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 Various Artists
Essential: Interpretations
[EMI-Capitol]
Rating: 0.1

If you aren't hep to what's going on with the business half of the term "music business," you're not alone. There's nothing interesting about it, really, but something major happened about a year ago: The once corporate giant, EMI Records, went under, leaving a massive back catalog with no one to continue releasing the stuff. So Capitol bought pretty much the whole damn thing. Their Essential series is, assumably, all the outtakes in EMI's archives that've never been fully capitalized on.

Interpretations is a two- disc set in the Essential series, most of which has never been released for a reason. There are only a few interesting moments here, which is not to say that even those are actually any good. In fact, of the 22 tracks Interpretations has to offer, there's not even a single, solitary second of enjoyment.

You might recognize a few of the bands on the compilation, but don't be surprised if you don't. I mean, yeah, you've got Belinda Carlisle's tacky rendition of the Sex Pistols' "Submission," the Foo Fighters' boring cover of "Baker Street," Sparklehorse's slaughtering of Pink Floyd's "Wish You Were Here" (even the brilliant Thom Yorke, who merely whines over a really, really long guitar solo and "plays his hotel television set" via telephone, couldn't save this one), White Town's horrific technoid version of "Rhinestone Cowboy" and World Party's verbatim "Martha My Dear." Does that make it worth listening to? Not for a second.

But what's even worse than hearing a familiar band doing a bad cover of a classic is a completely unheard of band doing a bad cover of a classic. Man! Who the hell are these people? And does the world really need a grungified version of David Bowie's "Ziggy Stardust," a warbly, off- pitch Brit's nightmarish rendition of Bobbie Gentry's "Ode To Billy Joe," or, even worse, an abyssmal disaster in the form of Kate Bush's "Why Should I Love You?" Um... do you really have to think about it?

On the cover of this disc, there's a wacky close-up of an ostrich. At the bottom of the track listing on the back of the disc, that same ostrich has his head buried in the sand. Really says something, doesn't it?

-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.