I was going to have this blog entry all set up and ready for Saturday morning (19th January) as it was supposed to be the actual release date of the album, but for the second time this week, Thom Yorke has pulled the rug from the entirety of music journalism in the UK, maybe the world.
The eighth studio album from Radiohead - 'The King Of Limbs' is out now, 24 hours earlier than expected. It was announced Monday morning and caught a lot of music websites and publications out, as many thought it wouldnt be around untill the autumn.
But is this the best way to publicise a new record? Granted it certainly breaks from the traditional format of releasing a new album, where promo copies are sent to journalists about six - eight weeks ahead of scheduled release for review, the first single is normally sent to radio about four-five weeks before its release – usually a week prior to the album launch.
What a lot of artists have been doing recently is making their single / album launch an event – Lady Gaga, The Strokes and now Radiohead have recently released new material, often with different amounts of 'warning time'; The Strokes and Gaga gave a couple of weeks notice before their singles were heard on the radio (and available for download straight away), but Radiohead put a tweet out on the Monday before a Friday release.
In terms of PR, making a release into an event works well for the bigger artists and musicians to the point where they don’t need that much help from a major label, as often a lot of hype and online media attention is afforded to the bigger artists, because online it is seemingly important to have the information available to your readers first.
This week has seen Radiohead pose in front of a tree (named The King of Limbs, in Wiltshire’s Savernake Forest) that some fans have travelled to visit, in order to search for clues about the record, or maybe even some other reward.
Anyway, these are my thoughts, based on my first listen of ‘The King Of Limbs’:
Bloom
A distorted piano and drum loop, this isn’t going to be a traditional Radiohead track; instead it sounds like something that Burial or the upcoming James Blake has worked on. Yorke’s familiar vocal kicks in after a minute, as he sings “don’t blow your mind with wires” and later “televisiual bile” yet on the first listen it’s not possible to pick up exactly what’s going on.
Morning Mr Magpie
Straight in with a catchier loop, it’s beginning to look like this will sit closer to The Eraser (Thom Yorke’s solo record) The vocals are easier to interpret here - “Good morning Mr Magpie / How are we today? / Now you’ve stolen all the magic / Took my melody” and on surface level this seems to be about somebody (or something) who has stolen something, or possibly some kind of sample robbery.
Little By Little
Thankfully this isn’t an Oasis cover. It is more of a “Radiohead sounding song” (if that’s something you can ever quantify). The chorus stands out "Over and over / goodbye crew / Never let anyone from this mirror / get judged" (well at least that’s what I think the lyrics were on a first listen!)
Feral
The synthy-drumbeats are now seemingly a theme throughout this record; this is arguably the most avant-garde Radiohead album since Kid A. This is the shortest track on the album at a touch over three minutes, it doesn’t feel quite long enough to connect with yet.
Lotus Flower
I think this is meant to be the lead track (dare I say single? probably not!) from The King Of Limbs as there was a video released online shortly before the download was available. Yorke sings “There’s an empty space inside my heart / there’s the wings too / so that I set you free“ and this is possibly the bridge from last album In Rainbows, also my favourite track so far.
Codex
Slow piano intro, sounds almost space-like. “Sleight of hand / Jump off the end / into a clear lake / no one around”. This is more like the Radiohead that people will know, and would have fitted in nicely with tracks like 'I Will' or ‘Sail To The Moon’ from Hail To The Thief. At the end is some weird sampling, which flows directly into...
Give Up The Ghost
A track that opens with acoustic guitar which is instantly noticeable, as the rest has been mostly electronically made. The slower second half of this record is almost a contrast to the up-tempo way that this starts out and seems like almost its two EP’s put back to back, rather than an entire record.
Separator
We end with another catchy drum/synth loop, which in terms of style sits in-between the experimental first few tracks and the calmer tracks it follows. “If you think this over / Then you’re wrong” is the key refrain in this track, but what it means for anything (including the bands future) is anyone’s guess, and definitely up for speculation.
The King Of Limbs is not an easy first listen, but it does definitely have the potential to be a satisfying one. As (somewhat of) a music writer, the pressure to write about songs as they’re being heard is not something I’ve ever experienced before, and any proper reviews in the next 24-48 hours will be rushed attempts to pick apart the album and turn into a review in order to be amongst the first to get their words out into the public domain.
I understand that nobody wants to be seen to be left behind (especially in journalism) but the better reviews will be those that haven’t jumped straight in. I will try to come back in a week and re-read what I’ve written today, and see if I still agree with it. As Radiohead have proven, a week can be a long time in music.
Have you heard The King of Limbs yet - what do you think?
Paul
Friday, 18 February 2011
Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Brit Awards 2011
Last night (February 15th) was the Brit Awards. Supposedly the highlight of British musical calendar, it’s in the past been just an evening of celebratory back-slapping. But for 2011, the approach had changed.
This year, the Brits were “all about the music”. So much so, that any (and every) opportunity to praise British music was shamelessly taken, almost to the point where it seemed like a bit of an ‘in joke’ that only the attendees were privy to.
As much as I wanted him to fail miserably at this, James Corden actually put in a pretty good shift as compere for the evening. Pretty good in terms of fronting the Brits does not equate to award-winning presenting skills, but the ability to avoid being upstaged by other or being compared to Sam Fox and Mick Fleetwood.
After Peter Kay toiled last year, the producers clearly wanted a much safer, less edgy host and in Corden they seemed to have their man. Towards the tail end of the broadcast he did wobble on the tightrope by stroking Justin Bieber’s face, as well as appearing to go off-script in the second half of the show like a boxer told to just “go out and throw punches”. His introduction of Alan Carr as a man who had sold out a venue as large as the O2 (a feat he could only dream of) must have stung, yet somehow he kept it together.
In terms of performances, the Brits always offer diversity in pop music, as well as professionalism and family entertainment values. Take That opened the show by performing complete with dancers in riot police costumes armed with batons, who were given about an hour off before being going through a different routine with Plan B. I understand that a lot of record companies face financial struggles due to falling sales, but its nice to see artists collaborating to book the same props and backing dancers.
But for every energetic performance, there was one of singers just affixed to a point on stage (Mumford and Sons / Adele were the main offenders in this) and while it’s “all about the music”, a little theatrics goes a long way for these events.
Being asked to perform is almost a sure fire way to guarantee not going home empty handed, this year being no exception. All who performed picked up a gong of some kind, except for the curiously unlikable Paloma Faith whose duet with Cee Lo Green was thankfully moved to the end of the show in the hope that those watching at home had switched channels, and those in attendance had switched from wine to champagne.
Canadian band Arcade Fire (pictured at top) were amongst the biggest winners on the night, taking off with Best International Album and Best International Group; but along with Laura Marling (who surprised many by claiming the Best British Female award) their reception was limited to those who knew their work prior to the awards. Tinie Tempah also stepped into the commercially acceptable rap & hip hop slot left unattended by Dizzee Rascal, going home with Best British Male and Best Single for ‘Pass Out’.
For a ceremony all about the music, offering out awards to the likes of Mumford & Sons and Justin Beiber did detract from the validity of the evening, but the biggest problem with the Brit awards isn’t the music, it’s the manner in which the evening is stage managed almost to the point of stifling the fun out of proceedings.
The Brits are never going to be as slick or as sharp as their American counterparts in the Grammys, so next year, I’d personally like to see a ceremony with a little more edge to it. Because if there’s a little more excitement, then there’s a lot more talking points, because it seems that the main tabloid focus was that Cheryl Cole was at the ceremony; not to perform, but just to pass on Best International Female to her “girl crush” Rihanna, who should have been reminded that miming is an “all or nothing” performance ethic before she took to the stage.
But, it’s all about the music, right?
Paul
Saturday, 12 February 2011
Is the internet the right place to display University work?
After a conversation with one of my course mates earlier this evening about the fact that I had decided to upload some of my work into the public domain (through this blog) I’m starting to question the decision to do so.
At the time I uploaded the report because it was relevant to the news agenda of the day; The ICC had banned the three Pakistani cricketers at the centre of the ‘spot fixing' furore for spells of between five and ten years. The opportunity to express my opinion in such an academic format and ‘catch the eye’ of professionals in all industries, especially PR, seemed too good to miss.
The main rationale behind my decision to continue blogging is the hope that it makes me more employable; one of the biggest worries I currently have is that I won’t be able to find a job (other than shelf stacking in Tesco) after I leave Southampton Solent University in May / June.
But now the more I think about it (and I have thought about it, a lot) there’s huge potential for this to backfire massively. Even though I’m happy with the work - and the report plus its findings make perfect sense to me, it might not actually be that good academically; putting it online before receiving the marks is a massive personal gamble.
I’m due to receive feedback on Tuesday and I jokingly said to my friend that if the report was graded at a 2:2 standard (50-59%) or lower I would take it down in the seconds following the return of my work.
But what happens if I do get a 2:2? I will remove the post with the report embedded within, which will obviously mean a loss of face amongst anyone who reads this blog, or knows that I’ve hosted my work online.
Should I have waited to find out the marks? I understand that the internet (especially blogging) is still one of the best ways to display and promote creative work, but things are obviously different for more academic material and reports are not gifted the external subjectivity that music and the arts are.
I’d be very interested to see what others think. Students - would you ever display academic work online and what grade would you want to attain before doing so?
Paul
At the time I uploaded the report because it was relevant to the news agenda of the day; The ICC had banned the three Pakistani cricketers at the centre of the ‘spot fixing' furore for spells of between five and ten years. The opportunity to express my opinion in such an academic format and ‘catch the eye’ of professionals in all industries, especially PR, seemed too good to miss.
The main rationale behind my decision to continue blogging is the hope that it makes me more employable; one of the biggest worries I currently have is that I won’t be able to find a job (other than shelf stacking in Tesco) after I leave Southampton Solent University in May / June.
But now the more I think about it (and I have thought about it, a lot) there’s huge potential for this to backfire massively. Even though I’m happy with the work - and the report plus its findings make perfect sense to me, it might not actually be that good academically; putting it online before receiving the marks is a massive personal gamble.
I’m due to receive feedback on Tuesday and I jokingly said to my friend that if the report was graded at a 2:2 standard (50-59%) or lower I would take it down in the seconds following the return of my work.
But what happens if I do get a 2:2? I will remove the post with the report embedded within, which will obviously mean a loss of face amongst anyone who reads this blog, or knows that I’ve hosted my work online.
Should I have waited to find out the marks? I understand that the internet (especially blogging) is still one of the best ways to display and promote creative work, but things are obviously different for more academic material and reports are not gifted the external subjectivity that music and the arts are.
I’d be very interested to see what others think. Students - would you ever display academic work online and what grade would you want to attain before doing so?
Paul
Thursday, 10 February 2011
Dot Com
This is just a short update to let you all know that this blog now has a proper web address, instead of the old xxxx.blogspot.com malarky.
The website address is www.plusduckspeak.com
I've decided to upgrade to a .com address because its quicker to type, looks more professional and will hopefully increase my 'googleability' (if that isn't a word it should be).
Please continue to read this blog, and enjoy the rest of your day.
Paul
The website address is www.plusduckspeak.com
I've decided to upgrade to a .com address because its quicker to type, looks more professional and will hopefully increase my 'googleability' (if that isn't a word it should be).
Please continue to read this blog, and enjoy the rest of your day.
Paul
Monday, 7 February 2011
Super Bowl XLV
Last night (February 6th) was Super Bowl XLV (45) between the Pittsburgh Steelers and Green Bay Packers, in North Texas. As always, I stayed up late to watch the game, but this year was more special, because the team I support (Green Bay) had made the Super Bowl for the first time since 1998 and went on to win the Vince Lombardi trophy (pictured below, left-right, are Clay Matthews with Super Bowl MVP Aaron Rogers) by beating the Steelers 31-25 in what proved to be another close Super Bowl, which went right down to the wire.
The Super Bowl has always been essential watching in America (and increasingly so worldwide) so companies spend an incredible amount of money on adverts during the broadcast (a 30 second commercial could have cost up to $3million this year). Because of the high financial cost of advertising, there is immense pressure for ads to be memorable and I’ll reveal some of my favourites from this year’s batch later on.
Each year the NFL asks a popular musician or band to perform a 12-13 minute set during half time of the game, this year is the turn of American pop group The Black Eyed Peas. Here’s a handy YouTube video of their performance, followed by some opinions (mine) of their set.
Some notes from the Super Bowl XLV Halftime Show:
1. As halftime shows go, it wasn’t the best, but did have some good bits. As a tele-visual performance, it was well run and no wardrobe malfunctions (deliberate or otherwise) were had.
2. Some questionable costumes were featured in this performance. Examples being Will.I.Am’s whole ensemble (plastic haircut included in this) and his colleague’s glow-in-the-dark jacket were the worst offences, as well as all those who were forced to wear either a neon gimp suit or an Ikea box on their head (or in some cases, both).
3. The guest spots from Slash and Usher were a bit contrived, both were seemingly only there to pick up a hefty cheque / publicity for a short appearance. To his credit, Usher did dance, and jumped 6ft into the air and landed in a splits position, but Slash just stood there being stroked by singer Fergie like he was in a lap dance club.
4. The Black Eyed Peas do have some good ‘pop’ songs, which should have been sung in their original form, not altered to generate further publicity by having a cheeky dig (see 09:34 in the video) at Barack Obama’s plans for education in the United States. If you are going to change the lyrics to any song during a Super Bowl performance, then Christina Aguilera's lead should be followed (by changing / forgetting the words of the national anthem).
5. As point 1 states, this was not the best Super Bowl Half Time show, and next year I would like to see something totally different (Muse / Lady Gaga) or something out-and-out controversial (Kanye West).
Here are some of my favourite commercials featured in the Super Bowl broadcast. Feel free to watch these adverts, as I spent a good hour trawling through YouTube for them! My top 5 is as follows:
5. Doritos: House Sitting
4. Coca Cola: Border
3. Bud Light: Product Placement
2. Bridgestone: Carma
1. Volkswagen: The Force
I hope you enjoyed this blog post as much as I enjoyed Super Bowl XLV
Paul
The Super Bowl has always been essential watching in America (and increasingly so worldwide) so companies spend an incredible amount of money on adverts during the broadcast (a 30 second commercial could have cost up to $3million this year). Because of the high financial cost of advertising, there is immense pressure for ads to be memorable and I’ll reveal some of my favourites from this year’s batch later on.
Each year the NFL asks a popular musician or band to perform a 12-13 minute set during half time of the game, this year is the turn of American pop group The Black Eyed Peas. Here’s a handy YouTube video of their performance, followed by some opinions (mine) of their set.
Some notes from the Super Bowl XLV Halftime Show:
1. As halftime shows go, it wasn’t the best, but did have some good bits. As a tele-visual performance, it was well run and no wardrobe malfunctions (deliberate or otherwise) were had.
2. Some questionable costumes were featured in this performance. Examples being Will.I.Am’s whole ensemble (plastic haircut included in this) and his colleague’s glow-in-the-dark jacket were the worst offences, as well as all those who were forced to wear either a neon gimp suit or an Ikea box on their head (or in some cases, both).
3. The guest spots from Slash and Usher were a bit contrived, both were seemingly only there to pick up a hefty cheque / publicity for a short appearance. To his credit, Usher did dance, and jumped 6ft into the air and landed in a splits position, but Slash just stood there being stroked by singer Fergie like he was in a lap dance club.
4. The Black Eyed Peas do have some good ‘pop’ songs, which should have been sung in their original form, not altered to generate further publicity by having a cheeky dig (see 09:34 in the video) at Barack Obama’s plans for education in the United States. If you are going to change the lyrics to any song during a Super Bowl performance, then Christina Aguilera's lead should be followed (by changing / forgetting the words of the national anthem).
5. As point 1 states, this was not the best Super Bowl Half Time show, and next year I would like to see something totally different (Muse / Lady Gaga) or something out-and-out controversial (Kanye West).
Here are some of my favourite commercials featured in the Super Bowl broadcast. Feel free to watch these adverts, as I spent a good hour trawling through YouTube for them! My top 5 is as follows:
5. Doritos: House Sitting
4. Coca Cola: Border
3. Bud Light: Product Placement
2. Bridgestone: Carma
1. Volkswagen: The Force
I hope you enjoyed this blog post as much as I enjoyed Super Bowl XLV
Paul
Friday, 4 February 2011
Spot Fixing Verdict / Ethics Report
As the verdict of the ICC tribunal into the spot-fixing allegations by Pakistan cricketers Mohammad Amir, Mohammad Asif and Salman Butt has been announced today (February 5th 2011) this seems like a good enough time to go ahead with this blog entry.
It's been announced that all three players have been found guilty by the ICC and have recieved lengthy bans; Butt for ten years (with five suspended), Asif for seven years (with two suspended) and Amir for five years. The players also face corruption charges in the UK, with the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) claiming that they will seek to extradite the players if they do not come to the UK to answer the charges voluntarily.
For one of my university units (Ethics, Issues and Crisis Management) I had to write a 4,000 word research report on an organisation and investigate its approach to ethical issues and how it has developed its issue / crisis management strategy over time, as well as how they could potentially repair their reputation.
I chose to focus on the Pakistan Cricket Board, after members of the Pakistan Cricket team were alleged to have been caught 'spot fixing' in a test match against England in August 2010.
Back in January I hounded people to respond to a questionnaire I had posted online for the primary research section of this report. Thank you to all who took the time to complete it, it really means a lot!
This is the first time that I have made any of my university work available for public consumption; if it disappears in the next few days it will be because I'll have found out that making my work available in the public domain has breached some rule that Southampton Solent University has about this sort of thing.
I've been contemplating putting this report online for a few weeks now, but I wasn't sure if it is appropriate to do so, especially as it hasn't yet been formally marked by my lecturers.
I want to use this blog to promote myself as I search for a job in PR after I complete my degree in Public Relations and Communication at Southampton Solent Uni in June 2011, so putting my work online for potential employers to read seems like a logical decision. Plus I think that for the countless hours that I put into this report, having only three people reading it (myself and the two markers) would be a shame!
I have been advised by my lecturer to make clear that this work is my own and that it should not be re-used without permission.
Therefore this report may not be copied in part or in whole without prior permission, and if used in an academic capacity must clearly be cited properly using the author (Paul Taylor) as a reference. By reading either 1. This blog page or 2. Any section of the report, you (the reader) explicitly agree to abide by these terms.
Anyway, here is the report. If you are viewing this blog on a mobile device such as an iPhone please click the direct link to view in iBooks (or whatever the Android / Blackberry equivalent is).
Here are the appendices that don't appear in the embedded document.
Appendix E - Survey Monkey questionnaire on Spot Fixing . Please note that pages 35-37 are intentionally blank. Please don't fill out the questionnaire (I don't need any more responses)
Appendix K - ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel
(PDF)
Appendix L - ICC Anti Corruption Code for Players and Player Support Personnel
(PDF)
Appendix M - ECB Rules and Regulations (Web page)
Appendix N - Southampton Solent University Ethics form (Unavailable)
Appendix O - Blog post about Spot Fixing
Feel free to digest at your leisure, I hope you find it an informing read.
Paul
It's been announced that all three players have been found guilty by the ICC and have recieved lengthy bans; Butt for ten years (with five suspended), Asif for seven years (with two suspended) and Amir for five years. The players also face corruption charges in the UK, with the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) claiming that they will seek to extradite the players if they do not come to the UK to answer the charges voluntarily.
For one of my university units (Ethics, Issues and Crisis Management) I had to write a 4,000 word research report on an organisation and investigate its approach to ethical issues and how it has developed its issue / crisis management strategy over time, as well as how they could potentially repair their reputation.
I chose to focus on the Pakistan Cricket Board, after members of the Pakistan Cricket team were alleged to have been caught 'spot fixing' in a test match against England in August 2010.
Back in January I hounded people to respond to a questionnaire I had posted online for the primary research section of this report. Thank you to all who took the time to complete it, it really means a lot!
This is the first time that I have made any of my university work available for public consumption; if it disappears in the next few days it will be because I'll have found out that making my work available in the public domain has breached some rule that Southampton Solent University has about this sort of thing.
I've been contemplating putting this report online for a few weeks now, but I wasn't sure if it is appropriate to do so, especially as it hasn't yet been formally marked by my lecturers.
I want to use this blog to promote myself as I search for a job in PR after I complete my degree in Public Relations and Communication at Southampton Solent Uni in June 2011, so putting my work online for potential employers to read seems like a logical decision. Plus I think that for the countless hours that I put into this report, having only three people reading it (myself and the two markers) would be a shame!
I have been advised by my lecturer to make clear that this work is my own and that it should not be re-used without permission.
Therefore this report may not be copied in part or in whole without prior permission, and if used in an academic capacity must clearly be cited properly using the author (Paul Taylor) as a reference. By reading either 1. This blog page or 2. Any section of the report, you (the reader) explicitly agree to abide by these terms.
Anyway, here is the report. If you are viewing this blog on a mobile device such as an iPhone please click the direct link to view in iBooks (or whatever the Android / Blackberry equivalent is).
Here are the appendices that don't appear in the embedded document.
Appendix E - Survey Monkey questionnaire on Spot Fixing . Please note that pages 35-37 are intentionally blank. Please don't fill out the questionnaire (I don't need any more responses)
Appendix K - ICC Code of Conduct for Players and Player Support Personnel
(PDF)
Appendix L - ICC Anti Corruption Code for Players and Player Support Personnel
(PDF)
Appendix M - ECB Rules and Regulations (Web page)
Appendix N - Southampton Solent University Ethics form (Unavailable)
Appendix O - Blog post about Spot Fixing
Feel free to digest at your leisure, I hope you find it an informing read.
Paul
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)