Todd Rundgren: C or D

Something to Fall Back On is his best song imo. Could have been a great quasi-Motown stomper in any age.

Wolfman Jack has a classic-era Motown vibe as well.

I love the mid 80s “tough guy” production and performance of “want of a nail”

Something to Fall Back On is his best song imo. Could have been a great quasi-Motown stomper in any age.

Do you rate it so highly because of or in spite of the a cappella arrangement?

Mostly in spite - it would hold up incredibly well even if it had (for a 1985 analogy) I'm Your Man-type production as it's such a strong song. That said, the production still gives it crucial peripheral strangeness (e.g. the way the Witch Doctor-y 'do-do-do's sound so sampled and assembled, like someone gently going glissando on a keyboard, or the way the beat 'feels' like beatboxing but clearly is something more indeterminate).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zaF4m4T8x6c

this was the first song my dad taught me to play on piano, it's always gonna be special to me. could never do the fast part at the end though!!

Written by request of Patti Smith, who wanted him to do a song about his Scandinavian background.

https://open.spotify.com/track/0tufiRu3Ij4sEaLvlqt9Bb?si=wU-t3E_5THS0BbmJWf9ShQ&context=spotify%3Aalbum%3A7pguPd8sT14AhOcbrnksHn

?

(21st c schizoid man cover)

Don't know why I let Healing sit in collection for so long before listening to it, I'm loving it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7rcPhyVZL8w

found a copy of Faithful today, listening to it now and uhhh what is the point of Side 1? just an ego exercise? I mean I'm impressed. was Todd the first person to record cover songs designed to be indistinguishable from the original?

I've never bothered playing side 1 again, but side 2 has some pretty good songs.

wiki:

Rundgren explained the motivation of the first side as treating rock music like European classical music, where a piece is performed over and over again in essentially the same way.

Not one of his brighter ideas.

I don't think that's actually true of European classical music either though

But well ahead of the curve in some respects, considering the fairly recent trend of bands faithfully covering their own songs in order to circumvent copyright issues and garner a bit more streaming revenue.

well it would be if these bands were hiring Todd Rundgren to record identical covers of their songs

That happened all the time in the 70s anyway. Not by the likes of Todd Rundgren though, more Freddie & the Dreamers.

the yardbirds cover completely fucking rules come on

about as much as the original does yeah

I don't think that's actually true of European classical music either though

Correct. I get where he's coming from but his explanation is a grossly inaccurate oversimplification. I saw this firsthand last week when I was looking for a rendition of the Badinerie from Bach's orchestral suites that matched my memory of what I heard as a kid - Trevor Pinnock recorded two well-received renditions about 15 years apart, and that segment alone was markedly different, with the later one taken a much faster tempo.

*taken at

I've never seen Gus Van Sant's shot-by-shot remake of Psycho, but I'm wondering if it's the same kind of impulse.

the yardbirds cover does sound different, though! It sounds like heavy 70s rock, the guitars all have that gorgeous golden 70s Boston BOC distortion… the original is awesome too, it just sounds garagey and ramshackle and kinda messy

ok ... i think we all know what he meant about the difference between european classical and rock music. you don't have to put on your musicologist hat to understand

I admit that's the one cover where the original I don't know too well, you're right that one is a bit different

its still kind of a weird message, like I get the whole "this is Mozart to me" angle, a lot of people have said things like that about classic rock, but then showing you can replicate these incredibly revered studio tracks all by yourself...its kind of a weird message

mostly I think people give him shit for it because the second side is so good, if the first half had more songs of that quality I think this would be considered one of his best albums.

I've never seen Gus Van Sant's shot-by-shot remake of Psycho, but I'm wondering if it's the same kind of impulse.

Personally, I thought that was at best a misguided waste of time. But a friend who thinks it's a commendable film based his argument on the casting - something to do with sexuality where Van Sant now had Anne Heche in Marion's role rather than Anthony Perkins in Norman's role. It's been too long for me to correctly remember and repeat his entire argument, but he kind of engaged with it the way one might engage with a film being shown in a loop as part of an art installation - you didn't necessarily have to sit through the whole thing, just enough to pick up on the conceptual idea being put across. Anyway, if side 1 of Faithful had some conceptual idea of real value, I'm more than open to it, but I haven't heard Rundgren make a case for any that sounded compelling.

I recently read this little reappraisal, which I thought was interesting: https://www.pastemagazine.com/movies/gus-van-sant/psycho-remake-gus-van-sant-predicted-hollywood-ip

That reading works, but it's also referring to ideas that have been famously explored but other filmmakers at least 30 years before Van Sant made his movie. (It's also a pretty glaring omission for that reviewer not to acknowledge any of that.)

I’m sure you’re right, but what are you referring to specifically? Just curious (though I guess we could take this to a GVS thread…)

With the covers, personally I think growing up listening to Todd since a baby it was just like, “here’s uncle Todd playing the songs he likes”. Like a folk kind of thing more than classical.

It is fun to spot the seams, where he didn’t get the sounds right and what he did to compromise. Or, like for happenings where he was just like “fuck it, let’s so heavy and soaring on this one”. And it is a good collection of tunes. But yeah, not necessary I guess.

I love Todd biut not an essential record….also considering he was supposed to be an engineer his records do sound a bit lacklustre and I’m no audiophile

xxp Warhol is the first one that comes to mind - not just for his work addressing reproduction and pop culture, but even zeroing in on the actual differences between the two films bring to mind Warhol's films showing activities that would seem mundane and predictable. They may test an unsuspecting viewer's patience, but the audience can light up when even the smallest gesture breaks the familiarity of what's playing out (like a guy lighting a cigarette during a haircut).

And Godard has experimented with replication, and not just with films but with literary works - he's made films like Nouvelle Vague, Puissance de la parole and several others where every the script consists entirely of quotation, and it's not even supposed to be an adaptation - one of the boldest examples I can think of if you want to explore how replication can relate to creation.

*every line in the script

I love Todd biut not an essential record….also considering he was supposed to be an engineer his records do sound a bit lacklustre and I’m no audiophile

This is crazy to me. Side 2 rules. And i think my vinyl sounds finefine

I don't think any of his 70s records sound particularly good but they all have some magic moments, moments which make me go "how'd he do that?" he was the one guy really pushing the boundaries of how much music you could fit on one side of a record, which in turn I think is why he produces his records to be more treble-heavy. but unfortunately it does make some of his most ambitious stuff sound pretty bad in spots. the first Utopia LP is a good example of that. Faithful sounds pretty good though.

Anyway, if side 1 of Faithful had some conceptual idea of real value, I'm more than open to it, but I haven't heard Rundgren make a case for any that sounded compelling.

I mean if nothing else it's the only cover album I can think of where the goal is to sound as close to the original as possible (minus the thing mentioned upthread where artists re-record their own catalogue for more better royalties). I suppose that is kind of interesting. I guess that Weezer covers album comes pretty close but I think this is more because Weezer kinda suck as a band.

His albums sound great but no they’re not like… slick carpenters or arif mauldin or something. the sound the dude got in the 70s was extraordinary, like the compressed distorted drums on “international feel”, his freakin gorgeous piano sound, his phased Hendrix tributes, his production style had character and I don’t think it’s fair or relevant to point out that it doesn’t sound as good as Barry Manilow or something. Sorry for aggro, I like poster frogbs I just love Todd and get carried away

“Hello it’s me” is kind of a marvelous production, he wall-of-sounds it but everything still sounds light and crystalline

hah no worries, I mean it's the same complaint I have with a lot of weird 70s stuff where the lack of bass sometimes makes me feel like I have a head cold. the end of Side 2 of Wizard is a good example, like "I Don't Want to Tie You Down" sounds absolutely brilliant to me, like it's a song that seems to only take place in his imagination if that makes sense...all those unsteady synth effects against such a gorgeous ballad, it's really special. but then the next "Is It My Name?" just feels really compressed, almost like it was recorded in a garage or something. at first I wondered if this was just inner groove distortion but the CD sounds this way too. to some degree I think it's intentional but I wish it had some bass. Zen Archer is kind of the same.

"Shine" is so amazing, sounds very ahead of it's time too (am I wrong?)

I think so too, I can't think of any early 80s electronic tracks which use a rave up beat like that. but there's gotta be something.

always wondered how exactly the drums were done on that album, I kinda suspect Todd just built his own stuff which is why every drum pattern sounds so unique and odd

Healing is amazing all around, one of the best albums still readily available in the bargain bin and my favorite of his after Wizard (or maybe just my favorite).

But yeah it does sound ahead of its time by a few years

Was surprised to find a copy for two bucks a while back, but I got the reissue anyway because it was cheap and had the 7 inch, which I think is essential. Plus the clear/blue vinyl looks pretty.

This years RSD will have a reissue of Liars, which I think is his best album since. Pretty similar to Healing too.

this dude just announced a show this summer in my small town. a 450-seat theater that sounds great. should i go see him?

you should, though don't expect to hear any of the classics, when I saw him it was nearly all 21st Century stuff. who knows though he changes it up a lot so maybe he is touring the classics now

If he wanted to do Liars all the way through I'd be up for that show.