|
| |
|
|
|
Review Summary: Beautiful and blistering. Between 1998 and 2000 a guy named Dylan Nathan released two albums under the Jega moniker. Notable works in their own right, Spectrum and Geometry went pretty much unnoticed at the time. Those who took the effort to listen closely to those albums discovered a talent above average: he had programming skills, was very creative and could write great melodies. He handled the little details without losing the big picture, and behind the abstract and sometimes provocative soundscapes, hid some raw, savage quality that made his music more compelling and enigmatic. In fact, his talent impressed fellow musician and friend Mike Paradinas (aka μ-Ziq) enough to launch his then-new label Planet Mu with a Jega EP. Dylan had everything to be one of the top acts in electronic music, but left without fulfilling that promise. With the brightest future ahead, he decided to quit the scene for nine years.
All of a sudden, in 2009 this changed. Nathan released Variance, to the surprise of everyone who still remembered him. Had the man still something to offer? Jega gave the impression of an intellectual guy who was full of ideas and was eager to show you what he could do, but did it in a harsh, uncaring manner. Despite having only two albums, his work was considerably dense, jumping quickly to one idea to the next, giving his work a still-in-development appearance. Nathan had already a draft since 2003 for what would be Variance, but it leaked on the internet, his alleged reason to cancel the project.
With the completely reworked Variance Jega makes an impressive comeback. Momentarily he forgets about the weird and cold compositions, and like the sound architect he really is, he designs a prettier and comfortable sonic complex. No, this is not the same person who recorded the dark and desolate Geometry; he has changed, and right from the beginning Dylan reintroduces himself as a very civilized person, with a fine taste and spotless manners, as he guides you through the beautiful and idyllic sonic pieces he has conceived. A delicate mixture of kindness and melancholy floats in the air, while soft melodies and smooth beats make sure you want to stay and see the end of this little aural utopia. The seduction, nonetheless, is a trap.
As he leads you to watch a promised beautiful sight, he suddenly pushes you through the window to enjoy it in free-fall. Do not worry; there is a shift in perspective, but he assaults your senses without inspiring fear. In the second half Jega does not let you forget that he is also a sonic wizard, and puts up a show of electronic fireworks. The tricks used are not entirely new, but the spectacle is still impressive. The particular mixture of aggressive beats with free-form, evolving structures forms saturated and explosive soundscapes that are every bit as overwhelming as they are compelling. If the first part was all about harmony, the second one is only to upset your mind.
In the way he works this contrast is where the album truly stands out. If music sometimes can appear to be a happy accident, where some dots connect with each other to complete the intended figure, Jega has everything under control here from start to finish. He manages to separate and outline in equal parts the duality present in previous albums, while making a true synthesis of his former scattered ideas. As a result, Variance is a lot easier to appreciate and assimilate without watering down the qualities that made Jega so promising. At almost 80 minutes, the album is notably cohesive and has the musical depth to satisfy the most demanding listeners.
Will we have to wait another nine years to see a follow-up? Let us hope that it is not the case, but if Dylan Nathan can continue making albums of this caliber the wait will be easier, for Variance is one of the finest electronic releases in recent years.
4.5/5
|
Album Rating: 4.0
excellent review, a huge pos.
i will most definitely check this out.
| | |
Okay, Zettel - here we go; and remember, I'm also counting on you to do the same to me the next time you see the word "Irving" on the Users review list.
I thought this review was decent. In terms of prose it flows well, and the ideas and arguments that you have are sufficiently developed and exposed so that it's easy to follow. However, I feel like your introductory paragraph takes a bit too long to get started, and it meanders a little bit, which takes away from the review. Here:
Between 1998 and 2000 a guy named Dylan Nathan released two albums under the Jega moniker. Notable works in their own right, Spectrum and Geometry went pretty much unnoticed at the time. Those who took the effort to listen closely to those albums discovered a talent above average: he had programming skills, was very creative and could write great melodies. He handled the little details without losing the big picture, and behind the abstract and sometimes provocative soundscapes, hid some raw, savage quality that made his music more compelling and enigmatic. In fact, his talent impressed Mike Paradinas (who?) enough to launch his then-new label Planet Mu with a Jega EP. Dylan had everything to be one of the top acts in electronic music, but left without fulfilling that promise. With the brightest future ahead, he decided to quit the scene for nine years.
The bolded bits are phrases that I feel are unnecessary and add nothing to the review. I understand you're trying to frame the context in which the review takes place, but it's a bit ineffective. Several other similar bits can be found in this review. I think the best way to spot them is to have an eye that is not yours go over them to that they can be extricated from this piece. Also of note is your name-dropping; do consider adding words like "producer" in front of Mr. Paradinas' name (I assume he's a producer) because the lay person (like me) doesn't know anything about him.
| | |
Yet, the more critical piece of analysis which I want to mention is the fact that this review sounds too personal - in that too much of yourself shows. I don't mean this in the "too many pronouns negnegneg" sense, but rather that the experience which you appear to describe seems unique to yourself. Now, this may not be a bad thing to put in a review, but I think it runs a danger of not being correlative to the impressions that another person might get. This ends up making the review a bit less informative than it could be. There's also something about the reviewer's voice to be said here, but I suggest you talk to Keelan (thebhoy) for that. He can explain it better than I can =)
Solid work though, Zettel. My apologies if this was a bit of a - in Maniac's words - bitch-slap, but I think you know as I do that we all need a good kick up the behind even if our body of writing is top-notch. Cheers!
| | |
Shit that was long. I apologize.
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
@ Irving
Honestly man, i wonder where you saw all these "negative" parts in Zettel's review.
The "negative" parts that you mention are immensely "positive" for me, as a complete overview of Jega's work is being given via the review, without compromising its main purpose, which is describing Jega's 2009 work.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
I greatly appreciate the feedback, Irving --never worry about the lenght of it. I need time to ponder your analysis, you make very interesting points. I will get back on it later. Thanks for taking the time,
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
great review. this guy tends to get looked over in the "idm" world, which is a shame cause he's real good.
| | |
The "negative" parts that you mention are immensely "positive" for me, as a complete overview of Jega's work is being given via the review, without compromising its main purpose, which is describing Jega's 2009 work.
Fair enough, Voivod. I just felt that sentences like the one I bolded seemed a bit too inclined towards Jega's work, and that they didn't add anything to the neutral reader just wanting to know more. That being said, as I intimated, it's just my opinion. Of course a different reader might perceive it differently - as you have shown.
Zettel - always take criticism with a pinch of salt. Listen to it, but do decide for yourself whether you want to take it 100%, or parts thereof. What I'm trying to do is give you an alternative point of view to examine, and I sincerely hope I succeeded, because you can certainly write very well.
| | |
Irving is the man of the situation.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
"...a complete overview of Jega's work is being given via the review, without compromising its main purpose, which is describing Jega's 2009 work"
That was really my intention, but I can see why someone could find it meandering, especially if they have little interest on his previous works. You may be right about the The bolded sentences; that is why I tried to keep them the shortest possible. I take as a good sign that you were not THAT harsh to me, since one of your main criticisms is that I take too long to get started...in my opening paragraph!
I can see why the review may sound too personal, since it was hard to detach myself from an album I have listened countless times.
"Zettel - always take criticism with a pinch of salt. Listen to it, but do decide for yourself whether you want to take it 100%, or parts thereof. What I'm trying to do is give you an alternative point of view to examine..."
That goes without saying, but I respect you for pointing it out. Good criticism is always welcome, and sometimes, even necessary. That is why I appreciate your feedback; certainly you succeeded in your intentions. Let us see if next time I can do a better work.
Manic_:
How come you were the only one to have rated this album?? You are right: Jega is criminally ignored, although he did not help much to change that.
| | |
Bon travail sur ta critique, Zettel.
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
Merci beaucoup, gentleman. Ravi de te voir à nouveau.
| | | Album Rating: 4.0
Let us see if next time I can do a better work.
In my humble opinion, don't strip your future reviews off historical overviews like the one you did here.
Sometimes in order to understand the present, we must learn about the past first. And I, for one, am profounfly interested (within my grasp, of course) in knowing the past, present and (potential) future of everything i try in music.
Es-tu Canadien-Francais comme Jethro42 Zettel?
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
"In my humble opinion, don't strip your future reviews off historical overviews like the one you did here."
I did not mean that, and I am sure Irving was not asking for it neither. I would like to read your impressions on the album if you check it out.
Es-tu Canadien-Francais comme Jethro42 Zettel?
Pas du tout; je suis Mexicain.
| | |
Zettel is gifted to both express himself and write in French. the proof;
http://www.sputnikmusic.com/review/36205/Alcest-Ecailles-De-Lune/
Plus he, like you Voivod, is a regular visitor on the ProgJect reviews.
| | |
Wow. Il y a un canadien, un mexicain, un grec et un malaisien dans ces commentaires. Fuck yeah Sputnik!
| | | Album Rating: 4.5
You are too kind, Jethro. Looking back at that review, I find my French very rigid. Since then I think I have improved, but it is unlikely that I post another review in French here. Now I find it kind of unpolite. Nevertheless, I do intend to keep writing, and be sure I will ask you for advice.
"Wow. Il y a un canadien, un mexicain, un grec et un malaisien dans ces commentaires"
Tu es d'où, Irving? Je suis curieux...
| | |
Je suis malaisien, mais maintenant j'habite au Canada parce que je suis un étudiant internationale (je fais mon baccalaureate ici).
(excusez-moi parce que mon français est comme ci comme ca)
| | |
That is not true, Irving. You're right after Zettel at it, and that says a lot. Voivod is pretty good either.
| | |
Tu es tellement gentil, Jethro =)
Je pense que la langue francais serai le meilleur souvenir que je vais prendre du Canada. Je suis très heureux d'avoir l'appris.
| | | |
|
| |
