[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

!!!LONG!!!: Double your pleasure with double a Sloan album (Barn



Hi friends,

Since I missed the conversation on "Should there be a Sloan double 
album or not?" (Gone home since last Thursday), I'd like to put in my 
$0.02, with compounded interest calculated daily...

The biggest reason I started chanting for a double album (apart from 
the fact that I'll welcome and cherish everything these guys put out, 
as long as they don't regress to sampling bodily noises over a Casio 
drum machine) is to get what I've been waiting for ever since I got 
into Sloan's music: a GaTeFoLd CoVeR!!! Imagine it, you receive your 
Sloan vinyl in the mail, two 12-inches, 74 minutes of music (which 
could fit on a single CD), and you open the cover to find... Lyrics? 
Liner notes? Or a really "fab" picture of the band? Of all the vinyls 
I have, gatefold covers are by far the coolest (well, the _double_ 
gatefolds are even more impressive!), and I was really disappointed 
when the Enclave didn't make use of all the extra cover art in the 
Canadian OCTA release (lyric sheet, picture of the boys in the living 
room, the four single shots, the faux record review describing them 
as "ORIGINAL") to package the vinyls of OCTA and the "Party 
Album" into a beautiful gatefold. Heck, all they would have to have 
done was to re-create the CD packaging for vinyl, if they were scared 
of spending $$$ for a cover designer!

True, Guns and Roses releases two albums simultaneously, "Use Your 
Illusion" I and II. However, each of these albums clocked in above 70 
minutes, and resulted in _four_, count 'em, four vinyls, inside two 
gatefolds jackets. I'd rather pay $29.99 for a double-length Sloan CD 
than $37.98 for two single Sloan CD's (and that would be at the sale 
price of $18.99 apiece at your local store). A single release 
(instead of two simultaneous releases) would mean less money spent by 
the consumer (The boys aren't getting less, just those middlemen upon 
middlemen who insist on sticking a price on their merchandise that is 
double what they paid for it in the first place... Put three in a row 
and you get the final product of $20 or so...)...

Remember what was said on the liner notes for OCTA? Sloan aren't a 
band to waste their written material, leaving songs behind. If they 
weren't to release everything they recorded with which they are 
satisfied in the space of a year (including that "One album, wait 
five months, then the other...") it would mean that either:

A) Sloan, as a band, is forced to "jet lag" their creativity onto 
disc by releasing stuff they recorded a year prior (ex: their 
feelings on the "Smeared" album I read in, was it "Vallium"? 
Paraphrase:"...'Smeared' was something we recorded 2 years before and 
just remixed. We have time to grow since then, and have continued to 
grow. That's why "Twice Removed" is so different." ...something like 
that. Having to release the extra material later would either cheat 
us of seeing Sloan evolve into being "the best Sloan there can be" or 
slow down the revelation of seeing your favorite band progress.

B) Sloan is forced to leave 7 to 9 songs in the can, opting to put 
them on CD singles or compilation albums... (Please, no!)

C) Sloan foresake their unspoken "Waste not, want not" credo, only 
releasing their favorite 11 to 12 songs. Where to choose? "Oh, let's 
put out more Patrick songs because he writes such catchy singles"... 
"Let's favor Andrew's songs, his are always so different and 
surprising, remember 400 metres?" ... "Jay's voice and production 
skills are sweeter than the others, and makes for good ear appeal" 
... "I always agree more with what Chris has to say, and his songs 
always rawk!!!" ... "Let's split it all equally, but that means my 
favorite among my songs is left off because the other three aren't 
hip to it." ... "Thank God we have no A&R men who make these 
decisions for us at board meetings..." The list goes on. 

D) Everyone puts out a solo 10" and CD single, each containing the 
"Four Songs Most Likely To End Up On Radio" plus all the remaining 
songs from your Favortie Sloan Member... KIDDING! S;^D

Thinking about the "bonus album" thing for a minute: If they were to 
design their new album like the American OCTA release (1 standard 
album with 1 bonus album), they could send a certain message to their 
loyal Canadian fans: "We're sorry for making you buy an extra copy of 
OCTA just to get the Party album, here's an extra album full of new 
material in return. We hope you like it.)

So, in all due respect, what I should have been chanting is:
GATEFOLD!
GATEFOLD!
GATEFOLD!

Then we could see a picture of the boys inside the album instead of 
on the cover (for the someone who mentioned that fact that they all 
appear on the cover of each longplayer). I just think that most 
people who've attempted a double album (whether LP or CD) have been 
blessed with added publicity _solely_ on the album length! (Smashing 
Pumpkins, Wilco, Phish, etc.) Couldn't Sloan do the same? Others 
produce epic-length single CD's, combined with Double LP (with 
gatefold!) releases: Oasis, Radiohead, Jimi Hendrix (okay, that 
doesn't count, those are from a long-gone legend), etc.

Working at the store, so far I've seen:

- Albums with a bonus disc going for anywhere from $19.99 (sale) to 
$29.99 (regular price)

- Double albums going from $25.99 (sale) to $35.99 (regular price)

- Double-length CD's (above 65 minutes) selling for sometimes even 
the same price as single-length CD's!

So, considering the fact that Sloan have only recorded 18 songs 
(meaning slightly over 70 minutes at best, judging from their 
previous albums), and don't sound like they'll be recording more 
(although I wish they would), I'd personally vote for a Double-length 
single CD release, with a Double-LP release (WITH a GATEFOLD! S:^) )

Unfortunately, there would be one ironic reality to face with a 
gatefold for their fourth album: Sloan would unintentionally be 
creating an extra link in the Sloan/Beatles chain, since the Beatles' 
fourth UK longplayer release was also their first gatefold ("Beatles 
for Sale", 1965.). Please, don't let that discourage the band. I 
don't think the comparisons between the two groups will ever get to 
the point that people start thinking clues to Chris Murphy's faked 
"death" are throughout the album covers and recordings of the band's 
later works...

Thought of the day (inspired by the "Seventh Day Rawk" comment): If 
God played guitar, he'd most likely have one of those multi-necked 
guitars that Jimmy Page used to play onstage, each one reproducing 
key sounds: A Rickenbacker 12" electric, a Fender Strat, a Gibson Les 
Paul, and an electric Lute, just to be different. 

Bitchin' (feel free to ignore): In the past 10 days, I've received 
mail saying I personally was to _blame_ for all the extra mail that's 
been travelling on Sloannet as well as mail _thanking_ someone else 
for his ability to get everyone to start posting again. Somehow, I 
think someone has their lines crossed on this one. Cheers to Mike 
Catano for posting a topic to which many chose to respond, the golden 
raspberry to those insisting I have no place on this mailing list 
because my letters are of _no_ _value_ _whatsoever_ and 
that I cannot write anything _interesting_ (Maybe if I just said the 
word sh*t 25 times in separate parts of a phrase, I'd be more 
interesting.), and a word: 

_To_ _all_ _of_ _you_ _who_ _sent_ _a_ _post_ _on_ _Sloannet_ _in_ 
_the_ _past_ _month_: Thank *_YOU_* for making Sloannet a more 
interesting mailing list to be a part of, and let's all try to be 
more considerate towards others when posting something on this list 
(I know, I know, this post is quite long, but don't say I didn't warn 
you, and besides, I have a week of messages to deal with here. Of 
course there's more to say.). Before posting, _you_ know what _you_ 
want to see on Sloannet, and if you didn't appreciate someone else 
posting something similar to what you're posting, think twice before 
sending it publicly. To face the other side of the coin, no one has 
ever been killed by using a Delete key. We all like the same music, 
our reasons to be on this list are quite similar (if not identical), 
therefore let's try to make Sloannet as much fun a place as possible 
without hurting anyone in the process. 

Alas,
Glen (aka Barney Rubble)