archive : A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z sdtk comp
Cover Art Rachel's/Matmos
Full on Night EP
[Quarterstick/Touch and Go]
Rating: 7.8

This two-track EP is a wonderful study in contrasts. Though both these lengthy pieces (14 and 18 minutes) are ostensibly remixes of the Rachel's track "Full on Night" (which originally appeared on their first record, Handwriting), the two approaches couldn't be more polarized. Rachel's remix is actually more of a remake. Rather than tamper with the original source tapes, the band laid down all new tracks in 1997 and toyed with them in a way that still sounds like a band playing together. Matmos, on the other hand, took recordings from that session and subsequent live dates and twisted the sounds into something unrecognizable and transcendently powerful.

Rachel's have their fans, but I don't count myself among them. To me, Rachel's is a band that exists to fill a void for narrow-minded indie rockers. They're part of a trend of non-rock music being marketed in somewhat watered-down form to college kids. Other examples of this abound. For those hoping for a dip of electronic music but are unwilling to take the digital plunge, there's IQU. Want to hear some ambient music? Well, the Olivia Tremor Control has this thing called the Black Swan Network. And if you want to hear "classical" music, forget Kronos Quartet performing a Terry Riley piece, or actually picking up some Ravel, just get Rachel's.

The aforementioned bands are pretty good, of course, but they owe at least some of their popularity to the fact that they come pre-packaged to indie rock fans and don't have to compete with the heavy hitters of their chosen genre. That said, I have to admit that Rachel's new version of "Full on Night" is appealing. It starts slow, building with a distant drone, and then veers toward a Slint-like guitar introduction (there's that Louisville lineage). All the rock elements of the piece are in place, but when the piano-and-strings stuff comes in, interest wanes. It's damn hard to make a nice recording of a cello and piano engaging any more-- our ears are too quick to remember lame film scores to stay focused. But enough odd guitar bits and processed strings pop up on "Full on Night" to give the piece some power, and it builds to a surprisingly rocking and dissonant finish.

What Matmos manage to do with the song, on the other hand, is mind-blowing. The band had previously struck me as a marginal, second rate Autechre, channeling some of the same electro influences in pieces that depended too heavily on uninspired loops. But Matmos' take on "Full On Night" (re-titled "The Precise Temperature of Darkness") shows staggering compositional talent and sampling virtuosity of the highest order.

Some of the credit has to go to Rachel's for providing both the conceptual framework for the piece in addition to a host of cool sounds. But what Matmos does with the raw material far surpasses the source. First, they deftly build sustained guitar scrapes and digital distortion into a hypnotic bass melody somewhat reminiscent of Bjork's "Human Behaviour." Then, as noisy cello screeches and ringing guitars strings pile one atop the other, the piece slowly transforms into a towering wall of percussive terror. It undulates and twists with perfect logic from one complex and fascinating section to the next-- this is what Godspeed You Black Emperor! might sound like if they ever get out of their rut. This track is the Mogwai Fear Satan of the laptop set, and one of the finest extended electronic compositions in many years.

-Mark Richard-San

TODAY'S REVIEWS

DAILY NEWS

RATING KEY
10.0: Indispensable, classic
9.5-9.9: Spectacular
9.0-9.4: Amazing
8.5-8.9: Exceptional; will likely rank among writer's top ten albums of the year
8.0-8.4: Very good
7.5-7.9: Above average; enjoyable
7.0-7.4: Not brilliant, but nice enough
6.0-6.9: Has its moments, but isn't strong
5.0-5.9: Mediocre; not good, but not awful
4.0-4.9: Just below average; bad outweighs good by just a little bit
3.0-3.9: Definitely below average, but a few redeeming qualities
2.0-2.9: Heard worse, but still pretty bad
1.0-1.9: Awful; not a single pleasant track
0.0-0.9: Breaks new ground for terrible
OTHER RECENT REVIEWS

All material is copyright
2001, Pitchforkmedia.com.