GNX : LA's Latest Victory Lap By Ian Sherry 12/10/2024 On 11/22/2024, Kendrick Lamar released his 6th studio album, GNX . Kendrick has been a very busy man. In the months leading up to the release of GNX Lamar returned to the public eye, challenged and disposed of Drake, held a historic concert showcasing unity in LA’s Hip-Hop scene, and was named the halftime performer for Super Bowl LXI. Riding that wave, he dropped this record. More than any other record this year, GNX is impossible to separate from its context. It is and always will be the record that came after the Drake feud. While Lamar tastefully refrained from including any of the diss tracks, he brought the most important spoils of his mudslinging war to this record: the sound that took “Not Like Us” to no. 1 and the local scene he stood up for. Neither was guaranteed, but in the end they accounted for his most spirited top-to-bottom performance since TPAB . The stylistic discoveries Lamar made following Mr. Morale & The Big Steppers have completely reinvigorated my enthusiasm for his music. His 2022 record hit the right critical spots and had a passable share of highlights, but the stylistic persona he put forth in his return from a 5 year absence felt safe, as if that time away left him tight and self-limiting. GNX is anything but. “wacced out murals” , while it's a bit lengthy for an intro track does a great job of introducing Kendrick Lamar’s latest vocal persona. Using audible restraint to create breathier cadences, Lamar is able to build tension and excitement with his words without expending a lot of energy. It’s a skill that Pusha T enlists so that his audience hangs on every word and his lyrics cut deep. Now Lamar can do the same, but with the added advantage that he has more in the musical tank. Here’s what I mean track 6, “reincarnated” , is the album’s most intense track. Lamar’s most conceptual exercise of the record attempts to place him in the shoes of his past lives in order to critique the choices they made and the extent to which they used their gifts. A demanding undertaking like that requires performative chops and an energy level he’d yet to exert through 5 songs, so when he screamed ‘REINCARNATED’, the track popped the way he clearly intended it to. Energy isn’t the only performative improvement Lamar made on this record, his package of flows and cadences has gotten as strong as ever. Evidenced by his recent feature work, take Beyonce’s “AMERICA HAS A PROBLEM” or Baby Keem’s “family ties” , Kendrick has been expanding his bag of flows and that process was only accelerated by the creative flurry that Drake brought upon himself. At this point it feels safe to say Lamar’s days of somewhat regularly defaulting to well-worded but averagely-performed verses are over (RIP 2017-2022). Look at “hey now” , Lamar hops on one of the two Mustard beats on the record and dominates with career-best confidence and charisma fueling a generous display of the many entertaining flows he’s accumulated. While "tv off" and "peekaboo" are the next best displays of pure spitting, nearly every track on this LP brings something vocally fresh to the table, and the impact that consistently entertaining performances have on an assorted album like this is invaluable. In addition to the variety of vocal projection Kendrick Lamar brought to GNX , his production has been retooled as well. In his departure from Top Dawg Entertainment production personnel was bound to change to an extent, but what I didn’t expect was to see Jack Antanoff’s name on every track. The current king of pop production is a fellow Grammy darling, and his influence on GNX is clearest in the cleanliness and atmospheric aspects of the record. My initial reaction was my usual anti-mainstream gag reflex, but upon listening I can see how Antanoff’s capabilities could contribute to the gloomy feel that makes “reincarnated” and “heart pt. 6” effective and the pop factor needed to elevate "Luther" to one of the album's most popular songs. Given, Antanoff also contributed to some of the pop-sensible misses like “men at the garden” (which sounds like DAMN and Mr. Morale had a really ugly baby), the boring “dodger blue” , and the chivalrous but misplaced last track “gloria” , his versatility will still go down as a positive influence on this record because ultimately it allowed for Lamar’s successful plunge back into the west coast. As his career progresses, Lamar feels increasingly calculated in who he chooses to associate with, but not since 2016 have I heard Lamar thrive in the West Coast bounce like he does on GNX . He made a point of it. He filled his feature list with newer names from the greater LA/Compton scene (Dody6 , Lefty Gunplay , Wallie the Sensei , Siete7x , AzChike , Hitta J3 , YoungThreat , Peysoh , even Roddy Rich ), and the pop-star cleanliness Lamar lent to his raw but hungry guest artists left them in their best form. Combine that with the long-time collaborator Sounwave’s presence on every track and you’ve got a musically holistic homecoming for Lamar (with SZA in tow). While there are moments throughout the record that carry that West Coast aroma - take the Eminem /D12 -like chorus on “hey now” or constant remnants of Black Hippy in his music - I really knew LA was present the moment “squabble up” began. The unique blend of 2000s club-tinged g-funk is ridiculously catchy. Imagine a YG song with the sonic layering and atmospheric control Lamar fans are accustomed to, plus the synth performance of a true techno madman. It's the kind of song I wasn’t sure Lamar could make after his last project - the kind of song that makes you wonder what else he could possibly do. I saw criticisms of Lamar as a person in regards to this record - complaints that his narrative has become too self-indulgent since his feud with Drake making this braggadocious record difficult to swallow. Personally I disagree. While it can be enticing to think of an artist as someone you know based on the extensive material they’ve presented, the truth is you really don’t. The introspective Kendrick Lamar persona we know has been as much of a product as his music. It makes sense that the public persona of the artist would change in tandem with their newest product. Therefore, it also makes sense that following the most substantially publicized victory of his career he would release a sort of victory lap record. It is not a reflection of his character or ego as much as it is the logical next step in an increasingly lengthy career that has rightfully resulted in his superstardom. This record is not his best, nor is it his worst. A smaller undertaking than Kendrick’s all-time great concept albums of the 2010s, GNX had a lower ceiling to begin with, however, he still packed the record with a variety of new creative angles. Aside from creating the ever-elusive flawless tracklist, cultivating a variously entertaining and passably cohesive group of songs is the ultimate goal of any record that focuses on the collection of songs rather than a core concept. By that measure GNX is a success. It’s also a success as it exists in the world. The album’s reception can be just as important as its content, and the exposure he brought not only to his features but to that g-funk sound might be what I love most about the record. GNX is a 8.6.

Tabs On Tigers: In Memorium 10/27/2025 BY: IAN SHERRY On October 10, the Detroit Tigers were eliminated from the MLB Postseason. Tabs On Tigers Vol. 5 Is anyone surprised? Something about the intensity of my Tigers fandom and the connectedness I feel with fellow fans makes me unrealistically confident that I can speak for everyone. So in regard to the question above, our answer is no. Last year, General Manager Scott Harris and Manager AJ Hinch enjoyed the spoils of public opinion as their squad’s late-season comeback placed them in rare postseason company, but this year brought a historically singular collapse. The story of the Tigers’ eventual demise is simple, and it began at the trade deadline. The specifics of Scott Harris’ acquisitions on July 31 spawned a million complaints and a few simple questions. ‘Why these guys?’ is a question that kept 97.1 phone lines hot for the duration of August and September, as the Tigers squandered a 15.5-game divisional lead. Following the righteous elimination of our wounded cats in Seattle, the collective’s questions are changing. The focus has shifted away from the forgettable acquisitions and onto the attitude of the front office. What were they thinking? Scott Harris’ actions were those of a middling team with reserved playoff ambitions, not the number 1 team in baseball. Kyle Finnegan and Raphael Montero made for intriguing projects down the stretch, and proved themselves roster-worthy come October, unlike Charlie Morton or Chris Paddock. However, roster worthiness is not the scale by which playoff-bound teams calculate their deadline moves. Where was the hunger? In the days of Dave Dombrowski, a strong Tigers team could expect an addition to the middle of the batting order or starting rotation. With Javier Baez signed to the single costly contract on a promising roster full of moderately talented players with shallow experience, D would not have hesitated to pounce on a $30 million player. Harris didn’t have to look far. Former division rivals Carlos Correa, Shane Bieber, and Josh Naylor should be familiar to Tigers fans, as should Eugenio Suarez and his career-high 49 homers. Did he know? The Tigers could have won the World Series. With Skubal and Mize, the playoff experienced Flaherty, and a legitimate edition to the rotation, the staff would have been perfectly suited for a 5-game series. The bullpen was not playoff-worthy, but it was just a dominant arm away from serviceable. The batting order far surpassed its offensive production of 2024, but you could feel the breeze of their bats from the upper deck during the cold stretches, the longest of which came with the changing weather. Yes, Scott Harris faced problems, but concrete solvable problems of endlessly greater simplicity than those faced by Al Avila, Harris’ scapegoated predecessor. Avila was all too aware of the difficulty of the ‘rebuilding’ task he inherited (to the point of paralysis). Harris on the other hand, seemed unfamiliar with the position he found himself in entering August – a competitive, yet incomplete team sitting gingerly atop the American League. It seems unlikely that Harris didn’t believe in the squad’s World Series potential, considering their record at the break. Yet it feels even less probable that he thought they were a sure-in. Did Scott Harris try but and fail to improve the Tigers roster amid the competitive inter-team market? Did he fail to earn he respect of other organizations? Did he lose his grip on the goal at hand – improving the team for a postseason run - while clinging to his prospects? Or did he just flat out fail to make a sincere effort? Scott Harris did not commit any philosophical misdeeds. He is not the only person to blame, just the easiest. Sure, AJ Hinch’s oddball bullpen management may have cost the Tigers a game or two in October, and Riley Greene’s acknowledgement of his strikeout problem confirms a fundamental issue at the top of the order. Furthermore, injuries to the rotation plague Detroit year in and year out, and the bullpen is undeniably mediocre. Yet, there they were in the postseason once again, poised to make a deeper run – if only… Even after taking the opposite path into the fall, the Tigers once again hit the road for the AL Wild Card Series to dispose of their opponents - this time a weakened Cleveland team – and again the Tigers, behind Cy Young winner Tarik Skubal, fell in game five of the ALDS to a division winner. In other words, a season that flaunted positive results of the faithful but tentative mindset of this Tigers regime managed to end where it began: second place in the division and ALDS losers. Déjà vu. Now, Scott Harris is reportedly reviving his pursuit of Alex Bregman, who unsurprisingly snubbed the Tigers for Boston, only to opt out of his 2-year $40 million deal in search of more money - (they should call him ‘Breadman’) - making his injury-riddled 2025 season a prove-it campaign devoid of proof. Will Harris really chase that dragon for another winter? Will you?

Anderson .Paak: Freedom Hill 10/5/24 10/29/24 By Ian Sherry On January 15, 2016, Anderson .Paak released Malibu. On October 5, 2024 I saw him perform it live. When I was in 8th grade, I had what I considered a pretty wide-reaching taste in music for a kid my age. Most of my musical discoveries at the time were either handed to me directly from my dad or I found them digging through his Itunes library. I had my favorites - old-school hip-hop, Motown standards, that 4 month Journey kick I had in 7th grade, or every bit of Prince material I could get my hands on - but I had and have a few weak areas as well. One in particular stood out: I hardly knew any new music. In an age before I had access to the unlimited horizons Spotify provides, if it was new and it didn’t get played on the radio (which I generally disliked anyway) then I had no way to hear it. That is until the fateful summer night I heard “Come Down” . I was watching TV with the family when I heard Anderson .Paak’s most energized anthemic song to date being used on some commercial (obviously not a good one because I only remember the song). I casually slipped off to the basement, pulled out my brand new phone and found the song, then another, and another, and the rest is history. The trajectory of my music fandom had changed forever and I knew it. As I listened to “Come Down”, then “Jet Black” , and “Am I Wrong” I fell in love with a new artist, not for the first time in my life, but for the first time all on my own, and that meant everything. Now, a few weeks ago I was blessed with the opportunity to relive that night. Let me tell you about it. I was lucky to latch onto the .Paak train when I did in 2019, because following the acclaim he earned with Ventura , that year’s release, he took the next decade by storm winning 6 Grammys in 4 years and dominating the pop charts as Silk Sonic , alongside the ultimately efficient hit-maker Bruno Mars . The material responsible for .Paak’s eruption onto the scene is some of the cleanest of his career, so its success is no mystery. However, regardless of the accolades, the attention, or even the artistic maturity of his later releases, Malibu remains his best piece of work. At his core, Anderson .Paak is a musician. You can really feel that on Malibu , for which he performed and recorded all of the drums before mixing the rest on his laptop. You can feel the difference in both philosophy and product between .Paak’s intentionally constructed pieces of music on this record and the standard formulaic production that is standard today. While most rap, pop, and r&b producers are looking for that golden hook or sample they can run throughout the song, .Paak spends all of his time searching for grooves. On Malibu, he does nothing but find them, one after another. That’s due in part to the talent Anderson associates with: The Free Nationals (more on them later), Robert Glasper , KAYTRANADA , and Madlib all make instrumental or production contributions to the album as did a cast of musicians and producers that worked alongside other musically excellent acts like D’Angelo , JAY-Z , John Mayer , even Nine Inch Nails . Big names I know, and their individual instrumental contributions are evident on every song in an intentional and impactful way, but make no mistake, Anderson .Paak is the common denominator from which this music emerges. Each track thrives in the coordination of many moving parts and the result is 16 comfortable performances backed by smooth progressions, transitions, and the multi-genred sonic excellence .Paak aims to capture. No album better illustrates his dual prowess as a musician and entertainer than his 2016 record, so naturally, when I heard he was taking one of my all-time favorite albums on tour 8 years later, I couldn’t miss it. THE SHOW As a conscientious objector of arena shows I was happy to hear Anderson .Paak’s Malibu Tour would be gracing Freedom Hill, one of the Detroit area’s better sizable outdoor venues. Maurice Brown came on first as my partna and I traversed the parking lots and concourse. In the vein of his headliner, Brown is a jazz, hip-hop dual threat who performs on trumpet and as an occasional MC. GAWD followed as I found my spot on the hill. The feminine-energetic duo (Good Ass Women Deserve) lives in the wide umbrella that is contemporary r&b and as a result they have yet to settle anywhere specific. Their set, which lasted in the neighborhood of 45 minutes, was a solid performance that showcased plenty musically and got the ball rolling with crowd engagement, a big focus for the entire night. Their live sound was very 80s-reminiscent, but it had hints of house and modern west-coast electronic. They confidently flexed their songwriting with catchy hooks and choruses while performing rigorous dance routines in tandem backed by a bouncy pop-funk band. They bit off a lot and largely executed with energy, aside from some of the more challenging singing. Their modern pop/r&b vocal choices better lend themselves to studio-to-radio arrangements as they proved to be difficult to execute live and raw. Both openers did a great job of prepping the environment for the main attraction, and as they exited and the pre-show playlist kicked on for the last time, the countdown began. The entire production was solid back to front, and it started with the pre-show mix. “Crowns For Kings” , a fantastic contemporary hip-hop collision between Black Thought and Benny The Butcher started playing and immediately put me in a good mood. It’s then that I noticed how mic-heavy the drums were and realized (though I should have assumed) that Anderson .Paak would be singing from the drumseet. The longer I sat and waited the more me excitement grew, and I started reflecting on the performative skill it must require to do what he was about to do. That showcase of instrumental consistency on a pacekeeping instrument in a percussion-centric sound in addition to the vocal exertion of rapping is something I couldn’t wait to see. To me it elevates him to a greater category of lead performing musicians. Some, like Raphael Saddiq brand themselves as musicians on the strength of their creative and compositional skills. Others, say Robert Cray , on the unique strengths of their instrument in tandem with their voice. Then there's those who fit both descriptions - like Stevie Wonder or Curtis Mayfield . It was perfect then, that while I waited to see an artist with a categorically similar skill-set, Mayfield’s “So in Love” suddenly washed over me. The best track on his impeccable 1975 LP is one of my very favorite love songs of all time. From the first note, per usual, I was trapped in the soulful combination of keys and brass, not to mention Mayfield’s signature piano-like guitar that perfectly sets the stage for his uniquely firm yet delicate voice. One of the greatest vocalists in American music, Mayfeild’s ability to stretch his voice to its limit in a sustained fashion was responsible for his heavenly tone, and as the song glided along that’s what I found myself thinking about. I thought about the strength of his vocal control, how he was a true performer in the studio and out, and I felt lucky to soon be seeing a man with similar talent. As Anderson .Paak was introduced, Maurice Brown took the stage alongside the Free Nationals and got the program started on trumpet. As he began to riff on “The Bird” the screen lit up, and finally, on camera backstage wearing a baby blue embroidered suit, .Paak started making his way to the stage performing the first track of his best album. Immediately, the energy, sonic quality, and confidence elevated across the board, and as that sunk in he made his way to the drums. A drummer by trade, .Paak is no stranger to the instrument and he made that abundantly clear throughout the night, rotating between the drums and center stage, and consequently between stylistic personas (the pop-star frontman, the nimble-drumming master of breath control, and the solist-level drummer in a great band). His strong supporting cast made those transitions easy. Starting with track 2, “Heart Don’t Stand a Chance” , and continuing throughout the night GAWD provided the washy background vocals that play a huge role in bolstering the album’s sound. Regardless of who is filling it, the role is essential in that sound, especially in a live setting where precise sonic balance is needed to accommodate a lead singer who drums and raps simultaneously. That wasn’t the only trick up .Paak’s sleeve (which flipped from blue to an identical red version at his mid-show wardrobe change). “The Waters” is one of the smoothest songs on the record, largely because of BJ Chicago Kid ’s vocal contributions, so, to help it translate to a live performance in BJ’s absence, the Free Nationals’ secret weapon Ron Avant stepped in. The band’s keyboardist played swiss army knife all night, painting keys across every track while contributing as an occasional background vocalist, commanding the talkbox to its full effect, and acting as .Paak’s hype-man. Malibu cannot be executed live without that kind of versatility. It thrives in the fullness of its sound, and while .Paak’s rhythmically focused drumming is an excellent addition to their live show, he can’t replicate that music alone. Togetherness was a major theme on October 5th. It was most evident in the way Anderson .Paak interacted with his band and tourmates, but it continuously factored into the crowd interactions and messaging throughout the night. Track 4 stood out in that way, and it was no mistake. “The Season | Carry Me” is the heart of Malibu . Many of .Paak’s strongest album moments through the years have benefited greatly from nostalgia and emotional songwriting. On this two-part song, with the help of Bill Withers , .Paak writes about and reflects on his childhood and the surroundings he came up in. The first half relishes in the triumphant aspect of his journey that began in Oxnard CA, but the later half was the show-stopper, literally. As he concluded the song’s last verse, he cut the track and told a story about his mom. With the help of Ron Avant - his conversation partner of choice- .Paak began to paint this picture: his usually strict mom took him to the mall on his birthday. Since there allegedly wasn’t much to do in the mall then aside from visiting Foot Locker, and young Brandon happened to be in need of some shoes, that’s where they went. That’s where he met his first love - “A grown ass woman?” asked Avant - no, it was a pair of jordans. From there, it quickly became clear to past Anderson and his future audience just how much his mother loved him, as he went on to explain that not only did she buy him the not-so-cheap footwear, she carried him (but more-so the shoes) safely over the dirty sidewalk to the car. It was a sweet humorous story that cleverly culminated with the line “Momma can you carry me?”, the final hook and jumping off point for the song’s outro. How do you follow up a moment like that not half way through the show? Well Anderson .Paak decided to announce this next song was about Jose Rios’ ex girlfriend, and as the band's guitarist stood there speechless for just a moment, .Paak jumped right into track 5. That kind of smooth showmanship was the standard for the duration of the show. Whether it be the washy samples between songs that aided the transitions and kept the performance accurate to the album or the features on screen that ranged from colorful background graphics to what I think was an AI rendition of the Family Matters Theme song with the Free Nationals in place of the Winslows, the show had clearly been carefully planned with a broad audience in mind. As the show progressed into the middle of the album, crowd engagement became even more of a focus. .Paak and co. consistently tried to get the fans to participate in a variety of capacities, clapping, call and response, singing along, pulling out the flashlights, hanging out with DJ Peewee - you know, all the concert classics. He flew through the albums mid-section, still moving between the drums and center stage and performing every performable aspect of the album until it was time for a break. After gliding across track 10, “Room In Here”, which normally features The Game and Sonyae Elise , .Paak and most of the band exited, leaving GAWD and Avant alone on stage with DJ Peewee, a giant projection of .Paak who appeared on screen wearing a black bob wig and some big shades. He tried a bit of awkward pre-recorded crowd engagement before dropping the needle onto his Malibu vinyl and giving way to GAWD and Avant who performed “Water Fall (Interluuube)” . In the moment it felt like a thinly veiled break for the performers, who did deserve a breather, but in hindsight it symbolized the halfway point in the show. While GAWD and Ron Avant held it down on stage, .Paak and the rest of the Free Nationals took a moment backstage to prepare for the daunting second half of the performance. He made it clear upon his return to the stage that the energy levels would rise one way or another in the second half, as the sizable but reserved crowd had been annoyingly sluggish (although attentive) to that point. Immediately they succeeded, as the infectious spirit of “Come Down” asserted itself on the audience. The most popular song on the album mustered some genuine fan participation that carried through “Silicon Valley” , they stayed engaged through the somewhat cathartic “Celebrate” and lastly an energized rendition of the positively spirited finale “The Dreamer” which concluded .Paak's 2016 masterpiece. At that point, having successfully achieved the main goal, a positive high-energy finish to the album, .Paak exited the stage and let his band take over. As the Free Nationals reintroduced themselves and began to perform a few of their best, I reflected on how lucky I was to see that album performed live and how cool it was that I was now watching a great band perform a pseudo-encore despite the crowd not necessarily earning it. It was a good concert experience, and I was satisfied listening to the good vibrations of “Eternal Light” , that is, until they brought .Paak back out. That’s right, after performing the entirety of Malibu, Anderson .Paak came back on stage, this time performing songs from across his discography. I was particularly happy to hear “Make It Better” and “Come Home” from Ventura and “Bubblin” , all three of which were in my initial tight rotation of .Paak’s music. He brought hits from all phases of his career, rattling off song after song including new singles and work from his most recent NxWorries project , all in a pleasantly unrelenting attempt to send the crowd home entertained. He dipped into his Silk Sonic catalog and threw it back for the more long-time fans, particularly with “Dang!” which he dedicated to his late friend Mac Miller who’s featured verse was performed live by Maurice Brown. I felt as though .Paak had taken me and every other possible attendee into consideration by performing a variety that anyone could at some point identify with. That means he delivered. I’ve been to a respectable number of concerts now and the best ones have been those where the audience would die for the artist. Two come to mind: when I saw Aretha Franklin ’s last concert in Detroit, and when I saw Action Bronson in Chicago. The first audience represented a storied musical city coming forward in a big way to see, support, and have their hearts filled by their queen for what ended up being the last time. The second audience consisted of a cult-like group of fans who in many ways emulated the persona of the man they came to see. In both of those cases the artist energized the crowd with ease, but the crowd bolstered the artist as well. That give and take is essential, and .Paak seemed well aware of that. He made crowd engagement a point of emphasis for not only himself but his openers, and while his efforts to cultivate the ideal concert experience didn’t result in the most elite concert crowd experience, any shortcomings fall squarely on the shoulders of those who paid to see him. The kind of work and thought he puts into a performance like that combined with the level of talent he possesses deserves an audience on par with those select few. That's because is an artist on par with a select few - and that late summer night I got to see him live.

THE POP SHOP BY: Ian Sherry 9/5/2023 If you came for Faygo I apologize. In the grand scheme of music creation and consumption, genres are completely trivial. However, they are one of my favorite things to noodle around. The most noodley of the bunch is pop. As music continually evolves, defining pop gets increasingly difficult. Michael Jackson is the ‘king of pop’, yet he falls under the same general mega-genre as Ethel Cain , The Beach Boys , and Shania Twain . Strange but true. The pop quandary is most evident, to me, in a record store. Most often, you’ll find a pop/rock section. Certainly that model was sensible at a time, especially in a stretch like the 80s through the 2010s. These days however, I’m not sure those two genres align as closely. With acts like Imagine Dragons and Fall Out Boy fading, the bridge between the two has narrowed in favor of the slow-motion collision of rap and pop. Therefore, everytime I see a pop/rock section, I’ve granted myself permission to chuckle at whatever dinosaur constructed it. As a freshman in college without a credit rating (or whatever you need to own a business), I have no chance of running a record shop anytime soon. Admittedly, my opinion is from the outside looking in, however my occasional frustration with genre organization is justified. So, because my writing this article is conveniently inconsequential, let’s organize my theoretical record shop: The Pop Shop. Here at the Pop Shop, we operate under the assumption that all of our customers are equally, if not more, opinionated as myself, especially regarding genre placement of their favorite artists. Now that I’m a shop owner, I suppose I’ll have to make compromises here and there to accommodate customers with diversified taste. As I touched on previously, pop is what holds most genres together. Pop is the key to a broad musical palette. Therefore as a record store owner with fairly diverse taste and an equally multi-interested customer base, my first order of business is to define pop. Is pop linear? Well, I’m not sure but I might be by the time this paragraph is done. My instinct is to say yes. One of my favorite music-listening activities is creating playlists that transverse eras. It’s very satisfying to look at dissimilar beginnings and endings to tracklists, wondering how they connect, and finding out somewhere in the middle. How did American popular music seamlessly evolve (or regress) from Frank Sinatra to Drake ? That’s an answer for another article, but it certainly did. The keyword to my previous claim is seamless. There is no definite instant in pop music history in which the definition itself suddenly changed. There have been game changing artists, releases, even songs, but mass artistic or stylistic change simply can’t happen over night. The result is a genre which is constantly mentioned but insufficiently defined. Concise or concrete definitions to abstract concepts are futile in nearly every case. That’s why I’m taking a whole article to unpack it, instead of a sign behind the Pop Shop’s front desk. So, after brief deliberation, pop is indeed linear. It’s not linear in a traditional sense though. It’s not a straight line. It’s a chain linked together by genre-bending or trailblazing artists. That chain looks drastically different at some points than others, but it’s all one piece. I’ll take it a step further: it's a gyre. Pop is a gyre If you don’t know what a gyre is, you haven’t explored our homepage enough. Go now . Welcome back. To summarize: a gyre is a linear pattern in which a vortex widens from a point until it reaches a breaking point of sorts, it then continues from a single point in the center of the widened end. The most important thing to understand about the pop gyre, is that it doesn’t stop at any point, which makes it linear, but it does have significant and traceable points of reshaping. These points are marked by collections of those aforementioned artists, projects, and songs. Whether it's Billie Holiday’s shedding the light of pop culture on the horrors of the south, the gay sensation that was Freddie Mercury , or one of David Bowie’s many genre-quaking phases, individual impacts on mainstream pop music have more significance in the real world than we could understand. That impact, if you want to fully understand pop, cannot be separated from the stylistic evolution of the genre. I have no problem with the general opinion that Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra are America’s first pop stars. That makes them ground zero for American music’s gyre. Highlighting an artist is a very useful tool for defining a genre, someone who encapsulates the sound and or attitude of a musical movement. Artists like The Beatles , David Bowie, Michael Jackson , Whitney Houston , Madonna , and Adele have all held that role. You’ll find all of those artists in the Pop Shop’s signature pop section. However, as they don’t currently define 2023’s pop sound, they can’t be at the center of our biggest section. We have to pick a new artist. 2023’s centerpiece of pop ‘Finally some specifics’, says any reader more interested in facts than conceptual rambling. 2023’s pop music landscape is broader than ever. As music continues to evolve, despite the gyre resets, the scale of pop will continue to broaden. That only makes sense. Generally, anything that charts on the billboard is somehow pop-adjacent. Nowadays that means pop directly overlaps with rap, r&b, country, indie, and rock, among others. When Kendrick Lamar was charting with To Pimp A Butterfly , pop had a link with jazz. When The Weeknd and Dua Lipa started stylistically dipping into 80s tropes, pop had a link to a different decade. When Lil Uzi Vert charted with “Just Wanna Rock” , pop had a link to New Jersey club. That’s all to say a diverse landscape makes it hard to pinpoint a centerpiece, but I have a pick: SZA . Although pop is the common ground for any mainstream genre, it always has a definable sound. This sound is constantly shifting, and with rap and r&b packing the charts, it has begun to shift that direction. The more palatable, even inoffensive, approach that a Taylor Swift or Harry Styles brings to the table is no longer the solution. The ideal pop star has to incorporate their own sound, have an interesting persona, a splash of sexuality, but most of all, the ability to collaborate. I don’t just mean Dua Lipa adding Dababy to her song that’s already charting, I mean real sound-altering collaboration. SZA has all of that. SZA has been a fixture in modern r&b since her hit album Ctrl , but her 2022 release SOS launched her into the center of today’s music scene. The hit single “Kill Bill”, which was accompanied by quite the music video, captured a huge audience. Her variety of moods accommodated brand new audiences. Her attitude and personality thrilled her long-time fans. And, her well-executed and occasionally unexpected features further proved her ability to bring together the best in music. Try “Kill Bill” , “Seek & Destroy” , “Snooze” , “Ghost in the Machine” , and “Open Arms” . Though it leans towards r&b, SOS embodies pop. It will be listened to, referenced, and imitated for the rest of this decade. So, when you enter the Pop Shop looking to buy SOS , check smack in the middle of the store. Nitpicking Now that we’ve established the center of pop, we have to do the dirty work: marking borders. I think the best course of action is one mega-pop section subdivided into the various genres of influence and today’s popular sound. The outer walls will be lined with the following non-pop-adjacent genres: blues, punk, metal, folk/bluegrass, hip-hop, soul, jazz, house/techno, reggae, and classical. The border of the mega-pop section will be made up of the following pop-adjacent genres: rock, r&b, rap, indie, country, and latin. Each of those will connect to the mega-pop section like this: genre/pop. Here’s two defining artists for each, but the Pop Shop has everything. rock/pop Elton John Portugal. The Man r&b/pop Whitney Houston Ella Mai rap/pop Nelly Doja Cat indie/pop The Smiths Wet Leg country/pop Dolly Parton Chris Stapleton latin/pop Selena ROSALIA Prince gets his own section. Isn’t this fun? Closing for the night I find it interesting that pop seems to glean a negative connotation. For example, if you tell someone their favorite Canadian rapper, who they might consider a hip-hop icon, is more of a pop artist, they might take offense. In fact, I’ve found it's a good way to immediately turn a conversation into a confrontation. Try it some time. Then, remind them of that elite crop I just listed. Remind them that pop is the confluence of everything that is hot in music today. Remind them that it's a perfect gauge of just how much this divided country has in common. Remind them that ultimately genre has no relation to merit. If they’re still stuck on their anti-pop attitude, send them to my shop. I’ll be waiting.

The Return of The Stones 11/17/23 BY: IAN SHERRY On October 20, 2023, The Rolling Stones released their latest album, Hackney Diamonds . The legendary band continues to make history… And now for a real-life interaction from my history class lecture hall: Random Kid #1: “Dude, the Rolling Stones just put out a new album” Random Kid #2: “Who?!” Random Kid #1: “I know, right! It’s not like a greatest hits or anything, just a new album. They didn’t even say it’s their last one, they literally just announced a random album.” Random Kid #2: “No, I mean like actually who is that?” Kids these days. The Rolling Stones, in fact, are (one of) the greatest rock band(s) of all time, and despite their median age being something like 78, they just released their 31st studio album. This raised an abundance of questions amongst listeners, the most important one being: will it be any good? Well let’s talk about it. Hailing from London, The Rolling Stones were key blazers in the British Invasion and consequently, the formation of rock as we know it. Dabbling in everything from American Blues to British Pop, they set the standard for what a talented band could and should attempt to accomplish across genres and decades. Now, with legendary frontman Mick Jagger sitting at 80 years old, we have to wonder what version of the Stones we’ll see. Personally, I was hoping for some blues. The Expectations The Rolling Stones are a well oiled machine that has produced decades of success. They’ve long since mastered the finer points of instrumental production, songwriting, and album construction. They have their own sound - several in fact - to rely upon when developing new material. And they bring their vast discography, deep experience, and a hall of fame reputation. But it’s time to address the elder elephant in the room: a lead singer who’s 80 years old and a collective group who cannot possibly be completely in touch with today’s musical landscape. This is a clear barrier, but not an insurmountable one. Johnny Cash recorded his legendary cover “Hurt” at the age of 71 in poor health. Although his singing on “Hurt” isn’t bold and exuberant, his sense of emotion is so powerful that it registers as one of his greatest vocal performances ever. All that is to say, physical vocal capabilities are not the end all be all - not by a long shot. Johnny Cash collaborated with Rick R ubin on that album. The legendary producer helped him structure songs around his ability, bolstering the instrumentals at the perfect times and saving the best of Cash’s voice for the right moments. They worked with what they had, and they made beautiful music. Should this set the standard? Perhaps that bar is too high, considering Cash and Rubin are two of the greatest musical minds of all time. However, The Rolling Stones ought to be measured in such elite company. As a reviewer, I feel faced with the ultimate dilemma: delivering an objective critique of an album/a rtist in a context full of subjective contradictions. For instance, The Stone s are one of the greatest bands ever, yet as octogenarians, do I hold them to their career-long standard? (I don’t normally check album review ratings from other sources, but I checked Pit chfork out of curiosity and that’s what they decided to do). Or do I hold them to the standard I would use for an elderly member of the local volunteer church choir? This is tempting, but the reality is Mick Jagger isn’t just singing on Sundays, he’s in The Rolling Stones. Or, do I hold them to the standard of late-career Johnny Cash? They’re different artists, and they aren’t working with Rick Rubin, but they could have. And maybe that should have. So, just as I might rate a debut on the scale of all debuts, I’m going to rate Hackney Diamonds on the scale of Johnny Cash’s final album. The Genre As I mentioned, I was hoping for blues. While The Beatles first met resistance for impersonating the American artform that is rhythm & blues, The Rolling Stones were more easily welcomed. Why? Well, I think they were just better at it. So, several decades later, I wanted a return to that blues-driven sweet spot that Rolling Stones made their own. Shouldn’t their consistently pure, unique instrumentals and personality-filled vocals still be replicable in 2023? Nobody since the heyday version of the Rolling Stones has been able to capture that unique blues sound like they did, and unfortunately as I listened to Hackney Diamonds , that standard has yet to be met. The best blues moments are fleeting and scattered at best. Track 6, “Dreamy Skies” , track 10, “Tell Me Straight” , and track 12, “Rolling Stone Blues” give us a taste, and they’re some of my favorites on the album. But, that’s only 3/12 tracks. Instead, the Stones seem to have made a conscious choice for safe pop-rock. Aside from their brief blues departure later in the album and 2000s impression-rock track “Whole Wide World” (a bad song), they leaned into the 80s. Though this isn’t my favorite era of rock by any means, they were able to deliver a recognizable sound, albeit safe and far from unique. Flighty group vocal choruses, repetitive but consistent song structure, and the occasional guitar solo. After a few songs I knew exactly what to expect. “Angry” is the first song of the album, and it does a good job of setting the pop-rock tone. It may be the best example of their general aim for the album, though it’s hard to tell at times. Meanwhile “Bite My Head Off” (track 4), which supposedly features Sir Paul McCartney , is a perfect example of their formula falling flat. The Bridge Structure is not a bad thing. Though it often receives a negative connotation, it is a helpful tool for delivering a solid end product. I’ve had moments of frustration reviewing albums this year, as artists move further away from traditional pop structure - Verse, verse, bridge, verse - only to lose their way with underwhelming results. The Stones have it down. When I review albums, I take notes chronologically, adjusting my opinion on a song as it unfolds, usually finishing with ¾ lines of notes per track. In those notes I’m always sure to make a note of a good chorus, verse, or bridge. After marking down ‘BRIDGE’ for six of the first seven songs, I realized I should just mark it at the bottom of the page as its own category. Whether it be vocal, piano, guitar, or some combination of the three, the bridge is often the strongest stretch of a Hackney Diamonds song. This is entirely undervalued in music today, so I’m glad to see The Rolling Stones reviving it. No matter how good of a hook you have, no matter how good your verses are, no matter how engaging a song is, the audience may not want to hear it repeat itself 3-4 times with no interruption. Therefore, in order to venture over 2 verses or three minutes, a bridge is a necessity. “Mess It Up” for example, is redeemed, to an extent, by its bridge. Frankly, so is the album itself. The Vocals Can Mick J agger sing like he used to? I don’t know, he doesn’t really bother. For much of the album, the verses are straightforward, and the choruses are basic. While that does fit into their sound of choice much of the time, it was an unnecessary sacrifice of personality. There is a reason Jagger is one of the most famous frontmen/women of all time. He has a swagger as a vocalist and live performer, and his abilities are rarely topped. He’s comfortable, creative, and assertive on the microphone. The Rolling Stones are a historically cohesive, well-rehearsed unit of instrumentalists, but so were the Grateful Dead . What vaulted The Rolling Stones into superstardom was the man in the middle. I don’t expect him to wail on a track like he used to, but that swagger that gives them such an elite feel as a band was lacking this year. There is no real excuse for this. Johnny Cash, despite his comparatively limited vocal capabilities, actually elevated his performative repertoire on his final album. Jagger should’ve been able to at least replicate his own. Instead we have a vocally clean, yet flat album. That vocal cleanliness, in a vacuum, is no sin. However, there’s something fishy about it on Hackney Diamonds . It feels polished, literally, as though every single second of every song was doctored post-recording. And this wouldn’t surprise me. Autotune, aside from its obvious vocally altering capabilities, is also used to smooth out sl ight imperfections in performances. On My Next Guest Needs No Introduction with David Letterman , Billie Eilish explains the practice of vocal comping. This is the recording of multiple takes, and splicing them together to create one perfect vocal performance. Whether the Stones were using one of these methods or something else, I’m not sure. All I know is there are noticeably unnatural portions of vocals on this album. In comparison, once again, to Johnny Cash, who leaned into his imperfections and weaknesses out of vulnerability, Jagger seems to have tried to hide his, at the cost of his own persona on the microphone. I’d give examples, but you can find them on almost every song. Let’s shift to the positives instead. The Strengths One step The Rolling Stones took to modernize their sound, which I actually appreciated, was the inclusion of features. While McCartney’s presence on track 4 is inconsequential, the other two features resulted in the strongest songs on the album. The first is “Live By The Sword” , featuring Elton John . This raucous track came out firing. Elton John is very present on piano, the pace is great, and Jagger's vocals feel more prominent. For the first time on the whole album I felt my foot tap. It’s a fun, well-executed song in their own style, in contrast to a song like “Get Close” , which has a similar aim but sounds more like The J. Geils Band than the Stones. Meanwhile, the best song on the album is more than just a fun time. Track 11, “Sweet Sounds of Heaven” , featuring Lady Gaga , is a total success. A classic Jagger lead-in sets a tone that strikes a perfect balance between fresh and vintage, especially as the Gaga accompanying vocals come in. She quietly harmonizes in the background, providing a lighter, more feminine edge to Mick Jagger’s most bold performance on the album. They combine to build the energy to a high point, then bring it down for Lady Gaga to handle the bridge alongside the piano, before building it up one final time to the finish. While the final build is a bit messy, it brings a genuine energy to the track and album that was desperately needed. Once again Lady Gaga proves herself to be an elite collaborator, and The Rolling Stones deliver an authentic performance that reminds us who they can still be. If there’s one thing I did have absolute confidence in, it’s this: The Rolling Stones’ ability to make an album. The first and last tracks were great choices, the album flowed fairly well and with a generally uniform sound, and it wasn’t too long. Despite the fact I didn’t enjoy every track, they all felt worthy of inclusion, in the context of the whole. That really goes a long way in my opinion. If your album flows all the way through and stands on its own as one cohesive musical composition, you can better hold the attention of an audience, even one that isn’t fully captivated. So that’s where I leave this review: on a positive. The Rolling Stones are one of the greatest bands of all time. The way the English language works, ‘are’ is the correct word. Because they still exist, they ‘are’ one of the greatest bands of all time, however everyone knows that they are now a different version of the band they once were: something closer to The Stationary Stones. All things considered though, Hackney Diam onds isn’t a failure. The vocals, while audibly tolerable, don’t really find an identity, at least not until the end, and the instrumentation is fairly safe. But, they took a chance on the features and landed two thirds of the record. And Stones successfully constructed a cohesive album, giving us songs with actual replay value in the year 2023 - 58 years after they first topped the American charts. So, summing it up as briefly as I can: it’s a mixed bag. Johnny Cash’s American IV: The Man Comes Ar ound is a 10/10. By the standard Johnny Cash s et in 2002, Hackney Diamonds is a 5.7/10.

Forever Howlong: OK, Now Everyone Play At Once! By Ian Sherry 4/16/2025 Black Country, New Road’s newest project, Forever Howlong , is every bit as creatively constipated and authentically heady as their last cult favorite. In 2022 Black Country, New Road struck a 7 on the alt-rock Richter Scale with their second studio album, Ants from Up There . I listened, my head spun, and I moved on. At the time it wasn’t something I felt ready to formally rate as my thoughts didn’t match my friends’ positive ravings, but Pitchfork awarded it a 8.4 (and Rolling Stone currently has not 1, not 2, but 3 stories about Donald Trump on its homepage – just read The Culture Gyre instead). Now, I’ve got 3 years of patience and unwaveringly correct opinions under the belt I’m wearing to this BCNR review; let’s see what they brought. The density of the Black Country, New Road sound is what makes it so polarizing. While the reception of their music has been overwhelmingly positive, confused and overwhelmed appreciation is the dominant sentiment. I believe I’m starting to see through the haze (or hear rather). A true British situation, the BCNR instrumental repertoire includes drums, piano, sax, and a truckload of strings – electric guitar, acoustic guitar, bass, banjo, and violin. In true folk style, they use that litany of stringed instruments to form a steady sonic bed under the rotation of lead vocalists. From there, tradition is thrown to the wind. On Forever Howlong , the budding sextet of creatives leaned into their art-rock sensibilities in the absence of Isaac Wood, the gravitational center of their last sonic system. With their lead singer and strongest guitarist stepping aside, Black Country, New Road has begun to drift further from contemporary song structure. This record is defined by striking shifts within tracks that are dictated more by lyrical content than rhythmic progressions. The West Coast art-pop scene of the 60s and 70s lived by a similar code. Their dramatics were more so the product of free will than the type of musical reasoning BCNR operates with, however, the results are a bit too similar. Dramatic shifts between or within songs, which were a common issue on those LSD records, became an inexplicable normality on Forever Howlong . The stop-and-go is likely intended to draw the listener in, but the overuse of these atypical progressions makes for a laborious listening experience. “Socks” and “For the Cold Country” took years off my life. Luckily, BCNR has the power to give those years back. Just as soon as “Socks” pushed my face in the dirt, the pleasant build of “Salem Sisters” lifted my back up. A refreshingly decipherable and sprightly instrumental, a bit of solid structure, and beautifully done background vocals throughout the entirety of a track is all it took for me to buy into Black Country, New Road 4 songs in. When organized sonic clutter presents itself effectively, the results often feel elevated from an average band’s sound, but a balance is needed. The abstract needs normalcy to define itself, and BCNR checks that box when absolutely needed. Forever Howlong provides just enough straightforward material to anchor the rest of its content, and “Mary” is the perfect example. The instrumental bones are as simple as any track on the record and with that easy synchronicity on display, the group vocalists are free to steal the show as they deliver one of the record’s most powerful performative stretches over the final third of track 6. Some of their best displays of talent came just like that – naturally. On an album where they’ve clearly reconfigured to fill a Wood-shaped hole, it often feels like BCNR is chasing the dragon of bombastic songs like “The Place Where He Inserted The Blade.” The instinct to mimic one’s best work is tempting, but they don’t need to force conceptual complexity to make high level music. That’s obvious on the title track, which affords the rare opportunity for the listener to sit back and experience Black Country, New Road creating without having that creation thrust in our faces. “Forever Howlong” throws zero curveballs, stays within itself, shows just enough life on the bridge, and concludes with a quality finish, all to beg the question: why don’t they approach every track like this? I’ve got two answers, “Two Horses” and “Nancy Tries to Take the Night.” The first dreamily starts with a singular guitar and some lovely voices, then a whistle and a second guitar that continue to lull the listener through the 2-minute-mark when the track begins to come to life. It takes off fully at 3:00 when a firm bassline, dual guitars, and flourishing high keys flood the airwaves in perfect unison for an organically incredible sonic highpoint the likes of which I’d yet to hear across any of their work. The second begins with a 2-minute-long, guitar-forward introduction that gives way to a temporarily Adrienne Lenker-like vocal performance, before the song morphs into a tight, beat-like instrumental that continuously and relentlessly builds on itself before finally relinquishing to a theatrical minute-long vocal conclusion. It’s a ridiculous but inexplicably well-executed example of the musical behavior I’ve been trying to discourage. Sonic maximalism and track-to-track overambition plague this record but result in songs like those, which makes it much harder to condemn the approach. While the pursuit of 10/10 tracks feels forced on the majority of songs, Black Country, New Road is able to justify those pursuits, even within the songs that suffer from them. This record feels like a step back, but not the permanent kind. Wood’s guitar feels fairly irreplaceable at this point, but the trio of vocalists, Tyler Hyde, May Kershaw, and Georgia Ellery, was extremely effective, and their group vocal ability adds more to the sound than Wood’s vocal persona could alone. The balance of instrumental complexity and dynamic vocals led to their strongest work when properly struck, but the many lengthy intros tend to expose a less complex sonic palate that their structurally ambitious songs work to mask or overcome. Further mastery of their many moving parts and a matured understanding of listenability could result in their best record, but a deepened obsession with sonic maximalism and out-of-the-box track development may lead them down a path of creative anti-progress. Black Country, New Road: professional line-toers. Forever Howlong is a 7.6 .

THE POP SHOP BY: Ian Sherry 9/5/2023 If you came for Faygo I apologize. In the grand scheme of music creation and consumption, genres are completely trivial. However, they are one of my favorite things to noodle around. The most noodley of the bunch is pop. As music continually evolves, defining pop gets increasingly difficult. Michael Jackson is the ‘king of pop’, yet he falls under the same general mega-genre as Ethel Cain , The Beach Boys , and Shania Twain . Strange but true. The pop quandary is most evident, to me, in a record store. Most often, you’ll find a pop/rock section. Certainly that model was sensible at a time, especially in a stretch like the 80s through the 2010s. These days however, I’m not sure those two genres align as closely. With acts like Imagine Dragons and Fall Out Boy fading, the bridge between the two has narrowed in favor of the slow-motion collision of rap and pop. Therefore, everytime I see a pop/rock section, I’ve granted myself permission to chuckle at whatever dinosaur constructed it. As a freshman in college without a credit rating (or whatever you need to own a business), I have no chance of running a record shop anytime soon. Admittedly, my opinion is from the outside looking in, however my occasional frustration with genre organization is justified. So, because my writing this article is conveniently inconsequential, let’s organize my theoretical record shop: The Pop Shop. Here at the Pop Shop, we operate under the assumption that all of our customers are equally, if not more, opinionated as myself, especially regarding genre placement of their favorite artists. Now that I’m a shop owner, I suppose I’ll have to make compromises here and there to accommodate customers with diversified taste. As I touched on previously, pop is what holds most genres together. Pop is the key to a broad musical palette. Therefore as a record store owner with fairly diverse taste and an equally multi-interested customer base, my first order of business is to define pop. Is pop linear? Well, I’m not sure but I might be by the time this paragraph is done. My instinct is to say yes. One of my favorite music-listening activities is creating playlists that transverse eras. It’s very satisfying to look at dissimilar beginnings and endings to tracklists, wondering how they connect, and finding out somewhere in the middle. How did American popular music seamlessly evolve (or regress) from Frank Sinatra to Drake ? That’s an answer for another article, but it certainly did. The keyword to my previous claim is seamless. There is no definite instant in pop music history in which the definition itself suddenly changed. There have been game changing artists, releases, even songs, but mass artistic or stylistic change simply can’t happen over night. The result is a genre which is constantly mentioned but insufficiently defined. Concise or concrete definitions to abstract concepts are futile in nearly every case. That’s why I’m taking a whole article to unpack it, instead of a sign behind the Pop Shop’s front desk. So, after brief deliberation, pop is indeed linear. It’s not linear in a traditional sense though. It’s not a straight line. It’s a chain linked together by genre-bending or trailblazing artists. That chain looks drastically different at some points than others, but it’s all one piece. I’ll take it a step further: it's a gyre. Pop is a gyre If you don’t know what a gyre is, you haven’t explored our homepage enough. Go now . Welcome back. To summarize: a gyre is a linear pattern in which a vortex widens from a point until it reaches a breaking point of sorts, it then continues from a single point in the center of the widened end. The most important thing to understand about the pop gyre, is that it doesn’t stop at any point, which makes it linear, but it does have significant and traceable points of reshaping. These points are marked by collections of those aforementioned artists, projects, and songs. Whether it's Billie Holiday’s shedding the light of pop culture on the horrors of the south, the gay sensation that was Freddie Mercury , or one of David Bowie’s many genre-quaking phases, individual impacts on mainstream pop music have more significance in the real world than we could understand. That impact, if you want to fully understand pop, cannot be separated from the stylistic evolution of the genre. I have no problem with the general opinion that Bing Crosby and Frank Sinatra are America’s first pop stars. That makes them ground zero for American music’s gyre. Highlighting an artist is a very useful tool for defining a genre, someone who encapsulates the sound and or attitude of a musical movement. Artists like The Beatles , David Bowie, Michael Jackson , Whitney Houston , Madonna , and Adele have all held that role. You’ll find all of those artists in the Pop Shop’s signature pop section. However, as they don’t currently define 2023’s pop sound, they can’t be at the center of our biggest section. We have to pick a new artist. 2023’s centerpiece of pop ‘Finally some specifics’, says any reader more interested in facts than conceptual rambling. 2023’s pop music landscape is broader than ever. As music continues to evolve, despite the gyre resets, the scale of pop will continue to broaden. That only makes sense. Generally, anything that charts on the billboard is somehow pop-adjacent. Nowadays that means pop directly overlaps with rap, r&b, country, indie, and rock, among others. When Kendrick Lamar was charting with To Pimp A Butterfly , pop had a link with jazz. When The Weeknd and Dua Lipa started stylistically dipping into 80s tropes, pop had a link to a different decade. When Lil Uzi Vert charted with “Just Wanna Rock” , pop had a link to New Jersey club. That’s all to say a diverse landscape makes it hard to pinpoint a centerpiece, but I have a pick: SZA . Although pop is the common ground for any mainstream genre, it always has a definable sound. This sound is constantly shifting, and with rap and r&b packing the charts, it has begun to shift that direction. The more palatable, even inoffensive, approach that a Taylor Swift or Harry Styles brings to the table is no longer the solution. The ideal pop star has to incorporate their own sound, have an interesting persona, a splash of sexuality, but most of all, the ability to collaborate. I don’t just mean Dua Lipa adding Dababy to her song that’s already charting, I mean real sound-altering collaboration. SZA has all of that. SZA has been a fixture in modern r&b since her hit album Ctrl , but her 2022 release SOS launched her into the center of today’s music scene. The hit single “Kill Bill”, which was accompanied by quite the music video, captured a huge audience. Her variety of moods accommodated brand new audiences. Her attitude and personality thrilled her long-time fans. And, her well-executed and occasionally unexpected features further proved her ability to bring together the best in music. Try “Kill Bill” , “Seek & Destroy” , “Snooze” , “Ghost in the Machine” , and “Open Arms” . Though it leans towards r&b, SOS embodies pop. It will be listened to, referenced, and imitated for the rest of this decade. So, when you enter the Pop Shop looking to buy SOS , check smack in the middle of the store. Nitpicking Now that we’ve established the center of pop, we have to do the dirty work: marking borders. I think the best course of action is one mega-pop section subdivided into the various genres of influence and today’s popular sound. The outer walls will be lined with the following non-pop-adjacent genres: blues, punk, metal, folk/bluegrass, hip-hop, soul, jazz, house/techno, reggae, and classical. The border of the mega-pop section will be made up of the following pop-adjacent genres: rock, r&b, rap, indie, country, and latin. Each of those will connect to the mega-pop section like this: genre/pop. Here’s two defining artists for each, but the Pop Shop has everything. rock/pop Elton John Portugal. The Man r&b/pop Whitney Houston Ella Mai rap/pop Nelly Doja Cat indie/pop The Smiths Wet Leg country/pop Dolly Parton Chris Stapleton latin/pop Selena ROSALIA Prince gets his own section. Isn’t this fun? Closing for the night I find it interesting that pop seems to glean a negative connotation. For example, if you tell someone their favorite Canadian rapper, who they might consider a hip-hop icon, is more of a pop artist, they might take offense. In fact, I’ve found it's a good way to immediately turn a conversation into a confrontation. Try it some time. Then, remind them of that elite crop I just listed. Remind them that pop is the confluence of everything that is hot in music today. Remind them that it's a perfect gauge of just how much this divided country has in common. Remind them that ultimately genre has no relation to merit. If they’re still stuck on their anti-pop attitude, send them to my shop. I’ll be waiting.

A Perfectly Timely Review of Head of the Love Club BY: Ian Sherry 5/22/23 I discovered Hänlyn shortly after the release of this EP and after spending the last few months listening to her I decided she was the final piece to an article I’ve been wanting to write for some time. As I attempted to properly unpack Gretel Hänlyn’s talent in her section of “Putting You On Three” , I realized this EP needed its own review. So, months after the release, it’s here. On March 13, 2023 Gretel Hänlyn released her sophomore EP Head of the Love Club. Gretel Hänlyn’s debut Slugeye showcased a clearly defined and developed sound coming from a talented artist. Its production, song structure, and stylistic flexibility, (all things young artists often struggle with) were all standout quality. She thrived when creating complicated soundscapes and then singing right down the middle of them, allowing the music itself to shine while her voice pulls everything together. It was a musically diverse and well-rounded EP, but after this most recent release it feels safe. Gretel Hänlyn’s 2023 Head of the Love Club is exciting to say the least. Let me tell you why. “Dry Me” is a perfect start. Immediately Hänlyn brings an intensity, both vocally and instrumentally, she’s never shown before. She ranges up and down vocally within lines, hitting highs and lows in just one sentence. The vocal performance itself pulls the listener in close through the 1:30 mark, at which point she begins to build tension. Rising synths and a repeated acoustic guitar progression lead to the payoff at the 2:45 mark: her voice reaches peak intensity, and heavy piano slams in the low end along with the drums as a much lighter piano riff is sprinkled over the top. The intense soundscape provides the perfect release of tension, and though it lasts just over 15 seconds, it is a fantastic preview of things to come. Moving chronologically, “Drive” puts this EP in motion. Employing a lot of the keys to the success of Wet Legs debut project, Hänlyn nails the more raw end of this modern indie pop sound. The electric baseline rolls over and over, setting the pace alongside punchy drums. Her buzzy spoken vocals sit on top, letting simplicity command the audience’s attention, until the chorus serves as a well-timed interjection. She brings in poppy feminine vocals and electric guitar to do so. Sending the audience seamlessly in and out of witty verses is essential, especially with these kinds of spoken vocals, which can wear down an audience over long terms of exposure. “Drive” is a challenge, but a simple and effective one: Hänlyn is bringing the energy and you have to absorb it. “King of Nothing” immediately addresses the other end of the modern indie pop spectrum, and its placement directly behind “Drive” feels like no mistake. To use a literary term, it is essentially a foil of its predecessor. The baseline rolls just like before, but the distortion from the previous verses’ baseline is placed on the chorus’ guitar in “King of Nothing”. The distortion is also removed from the vocals, and the higher, more delicate layered vocals take hold of the verses instead of the choruses like before. Using a similar song structure to boot, Hänlyn is able to create a completely different sound with just a few small switches. Whether or not this particular contrast is intentional, Hänlyn’s technical and artistic abilities are on full display with “King of Nothing”. “Wiggy” provides more of a stylistic continuation than the previous transitions. Hänlyn amps up the vocal layering. The song moves along nicely, once again being subtly guided by the baseline. She uses the higher pitched guitar to insert air into the track by separating the upper and lower ends of the mix. Together, these factors create a very catchy sound. For most of the song she layers the instrumental up and down more seamlessly than any of her other work, even to a fault as the final chorus is frankly built up too much. While it doesn’t have the most sonically pleasing conclusion, track 4 is another detail-oriented success that transports the audience to a happy wiggy world. Yet another stylistic swerve, “Little Vampire” revisits the Slugeye vibe. Using acoustic guitar and drowsy vocals (a combo that reminds me a lot of Nirvana), Hänlyn begins to build tension like she does so well on this EP. As the song progresses, a buzzing sound creeps up and she begins to mix in eerily delicate vocals. She even sprinkles in some keys in place of vocals. As the buzzing persists and the wall of tension continues to build, her delicate vocals start to feel crushed under the weight of what’s coming. Then, the song ends. Gretel Hänlyn knows exactly what she’s doing. She knows how well she builds tension. She knows the power of her vocals to set the mood. She knows that her command over the mix only adds to that mood. And she uses this knowledge to trick us: leaving her audience with a conclusion that should be unsatisfying, yet somehow is completely the opposite. “Little Vampire” might not be the most exciting song on Head of the Love Club , but it's a masterpiece. Hänlyn knows that too. “The Head of the Love Club” is probably the worst song on the album. It begins with a grinding distorted guitar and it continues without much pause for 2 minutes. It is just too much. The points where it releases and is replaced with a pleasant baseline are very enjoyable, but it's not nearly worth the payoff. It also disrupts the flow of the song, preventing the instrumental from building properly, removing any chance for airiness, and taking away from an enjoyable vocal performance. I know what Hänlyn was going for, but the result is disappointing, especially considering she successfully executes this concept elsewhere in this EP. Thankfully, “Easy Peeler” is a complete release of tension. Weaving in three different acoustic guitars at some points, Hänlyn creates an elegant sound. Her beautiful vocals only add to it. She adds an electric guitar on the chorus and later verses, ensuring she won’t lose that familiar low end, as she thrives atop the mix. My only gripe with this song is its occasional struggles layering the instrumental, however she nails it on the last try. She lets the vocals rest a bit longer on the last attempt, allowing herself time to layer the final high point, piece by piece, and give this pretty song the ending it deserves. “Today (Can’t Help but Cry)” is as good of a conclusion as “Dry Me” is a start. The sharp contrast between the two allows the audience to reflect on the 26 minute journey as they enjoy the Kate Bush-like world Hänlyn creates down the stretch of this final track. A classic indie pop intro is followed by soaring verses. She clears out any distortion in favor of echoing vocals, for a dreamy sound. Hänlyn sings in stride with the music on this track. Instead of looking for a pocket in the mix for her vocals, she floats alongside it. She minimizes the instrumentation of the bridge in favor of those echoed vocals, before bringing it back to ride out the album. She lets the audience admire this soundscape as it fades away, taking her 2023 EP with it. My initial thoughts centered around how many risks she took considering the quality and consistency of her first EP. However, I now realize that for Hänlyn, executing risks comes naturally. She stays within her abilities, and those abilities are responsible for one of my favorite releases of the year. Things like building tension, mid-line tone shifting, vocal layering, and messing around with song structure, are occasional tools for most artists (something to try once in a while for effect). For Gretel Hänlyn they are an integral part of her sound. She is so advanced, it's hard to believe her streaming numbers aren’t higher, but it won’t be long. Of course, there are kinks to work out on this EP, but to me, they feel like the musical equivalent to first-world problems. There is one glaring miss on this album, but there are so many good things to unpack, even on that song, I have no problem looking by it (except when I’m rating). If you haven’t listened to Head of the Love Club please do, and if you haven’t heard of Gretel Hänlyn, you’re welcome. Head of the Love Club is a 9.25/10. Suggested Listening Balance

Tabs On Tigers 2/18/2025 BY: IAN SHERRY Forward: The Issue of Immediacy Greetings sports fans. You’ve heard about the Luka Doncic trade. The 25-year-old Slovenian star, formerly of the Dallas Mavericks, was traded to the Lakers within the first 24 hours of February for Hall of Fame Swiss cheese slice Anthony Davis and some change. Within those same 24 hours, like clockwork, Shams Charania’s early-bird tip was broadcasted to Americans nationwide via ESPN alert. The result, then, was a media-fueled and interpersonally experienced hellstorm of unkempt sporting enthusiasm and perplexed fandom that has yet to fully cease. The bone I’d like to briefly pick with the phenomenon above doesn’t concern the aforementioned hellstorm nor the reliability of the American sporting news system. It’s the pace. Mainstream sports journalism, because of its constant active, proactive, and reactive content stream, tends to skew in an emotional, argumentative direction that intertwines with fandom and biases to the point that the coverage becomes lost in the sport itself. With media being as conclusive and invasive as it is in today’s age, the lines between your couch at home and an pro locker room are more blurred than ever. While there certainly are benefits of this arrangement, I’ve been more aware of the dangers recently. I think it suffices to say, and this reflects across most genres of journalism to an extent, that the competitive rush to be lead opinion on a subject you’re passionate about can be blinding, and its tangible in the mosaic of bad takes that we’re meant to recognize as authority in today’s reportorial landscape. Resistance to that is The Culture Gyre’s angle indiscriminately. Now please join me in embarking on coverage of a subject I was born to discuss: Tigers Baseball. Tabs On Tigers Vol. 1 Alex Bregman’s 3-year 120-million-dollar contract became official Thursday, February 13th. In that moment he became the third highest annually paid position player, behind just Ohtani and Soto and tied with Judge, and in that same moment, a bullet was dodged in southeast Michigan. That came following the Tigers’ months-long pursuit of the veteran third baseman. General manager Scott Harris and the majority of the fanbase felt that Bregman would be a concrete solution for a currently uncertain foundation at the hot corner. Harris went as far as to offer a 5-year 170-million-dollar contract that most closely resembled the 7-year 200-million-dollar deal Bregman thought he was worth, but that was not to be. Now, the discussion surrounding Tigers team improvement has shifted to the trade market, but we’d like to offer a more complete synopsis of the most recent developments and current condition of this 2025 Tigers team. The most pressing concern of fans headed into free agency was the left side of the infield. While the starting pitching staff was alarmingly thin on paper last year, it’s hard to argue with the hodge-podged late-season results, plus having the reigning Cy Young offers a certain level of security. Harris addressed it anyhow with the thrifty signing of the veteran (and already inured) Alex Cobb, who’s quietly carried a sub-4 ERA for four consecutive years, and the recent readdition of the flourishing Jack Flaherty. Add a pair of bullpen arms, (one great and one solid) in Tommy Kahnle and John Brebbia, and an assortment of sub-30-year-old starting pitchers – plus Kenta Maeda - competing for a spot at the end of our rotation (2 until Cobb returns) and suddenly this pitching staff feels legit. But still, no signings on the left side. The left side of the infield – the carrot on a stick. Gleyber Torres used to play there, but not since the arrival of better fielding prospects on the Yankees infield. From there, the former 38-homerun all-star’s relationship with his former team began to wash away, and as the impact of that process began to show itself on the field over the past couple seasons, the stream carried him to Detroit. The Tigers front office locked him up for a season at $15k, just half the yearly offering we placed on Alex Bregman’s table. While Torres will have to earn his play in a platoon-heavy infield like he got tired of doing in New York and his overall game doesn’t compare to Boston’s most recent overspend, his offensive upside is that of a player with equivalent homerun power to Bregman. He is admittedly a notch below in most other offensive categories, but just one notch, and the optimist in you might expect a jump in plate discipline given his more veteran role on this team as well as an increase in RBI production assuming he finds himself more central in the Tigers lineup, which still boasts zero established major league left-side infielders. The Torres addition, of course, means a move for the Tigers’ long-term commitment Kolt Keith, but not to third base, his former position. Instead, Spencer Torkelson drew the short end of the stick this winter. The former number-one pick has had obvious struggles at the major league level, showing flashes at times on both sides of the ball, but ultimately scraping his way to replacement level over his first three seasons. With Jace Jung and Trey Sweeney being a part of the miracle Mudhen formula that propelled the Tigers to last year’s post-season and Matt Vierling working in at third, it seems Scott Harris decided the direst situation on the infield was at first base. At least, it was the most easily solvable. The fact is, problems remain unsolved headed into Spring Training, but Baez, McKinstry, Maeda, Hinch’s musical chairs batting order, the hitting coaches, and the away uniforms are for another day. For today, we have a minor leaguer, Trey Sweeney, attempting to prove himself a pro at shortstop. We have an ultra-scrappy yet questionable three-man platoon at third base among the switch-hitting Jung, versatile and athletic Vierling, and lefty-killer Ibanez. That goes with a right side manned by Torres and Keith (perhaps Torkelson against a lefty) to round out a blatantly poor defensive infield. Luckily, they’re backed up by what could prove to be an excellent outfield with premium left fielder Riley Greene, thoroughbred center fielder Parker Meadows, and the looming power threat, Kerry Carpenter, in right field. We also have a rotation book-ended by the lefty Cy Young Tarik Skubal and the potential of a Hinch chaosball platoon in the 5th slot, which will, in theory, allow Cobb to rehab and settle into the middle while Flaherty picks up where he left off and Reese Olsen continues to grow into one of the leagues most underrated young arms. We have a full bullpen and a decision to make at closer. We have a coach with the team’s faith. We have an active front office led by a diplomatic and measured GM with at least some of the owner’s attention and a willingness to trade. We have a lot to look forward to.

Coverage Vol. I 12/2/23 BY: IAN SHERRY Cover songs are one of my favorite music industry phenomena. When done well, cover artists pay homage to the original song while offering their own spin or twist. Sometimes they see massive success, surpassing the original, such as Aretha Franklin’s “R espect” , Johnny Cash’s “Hurt” , Chaka Khan’s “I Feel For You” , and I could go on. One of my favorite exercises is digging through versions of a song that’s been covered over and over, and picking the best version. You can often find great performances by legendary artists that you didn’t even know existed. I always seem to find at least one. Would you like to try one with me? The Beatle s are one of the most covered artists of all time. For my first in a forthcoming series of articles, I felt it would be fitting to start with a Beatles original: “Got To Get You Into My Life” . One of the bigger songs off their culturally essential Revolver, this track has settled into an interesting niche, like much of the album. The cinematic instrumentals sit in back with a more restrained vocal in front that branches out on the chorus. I heard someone call it The Beatles’ Motown song. In short, it’s a song with great bones and lots of moving parts, making it an enticing candidate for covers. MENTIONS Chicago (Live in 75) - This is a fun live performance, and while it’s well done, they play it fairly straight. It doesn’t separate itself from any live Beatles or McCartney version. Joe Pesci- I only mentioned this because it’s crazy to hear such a prolific rapper branch out. There's lots of ‘ohs’ and ‘heys’ to be had here - if you’re into that kind of thing. Daniel Johnson- Johnston’s awkward low quality performances h ave touched many people. He thrives in a raw emotional space, but sometimes he can be grating, and unfortunately this cover is one of those instances. Blood Sweat & Tears- It pains me to rank this band within the ‘Mentions’ instead of slotting them above the Beatles original. Blood Sweat & Tears scratches a very specific big band/raw vocal itch for me. They often elevate songs with their arrangements and instrumentation, but this time they didn’t do quite enough to surpass the original for me to justify bumping them up into the Top Four. TOP FOUR I can’t explain why four is the right number, especially as a believer in the rule of three. Maybe I just want to be different. Lucky for me, this time around, the top four are a step above. NUMBER FOUR The Beatles, 1966 Yes it’s the original, and that certainly counts for something. In fact, if it weren’t the original it might have slipped out of the Top Four, which may happen at some point in this series. But not this time because th e original is a creative masterpiece. A massive song with room to get bigger, the Beatles really nailed it instrumentally. However, I have an issue with the vocal performance: the energy and tone feel a bit meek in comparison to their backing. McCartney elevates his vocals for the chorus, but it feels a bit sudden. While the initial surprise factor pays off the first time around, you only hear The Beatles for the first time once. Did they do anything wrong? Not necessarily. This is just the Revolver sound in a nutshell. It strikes a unique balance between all of what makes The Beatles great, but in a semi-chaotic way. That organized chaos is responsible for the large number of fans that choose Revolver as their top Beatles album. However, I’ve always preferred the cleanness of Abbey Road, and my next pick reflects that. But, I have a final note: The Beatles are so good, this song included, that I have to argue against them in order to justify them sitting anywhere but #1. NUMBER THREE Dave Koz And Friends Summer Horns, 2013 When you talk about covers, you want the artist to elevate the song and clean up some missteps the original artist may have taken, such as the Beatles safe vocals. I don’t listen to much instrumental music, and this isn’t the only instrumental cover out there, but this one really stands out. Although it’s difficult to strike a balance between the vocal arrangement and backing instrumentation on a purely instrumental song like this, Koz’s cover has a remedy that elevates the song: just add more horns! This same sentiment is shared by the group occupying the top slot, but the pure woodwind firepower on this track is unmatched. Instrumental music can be boring to some, but thi s energized cover couldn’t possibly bore anyone. Check it out. NUMBER TWO Ella Fitzgerald, 1969 Nobody claims songs like powerhouse Black female vocalists of a certain era. Nina Simone, Etta James, Aretha Franklin, and of course, Ella Fitzgerald. Incorporating many of the same elements as The Beatles, Fitzgerald plays it as close to the original as anyone on this list, but her subtle changes set this 1969 cover apart. Her version opens with a subdued and simplified instrumental approach, making it easier to execute her clean jazz sound above the slightly chaotic arrangement of the original version. The instrumentation dances through her verses throughout, keeping the song upbeat, simple and clean. Then Fitzgerald elevates vocally and the music follows suit, rising to a crescendo at the high point of the hook. She yells ‘Got to get you into my life’ as the horns and background vocalists swell in unison. After the high point, the elevated sound continues, as she vocally freestyles through the final fade. She takes full ownership of the song by redesigning the builds and adding her signature vocal flavor. I can’t ask for more than that. NUMBER ONE Earth Wind & Fire, 1978 I suspect this is the second best known version of the song (behind Joe Pesci, of course). This isn’t just the best version of this song, it’s one of their best tracks ever. Earth Wind & Fire is one of the greatest American bands of all time, so that says a lot. I heard this version when I was a kid and didn’t even realize it was the same song until years later because it is so far elevated. The horns are clean, their signature background vocals are perfect, the addition of the stand-alone electric guitar is genius, the bass is more present than any other version, even their swagger elevates the song. Maurice White also outsings everyone on this list with sustained superior vocal range, rising up with the instrumental instead of joining it for brief splashes on the chorus. This was a track waiting to be done perfectly, and nobody is better suited to rise to the specific demands presented than Earth Wind & Fire. I think you’ll agree.

< Back WALK WITH ME There are no vocals. Conversations discussing the greatest musicians of all time don’t include Prince or Aretha Franklin. Instead they focus on the giants of the ‘classical’ music era or the pioneers of Jazz. Genres like rock and roll or hip hop, genres which rely on a balance between instrumental and vocal rhythm, don’t exist. At least they don’t exist as we know them. Celine Dion works at a coffee shop, Marvin Gaye has recently taken a step back from his lengthy yet local career as an activist for civil liberties in the greater Washington D.C. area. You’ve never heard of Elvis Presley and you don’t need to have an opinion on him. Rodriguez was able to retire just a few years earlier from his factory job on Detroit’s west side and Marshall Mathers’ relationship with his mother withered to an uneventful conclusion at the hands of bitter yet mild-mannered and mutual avoidance. I could go on. You love music, as you should. It may be at the center of your life. You might listen to it every night with your family over dinner, or as you work through your days. Maybe it puts you to sleep every night or wakes you every morning. It might perfectly encapsulate a feeling you can’t otherwise explain, or make you feel ways nothing else does. You might even go as far as to say it's the most important thing in your life, that if you couldn’t hear you couldn’t go on. And that may be true. But even then, you would have no idea what you’re missing. It’s a crazy thought right? Vocals are an intrinsic part of what we know as music. Not all of it, but at this point, to me, it’s more noticeable when a track doesn’t have vocals than the reverse. There’s no point in attempting to pinpoint the invention of ‘singing’ as we know it. Instead, I offer the assumption that it can be traced back to before the human race reached its current genetic resting place. It’s inseparable from the human experience. Lyrics are responsible for the basis of much of the world’s shared culture, and the entirety of old-school educators’ beloved Classics Department. (I’m a fan too, don't get me wrong). Lyrics are not only a musical luxury, they are a mankind essential. They tell stories, plural. They have their own message (ideally), but beneath that they tell the story of whichever world and worldview birthed them. Whether it be a world of political turmoil, a world of prosperity, a world of famine or economic depression, a world of emotional depression, or a world seen through the eyes of love. This world is delivered through the filtered consciousness of the writer on paper, then again through the voice of the performer. Whether it be the same person or not, there are several stops on the road to the audience’s ears, but all trace back to their perception. Their point of view. Instrumental arrangements can deliver excitement, composure, emotion, and countless other equally important feelings. But, one thing they simply cannot deliver is a point of view. This makes the most important job of the vocalist to deliver that exactly. A point of view. Otherwise, you’re doing nothing a powerful bassline or horn solo couldn’t deliver in its own right. Otherwise your voice is no more than an instrument, one with organic flaws and inconsistencies that Robert Cray’s guitar and Dizzy Gillespie’s trumpet don’t possess. Those flaws are less justifiable when the innately human component, that is perspective, is absent. This brings me to my daily union-supplied diss: Mac DeMarco. Believe it or not, I value my time on God’s greenish Earth, yet I still decided to listen to 9 hours and 30 minutes of Mac DeMarco. I did so with the intent of writing a review on his lengthy 2023 album, but a day later I was so severely mentally and emotionally beaten I withdrew in an attempt to salvage faith in mankind. Could I have written a lengthy Applebee’s Yelp-style review? Yes. Could I turn this into that in an instant? Yes. But, because this is a sort of love letter to music, like that text you send your friend at 3:00 that is unintentionally received as concerning instead of wholesome, I’ll be prompt. Mac DeMarco barely says words, and when he does, they add nothing lyrically and little to nothing rhythmically. It’s neither helpful nor welcome in my book. No thank you Mac. However, it does make me appreciate real vocalists. Take D’Angelo, and I’m thinking Voodoo specifically. His best album, in my opinion, might as well be an instructional manual for what Mac DeMarco attempted to assemble without unboxing the directions. In the year 2000, aided by Questlove on Drums and a long list of heavy-hitting studio artists across hip hop, jazz, and r&B, D’Angelo headed the production for his brand new atypical r&b sound. Voodoo focuses almost exclusively on finding and holding grooves. Much of the time, the vocals come across as a sonic afterthought, there to decorate the sound. (“Untitled (How Does It Feel)” is the exception). However, the lyrics don’t get a break just because they aren’t at the musical forefront. There is no better example than “Devil’s Pie” which I believe to be one of the best songs of this young century. Instead of attempting to go in depth at the risk of failing to do D’Angelo justice, I’ll opt to encourage you to, please, listen for yourself. While you’re listening, if unpacking lyrics isn’t your jam (music pun), you could imagine D’Angelo is the first person you’ve ever heard sing over what you previously knew as music. Imagine how you’d feel as the worlds of poetry and music collide. Imagine the weight this new combination might carry. You could even compare it to any track of Mac DeMarco’s musical boot camp or perhaps your favorite instrumental tracks. The difference is palpable, because good vocals add something that no other instrument can: a point of view. Thanks. P.S. Here is a short, semi-random, list of songs I consider to have perfect vocal performances. “Hope She’ll Be Happier”, Bill Withers “Change”, Big Thief “Pink Matter”, Frank Ocean feat. Andre 3000 “Save The Children”, Marvin Gaye “Nude”, Radiohead “Never Dreamed You’d Leave In Summer”. Stevie Wonder “Heaven - Live”, Talking Heads “That Feeling”, Durand Jones Previous Next