, I don't think I can ever forgive Derulo for it. 

But let's try to be fair here, because for some reason, Jason Derulo is still around, and to my absolute bewilderment, he's achieved some degree of chart success. To me, it's rather reminiscent of the success Flo Rida has achieved, as Jason Derulo is very much an 'anonymous' pop/R&B star: a guy who is going to have multiple charting hits, but nobody is going to know or care about him among his peers because he has so little distinctive personality. As I said, there's a reason he shouts out his name at the beginning of every song - because, in the case of the majority of audiences, you would have no idea who this guy is otherwise. And just because he has made songs I hate doesn't mean, like Flo Rida, he can't make songs I like: Flo Rida made 'I Cry', and Jason Derulo made 'Love Hangover', so there is a chance for improvement here.

And that's ultimately the reason I chose to shove back my nascent contempt for this fellow and give him another chance. Could I potentially recapture some of the positive feelings I had for Jason Derulo back in 2010?

video review: 'off the beaten path' by justin moore

So even though this post is several hours later, I've already managed to get flames and threats. Fun stuff. 

But yeah, this album is complete crap and should be avoided like the plague. No recommendations from me here. Can't say I've got a recommendation for the album that comes out next either. Want to know what that is? Stay tuned!

album review: 'off the beaten path' by justin moore

Let's talk about pandering in art.

Now, as somebody who listens to music that is shamelessly commercial and designed to appeal to certain demographics, I'm very much familiar to acts attempting to pander or cater to their unique fanbase, who will inevitably lap up whatever they put out. Now, I'll admit that part of this is a testament to the feedback relationship between artists and their fans, which has only intensified with the rise of the internet, as pop stars and musicians seek the approval of their fans and vice-versa. And before you know it, you get diehard fanbases who completely subsume to the artist's point-of-view, regardless of common sense or any form of sane criticism.

But there's a nastier version of this, and that's not just in the pandering towards the fans themselves, but towards their lifestyle and ideology. This is when some acts will make art designed to reinforce the fan's personal beliefs and preferences, make them feel justified in their lifestyle choices. And here's where I have to be brutally honest: we all have favourite acts in this category, the acts that don't really challenge us, but produce art that seems specifically designed to reward us for caring all the same. Hell, The Backstreet Boys made one of their greatest hits off of this premise with 'Larger Than Life', which was a song that spelled out that feedback relationship between fan and artist in explicit terms.

And look, art designed with fans in mind isn't always the healthiest - it's the equivalent of musical comfort food - but it doesn't mean this sort of material has to be harmful, as long as said fans keep their critical faculties engaged and are aware of the messages behind said art. It's not exactly a natural response, but then again, engagement with art isn't always designed to be easy - hell, some would make the argument that art that is challenging to engage with is the best kind of art, as those added hurdles on your part push you closer towards the artist's headspace.

But too often, that critical faculty gets shut off, and you get legions of Beliebers and Directioners and Juggalos, people who will say and do insane things because the artists have cultivated a fandom that reinforces their decisions, good or bad, so long as it supports the artist in question. And when you start including this sort of pandering towards lifestyle choices or ideology or political beliefs, elements that have a real impact on people's lives, you're treading in questionable territory, and if the artist isn't conscientious of that fact, things can get even worse. Or, to put it another way, there's a reason Eminem wrote songs like 'Role Model' and 'Who Knew' and 'Sing For The Moment' - he knew people empathized with the anger and fear and real emotion in his music, and in songs like 'Stan', he revealed his fear that his art could be used to justify dangerous lifestyles. 

But then you have artists who don't nearly care as much, or whom actively seem to want to encourage people to buy into their music, or whom are too lazy or stupid to notice the potential consequences of their art - and with that, we finally come to Justin Moore.

For those of you who are unfamiliar, Justin Moore is one of the most rancid and terrible country acts working today, and if Kacey Musgraves represents everything right with modern country, Justin Moore represents everything toxic and wrong. Not only is his instrumentation completely devoid of texture and flavour and his vocals make my skin crawl, but the premise of his material is centered around pandering to his country demographic. And it's not just directed at his fans, but at his fans' lifestyles, ideology, and political beliefs, music that seems clinically designed to reinforce the worst possible impulses of his fanbase. Songs like 'Bait A Hook' and 'This Is NRA Country' are tracks that are explicitly aiming to cultivate the sort of backwards, contemptible, anti-intellectual horse manure that plays to the FOX-News watching, Limbaugh-listening, Obama-hating types, all mixed with a heavy dose of masculine swagger and privilege that should have died decades ago. 

And you know, I'm not one to attack art for its subject matter - except when there isn't a shred of authenticity in Justin Moore's delivery or presentation. It's too clean, it's too polished, there isn't a shred of humour or real feeling here besides smug, stupid obnoxiousness. Let's throw up a comparison with The Zac Brown Band, an act that has their fair amount of southern pride as well, but it's clear from the rich texture in their vocals and instrumentation, and the emotional heart in which they sell their material that it's at least coming from somewhere real. In contrast, if it wasn't for the accent and the grating oversinging, Justin Moore would come across as a shill.

But I'm willing - for some ungodly reason - to give this guy another chance. After all, people can change and grow and given that he didn't write quite as many songs on his new album, maybe the Nashville machine managed to strip away enough of the elements I found reprehensible. So, with that in mind, what do I think of Justin Moore's new album, Off The Beaten Path?

video review: 'a.m.' by chris young

So, new camera. I have to be honest, I'm still trying to get a handle on it with focusing and lighting, but it's a good set-up (and hopefully one I won't have to sink much more cash into).

As it is, I dug this album. Certainly a lot more than the other two disasters I listened through today... oh yeah, the storm's coming.

Stay tuned!

album review 'a.m.' by chris young

I've written a number of times about how modern country music, particularly that which has had some appeal to the mainstream, has lost something of its edge and texture in favour of catering to a larger audience. Now, I've reviewed a few of these acts who have either gone straight towards pop country (this is your Keith Urban or Taylor Swift) or towards what's been branded 'bro-country' (this would be your Luke Bryan and Billy Curringnton, for example). Now what needs to be stressed is that, in country music, this shift towards the mainstream has happened a few times before - it happened in the 80s, it happened in a big way in the 90s (although there were a lot more factors in that particular shift, given the rise of alternative rock and Garth Brooks) - and it's happening again today.

And at each point in these shifts towards popularity and a subsequent loss of culture, there has been pushback in the form of what some have deemed 'neotraditionalist country'. This is country music that harkens back to the bluegrass and traditional country of the 50s and 60s, and there have been some highly successful acts who have led the charge here, like Alan Jackson, George Strait, Randy Travis, Tracy Byrd, and (to a much lesser extent) Vince Gill. Now as somebody who likes country on both sides, both moving towards the mainstream and those who would prefer to maintain the homegrown culture of the past, I can see both positives and negatives in the neotraditionalist country movement. After all, it's a good thing to know your history, and I certainly prefer this sort of culturally-minded country music compared to the offensive pandering put forward by the Nashville album-producing machine. That being said, if you stay too close to the well of the music of the past without innovation, you can occasionally run into stagnation. Fortunately, this hasn't happened (a big sigh of relief from me), and thus, it goes without saying that I'm fond of the neotraditionalist country movement. 

But for a while, I was starting to get concerned that there wouldn't be that push back in country music against the mainstream that would achieve sort of success. Would I be forced to retreat into alternative country or outlaw country to find any country music with texture and culture and quality anymore?

Fortunately, outside of the mainstay stalwarts, we do have a newer country act who's willing to bear the torch of neotraditionalist country music, and he comes from an unlikely source: Chris Young. For those of you who don't know, Chris Young started his career quite young when he was encouraged to try out for Nashville Star, a country-oriented version of American Idol. And when he won, it'd be the reasonable assumption this guy would immediately start making the sort of polished pop country that gets popular...

And that didn't happen. Chris Young pulled something of a 'Kelly Clarkson' in the country music scene and began working to take control of his own career, particularly in songwriting and artistic direction. It definitely helped matters that Chris Young has a great voice that is born to sing traditional country music: rich, powerful, impressively deep, and loaded with heartfelt emotion. And after several assorted successes (including several number one songs and the critical hit 'Gettin' You Home'), he's finally come roaring back with his new album A.M. this year. So, how did it turn out?

video review: 'dream river' by bill callahan

Jesus Christ, this took way too long to upload. The internet has been terrible all evening, but finally I got it up and working in order to get this review up. Honestly, I'm kind of really happy with this review - it's more free-form than ever, and I'd like to think that there's some decent emotion here too. And for good reason, because Dream River is incredible.

Returning to country tomorrow, stay tuned.

album review: 'dream river' by bill callahan

You know, I can't believe I'm saying this, but here it is: I think I might be softening my opinion on white guys with acoustic guitars.

I know. Believe me, I'm as shocked as you guys inevitably are. But really, it's not quite as simple as my tastes changing but more in line with a hunt for something I've had some trouble finding in music: texture. Keep in mind this isn't a reflexive hatred of pop music either, even though pop can have some of the least amounts of texture in music as a genre, but rather a search for music that has feeling and is organic and comes from a place of real emotion and depth. And while I doubt I'll ever have enough passion for acoustic music that I'll teach myself guitar or something, I have realized that more instrumental texture tends to survive the sanding process of the music industry if one goes to the independent scene. 

Because when it comes down to it, I'm a guy who cherishes honest emotions and well-written songs rooted in those emotions. That's one reason I tend to like country and folk over the general 'acoustic' scene - if you're just writing songs to pick up chicks and get laid, you're going to be dismissed as a hapless novice by songwriters who have a real story to tell. And if said stories can be paired with rich, gripping instrumentation that deftly accents and emphasizes the elements of the story... well, that's ultimately where I find plenty of my favourite songs from acts like Bob Dylan and Nick Cave and Richard Thompson and others. 

So with that in mind, let's talk about Bill Callahan.

Now for those of you who don't know, Bill Callahan has been around the edges of the indie acoustic scene since the 90s, often performing under the name of Smog. Only in recent years has he chosen to perform under his own name and release a series of critically acclaimed albums steeped in folk and Americana. So, as somebody who likes both genres and who was seeking some great instrumental texture from a man who has spent over 20 years making music, I was interested to see how his new album Dream River turned out. And...

video review: 'we are tonight' by billy currington

Geez, the white balance on that video didn't go well at all. Ah well, it happens. Think the video looks halfway decent, though.

Might take a break between the country reviews and go for the Bill Callahan album, though. Stay tuned!

album review: 'we are tonight' by billy currington

Here's something about modern music that the majority of you know: there are a lot of singers and musicians who do not write their own songs. In some cases, they might be the primary songwriter or they might compose the lyrics, but they typically have somebody helping them with the melody line or the instrumentation or other elements of the song. It takes a supremely gifted songwriter who is able to compose every single element of the song, and particularly in pop music, you don't see them as often anymore. It's not often you find guys like Prince or Beck, for example.

However, you used to see singer-songwriters a lot more in country music, and one of the big frustrations of the movement of modern country towards the mainstream is the fact that most country artists don't write their own songs in the same way anymore. With the rise of Garth Brooks, there are some country musicians who don't even write any of their own material, simply relying on the Nashville country song generating machine to crank out song after song. And I realize this isn't exactly a new thing, but it is something that frustrates me as a critic, because certain songs can lose something when you know in your mind that these songs don't have that direct, intimate connection with the singer in the same way.

That being said, I'm not exactly about to condemn the practice of other people writing musicians' songs for them - some people aren't good songwriters, it happens, and thus the job of the singer and performer changes - it's now to sell us the song, to make it their own not through composition, but through their delivery. I know that Garth Brooks didn't write 'The Dance', but his delivery is so damn good on that song that you can associate it with him forever in your mind. It transcends the fact that he didn't write the song and he makes it his own in a big way. And that's one of the big reasons when I look at pop music and country music that I don't mind the fact that producer-songwriters like Max Martin and Dr. Luke exist - in the best cases, I don't associate Max Martin with 'I Want It That Way' or 'Since U Been Gone', I associate those songs with the acts that made them real, The Backstreet Boys and Kelly Clarkson.

But even with all of that in mind, a big warning light tends to go off in my mind when I hear that a guy who used to write the majority of his own material is now only performing songs written by other people, which is the case of the new album by Billy Currington We Are Tonight. Now for those of you who are having trouble telling the various modern male country acts apart, Billy Currington has been, in my mind, one of the better ones, mostly because he's something of a traditionalist, harkening back to the country of guys like Alan Jackson and Tim McGraw and Brooks & Dunn. It also helps a little that this guy is a little older and isn't exactly a great singer, relying more on soul and honest delivery. If I'm going to describe his vocals on previous albums, he's got something of a 'hangdog' style of delivery - not exactly polished in the vein of a singer like Keith Urban, but having the same sort of honest likability. Unfortunately, it's a bit hard to tell if some of that likability is an act, given that he's currently facing charges linked to his poor response to a tour boat buzzing his island home (he got in his own boat and chased away the tour boat rather recklessly - might be the reason all of his marketing for this album vanished). Despite that uncomfortable incident, I was looking forward to his newest album, even though, as I mentioned, he didn't write or contribute to any of the songs on his album. So, how did it go?

video review: 'mgmt' by mgmt

Yeah, I suspect that many people will likely take issue with this particular review, but I stand by it. 

Now comes the influx of country reviews - three coming up over the next few days while I work to get through Manic Street Preachers' discography in preparation for that album. Stay tuned!

album review: 'mgmt' by mgmt

You know, psychedelic rock might be one of the most frustrating genres of music I've ever encountered, at least on the level of songwriting.

Keep in mind this is speaking as a fan of psychedelic rock - as anyone who saw my Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros review can testify, I'm a sucker for 'old hippie rock' and those attempting to emulate it (even if they don't completely manage to recapture it). And bands that dive straight into the weird, acid-tinged swirl of psychedelia often create some indelible imagery and powerful songs to support it. The Flaming Lips are often the band I'll point to who have managed to capture the raw insanity that birthed psychedelic rock in the mainstream today, and one of the reasons that particular band is so damn good is that they managed to capture more than just the flash of acid hallucinations, but the fragments of deeper meaning lurking behind said illusions, which they then fused together into compelling wholes. 

But here's my big issue with the themes and bands often present in this genre: they either go for complete, uncompromising sincerity towards light or darkness (like Edward Sharpe or, if we're going over to the progressive side, acts like The Flower Kings) or they flip the script, using upbeat psychedelia to contrast with twisted, grotesque imagery or incredibly dark lyrics. It's a rictus grin, a painted smile used to conceal the horrors beneath. Instead of the acid high, it's the acid freakout. The really frustrating fact is that the majority of psychedelic rock is lodged within one of these two camps and nowhere else, with the latter growing more and more popular today in this age of increased irony and general cynicism, particularly for the hippie ideal. And as I have mentioned before, I don't respond as well to bands playing that dichotomy, because I feel a certain purity of theme is lost. Yes, psychedelic rock can plunge into darkness (The Flaming Lips proved that this year with The Terror, one of the best albums of the year and one that scares the crap out of me), but when bands seek to play the dichotomy, I can't help but lose a certain deeper connection to the material in a lot of cases, most of the time because too many of the bands seem entirely too self-satisfied with coming up with the idea.

So let's talk about MGMT, a neo-psychedelic indie rock act that amassed a certain amount of critical acclaim by playing that dichotomy very well - and yet one with which I cannot really feel a connection. Now, let me make it clear that I don't think either of their first two albums are bad (Oracular Spectacular is better than Congratulations, though), but I have a hard time truly getting invested in them because the band is very much enamored with the concept of exploring, taking upbeat melodies and delivery and fusing it with some pretty dark lyrics all things considered, with the glaring contrast being one of the grandest selling points of the album. It doesn't help that it's very clear their albums are draped of layers of irony and sarcasm which makes any shred of authenticity very hard to find in the whole experience - which I suspect is part of the point, but it really doesn't resonate with me. 

However, I'm not entirely sure that MGMT plays to their strengths as much as they should. Their first album gained a lot of press and acclaim due to their fusion of psychedelic indie rock with complex and yet catchy rhythms that had a striking amount of populist appeal - so when the band made a left turn into art rock with their second album, they alienated a lot of fans. For me, that wasn't quite the issue, as it basically felt like a less catchy, more backwards-looking version of their first album, returning frequently to the fount of late 60s and early 70s psychedelia and prog rock and not doing a lot beyond that, particularly lyrically. That being said, as a fan of progressive rock, I can say that MGMT's attempts here are well-intentioned, but more than a little overstuffed, and their better tracks are their simpler experiments.

So, with all of that in mind, did MGMT manage to make something that I found compelling on their third swing, with a self-titled album three into their career (something I always take issue with, by the way)?

video review: 'after the fact' by lmno ft. evidence

Well, I'm not the biggest fan of this review, but that's mostly because I'm working to transition from a more heavily scripted review to something a little more free-form, and I'm not quite sure I've gotten there yet. Plus, it's a great album and thus I don't have a lot to really complain about.

So, the next wave of September albums is about to crest upon me, with MGMT, Justin Moore, Billy Currington, and Chris Young. Also, I need to do some serious catchup on my Dream Theater before that album drops... these next few weeks are going to be goddamn nuts...

album review: 'after the fact' by lmno ft. evidence

Some of you who have been following my reviews are probably wondering why, in comparison with most music critics, I don't tend to cover a huge amount of hip-hop or rap music, that outside of the major releases (and sometimes not even including those), I don't tend to hit up every single mixtape or underground album that gets dropped. 

And believe it or not, I do have a reason for this: I simply do not have time. I'm serious here - given than I want to cover other genres besides hip-hop or rap, I simply do not have time to cover everything that gets dropped. If I chose to dedicate myself to just covering hip-hop or rap I'd have a better chance of tackling most things, but I bet I'd still be utterly swamped.

But here's the other, unfortunate fact, and that is that I'm kind of getting tired of the direction that modern rap is taking. I've mentioned in previous videos that I don't think trap instrumentation is a good fit for modern rap music, how the dour, humourless, often creepy beats are a bad tonal fit for brag rapping, and much to my frustration, they don't really seem to be going away. And sure, while the retro direction Eminem appears to be going in looking intriguing and I'm cautiously optimistic, I'm also aware that The Marshall Mathers LP II will likely never live up to the high, high expectations Eminem is trying to create.

So perhaps it was the best possible time for me to go back to the underground and check out the newest album from LMNO, a very prolific white rapper from Long Beach signed to Up Above Records from the hip-hop crew the Visionaries. LMNO has been around since the mid-90s, and he has released a ton of material over the past several years, particularly in 2010 where he dropped ten albums. And while I highly doubt all ten of the albums were solid, it does point to a rapper who has a lot of experience and who has refined his flow into something truly potent. So, teaming up with producer Evidence (from Dilated Peoples), he released After The Fact this year after taking 2012 off, and on a recommendation, I decided to take a look. So what do I think?

video review: 'echo bench' by echo bench

Hmm, surprised how well this turned out. I talk about the newest Echo Bench album and address a few criticisms from previous videos. Outside of my reviews, I've been working to catch up on MGMT and am working on bringing together my opinion on LMNO's new album. 

Third wave of albums is coming up, so it's going to get crazy here in a few days.

album review: 'echo bench' by echo bench

I'd like to start this review with a necessary clarification that I really didn't was necessary until fairly recently, specifically in some of the comments that were posted on certain videos. This is not a response to these comments and I won't be naming any names, but I do feel I need to get something off my chest before I get into the meat of this review.

And here it is: one of the big reasons that my reviews are so long in comparison with others is that I want to ensure that people going through them are completely informed regarding my state of mind before I dive into what I like and dislike about music. I want all of my cards to be on the table in full view, and since I prize honesty, I want to make sure that you're aware of all of the factors that could influence my opinion, one way or another. 

Now this has led to a criticism I didn't really expect: the comment that since I went into said reviews with expectations, I was thus unfair to the artists in question. And there's a simple response to this: yes, I did go in with ideas and potentially even expectations regarding what said albums might entail - I'm a human being, and it would be intellectually and emotionally dishonest for me to curtail those expectations and not speak without a fully informed opinion that is uniquely my own. 

That being said, there is a marked difference between expectations and keeping an open mind, and this is where I feel the majority of said comments missed the point. Sure, I might have gone in with expectations, but I was open and willing to believe that I might be wrong in some capacity. I never go into reviews 'wanting to hate' something - if anything, I want to be proven wrong, I want the artist to step up and smash all of my preconceived opinions about their work. Is it the artist's job to prove themselves to me exclusively? Well, of course not, but it is the artist's job to make art that is compelling or is informed by some purpose, and it's my job as a critic to interpret that purpose and pass judgement on whether it works or not. And thus, when it comes to every act, be it country or hip-hop or metal or indie rock or even the shallowest of pop and EDM, I try to keep an open mind and try to understand their appeal. And while I might have creeping feelings of dread opening up some albums, I'm always willing to give them a fair shot, and i'm constantly seeking to improve my knowledge of acts so I can make my judgments fairly.

And yet, I'm going to get excited about some albums, and I'm going to dread reviewing others. I'm not going to stop having expectations, because said expectations inform my opinions and thus my reviews. And since I am an optimist, I will reaffirm my commitment to go into albums with hopes for the best. And so when I got a copy of the debut self-titled album from all-female post-punk trio Echo Bench and was informed they were reminiscent of acts like Savages (who I reviewed very highly earlier this year) and Joy Division, I was excited. I made sure to temper my excitement with some measured forethought - indie rock debuts are tricky things, and the high, high standard Savages set should definitely not be the same for every act in their vein - but I was excited and intrigued just the same. So, how does the Echo Bench album turn out?

video review: 'true' by avicii

So here's the final video in the second wave of albums from September. I'm going to spend my weekend catching up on a few other little things that shouldn't take long to review - or at least I hope they don't - before the deluge gets altogether too huge (which starts at around September 17 with a trio of country albums that I'm likely going to have a hard time telling apart - joy).

Stay tuned!

album review: 'true' by avicii

There are certain acts to which I don't feel qualified in reviewing, often for a number of reasons. I don't touch classical music or jazz mostly because I'm largely unfamiliar with the genres and I don't feel remotely qualified to talk about them. Similarly, there are whole swathes of heavy metal that I would like to review, but I just haven't had the chance to become familiar enough with the best and worst of the genre to speak definitively on the subject. Sure, I'm working my ass off to catch up, but until then, I don't think I'm the best reviewer to speak to, say, the new Motorhead or Carcass albums (Motorhead more because I'm not as familiar with their discography as I'd like to be), or that Deafheaven album that came out earlier this year and has received a ton of critical acclaim. And of course there are genres like metalcore and electrocore of which I've listened to a fair bit and thus cannot be remotely objective when talking about these acts (it's a hatred thing).

And for a long time, one of those genres I hesitated to talk about was EDM, partially because I felt I wasn't familiar enough with the genre, partially because I didn't particularly like most of what I had heard, and partially because, as a critic, I tend to spend a fair amount of time analyzing lyrics - I'm a published author, that's one of my big strengths. And since most trance and house and EDM don't have lyrics, I find myself guessing more than I'd like when I review those albums, because the review is less based on solid content and more based upon mood and emotion. And thus, there'd be a limit to how much analysis I'd be able to provide when reviewing the act.

But as of recently, there's been something of a shift, mostly due to EDM-inspired music moving more towards the mainstream, with the success of acts like Zedd and Swedish House Mafia and David Guetta and Calvin Harris. What I find as a significant relief is that a lot of this music has vocals and lyrics - often not very well written lyrics, but they are there in order to better court the mainstream. 

And thus, when I heard about Swedish DJ Avicii's debut album not only containing vocals and lyrics, but also an exploration of folk and country, I was seriously psyched. Not only would I have some lyrics to examine, I'm also significantly more familiar with folk and especially country music. For once, I felt that there was an EDM album that fit within my area of expertise, and I was really looking forward to reviewing Avicii's TRUE. So, what did I find?

video review: 'back 2 life' by sean kingston

I feel like I'm the only guy who bothered to review Sean Kingston, but here it is anyways. What's more annoying is that I'm not satisfied with how the lighting is working out. Sure, it's brighter, but it's inconsistent between videos, and I'm starting to think it's an issue with my webcam.

Ugh. Guess it's getting close to that time when I actually have to invest money in a good camera.

album review: 'back 2 life' by sean kingston

There are some performers that you can look at once and immediately know that they're going to be a pop smash hit - and sometimes, it doesn't even rely on their music. They have the look and sound and natural charisma and you just know in your gut that on image alone, there is serious potential for them to become huge. The great producer songwriters have a knack for spotting these types and then giving them everything they need to become chart smash hits, whether it is songs or enormous overproduction to overlook the fact that they can barely hit a note - they smell money, and they're going to make a killing.

With all of that in mind, Sean Kingston does not seem to fit that mold - at all. Not to be offensive, but the fellow kind of looked a bit like a doofus back when debuted with his self-titled album in 2007, and he just seemed to have some of that wide-eyed naivete that didn't exactly strike me as the look of a professional. Now there was a reason for that - he made those first two albums when he was a teenager, and it shows - but he seemed like the kind of performer who was very much aware of the fact that he didn't quite belong in the pop landscape, and was just riding out his time in the spotlight for as long as he could.

And really, that was kind of a shame, because he wasn't a bad performer, particularly for his age (his first album came out in 2007 when he was seventeen, when he was my age). He had a distinctive voice and some occasionally interesting (if amateurishly written) songs. Furthermore, he brought a welcome touch of reggae to the mid-to-late years of the first decade of the 2000s that I definitely appreciated - it gave him some personality and helped him stand out. Yes, most of his songs had the reek of JR Rotem behind them, but I thought that with time, he might be able to transition into at least a successful reggae act, if not a pop star in his own right. But after his second album didn't sell all that well, Sean Kingston seemed to vanish from the public eye for a good four years, with only occasional public appearances (most in Africa), a series of mixtapes that nobody cared about, and a pretty traumatic jet-skiing accident (he made a full recovery) to mark his time out of the spotlight. 

But now he's back with a new album Back 2 Life, heralding his return to the spotlight once again. Did he put those four years off to good use and have something great for us?