Jump to content

Wu Tang to release new album A Better Tommorow on a speaker


Len Cnut

Recommended Posts

Wu-Tang Clan to release new album on boombox speaker

RZA says A Better Tomorrow will be available on a special-edition speaker – and affirms that all existing ten members will appear on it

After announcing their single-copy “art” album Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, featuring Cher, Wu-Tang Clan have unveiled details of their next project: the long-awaited A Better Tomorrow, which will be released via a portable speaker akin to a boombox. Neither album will be downloadable.

During a recent Billboard interview, the band’s leader, RZA, confirmed that A Better Tomorrow should be ready by 28 November, the start of the Christmas shopping season in America, known as Black Friday. He said that all 10 Clan members would feature on the release – which lends support to recent reports regarding Raekwon’s return to the project.

Teaming with Boombotix, the album will be released only as a limited-edition special version on a portable speaker, the Wu-edition Boombot Rex. Those who have purchased the album on this platform can then play the music files it contains through any Bluetooth device.

“I had the idea pop up into my head, for a while, about music being kind of disconnected to us. Of being so digitised and accessible, but yet not tangible,” said RZA. “But this thing here, a tangible item, like your old Walkman or your old cassette, or your old record, that’s what this is bringing back.”

The album, he hoped, would prevent piracy, as it cannot be downloaded. RZA described the Wu-edition Boombot Rex – costing $79.99 (£49.39) – as giving “a layer of protection” to the musician’s art. The music, he added, would form a “kind-of” concept album.

Musically, it travels from a guy who is going through difficulties, tries to find himself, gets involved with some violence, some troubles, but then realises that it’s best sometimes to walk away from the past and all the bad times and maybe work on making his life better, and making a better tomorrow.

The other forthcoming Wu-Tang release, Once Upon a Time in Shaolin, exists only as a single physical copy. The group said that the album, intended as a kind of art spectacle, will tour galleries, museums and festivals, and that punters will have to pay for admission to listen to it on closely monitored headphones. The band then hope to sell the sole physical copy of the album for millions of dollars, and claims that offers have already started to roll in.

Wu-Tang are the latest group to experiment with unconventional methods of distribution: Nine Inch Nails have dropped USB sticks in concert venues, Flaming Lips released an album housed inside a “hand-crafted, custom-made … anatomically correct and life-sized” chocolate skull, while Thom Yorke was the first artist to use the “pay-gate” feature with a BitTorrent bundle release.

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/oct/01/wu-tang-clan-to-release-new-album-wu-edition-boombot-rex-portable-boombox-speaker-a-better-tomorrow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree. Firstly, they've only released one album in the last 10 years and it was pretty hotly anticipated, with all that Dhani Harrison shit and the fact that RZA was gonna take em in a different direction, that shit was really pretty highly sang up. So where you get this idea from that nobody cares about a Wu release I don't know.

And as far as 'gimmick', shit, was 36 Chambers gimmicky cuz it had songs with no choruses (some of em) and Kung Fu samples and their entire concept was put out there? Or was 8 Diagrams working on a gimmick because it has folks playing the real instruments and broke away from their original style? That ain't gimmicks, thats creativity, thats having your own identity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think by "gimmick" he means releasing one copy of an album and "touring" it through museums, then eventually selling that one copy for however much money. And now this, releasing an album through a speaker, limited to 1,000 units.

But thats the point, this is the Wu, they've always done some different shit with their albums, 36 Chambers, Wu Tang Forever, Ironman, Cuban Linx, Liquid Swords, Return to the 36, which of these, as albums in and of themselves (Wu Tang Forever probably :lol:) is not innovative on some level?

I guess they could have been total knobs and inserted it right into our itunes without our asking for it. :lol:

Nah, what kinda twat would do that? :lol:

*bait*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter who the artist is - any album that isn't released "traditionally" is, in a sense, a "gimmick". Not always a bad thing, if at all, but still a gimmick.

I do find it funny how one artist does they're ragged for it but when someone else does it, albeit in a different manner, they're "innovative" :lol:

I mean, it is an interesting concept and if an artist I was a big fan of did it, I'd purchase it (though the speaker is probably shit). But, the speaker is one thing. The single-copy-in-existence is just pretentious, honestly. Much more-so than inserting a free album into people's precious iTunes libraries.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't matter who the artist is - any album that isn't released "traditionally" is, in a sense, a "gimmick". Not always a bad thing, if at all, but still a gimmick.

Only if you suffer from some strange illness that makes you think you are an A&R guy.

I do find it funny how one artist does they're ragged for it but when someone else does it, albeit in a different manner, they're "innovative" :lol:

Because if it's a different manner then it's...uh, different, isn't it?

I mean, it is an interesting concept and if an artist I was a big fan of did it, I'd purchase it (though the speaker is probably shit). But, the speaker is one thing. The single-copy-in-existence is just pretentious, honestly. Much more-so than inserting a free album into people's precious iTunes libraries.

I don't mean to be rude Sabbath but do you know what the word 'pretencious' means? How is sticking free copies of album into itunes 'pretencious'? Presumptuous yes but pretencious? With the Wu, yes, you could make that claim but hold on a second, which is it? Is it a serious artistic statement on the part of a band or is it a slick manuevre to make it so people don't rob their shit for free? If the former then you could make a case for pretencious but if not then it's a different story and this is what gets me about this position, it's gotta be one way or the other surely, either they are artsy fartsy and up their own arse or they are cold calculated money men.

No one (other than diehards) cared about Iron Flag either. Between that and 8 Diagrams I don't see much anticipation for Wu Tang anymore. Neither of those albums broke even half a million units and neither were even close to being in the top ten.

Judging the importance or the relevance of something like the Wu by way of commerce is disingenuous. They were an underground group who, for a period, went over ground. This does not mean to say that their relevance is then stuck in this Britney Spears category where the numbers are the measure of their success cuz they ain't. Wu succeed when they do the Wu justice, Wu succeed when their community is onside. Like Rae' was saying in this interview i heard recently, these guys are never gonna be big mainstream staples, it was just never gonna happen. The fact that people like Rae and Ghost went platinum was an anomoly not a standard that was ever going to be maintained, Rae' (or any of the Wu) succeed based on the response of their community to the work, their peers. So the best thing that Rae' can do is do Rae in the best was possible and the worst thing for Rae' is his people to look at it and go 'that ain't Rae''

Wu's position in the hip hop community (and history) is unassailable. The Wu fail the day they make an album that doesn't sound Wu, or they do something as individuals, on the record, thats so far out of pocket in terms of their thing and the standards they set that their people, their community look to them and go 'nah, that ain't Rae' or that ain't Ghost or that ain't...whoever.

If record sales were the thing in that sphere then shit, there are greater greats than The Wu that never ever were relevant, they simply never sold enough, so Kane weren't relevant, G Rap weren't relevance, Ricky D weren't relevant, Rakim weren't relevant...it doesn't work like that when you're talking about real hip hop. Yeah, i said it, real hip hop.

Ghost is a perfect example of this, he's been steady throwing out albums, high quality hip hop albums pretty much straight since the mid 90s, Ironman, Clientele, Bulletproof Wallets, Fishscale, Apollo Kids etc etc etc...now some of these went platinum some didn't...but the high standard was maintained throughout, none of those albums is less than an 8 out of 10 album...THATS success in the framework of who and where and what the Wu are.

Wu serve a community first and foremost...thats their success, whatever happens after that is just like a cherry on top.

Is The Abbotts lisp getting worse or what? Won O Nee-yo :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because if it's a different manner then it's...uh, different, isn't it?

Right, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about just releasing albums in a different manner than "Hey, it's on store shelves." Whether it be for free through iTunes, or through an $80 speaker. Why does one way make it one artist a knob, and the other way make them innovative or different? Honestly Len, I feel like if Kanye or U2 did either of the last two things Wu did with this album and their last, you would have been all of that like flies on shit in terms of giving them a hard time.

I don't mean to be rude Sabbath but do you know what the word 'pretencious' means? How is sticking free copies of album into itunes 'pretencious'? Presumptuous yes but pretencious? With the Wu, yes, you could make that claim but hold on a second, which is it? Is it a serious artistic statement on the part of a band or is it a slick manuevre to make it so people don't rob their shit for free? If the former then you could make a case for pretencious but if not then it's a different story and this is what gets me about this position, it's gotta be one way or the other surely, either they are artsy fartsy and up their own arse or they are cold calculated money men.

Yeah, I do know what the word means, Len. Which is why I didn't say sticking free copies of an album onto iTunes is pretentious - I said creating a single copy of an album and having it make rounds in museums is pretentious. And doing that to prevent people from robbing their shit for free? Isn't doing that making it so people can't have it at all? :lol: It'd be one thing if they said they were then going to release it for fans afterward, but I don't think that was the plan? Artistic? Ok, sure, but that doesn't take away from that fact that fans still can't experience it. They can go to a museum? Alright, what about the ones that can't. They're selling the copy at auction? Okay, but the person who won it would likely be prosecuted if it leaked afterward. So...?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm talking about just releasing albums in a different manner than "Hey, it's on store shelves." Whether it be for free through iTunes, or through an $80 speaker. Why does one way make it one artist a knob, and the other way make them innovative or different? Honestly Len, I feel like if Kanye or U2 did either of the last two things Wu did with this album and their last, you would have been all of that like flies on shit in terms of giving them a hard time.

Well it's sort of like saying all murderers are the same, when they're not. Killing someone as a soldier in an army is different, killing your bird cuz she didn't boil your morning egg right is something else, although they are both doing a similar thing in the broader sense. Same with this, there is a weight of intellect behind what the Wu are doing, it isn't like a free supermarket giveaway, there's an imagination to it, it's a conceptual thing designed to reaffirm the artistic value of popular music and attempt to elevate it's position. Now whether you think thats a good idea or not it is an idea and you can't say that, just because it comes under the banner of unconventional marketing or release of a product that it is the same thing as what Bono and the lads are up to cuz it's not. I haven't really done the theory behind the Wu's releasing the mueseum piece thing it's proper justice but it's 10 past 5, i get off work in like 50 mins, i really can't be bothered but I'm sure you get the idea :lol:

I don't mind anyone doing anything as far out and pretencious as they like as long as they can explain the concept to me, sit me down and go OK, we're doing this this and this and if i see that in their thing then I'm all for it.

Yeah, I do know what the word means, Len. Which is why I didn't say sticking free copies of an album onto iTunes is pretentious - I said creating a single copy of an album and having it make rounds in museums is pretentious.

What you actually said was that the meuseum thing was 'much more-so' pretencious in relation to giving it away free on itunes so you kinda did.

But fair play, if you meant what you're saying now then it is what it is.

And doing that to prevent people from robbing their shit for free? Isn't doing that making it so people can't have it at all? :lol: It'd be one thing if they said they were then going to release it for fans afterward, but I don't think that was the plan? Artistic? Ok, sure, but that doesn't take away from that fact that fans still can't experience it. They can go to a museum? Alright, what about the ones that can't. They're selling the copy at auction? Okay, but the person who won it would likely be prosecuted if it leaked afterward. So...?

Who said the person who wins it will be prosecuted if it leaks?

Also, not to go off on a tangent but consider the notion of art for a moment. What is it? A manifestation of human creativity right? So a person has something to say and his chosen platform for that is...a song perhaps, or a piece of canvas with paint on it. Isn't that pretencious right off the bat? The very nature of artistic expression is pretencious and self indulgent, thats kinda what it is, we're in the theatre of pretence here, of performance of course it's pretencious but what popular music isn't? I don't think pretencious is seriously an accusation you can level at art, human beings do not need art to communicate ergo any music with anything resembling a message, that isn't just plain designed to make you move, any music or art saying anything is pretencious. It's kinda like having a go at Mike Tyson for being a brute.

Edited by Lennie Godber
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...