Hyperbole descriptions

[Andrew McIntosh]

If the topic is quality control for labels, let me suggest one thing that nearly all labels do that doesn't help - hyperbole. Is it possible for people to advertise releases without gushing on like it's the second coming of whatever? If you want examples, just go to any label website or any post on new releases and read for yourself. Shit like that just puts me off.

[Zeno Marx]

If the topic is quality control for labels, let me suggest one thing that nearly all labels do that doesn't help - hyperbole. Is it possible for people to advertise releases without gushing on like it's the second coming of whatever?...Shit like that just puts me off.

This isn't anything new to music, but it seems to be at an all-time high in the past few years.  I thought Relapse made its releases sound like shit, but they were novices compared to some of the utter bullshit I read for noise releases.  Is this the Aquarius Records Bullshit Effect?  Or maybe how online noise journalism culture goes about their business?  I feel like everyone attended a class on Creative Writing for Music 101 and dropped out after two weeks.  After a couple of sentences of that quasi-Rolling Stone gibberish, I stop.  It could be something really great and/or interesting, but I'll never know; not by the absurd write-up and because I'm then reserved to not ever listen to it.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I split this into another topic...  I guess hyperbole would be be those "Suffering souls buried under avanlaches of cosmic feces", while you could have said "screaming vocals over lo-fi rumbling pedal distortion"?

I was recently reading this very recommended swedish new noise zine FÖRDÄMNING #1. There is interview with P.Henning which sparks some good discussion worthy points. He expects more from labels texts telling details of their releases. Perhaps connected directly to quality control. You can tell and you can describe why this is essential and why it was put out in first place.
In many way I sympathize this idea, yet also same time wonder why not "brutal harsh noise" enough - that how tiny nuggets of information artist or label needs to dissect material for listener?

Even if we could say these almost meaningless generalizations as "harsh noise" tells very little, but also if one would need to know more of 5$ tape than "includes brutal harsh noise" or "includes filthy PE", I think it is kind of lazy. How detailed is the need of knowing what exactly one will get? You know, "I'm now in need of some German style PE, but no delay effects. And I don't want to hear about nazis or communists. Oh, this info here promises the release meets my needs"... heh...
How analyzed, and well written essays should be about material LISTENER needs to experience? Pre-dissected, chewed material.

Reviews of course would be different, but I'm personally quite hesitant to phenomena of style where album itself in moment of release (in linernotes or promotexts) is being dissected & analyzed too far. What is too little, what is enough, what is too far.. obviously matter of taste.

Certainly the hyperbole nonsense attached on top of just average noise blast seems totally out of place.

[Mikerdeath]

this looks good:
            
   
Francisco Meirino & Michael Esposito
GHOSTS OF CASE FILE 142 (40'46)

EVP research by Michael Esposito, Case File 142 from source recordings done
by Francisco Meirino at an ancient school of anatomy, now a library, in Lausanne, Switzerland 2011.
Assembled, edited and mastered by Francisco Meirino at Shiver Mobile, Nov-Dec. 2011.

[Bloated Slutbag]

this looks like it was copy-pasted from the liner notes:

Francisco Meirino & Michael Esposito
GHOSTS OF CASE FILE 142 (40'46)

EVP research by Michael Esposito, Case File 142 from source recordings done
by Francisco Meirino at an ancient school of anatomy, now a library, in Lausanne, Switzerland 2011.
Assembled, edited and mastered by Francisco Meirino at Shiver Mobile, Nov-Dec. 2011.

Surely, a healthy middle might be achieved?

[Andrew McIntosh]

Certainly, the psuedo-poetic wankery of a lot of descriptions of Noise/abstract music these days is simply headache inducing and say more about the aspirations of whoever writes them then what they are meant to be writing about. I was also thinking about how nearly every release is lauded as being wonderful. I realise this is a bind that labels have - they have to advertise their product, have to get people interested to get them to buy it, all of that. But it gets a bit much when nearly everything released is supposed to be so fucking indispensable. Again, examples abound, particularly of releases by more known projects.

My solution - online excerpts of releases. A single track, or a few decent minutes excerpt, on something as easy to upload to as Soundcloud, or Bandcamp, or Youtube, or even on your own site/blog. Let the Noise do the talking.

[martialgodmask]

Let the Noise do the talking.

I think a combination of samples for those who absolutely must "know" before purchasing and a few basic summary words should be sufficient.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

I have often trusted more written analysis than sample. Of course depending on style. Lets say the usual harsh noise wall, you may get the point in 2 minutes clip. But out of more complex album, how to show in sample or even full song the arch of album what finally makes it what it is? I notice certain impatience in checking samples, and it works negatively for my own listening.

I don't really bother to upload samples of my releases, but I have said and can say it again: Anyone who feels like uploading (ideally good quality) soundfiles of my releases online for free distribution is welcomed to do so. You got blog, you got youtube account, whatever - feel free to upload single songs or full albums.

[Black_Angkar]

In cases where tracks are many and separate I think that sound samples are fine. But on releases which are constructed as coherrent longer pieces this is a little troublesome, as a specific dramaturgy/construction of the music will be most certainly cut off, not being able to represent the work as a whole. Also, on a strictly personal level - I have nothing against downloading a whole release and then buy it, but I never listen to samples (unlkess they are whole songs in which cases I do so sometimes). There is a certain thrill in unpackaging a release, playing it and find it good without having heard it in advance. Even the disappointment felt with some relases are worth it.

[Zeno Marx]

Comparisons  to other artists, or rather associations to other artist periods or styles, goes a long way with me.  I understand how that can make the artist at hand cringe, or maybe even be a bit insulted that their work cannot stand on its own.  That is the consequence to this style of sales pitch.  This is how I do it in my own listening notes, so maybe it is better for a review than a label release advertisement.  I know it would help me either way, though.

This longwinded release advertisement seems to me to almost be a competition.  Who can write the best prose.  Ego.  It is difficult to keep ego out of the involvement with a label.

[martialgodmask]

I have often trusted more written analysis than sample. Of course depending on style. Lets say the usual harsh noise wall, you may get the point in 2 minutes clip. But out of more complex album, how to show in sample or even full song the arch of album what finally makes it what it is? I notice certain impatience in checking samples, and it works negatively for my own listening.

I don't really bother to upload samples of my releases, but I have said and can say it again: Anyone who feels like uploading (ideally good quality) soundfiles of my releases online for free distribution is welcomed to do so. You got blog, you got youtube account, whatever - feel free to upload single songs or full albums.

To me, this is why a combination of sound and write-up works. When I say a few basic words, some releases of course will require a little more elaboration as some things just can't be summarised in a couple of buzz words, some releases will talk through how they sound. I guess it's a difficult balance to strike as any given release may lend itself to promotion in a particular way. I guess ultimately the put-off for me is nonsense thrown together as clever wordplay... words that are to the point are more gladly received.

[HongKongGoolagong]

The old Cold Spring printed catalogues from the 90s were the first I remember using ridiculous over-the-top descriptions to try and sell noise, experimental and PE releases - kudos to the guy for selling some great rare material of course but I know for a fact even some of the artists were disgusted or amused by how stupid his write-ups were ("The sounds of blackest solar eclipse and ultimate war, using as sound source only the toilet seat in the visitor centre at a concentration camp, limited to 200 with obi and digipack, this essential addition to your collection will bring the Four Horsemen themselves to your speakers!")

EDIT - NB that description was my attempt at parody if it wasn't clear...

[Black_Angkar]

The old Cold Spring printed catalogues from the 90s were the first I remember using ridiculous over-the-top descriptions to try and sell noise, experimental and PE releases - kudos to the guy for selling some great rare material of course but I know for a fact even some of the artists were disgusted or amused by how stupid his write-ups were ("The sounds of blackest solar eclipse and ultimate war, using as sound source only the toilet seat in the visitor centre at a concentration camp, limited to 200 with obi and digipack, this essential addition to your collection will bring the Four Horsemen themselves to your speakers!")

wow. Aoch. I could imagine this was either an example of pompous ironical attempts at humor, or the expression of total lack of personal insight. Either way its pretty atrocius, but I suppose quite funny in hindsight.

[Black_Angkar]

I think if people rave on and on in descriptions it's OK, and often intrigues me more, if it's obvious that the person writing was really passionate about the release, especially when you can tell it made an impact on their life, etc. I think it's fine to gush about something as long as it's shameless. Shameful gushing, on the other hand, would probably be comparing something you are releasing to a bunch of classic albums that it doesn't really sound like. That, IMHO, is the definition of a hyperbole description, even though there's no "total quasar blast" language being used.

Good point. Perhaps like in some interviews where the artist just totally drops out of comprehensible style of communication and it's obvious that saying the "right" things doesn't mean anything as long as the artist is able to communicate his own beliefs?

[SiClark]

Mr Peterson puts it very well. Lets take recent examples from two labels 1) Hospital - these are normally very short descriptions but usually are quite fancy but say pretty much nothing about the release in question and I can never get much understanding as to what it will sound like 2) F&V - very recent descriptions of current 7"s are passionate but have a point and gives me a clear idea that I will no doubt love these releases. Hyperbole descriptions do very little apart from increase the word count.