September 08, 2003

The damn album still isn't finished, is it?

So I'm back in the USA, with a touch of jet lag, a still-unfinished album and a sheaf of obsessive compulsive notes (as I explained earlier.) We're really going to have to get cracking finishing it all up-- we've essentially got one week before Doomsday, i.e., the mastering date, after which everything is irrevocable.

In spite of the fact that it's not done, and the outlines of the final, final version are still pretty fuzzy, we're still supposed to be working on, or at least thinking about, other aspects of the finished CD, like the artwork, packaging, sequencing, etc. This is a bit strange, because all of those things are supposed to be subordinate to, reflective of, the essential character of the actual recorded music. It's a common situation. (One reason so many albums have incorrect lyric sheets is that the artwork/packaging had to be put together before the final versions of songs--which often change in the studio-- emerged.)

When I really get into it, I'm probably going to work up a post on the whole sequencing nightmare. Few people realize how important it is (as evidenced by how many albums are poorly sequenced) or how much of a headache it can be.

As for the other stuff, the first step is the title, which is still totally up in the air. Although it's the catchiest, most memorable one I've come up with, I'm leaning against "Yesterday Rules" at this point. The song from which that lyric was pulled ("She Runs out when the Money Does") isn't actually on the album, and while that has never stopped us before, I don't think it's a very accurate characterization of the feeling or spirit of the songs that are on it. On the other hand, if the comments on this blog were a focus group, it would come out far, far ahead. People seem to like it.

Despite the fact that it was (apparently) the title of a huge Guns 'n' Roses hit, "Don't Cry" is still in the running. That's because it does reflect a theme running through all or most of the songs. Not simply in terms of the songs that literally reference crying, though there are several, but in a more generalized abstract sense related to the possible, often perhaps unrecognized, double or alternate meaning of that phrase and others like it: it can be a thing you say to comfort someone who is suffering, but it can also be a harsher command pre-supposing an unspoken threat ("or else I'll..."), and sometimes it's a little bit of each at the same time. This is most literally and directly addressed in the song "Everybody Knows You're Crying," but it turns up all over the place in the album. Or it's supposed to. (Once again, I have to admit I feel a bit weird articulating this sort of thing in advance, as I did when I was detailing the ins and outs of the recording process: it seems a bit unseemly to telegraph this sort of thinking. Yet, I figure if you're going to do the Expose the Sausage experiment, so to speak, you might as well go the whole hog. I'm hiding nothing here, folks, though I realize it may make me look a little silly sometimes.)

Another advantage of "Don't Cry": it's a concrete image that will be easier to illustrate than something abstract and clever like "Yesterday Rules."

Or we could take a totally different tack. Part of me would get a kick out of calling the album "Sounds Good, Let's Move on." In fact, it's cracking me up right now. But that's more of an inside joke, only meaningful to me, the band, and the small subset of listeners who are also blog-readers.

Speaking of which, one idea for the CD is to include some of this studio journal stuff. What I'm picturing is a kind of mini-blog on the "enhanced" part of the CD itself, with live links so that people could leave comments directly from the CD if they happen to have an internet connection. I don't know if that would open a blog-swamping can of worms or not. I suppose we're dreaming of an album that would be successful enough that it would. Still trying to figure this, as everything, out. What do you folks think?

Posted by Dr. Frank at September 8, 2003 02:50 PM | TrackBack
Comments

I think I'd be afraid of the software implications rather than the blog implications.

And I also think "Yesterday Rules" can embody whatever spirit you want it too, pretty much: sad and regretful, or optimistic and chilled (a la "It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine").

Glad you made it home safely!

Posted by: Jackie D at September 8, 2003 03:28 PM

"Boys Don't Cry For Me, Argentina."

S'all I got. Of course "Don't Cry" would be easier to illustrate for the purpose of album art and such, but I don't think "Yesterday Rules" would be impossible, no way. In a sense, it might open you up to all kinds of ideas that don't have to be tied down to the motif (or whatever) of crying, tears, etc.

And yeah, I can't imagine the enhanced-CD bit would be anything other than a big headache. For you guys, I mean. It would indeed be really neat to be able to use the CD to access some of the "in-the-process" photos and link to comments, but not if it meant all kinds of grief and CD release delays, which the pessimist in me fears would be inevitable.

Posted by: geoff at September 8, 2003 05:52 PM

"Yesterday Rules" was my clear pick until later in your post I read the, "Sounds Great, Let's Move On" idea. I honestly think that would be a great album title. I wouldn't worry too much about the enhanced CD thing. Why would your blog readers give a crud? Yeah. Hope that helps.

Sam

Posted by: Sam at September 8, 2003 07:03 PM

Even More Songs About Girls

Somehow I feel overwhelmingly unqualified to cast a vote for either 'Don't Cry' or 'Yesterday Rules' (something Gene Pitney-ish about the former), even though I've faithfully followed MTX since forever. Ultimately, the name of the album, no matter how clever or dumb, seems to serve merely as a chronological placeholder in the long run ('Rocket to Russia' came after 'Leave Home' or 'Our Bodies, Our Selves' preceded '...and the Women Who Love Them'). The artwork and content are another story. As a consumer, I confess I'm a sucker for a good album cover. And as much as I enjoy following the misadventures of the irrepressible Dr. Frank via this blog, I don't want any "enhanced" junk on the new CD. Gimme 6 outtakes of 'Jill' or an AM radio friendly version of 'I'm just Fucked Up on Life' or even a secret hidden Banana Splits song ('This Spot' or 'Long Live Love', perhaps), but I'd prefer the disc not be cluttered with links or movie files.

If you are absolutely set on providing 'enhanced' stuff with the new album, how about packaging it as a 2-disc set? It's the latest sensation; the Donnas and White Stripes both did it that way. Look at all the records those kids have sold this year.

See what you get for asking?

Around the Corner Fudge is Made

Posted by: J. Francis Gretchen at September 8, 2003 07:55 PM

Call it "Yesterday Rules". The cover doesn't necessarly have to do directly with the title. This blog is the best focus group you could ask for.

Posted by: justin at September 8, 2003 08:30 PM

I still think "Yesterday Rules," is the title of the concept album that this isn't, but it does seem to be the overwhelming choice of the peanut gallery, which I guess means something maybe. For what it's worth, I think "Love is Dead" and "Alcatraz" are the strongest MTX titles in terms of capturing overall album sensibility, so, in my opinion, you should, err...just do that. I generally agree with J Francis Gretchen's comments about "enhanced junk," but I don't know if I'd consider this that, specifically I can't tell if this plan duplicates media from the blog or what the deal is, but, though there are exceptions, I also generally don't care about a bunch of alternate versions or whatever. I never know what I'm supposed to do with them...

"yep, it's that song again, only slightly different..."

The coolest "enhanced junk," although I'm sure it's impracticable for any number of reasons, would be something like the director's commentary feature on DVDs...the song is kind of muted and the MTX cadre and Kevin Army chat on top of it about various stuff related to the song/recording or whatever. I guess the pace and length of the songs (as compared to movies) would limit what's possible there, but it would still be pretty cool.

Posted by: spacetoast at September 8, 2003 09:34 PM

"Sounds great, lets move on" -- not the throwaway inside joke it appears. Fits many of the songs pretty well -- some in a more cutting sense than others, of course, but still, it does fit, and captures a more optimistic vibe than "Yesterday Rules."

Irony with an dash of optimism -- that's MTX in a nutshell.

Posted by: JB at September 8, 2003 10:47 PM

It's always bothered me when the lyric sheet has mistakes, but now I know why. I also hate when the songs aren't in a good sequence. I think that's a very important part of the album, because I always listen from start to finish.

I don't like "Don't Cry." I see the potential meaning, but a more clever title has to be out there. After reading all the blogs, my suggestion would be -
"The overwhelming feeling of..."

Not too good, but I'm just a blog reader.

Posted by: jq at September 8, 2003 11:15 PM

looks like a grat idea.. so people will be able to say what they like and what they don't and also read what peopl are saying about the album... too bad my english is not that great.. then I cannot understand everything you write! hehehe.. but I think you guys are recording a new album.. cool!

Posted by: big L bubblegum at September 8, 2003 11:17 PM

I hate 98% of album titles out there. Mainly because most bands release one album every two years, and two years is more than enough time to come up with a decent, clever album title. I love every MTX album title. My vote is totally for "Yesterday Rules", because I think that carries on the MTX tradition of really endearing album titles.

I like "Sounds Good, Let's Move On". But, it is an inside joke, and I tend to resent inside jokes as I'm usually the one on the outside of the inside joke. They seem to imply "It's an us thing, you wouldn't understand because you're not one of us". MTX, in my heart, has always embodied the antithesis of this mentatlity. And even though I'm one of those listener/blogreaders, I'd have to object out of principle. I'd hate to see that happen to all the listener/non-blogreaders.

So, anyways, you should totally call the album "Yesterday Rules". That's the best by far.

Posted by: Ron at September 9, 2003 12:20 AM

Don't Cry. All the way. I also like the way it embodies either entire songs on the album, or aspects of the songs (well, the ones I know), and it has pleasant literary ambiguity.

Yesterday Rules can be taken many diff ways, too, but what can I say? I just don't like it as well.

Or you could call it "Expose the Sausage." Ewwww....

BTW, I think Dr. Frank wrote "Everybody Knows You're Crying" about my wife. How'd he do that?

Dave

Posted by: Dave at September 9, 2003 01:33 AM

I've mentioned this before, but it's still my thought that you shouldn't give any importance at all to message board comments. If we were so great at deciding on the best name for albums, best songs, best sequencing, etc. why wouldn't we be rockstars? (This, of course, excludes the message board posters who *are* rockstars.)

And, yes, I see the irony in this message board comment.

Posted by: Dave Bug at September 9, 2003 02:12 AM

I personally like Yesterday Rules the best. I think it's a statement that ambigious enough that people may not find it too random, may find their own meaning in it, may search for the song that references the album title... on your next album. It works. I also really like "Sounds Great, Let's Move On" for similar reasons. And I don't think the fact that it's an inside joke gets in the way. If that was the case Yesterday Rules would be an inside joke too, since the people who know about the song it comes from would only be those who read this blog and fellow band members, Kevin Army and others around you you've told. Really, both are inside jokes. I'm just disapointed that the album's been pushed back to January already, is this true ? The Enhanced CD stuff doesn't matter much to me, though it would be awesome to hear some of the songs that didn't make it... maybe as untitled bonus tracks or something. You know like your demo of She Runs Out When The Money Does, if you did one of that, or something along those lines.

Posted by: chach at September 9, 2003 02:34 AM

If the only choices were "Don't Cry" and "Yesterday Rules," I'd vote for the latter, "Expose The Sausage" notwithstanding, though that sounds more like a Vandals album title. However, I really do like "Sounds Great, Let's Move On" because it's inherently interesting. While most of the album sales will come from those who already know the band, the discerning music aficionado who's wandering through Tower Records looking for something different would more like latch onto "Sounds Great, Let's Move On." It has that "Oh, really?' quality to it that makes one want to pluck it from the rack and examine the reverse side of the CD case. It also mirrors the epic "Revenge Is Sweet, And So Are You," which in my mind is not only the best MTX album title but the best MTX album, period. Another reason I'd go with "SG,LMO" is Dr. Frank's statement that this album will be different in some ways than any previous MTX work. That fits thematically with the change in structure which such comments portend.

Posted by: Don at September 9, 2003 05:58 AM

"Sounds Good, Let's Move on." is a great title. Sure , it may be an inside joke, but it wouldn't be the first time you threw an obscure reference into your music.

As far as the album cover is concerned, I know a guy that's done a few great album covers (he's a fan of your band too, so he'd probably work cheap) :

http://www.iwilldestroyyou.com/

Posted by: greg at September 9, 2003 06:25 AM

I like 'Yesterday rules' better than 'Don't Cry', just because it leaves room for imagination and can be interpreted a number of ways; then again 'Sounds Great Lets move On' is a neat title because most musicians rarley refer to the songwriting process and such in their songs, and because it really is the type of title that makes you want to know what's on the cd like Don kinda said, it makes you go 'is this a joke?' then really want to find out if it is

Posted by: Stephanie at September 9, 2003 07:05 AM

Seeing as the new album is recorded digitally, I think an enhanced CD portion of the disc should contain individual tracks to a couple of the songs, to initiate some fan remixes. I think this would be a clear extension of the audience participation you wanted from the "Eight Little Songs" release.

I'm putting in my vote for "Bill Posters Is Innocent," as your album title. Or maybe not.

Posted by: Brent at September 9, 2003 08:57 AM

'Sounds great, lets move on' get my vote !

Posted by: S TODD at September 9, 2003 12:43 PM

'Yesterday Rules' is a majestic title indeed. If there is no chance of it being 'Bill Posters...' then i'd go with that. There's nothing wrong with being clever and abstract from time to time. To me it sounds like an optimistic title.

With regard to the enhanced CD, I think most people who would actually bother looking at it would already know how to get to the mtx website to comment. If it would push back the release date then i'm against it! Everyone I know only looks at the enhanced portion of the CD once then it's forgotten forever.

Posted by: Andy at September 9, 2003 01:50 PM

Yesterday Rules,

It has just the right combination of wistfulness, anticipation, hope, and regret.

Posted by: Lynn at September 9, 2003 05:34 PM

Oy, I accidentally posted this on the "She runs out..." track back--this damn hypertext, I'll master it one of these days!

I don't get optimism from "Yesterday Rules." I get brooding, regret and longing, both generally and within the context of "She Runs Out When The Money Does". I'm thinking that maybe yesterday is a harsher mistress than tomorrow is--Yesterday Rules the thoughts and actions of today and tomorrow, and there's no going back (regretfully).

"Sounds Great, Let's Move On" is clever, especially if you're moving away from the "Pop Punk" pigeonhole. Also, the phrase "Let's Move On" has a sort of "Don't Cry" quality about it--as if you're saying "let's move on, there's no use crying over spilled milk." One drawback--the title may express a certain glib, "throwaway" quality that you may not want to convey, given the fact that you've worked really hard on this album.

I suppose "nailing the clams" is out of the question.

Posted by: sheckie at September 10, 2003 12:06 AM

Dr. Frank, if you decide to pass on "She Runs Out When the Money Does", then PLEASE, by all that is sacred, title the new album

"Chinese Democracy (You Snooze You Lose)"

Posted by: Stephen M at September 10, 2003 01:11 AM

You know, I don't think "Sounds Good, Let's Move On" is an inside joke. Unless there's a level here I'm not getting, I'm sure most people can imagine why a musician would title his album that. And I like it. It makes me smile.

Yesterday Rules is also good, though inconsistent with some of the yesterdays other MPX albums paint for us. :)

Posted by: InvisibleGirl at September 10, 2003 04:50 AM

I still like Yesterday Rules the best and I don't think it matters that the song is not on the record. Short of that Sounds good let's move on is so much better than don't cry. I also don't think it matter what's on the cover in relation to the title. If it does matter though I'm sure something can be done to make it work. It's your baby though

Posted by: Justin at September 10, 2003 07:42 AM

'yesterday rules' has my vote because it sounds like a refreshing change from 'don't cry' and 'love is dead' and titles dealing with brutal emotions. one guy posted something about it being "bill posters is innocent" which cracks me up everytime i hear it; however, it's a better title for a song rather than an entire album (perhaps an idea for the future, wouldn't you get a kick if you played a show and kids were singing along to a refrain that went "bill posters is innocent" ? maybe it's just me.)

as for the enhanced cd, pack it with outtakes or perhaps a different version of a song and tons of video clips. most bands don't have quality enhanced cds, but i must give you two thumbs up for the idea of having a direct link from the cd to a discussion board.

Posted by: tim at September 10, 2003 02:30 PM

Thanks for all the comments, folks. I have to say I'm more confused than ever about the title, but confusion is nothing new around here.

As for the "enhanced stuff," if there is to be any, it's still debatable how much we'll be able to get together in time. It will really turn on whether we come up with ideas that are worthwhile, do-able, and don't cost too much. The best idea I've had so far, I think, is to include chords/"tabs" in some form-- believe it or not, I get a lot of letters from people who can't figure out how to play some of the songs, and I think it'd be cool to answer those questions in advance.

Brent's idea about including individual tracks for possible fan remixes is pretty awesome, though probably beyond what we could do here. But as a general idea for the albums of the future, it's intriguing. I'm sure a standard CD wouldn't have enough room (though we'll be releasing music on DVDs sooner rather than later, I'd bet.) But even on CD, there could maybe be some kind of truncated version that could be fed into the free 8 track Pro Tools, and possibly more tracks of the tracks available on line? Would they be (easily) synchable?

My impression is that there are a fair few out there who would have liked to be able to turn down some of the Hammond organ on Alcatraz. The prospect of fans being able to "undo" pieces of records is frighteningly cool. Why not? Power to the people.

Posted by: Dr. Frank at September 10, 2003 04:27 PM

"Beautiful Hammer."

Posted by: Matt Welch at September 11, 2003 07:34 AM

I think the tab idea is really good. I for one would appreciate it. Although figuring songs out can be fun, it's also reassuring to see it 'authorised' officially by the writer/player themselves. And personally i would prefer alternative versions/demos etc to links on an enhanced cd. Also my vote goes for 'Yesterday Rules' just because i think it rules as a title. Simple as. Damn, i just spent fifteen minutes reading the album title votes when i should be working.

Posted by: Georgina at September 12, 2003 10:15 AM

Hey there.

Please don't use "yesterday rules" for an album title. It's too short. It's NOT clever enough ;). It doesn't make you smile. And it's too melancholic. Like sheckie wrote (see: above), it's completely devoid of any hope for the future :(. ALSO: "rules" is such a fashionable word ... and it's like saying something completely (Beavis&Butthead) idiot-like as : "whoah ... yesterday ROCKS!". I really can't see why this would be a good album title :(. I definitely prefer "sounds good, let's move on", which works just fine WITHOUT incrowd knowledge (heck, i don't have any!). And shows you have the ability to laugh at yourselves. True MTX style :).

I think "revenge is sweet and so are you" was the BEST mtx album title *ever* ... it still makes me smile :).

Posted by: Arjan at September 15, 2003 12:52 AM

Another good title would Be "Going Nowhere" shouldn't be too hard to work with

Posted by: Ryan Bartling at September 15, 2003 03:53 AM

Turn down the organ on Alcatraz??? God no!!!!!! Screw the people, power to the artist!

It's true, if you listened to us, the album would suck.

So, yeah, umm, don't listen to anything I say.

Damn.

Posted by: Dave at September 16, 2003 08:24 PM

'If you listened to us, the album would suck'. That's what it should be called. Any updates regarding that decision btw?

Posted by: Georgina at September 17, 2003 11:10 AM

df:
>>>What I'm picturing is a kind of mini-blog on the "enhanced" part of the CD itself, with live links so that people could leave comments directly from the CD if they happen to have an internet connection. I don't know if that would open a blog-swamping can of worms or not. I suppose we're dreaming of an album that would be successful enough that it would. Still trying to figure this, as everything, out. What do you folks think?


It'll never work.

Posted by: thom nova at February 28, 2004 07:24 AM