A few weeks ago, while watching an episode of NBC’s Chuck, I found myself enjoying the intentionally eccentric rendition of Toto’s 1982 hit “Africa,” played by the in-show band Jeffster. I’d never cared for the song in the past, but after the episode was over, I nonetheless ended up on YouTube listening to it a few more times. In the comments for the “Trouble in Dreams” review yesterday, I mentioned that I find it interesting when I listen to the exact same song twice, yet have two completely different experiences. In the case of Destroyer, this effect is due to the music itself; however, I think that movies and tv shows can often cause the same change in perception of music (even when the quality of the music might be questionable).

In the Sopranos series finale last year, Journey’s 1981 hit “Don’t Stop Believin’” plays over the closing scene, as Tony and his family sit to eat at a diner. According the The Guardian, sales of this song increased by 482% in the three days following the finale. Similarly, when this song played during a 2003 episode of NBC’s Scrubs, overall retail sales of Journey’s “Greatest Hits” increased 51% for the following week (per Nielson SoundScan).

Taking a quick glance at my DVDs, I thought of two other scenes in movies that, I’d imagine, have produced similar results in album/song sales: “Tiny Dancer” (Elton John) from Almost Famous (2000), and “Stuck in the Middle With You” (Stealers Wheel) from Reservoir Dogs (1992). I had never much liked “Tiny Dancer” before Almost Famous, but now I’ll listen (and usually sing along) when I hear it playing. Similarly, when I was doing some research for my Adventureland review, I read more than a few critics who said that, while they had never been fans of Lou Reed’s “Satellite of Love,” they found themselves downloading the track after watching the film. This all seems to reinforce the notion that the context in which music (or more generally, art) is experienced can significantly change one’s perception of it, which I find to be very interesting.

Given the figures above, it surprises me there has not been much interaction between companies like Apple, Amazon, TiVo, Directv, etc. to get that soundtrack information to users at the source. Especially now that many television manufacturers are including web connectivity with their sets (and trying to bypass the set top box), I would think they could do well by allowing viewers to purchase music (on, say, their iTunes or Amazon accounts) directly from the television.

Trouble in Dreams by Destroyer

While many of the other albums on this list are, in my opinion, among the best albums released in 2008, “Trouble in Dreams” is likely the only one that would appear on the list of my favorite albums of all time. As a few of you already know, I can talk about Destroyer — and this album specifically — for hours, so I’ll try to keep this pretty brief (at least shorter than my earlier, lengthy Adventureland review). For those of you (un)fortunate enough not to already know this — and, I’d imagine, for the vast majority of people, in general — Destroyer is the work of Dan Bejar, who more people are likely to know as one of the singers in the always-enjoyable The New Pornographers.

I made a promise to myself that I would never recommend Destroyer to any of my friends, as I’ve yet to meet anyone who loves Destroyer as much as I do (in fact, most of the people I know seem to barely tolerate it when I’m listening). But, since this isn’t a recommendation, I have no problem with telling you how fantastic Destroyer and “Trouble in Dreams” are. And in the interest of keeping this short, I’ll tell you that the four Destroyer albums before “Trouble in Dreams” (”Streethawk: A Seduction,” “This Night,” “Your Blues,” and “Destroyer’s Rubies”) are all amazing and drastically different albums, each of which is very effective at accomplishing its desired effect. With that in mind, I think that “Trouble in Dreams” is a masterpiece, and one of the best albums ever made.

Like most Destroyer albums, “Trouble in Dreams” evolves as you listen to the album over and over. Upon first listen, one or two songs stand out. On the third listen, four or five songs. By the fifth or so listen, I found myself astounded at how the album I was listening to was not the same album I’d listened to four previous times — every song has amazing moments (even short ones, that you find yourself eagerly awaiting on each listen), evoking varying emotional responses and blending together with the rest of album (that at first seemed so disconnected). The album is called “Trouble in Dreams,” and indeed the music and lyrics reflect a sort of dreamlike or spiritual mood, emphasized by the pervasive, rhythmic drumming that starts to stand out after the first few listens.

Growing up, I can remember listening to countless songs on the radio, cassette, or old records belonging to my parents, and creating, in my mind, what seemed like the most likely lyrics. Even though these were usually wrong, they held meaning to me, as they were part of my unique experience of each piece of music; this wasn’t because my lyrics were better (I’m pretty sure they rarely even made sense), but because those lyrics had grown to have some meaning to me. When I later discovered what the actual lyrics were (thanks, Internet), I usually felt disappointed, and my response to the music afterwards was (at least slightly) different for having this information. In contrast to this, Dan Bejar’s lyrics are always crystal clear, and there is no doubt as to what he is saying. However, as Bejar has said, the lyrics on “Trouble in Dreams” generally don’t mean anything, but are really just combinations of words intended to create a mood or evoke some response. And in this respect, they are very effective. Each listener will associate the lyrics differently in his or her mind, and be able to a create a completely unique experience for him/herself.

Immediate Catchiness: 1/5
Long-Term Playability: 6/5
Favorite Tracks: every track…

On Saturday I attended a three-hour IEEE guitar effects pedal building workshop here at the university. I paid $50, and was given a slew of parts (primary, around 10 resistors, 5 capacitors, a diode, a pcb, four potentiometers, an led, two audio cable jacks, a dc jack, four knobs, a pushbutton switch, and a metal case), then we worked for three hours in an Everitt Lab classroom at assembling the thing. A couple of months ago, I invested in a good quality set of equipment for working on such projects, and probably should have brought these to the workshop, because the given tools were less than ideal (obviously they weren’t going to buy everyone a $100+ soldering iron, as we were only paying for the parts). This and the fact that we were working in a crowded classroom with tiny, angled desks meant that I only got about half of the thing soldered and wired up in the three hours of the workshop. Later, I finished the remaining half in under an hour back at home.

Despite this, I’m really pleased with the result. I’ve owned around a dozen effects pedals throughout the past eight years (since I’ve been playing guitar), and this one has one of the nicest — if not the nicest — sounds, and feels very sturdy. The latter is great, as I’ve smashed about half of my old, plastic-case pedals. As for the former, the guys running the workshop claimed to have tested this pedal against the $120 Electro-Harmonix Metal Muff, and said that theirs easily sounds better. I’m not a big fan of the metal sound (and I’ve never used the Metal Muff), but playing around with the pedal earlier today, I was able to get a crisp distortion to it that I think will fit nicely with the kind of stuff that I do like to play. Finally, I named the pedal “THE CRUSHN8R,” after the robot from Futurama of the same name (”A woman that fine needs to be romanced.”), and in reference to the “crushing” distortion sound of the pedal itself. If I find some time later, I’ll post a sound clip of the pedal in action.

Real Close Ones by The M’s

I’m not really sure how to classify The M’s. I heard their first EP (which is now the first four tracks of their eponymous debut album) in 2003, after they opened for Wilco in a free outdoor concert (whose occurrence still has me amazed), and loved it. It has a garage sound, with twangy guitars and vocals that sound more than a little like George Harrison (especially on “Banishment of Love”), and with so much catchiness and hooks, I figured the only reason it wasn’t playing on the radio was because they were a new band that seemed to be only known in the Chicago area. Then, when The M’s released their sophomore album, “Future Women,” in 2006, I expected to hear it on the radio; while no less catchy than the original, this album was more mature, with the band adding a variety of instruments to their initial garage sound (creating some really unique, beautiful tracks, reminiscent of the later Beatles sound). But nobody seemed to notice, and shortly after, I stopped listening to the radio.

Two years later, “Real Close Ones” brings to mind another famous British rock band: The Rolling Stones. The first time I heard this album, I thought it was good, but not as creative or sprawling as “Future Women.” After another listen or two, I realized how superb the album really was; it was not trying to be “Future Women,” but something entirely different. Like “Exile on Main St.” (one of my all-time favorites), it is occasionally sparse, the vocals are fairly subdued, and the band is often accompanied by blues/gospel piano, brass, and backup singing. The best of these tracks is “How Could You,” (which could easily fit into “Exile” or “Beggars Banquet,” with the Jagger-esque vocals, backing trumpets and pianos, and soul-singing ending), but two no less fantastic tracks deviate from the album’s style in the same manner as “Sympathy for the Devil” and “Gimme Shelter” for the Stones in the late 60s. Specifically, “Naked” is ridiculously catchy, and plays like creepy Harry Nilsson (”Coconut”), and “Big Sound” like a more raucous “Rocks Off.” Overall, there is not a bad track on the entire album. But it’s a shame that this band has not achieved the level of recognition they deserve.

Immediate Catchiness: 2.5/5
Long-Term Playability: 4.5/5
Favorite Tracks: Big Sound, Breakfast Score, Ultraviolent Men, Naked, How Could You

In Ghost Colours by Cut Copy

A bit of a departure from Okkervil River (the previous album in this series of posts), In Ghost Colours is a new-wave and dance rock mixture brimming with catchy synthesizer hooks and strong vocals. A lot of the tracks on the album will, at first, likely remind you of singles from the early-mid 80s, but the strength of In Ghost Colours isn’t in a few good songs, but the way that the album works together as a whole. In fact, four of the fifteen tracks on the album are instrumental; while often these types of tracks on rock albums are ’skippers,’ here they add to the ambiance of the songs before and after, creating a great overall mood. That said, this album is best listened to from beginning to end, loudly or with headphones. The first time I had heard of this album, it was because the track ‘Lights & Music’ which, while it’s a great and catchy track (and was the impetus for my buying the album), almost caused me to fall into the only-listen-to-one-or-two-tracks-over-and-over trap. If you enjoy any of the songs I’ve linked to below, grab this album and listen to it all the way through — you will not be disappointed. The series of tracks from So Haunted to Strangers in the Wind is, by itself, worthy of buying the album.

Immediate Catchiness: 4.5/5
Long-Term Playability: 3.5/5
Favorite Tracks: Lights & Music, So Haunted, Hearts on Fire, Far Away, Strangers in the Wind

Reading the Grammy nominations from 2008 depressed me. Looking at online critics’ top albums lists, I saw some things that I liked, but was still disappointed by the crap that seemed to sneek in (that’s right, Lil Wayne). So, I’ve put together a list of my favorite ten albums from last year. Furthermore, since its not news that artists like Bob Dylan put out good records, I’ve tried to limit my selections to ones that you’ve probably never heard of (or at least not listened to). I’m also going to supplement each quick write-up with information about the album that I think is most helpful (as opposed to some general rating on an arbitrary scale), including how immediately catchy the album is, how it holds up after repeated listens, general moods or keywords that come to mind when I think about the album, and my favorite tracks. Without further ado, the first of my selections:

The Stand Ins by Okkervil River

My biggest reservation with Okkervil River’s otherwise excellent ‘The Stage Names’ (2007) is that occasionally singer Will Scheff’s vocals were a bit grating, in the way — but certainly not to the extent — of that guy from Linkin Park or that other guy from Blink-182 (you know who I’m talking about). This isn’t as much of an issue with ‘The Stand Ins.’ I saw these guys open for The New Pornographers in St. Louis about a year ago, and liked their hookiness and the variety of instruments they used; ‘The Stand Ins’ highlights these features, and the second track ‘Lost Coastlines’ is a good example, with (aside from guitars and drums) its tambourine, piano, banjo, strings, and trumpets.

Genre: indie, pop rock
Immediate Catchiness: 4/5
Long-Term Playability: 3/5
Moods: Driving, Sunny, Fun
Favorite Tracks: Lost Coastlines, Starry Stairs, Blue Tulip, On Tour with Zykos