Eisley - Currents (2013)

Sometimes it's incredible to think that Eisley has been around as long as they have, considering that in terms of full-length studio albums, this is only their 4th.  Granted, there have been some problems with their former label (well documented elsewhere), and some relationship/marital problems were a roadblock between 2007's "Combinations" and 2011's excellent "The Valley".  True, the band was busy in the interim, with an EP release, touring, and so forth, but personal struggles and issues definitely got in the way.  And in some ways, I'm not sure that a new Eisley album each year would be something I'd want.  Some bands (depending on the depth of their material or the style they play) can release a new CD each year and audiences will eat it up.  But for a group like Eisley, despite the general immediacy of their music, each record requires multiple listens and time to let it "sink in" to truly appreciate what they're doing.

Such is especially the case with the band's most recent output, the appropriately titled "Currents".  The album follows an "ebb and flow" (sorry, couldn't resist) feel that centers around water as a metaphor of life and how it moves and changes.  While "Currents" may not be thematically cohesive enough to call a concept album, it's certainly more dense than previous works and has less immediacy in the material, requiring several listens to begin to understand the album.  Sure, the lead-off title track has a hooky chorus and the band's usual buoyant melodic sense, but the initial tone of the album is darker, even, than "The Valley" and may throw some listeners for a loop if they were expecting "The Valley" mark 2.  Ultimately, I think this works in the album's favor, because repeated listens will reveal the beauty within.

Instrumentally, Eisley is excellent as usual.  Guitar is a bit less a focus than before, as there are more layers and textures present here.  Specifically, the piano takes center stage quite a bit, and adds a lot to the sound of the album at a level that piano and keyboards haven't on previous Eisley releases.  Don't think there isn't some guitar to be found, here, however.  There are some nice bits here and there, between the echoing guitar ring in "Currents" and driving riff in that song's chorus, the clean-yet-dark tone of "Blue Fish", to the more jangly rhythms contained elsewhere, notably in "Millstone" or "Lost Enemies".  Overall, the guitar work here is quality, if a bit understated at times.  Drum work is also good here, with nice dynamics.  When songs need "punch" to them, like in the chorus of "Save My Soul", it's there, but they shrink back when necessary so as not to change the tone of the material.  I also applaud the band (wait for it...) for the use of cheesy hand claps in spots where it doesn't seem to make any sense to do so ("Save My Soul"), yet don't sound out of place while you're listening to them.  Bass sounds good here too, and is well utilized.  There are moments when bass drops out completely to allow the piano, drums, or guitars do their thing, and there are spots where the bass work is pretty minimal so as not to overwhelm the mix, but at other times the bass rhythms are quite complimentary to what's going on elsewhere in the song.  As mentioned before, piano and keyboards are often the dominant force on this record, and that is a bit of a change.  Piano & keyboard work has always been an integral part of the Eisley sound, but here there is just so much more key work that it really does outshine everything else in sheer presence.  Also more prominent here than before is the use of stringed instruments, and often to great effect.

Vocally, there's a bit less emphasis on the DuPree sisters' harmonies, though those are still present.  Instead, there's a bit of a shift toward vocals as an instrument, as there are a lot of non-word based vocalizations that fill in spots where one might expect a bridge, solo, or other song padding.  Being that this is a theme album, it works well in the context of "flowing water" and gives an aural representation of same, so I think it works well overall.  I'm not sure this approach would work as well on a standard album where the songs don't flow (I can't help myself) the way they do here, but I like this approach with the material here.  The individual vocal work is good, too, and there are some interesting melodic things going on, especially in the title track, and "Wicked Child".  I'm not sure this is there most boisterous performance (I still think the songs from "Room Noises" get that honor), but then the album's tone doesn't call for that.  Lyrically, the album tackles personal topics with some degree of metaphor, and touches on the band's faith at times ("Blue Fish" seems to touch on that).  "Save My Soul" is a bit obtuse, much like my favorite Eisley track, "Marvelous Things" from the debut album.  Other tracks, like "Real World", carry a much more universal message of love and the importance of strong relationships.  Some of the references to the "water" theme are quite subtle and don't add much to the overall theme, but that reinforces the fact that this isn't a concept album about water, but merely a batch of songs that sort of follow a thematic arch.  So while this might not be their "deepest" batch of lyrics (okay, I'll stop!), mileage will vary as to how much one is spoken to through them.

As I mentioned above, Eisley albums are not usually immediate affairs.  Their music is pretty instantly likable, but in terms of the songs on this album, I think they're the least instantly catchy batch they've put out so far.  Having said that, I also think this may be the best set of songs on any Eisley album, and I say that recognizing that "The Valley" was a really strong set of songs.  I'm still waiting for the band to repeat "Marvelous Things" with something else that deliciously weird and obtuse, but alas, they haven't done so yet.  In the meantime, they've written what I consider to be their strongest album.  It takes several listens to penetrate and really latch on to, but once you do, you may find yourself in the position I've been in the last several weeks - it doesn't leave your stereo or stray far from your playlist.  It's a rewarding album, and something I hope the band gets some traction from.  Despite the failure of their Kickstarter campaign to help fund the album's tour, I hope they can get out and play as many shows as their schedule allows them to, because this is good material that needs to be heard and appreciated.  How this stuff translates live will be interesting, because it's more involved than previous works.  Either way, they have set the bar high for the follow-up.  Highly recommended.

92/100

Monolith - Voyager (2013)

For bands, artistic growth can often be like walking a tightrope.  If you have developed a distinctive soundscape or style, modifying that sound too much can often mean alienating fans.  Not modifying it enough means stagnating artistically, or sounding as though you're trying to replicate a successful formula, usually with diminishing returns.  The most balanced approach is to develop nuances and variations within the style to expand its range, while keeping the core of the style present so as to retain a commonality from album to album.  This common thread serves as a link between releases, while allowing the artist to continue to develop and grow, and for the overall sound to change in some fashion from one record to the next.  Monolith has the dubious position of following up their excellent debut, but are they up to the task?  I'd say emphatically yes!  There are elements of the band's sound that seem to have changed to meet the requirements of the new material, but the core of what makes Monolith what they are is still present.  The band still plays a tight combination of symphonically informed melodic death metal, metalcore and "extreme metal", combining a growled vocal and melodic/sung vocal approach, they still have a chunky guitar sound with catchy riffs, and still have the songwriting chops to pull it off.

The biggest change on display here is in the cleanly sung vocals. No longer are they handled by guitarist and songwriter Colin Parrish - now all vocals are handled exclusively by vocalist Mike Gallant.  Gone are the highly processed clean vocals, and in its place are a similar vocal approach that at first, doesn't sound that much different than what Colin brought to the table, but with more range and emotion present due to the vocals not being so "effected" in nature.  Also noticeable is that there is a bit less emphasis on the split between the symphonic elements, and those that are overtly "keyboard sounding".  The other thing I noted relatively quickly was that the level of aggression in the riffing and sound seemed a bit subdued as compared with the debut, in part because the songwriting here is slightly more varied in some aspects, using more build-up and melodic intro passages, or because the riffs aren't quite as staccato as those on the debut.  As I said, however, it's still quite recognizable as Monolith, for anyone who is familiar with the debut.

Colin Parrish's guitar still crunches nicely here as it did on the debut, with a good combination of heaviness and clarity.  The guitar sound is a touch less dense this time around, but the underlying bass provides enough weight to compensate.  Colin employs more solo work this time around, so I'm guessing the change in tone was necessary for a bit of clarity's sake.  Speaking of solo work, I'm glad to see Colin branching out in this direction more, as I highlighted that as something I'd like more when I wrote the review for their debut.  I also like that he does more than just a few short bits here and there, but he cuts loose a time or two and it comes off well.  Bass by Mike Gallant is quality, with a nice combination of thumping and galloping, providing both the necessary extra emphasis to the music, but doing enough to not just sound like a piece of the backdrop.  Colin Nafziger once again brings tasteful drumming to the table, employing double-bass when it makes sense, and going for a more groove-oriented or mid-paced take when the song calls for it.  There are some nice flourishes here and there that aren't flashy or too overt, but just little cymbal bits, fills or transitions that are just nice.

Vocally, Mike is in good form.  His growls continue to be powerful, yet understandable, with that mid-range tonality that works well with their sound.  Mike's clean vocals are an interesting counterpoint to the growled vocals, and often come off understated and muted compared to the growls.  I also like the group-shouted vocals in "Endurance", as I think they accent the song appropriately.  Lyrically, the band is a bit more obtuse this time around, using somewhat less obvious themes of Christianity, and mixing in some mythology and history, as well as songs that have faith at the core, but where the lyrics take a more subtle approach.  I like the slightly more personal approach, and I applaud the band for stepping out of the obvious topics and into some interesting lyrical material.  The way the lyrics are written versus the phrasing that Mike uses at times is also used to interesting effect, as things aren't always sung (or growled) the way you'd expect them to be when reading them off the page, so that makes for a nice change.  I also like the whispered vocal during one brief spot in "Desolation", which is a nice touch.

The thing about the debut that I miss is that it was a bit heavier overall, but honestly, the two records aren't all that different in terms of the balance between crunch and melodicism.  Mike's clean vocals change the sound enough to be noticeable, but not so much that it distracts or detracts from the experience.  There is use of more extended intros on tracks like "Onslaught" and "Desolation", as well as the use of a "faux vocal" in "Initiation" that give additional flavor to the album where the debut was a bit more straight-forward.  "Voyager" is a worthy follow-up to the debut, and improves upon its predecessor enough to say the band is growing, even if some of the impact of the debut is lost in the additional elements present.  Still, I think this is the appropriate direction for the band to go, and where I think their sound was most likely to have evolved to after the debut.  As before, I'd like to see Mr. Parrish continue to hone his guitar skill and give us more solo work, and would love to see the band expand the range of material so there are even greater contrasts between heavier, faster & more frenzied spots, and those of a more mid-tempo, melodic, "hooky" nature.  As it stands, an excellent follow-up, and because it's free to download, fans of the band and of the style have zero excuse not to check it out.  Highly recommended.

90/100

This album can be downloaded in its entirety directly from the band's website:
http://www.monolith2012.com/

Eisley - The Valley (2011)

You have to admire the persistence of artists, especially those who were born to be so.  Many a musician well past their so-called prime have been accused of being washed-up, has-been players who shouldn't even be out embarrassing themselves on the club circuit, let alone trying to recapture their "glory days".  Other musicians get out there and make great music but fail to make an impact and quit out of sheer frustration due to the lack of recognition of their art.  But for those who were truly made to be musicians, it's difficult for them to get out of the craft, even when life comes at them from all sides and makes things more "interesting" than they might be used to.  This is when the rubber meets the road, and when only the strong survive.

The difficulty and drama Eisley experienced from 2007 forward has been well documented, so I won't write a book here about the events that caused the band's 3rd studio full-length release to be so delayed since 2007's "Combinations" album, the release that was to catapult the band into super-stardom (in indie-pop terms, anyway), and get Eisley the recognition they so rightfully deserve as one of the reigning female-fronted bands of this style.  Sadly, though "Combinations" did raise their profile somewhat, it failed to garner the band the fame and record sales that the record company was probably hoping for, and as a result, the relationship between Eisley and Warner Bros was likely tenuous prior to the end of their contract came up in 2010.  Add the personal tragedies and drama within the ranks of the band, and it's easy to see why it took nearly 3 years between writing and recording to finally get their 3rd album out to the fans.

One thing that must be said about Eisley is that they certainly know who they are.  While the band's sound has shifted away from the slightly more obtuse indie-pop of earlier efforts to a much more radio-ready version of their sound, it's still immediately recognizable as Eisley, in part due to the consistency of their material, but also the lovely voices of the DuPree sisters and their effortless delivery (despite their assertions to the contrary).  The band still combines a somewhat tough (for indie-pop, anyway) guitar delivery with delicious vocal harmonies, acoustic and mellow passages, perfect pop melodies, and tight instrumentation.  What has changed since the earlier releases is that they have a much more "focused" sound, than they did early on.  Some songs lean more toward the melancholy while others are more "up" or happy sounding, but nothing sounds too far from a middle ground that vacillates between "hopeful yet pensive" and "sad but optimistic".

Guitar is just right for this kind of music - the sort of tightly played, yet slightly lazy rhythm playing that embodies what makes this kind of music so much fun to listen to.  It's deceptively simple, the kind of thing that might give an aspiring musician (who's also a fan) the impression that they could run up on stage and join in with the band and jam out.  At the same time, it's also concise in its presentation, well executed and content to be an integral part of the instrumentation, but not overbearing in the mix.  Piano and keyboard work is excellent as always, with Stacy's playing on this album reflecting an almost "bouncy" quality that keeps the mood light, even in the more somber songs.  Bass guitar sounds good alongside the guitars and drums, and is well played, though as expected with this style, not flashy or doing anything overly complicated.  Drum work is competent and well suited to the material, with the appropriate level of weight when needed, and more dynamic when the songs call for it.  The additional orchestral flourishes (such as is found in "Kind", for example) are a nice touch, and sound great in context with the material.  As always, vocally the material is a delight.  While Chauntelle maintains that her vocals aren't her strength, I personally feel all 3 sisters sound fantastic, and that perhaps that imperfection is part of the charm of the overall vocal sound - there's a certain feeling present in a voice that isn't classically trained that you just don't get from vocalists who are trained to avoid certain personal inflections or inclinations.

I've been listening to this album pretty solid for months now, and I think it's a strong release.  One understands the context of the lyrics better when having some knowledge of the events leading up to the album's release, which isn't necessary for interpreting them, but certainly gives the listener the upper hand.  The album's penchant for lyrics dwelling on broken or lost love is both a strength and a weakness, in that the common theme works well, but by the end of the album it can be a bit too much drama.  After all, how many songs can one write about the dissolution of a marriage and love relationship before they've said everything that can or needs to be said about the subject?  Still, that's only a minor criticism, as there's enough depth and breadth to the songs that the subject matter isn't entirely stale by disc's end.  I do miss the more obtuse lyrics of some of the earlier releases, and I also miss the more broad scope of material as well.  This album, as I said, is very focused in sound.  Don't expect to hear a "Marvelous Things" or "Lost at Sea" here, because you won't.  There's far more "Telescope Eyes", "Invasion", or perhaps "Golly Sandra" in the material here.  One of the things that initially attracted me to the band was the sort of weird vibe that "Marvelous Things" and its video had.  That's not what made me stay hooked, however - it was the vocal harmonies and the combination of songs that were incredibly tuneful and memorable all at once.  So while the band has in some ways "lost their innocence", they still have the memorable and tuneful material in droves, so a record like this is infinitely listenable.  I guess the best way to say it is this: this isn't my favorite Eisley release, but I consider it a triumphant return for a band that was in the throes of personal tragedy, and certainly a record that any fan of Eisley should eat up without hesitation.  Fans of indie-pop in general undoubtedly already know of this album, and likely already have it in their collection.  If you're just getting into the style, I'd recommend getting "Room Noises" first, if only to see the range of the band before delving into either "Combinations" or this platter.  Otherwise, I have no reservations recommending this strongly.

82/100

I Hear Voices - Subtle Female Vocalists

It's no secret that the rock and heavy metal worlds are overwhelmingly dominated by male voices.  There are plenty of notable female vocalists in these camps, to be sure, but when the vast majority of vocalists are male (despite the boon of female-fronted goth metal bands in the last 10 years), it's safe to say that this market is harder to crack when you're a woman.  Contrast that with the pop music world: while the production, A&R, and ownership segments may still be male-dominated, when it comes to vocals, the women have the corner on the market.  Sure, there are boy bands, Justin Beiber (yes, he's male) and male pop superstars like Elton John and George Michael, but women have consistently been the driving force in pop music since the late 1960's and early 1970's when men began turning their attention to harder rock music.
Female vocalists also range quite a bit as well.  You have your bona fide divas, the women who could sing you the phone book (thanks American Idol, for that nugget of wisdom) and you'd be amazed, due to their vocal quality, ability to be on-point with notes and delivery, and often their incredible range.  Then you have women on the other end of the spectrum who get by almost entirely on attitude and swagger, despite some of them having decent to good voices.  You know, like Suzi Quatro, Joan Jett, or Wendy O. Williams.  Some women have that one-two punch combination of power and versatility where they can bowl you over with powerful vocals, then in the next breath be delicate and dynamic, like Heart's Ann Wilson, Pat Benetar, Barnabas' Nancyjo Mann, or perhaps Evanesence's Amy Lee.  Some pop singers have reasonable voices but make waves simply by exposing themselves more than they should, and earn the adoration of throngs of fans because they're so "daring".

Then there are the subtle voices that are just so smooth, pure, and velvety that they just make you melt when you listen to them.  There's nothing inherently powerful about their vocals, no "big" notes, no inhuman vocal range, no giant crescendos that draw you to them instantly.  These are the singers whose understated performances become the stuff of legends because they are just really good at what they do, and while they may not turn heads like the Brittney Spears' of the world, they impress fans by simply doing what they do and doing it well.  Voices like these I like to think of as "quietly captivating".

SADE

Is that a Covergirl model?

Everyone knows Sade has a good voice, and most everyone has heard one of her early hits like the sultry "Smooth Operator" or "The Sweetest Taboo" on the radio at some point.  But the hits aren't enough to truly appreciate Sade Adu or her talent.  She has such a rich, smoky tone to her voice that has a unique quality to it.  But it's more than that - her singing is so accurate, even if she's not doing anything overly complex.  Listening to Sade sing is a simple joy entirely because she just sounds SO GOOD when she does.  When she took a break after her 1992 album and came back 8 years later with "Lovers Rock", some folks might have thought she would make no impact, but with that smooth voice of hers subtly crooning the lead single "By Your Side", it was inevitable that she'd be back in the spotlight again.  All I can say is, it's a good thing enough people with taste supported her return.

Margo Timmins (Cowboy Junkies)

Yes, she is feeling the music.

I'm slightly less familiar with the material of Cowboy Junkies than I am of Sade's music, but after listening to just a few minutes it's easy to hear that same kind of quality in Margo Timmins' voice - hers is a very subtle way of getting your attention, by simply singing sweetly and almost lazily along with the songs.  Of course, most of the Junkies' tunes are pretty laid back anyway, but Margo underscores that with what can almost be called a lackadaisical performance.  That's not a bad thing, mind you - the way she sings over the lazy sort of country/folk/rock the band plays is breathtaking in its own special way.  Take Sarah McLachlan and strip out the overly emotive nature of some of her stuff, and you have a slight idea of what Margo sounds like.  This is especially true on the band's 1996 album "Lay It Down" where Margo just floats along over the music so perfectly.  Don't take my word for it though, go listen for yourself and discover this woman's subtle vocal talent.

Norah Jones

She's just so cute! ^_^

Last, but certainly not least is Norah Jones, a woman who, over the last 9 years has captivated audiences with her slightly soulful, understated voice and her ability to take a song and just add that little extra to it that makes it transcend just being a song.  Her voice has such a natural, pure tone to it that words can't describe it - you simply have to listen to her sing to understand it.  In addition, she has stylized herself a bit of a musical chameleon.  Sure, her material is (mostly) grounded in pop-jazz, but she has explored country, folk, and indie pop within the framework of her voice and piano playing.  Norah is an artist I'd consider to be brilliant in her way of singing/playing the material "just right".  She doesn't over-sing stuff, she doesn't go nuts with the piano and do all kinds of crazy runs or whatnot - everything is so tasteful that it's always in service of the song.  In an age where showboating seems to be all the rage, Norah Jones is a shining example of what an artist can accomplish when they just do something and do it really well.  That doesn't even take into account that she is famous Sitar player Ravi Shankar's daughter!

So there you have it - understated voices that thrill me.  I love powerful voices too, as evidenced by much of the music I highlight on this blog, but sometimes the simple, elegant voices just hit the spot as well.  I'll be highlighting other vocalists over time, touching on ones that inspire me (as a vocalist myself), some that I just find amazing in their talent and abilities, or vocalists that I feel have brought something unique and interesting to the table that perhaps other vocalists haven't done in the same way before.