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 Plaid
Not For Threes
[Warp/Nothing/Interscope]
Rating: 7.5

Plaid is, like so many electronic acts, comprised of two gents: Ed Handley and Andy Turner. The duo used to kick it as the Black Dog (they were a trio then, but they ditched bandmate Ken Downie somewhere along the way) who are renowned for their contribution to making electronic a seperate genre apart from dance music. They also did their share of remixes for people like Björk and UNKLE.

Handley and Turner have been recording under the Plaid moniker since 1991, dishing out material inbetween Black Dog releases. And they've come a long way since their 1992 debut Bytes. The band's latest, Not For Threes, fuses trip-hop, drum-n-bass and ambient electronic nicely for a sound that crosses the Orb's psychedelic atmospherics with µ-Ziq's skittering beats and melodic beauty.

As an experiment, Not For Threes features guest vocalists on a few of its tracks-- Nicolette enjoys the spotlight on the mechanical "Extork;" Mara and Benet's appearances on "Rakimou" are stunning, to say the very least; even Björk pops up on one of the album's highlights, the oceanic toyshop soundscape "Lilith."

But let me put it to you like this: Plaid aren't for everyone. My mom is a big Hank Williams, Jr. fan-- she won't like this. My dad digs on Celine Dion-- this is not his album. But if you're like me, you're into Brian Eno, Squarepusher, Amon Tobin, Coldcut and Autechre. And Not For Threes will probably sit just fine with you.

-Ryan Schreiber

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.