David Bowie's "The Next Day" Offers a Bleak Yet Satisfying World View

David Bowie fans who lost the thread around his Tin Machine days or who meandered mystified or perhaps less than fully satisfied through his end of century output and beyond need to return for The Next Day his first album in a decade, following his 2004 heart attack and major surgery. Not that Heathens wasn’t a good outing or that some of the others didn’t have their great moments.

As if to erase years of creative clutter and to just plain shock, The Next Day’s artwork reprises the triumphant Heroes cover with “Heroes” “Sharpie”’d over and the iconic robotic cover photo pasted over with a large square Post-it note in which is written “The Next Day.”

Two things to keep in mind: Heroes may have arrived to critical acclaim, but it was a difficult record that was well ahead of the public and not happily received by the stodgy RCA, his record label at the time. And its worth remembering that Scary Monsters (and Super Creeps), his last for that label, was among his best. This new one produced by long time studio partner Tony Visconti (who produced Man of Words/Man of Music (later known as Space Oddity) and The Man Who Sold The World as well as the aforementioned Heroes among others, returns to the hard edged, tearing sound of Heroes (side 1) but more particularly the even more jarring and woefully underappreciated The Lodger. But this new, guitar shard saturated album is anything but an exercise in nostalgia.

While Bowie has previously expressed an interest in morbidity—he covered in concert Jacques Brel’s melodramatic “My Death” during his Ziggy Stardust touring days—here at age 66 and after a genuine brush with his finale, he confronts it head on with a series of songs about death and violence, shootings and suicides, war and no peace.

The first single, the resigned, almost bemused “Where Are We Now”, sprung last January via the Internet upon his unsuspecting pleased and relieved world-wide fan base sets the album’s overall mood, though the tone is far more varied within its sprawling sixty minutes.

The title tune opener is a nervous, resigned “Beauty and the Beast”-like chase of impending decrepitude and decay (“Here I am, not quite died, my body left to rot in a hollow tree”). The song spills out life’s cruel arc (“first they give you everything that you want, then they take back everything that you have”). It’s the perfect song to accompany a terminal cancer diagnosis.

The slinky/nasty “Dirty Boys” (“When the die is cast and you have no choice we will run with the dirty boys”) is prime Bowie, though in and out in fewer than three minutes is newfound economy. The lyrical urgency seems to have come from a much younger man.

The vampirish “The Stars (Are Out Tonight)” puts the Bowie-celebrity in your shoes, exploring our and his complicated love/hate parasitic relationship with stars and stardom (“they watch us from behind their shades…from behind their tinted window stretch.”) Bowie names names: “Birgitte and Jack and Kate and Brad”.

Even the dead ones remain active in this relationship “soaking up our primitive world.” “We will never be rid of these stars, but I hope they live forever” Bowie exclaims.

Three songs in this album has already packed an overwhelming lyrical and musical energy jolt and a sense of thematic purpose and focus Bowie hasn’t managed in a decade, even as his previous albums have had their moments among the meandering.

“Love Is Lost” comes next and it doesn’t relent. The loss begets “the darkest hour and you’re 22” and an attempt at a fresh beginning: “your country’s new your friends are too, your house and even your eyes are new, but your fear is as old as the world”.

Then, after four agitated songs Bowie serves up the gorgeous “Where Are We Now”—a reminiscence only an older man could have written and one that will resonate most richly with older listeners but with younger ones too. The Bowie/Visconti team can still bring the chills.

As far as this Bowie fan is concerned he’s already gotten his money’s worth and he’s only about eighteen minutes into the hour!

After a second slower wistful tune, “Valentine’s Day,” one of the set’s melodic highlights, though it's about a grizzly school shooting ("Valentine told me who's to go/Feelings he's treasured most of all/The teachers and the football star/It's in his tiny face/It's in his scrawny hand," it’s back to the linear nervous energy of “If You Can See Me” filled with the kind of brutal, mythical imagery found on Bowie’s earliest albums. “I will take your lands and all that lays beneath/The dust of cold flowers/drizzle of dark ashes/I will slaughter your kind/descend from belief/I am the spirit of greed, of gold, of theft/Burn all your books and the problems they make/If you can see me I can see you.

“I’d Rather Be High” is an anti-war song that equals or surpasses Elvis Costello’s “Ship Building”. E.C. pleaded a tragic case from the viewpoint of an adult outsider. Bowie’s is from the point of view of the youngster being sent to the front: “I’d rather be high/I’d rather be flying/I’d rather be dead/Or out of my head/Than training these guns on those men in the sand/I’d rather be high.”

Skipping a few tunes—none of which are filler—you get to the spit at death “How Does the Grass Grow?” another song with a war theme—cold war this time— with references to Hungarian skirts and Eastern bloc motorbikes popular in the early ‘60s, that reminisces about a couple’s long ago cemetery rendezvous (“would you still love me if the clocks could go backwards?”) juxtaposed with the sacrifices of the dead. It’s a rock’n’roll suicide.

Bowie sings “Remember the dead, they were so great!....some of them”. Such a twisted, mocking line deserves a musical rejoinder so Bowie and a chorus break into a “ya ya ya ya” rendition of the memorable riff from The Shadows’ 1960 instrumental hit “Apache” complete with falsetto echo.

The answer to the song title’s question is “blood, blood, blood.” And where do the boys lie? “Mud, mud, mud.”

The morbid tale fades and the song ends with bravado as Bowie sings “I gaze in defeat at the stars in the night, the light in my life burns away. There will be no tomorrow when you sigh in your sleep and meaning returns with the day.”

“You Feel So Lonely” has a “Rock’n’Roll Suicide” 1950’s ballad-like vibe with an ending that reprises the drum coda on Ziggy’s “Five Years”. When it hits after fifty plus minutes of turmoil and drifts into the fade-out ether you’ll feel more than satisfied, but “Heat” the album’s creepy Scott Walker-ish denouement will deliver you to higher plane. Bowie confesses in character “I am a seer but I am a liar.” This bit of self-doubt has crept into his work throughout his career.

The production and sound you ask? Well Bowie and Visconti didn’t produce this epic on the cheap and their sonic bona fides cannot be questioned. The musical cast was large and impressive and includes many familiar names along with some that aren’t—at least to me. Tony Levin and guitarist Earl Slick, who’s teamed up with Bowie numerous times are on board.

Bowie’s albums have almost all featured memorable sound—particularly the earlier and mid-period ones.

The overall sound and particularly the mix are very good, particularly in this era of mushy sonic drek, but I was disappointed in the soft, lifeless Pro Tools drum sound. Cymbals lack any kind of sizzle, the snare and kick are soft. Compare this to Scary Monsters… for instance.

But listen the days of mounting a production like this to analog tape are pretty much over and after hearing Visconti recounting the making of Heroes at one of Colleen Murphy’s “Classic Album Sundays” events that were part of last Spring’s Red Bull Music Festival, I would bet Tony is never going back.

That out of the way, let’s just say the sound is pretty damn good by modern standards and the mix and production are stellar. There’s a lot to dig into and the recording’s overall clarity and reverberant warmth invite you in.

I first downloaded from HDTracks the 48K/24 bit file said to be the master’s resolution and found the overall sound to be reasonably dynamic and transparent. After about a dozen plays the double 180g gatefold LP arrived mastered at Masterdisk from the original master file, perhaps first transferred to analog tape (still checking on that). For whatever reason or reasons the vinyl sounds way better than the digital file converted via my very good D/A converter. The sound is more spacious and definitely more dynamic.

The gatefold packaging is not an afterthought. It includes bespoke labels for the four sides as well as heavy stock color inner sleeves. And you get the CD thrown in containing three bonus tracks that are bonus tracks because they are not up the uniformly memorable fourteen album tracks.

Highly recommended to all but especially Bowie fans who have lost their way.

Music Direct Buy It Now

COMMENTS
Glotz's picture

I was juuuuust talking with co-workers today about local shops that may have it, and I just need to get online and snatch it up!

Great review, dude.

fivecolors's picture

Records great, better every listen. Definatly a grower (my favorite kind of record). I really do think its the best thing he's put out since Scary Monsters, and i'm incredibly excited and impressed that he still has got it in him! Who would have guessed?

Thanks for the review Mikey!

Glotz's picture

I thought that you were smoking some shit when I listened to the first play through... good but..  a 10? 

Well YOU ARE RIGHT, Mikey!!!

Every song is very infectious (after the virus has a had a few times to procreate), and  I really find the extra 3 tracks completely up-to-snuff.

Bowie NEEDS to go on tour one last time before it's too late. 

 

Jody's picture

Haven't heard this yet, but sounds like it's worth checking out. Masterdisk has cut some nice sounding records in the past few years... the Record Store Day reissues on the Vanguard label sound excellent.

otaku2's picture

But then again, Scary Monsters was the first CD I ever bought (after wearing holes in my vinyl copy).

jason049's picture

What a fantabulous post this has been. Never seen this kind of useful post. I am grateful to you and expect more number of posts like these. Thank you very much. opinion holiday

Prancing Horse's picture

This is NOT a great sounding album. Period.

BTW, you say you bought the 48/24 HDTracks download but it is actually 96/24. They list it as 48/24 because that is the original Pro Tools resolution used, then it was mixed to analog, then captured at 96/24. They did't want people complaining it was not a native 96/24.

Why, in 2013, are they making native 48 Khz recordings? And we have these annoying loons talking about "DSD downloads" lol. What a crock.

This pretty much sums it up:

"....but I was disappointed in the soft, lifeless Pro Tools drum sound. Cymbals lack any kind of sizzle, the snare and kick are soft."

And the "LP mastered off the digital file sounds better" schtick is gettiing old.devil

J. Carter's picture

FYI, they limited/ somewhat brickwalled the HDtracks, CD, iTunes and Amazon MP3 tracks during the mastering of the digital files. They didn't limit the vinyl during the mastering of the vinyl which is something that happens on a regular basis in the industry now a days. That is why the vinyl often sounds better than the digital files.

I have the vinyl of this album and I would agree with all of his assesments of the vinyl except the number rating. I would probably give it a 7.

My suggestion to you, if you are going to hammer somone make sure you have your facts straight.

Prancing Horse's picture

Really Mr. Big Shot?

The recording sucks. Your magic grooves will not help it. Mikey likes EVERY LP mastered from digital better than the corresponding files. His fetish knows no bounds.

He probably did not listen to the HDTracks download otherwise he would have noted it is actually 96 Khz on all tracks except 2 I believe.

J. Carter's picture

You may be right but that doesn't mean your information was right about the HDtracks not sounding as good as the vinyl in this case. I HAVE listened to both and the vinyl is definitely more dynamic. The bass is clearer and tighter and it has an overall more open sound.

Why are you even reading this stuff if you hate him so much?

The recording is not as bad as you are making it out to be unless all you have listened to is the non vinyl versions!

Prancing Horse's picture

Sure, Bowie's master plan was to come out of retirement after ten years, record to Pro Tools at 48 Khz, then make sure the LP was the only listenable version of the album in its best fidelity. LOL. Ridiculous.

Second, who said anything about hating Mikey? He can be utterly preposterous at times. But he is good entertainment.

Besides, do we know for sure the LP was mastered from the digital archive, or the analog tape mixdown?

J. Carter's picture

That you are so clueless to how the music industry is working now a days. What was done to Bowie's album is common practice now. The Beatles, Paul McCartney, Daft Punk, David Bowie and ZZ Top just to name a few are doing this. The Beatles and Paul McCartney ones are less obvious though but they have talked about the fact that they are doing it. That is why I very rarely buy CDs of new releases anymore.

Glotz's picture

There is NO need to insult anyone, for any reason. 

The only thread here that brings the discussion down is you, J. Carter. 

Arguing about who is more knowledgable just shows you to be a petulant child with too much time on your hands. 

We'll all listen, just act like an adult when you communicate. 

We're all happy that Bowie put out a GREAT record- don't be that one guy that brings us all down on this subject. 

 

 

Michael Fremer's picture

Listen Prancing Horse if I veer from "preposterous to entertaining" why bother reading? I don't see how the LP could have been mastered from the analog tape mixdown given that according to HDtracks, tracks 5 and 14 are recorded and mixed at 48/24 and there's no mention of an analog mixdown. 

The only way to have done it would be to cut it "on the fly" switching between the analog tape and a file. Now that's possible but not likely. And if it's was the case, well that's very cool and that would explain in part why the record sounds soooo much better—not because of the 'magic grooves' though I do believe there's magic in the grooves.

I will contact Masterdisk tomorrow and find out! 

So actually, please keep reading me and be as critical as you wish because I think it's beneficial.

 

 

 

 

Michael Fremer's picture

Otherwise why would I write that? Because you think I'm a liar? The HDTracks file said 48/24 and that's as far as I went with it. I didn't "examine" it and the Meridian Music Server upsamples it anyway.

HD Tracks identifies the file thusly:

Artists | David Bowie  | The Next Day
Audiophile 48kHz/24bit
 
despite what it says below that about how it was recorded and mixed. I should have mentioned in the review the mix to analog tape and re-conversion to digital. 
 
 
Michael Fremer's picture

From where did you get the info that it was mixed to analog and then re-digitized at 96/24? Not doubting it just interested to know the source.

Sorry if the "LP mastered off the digital file sounds better" shtick is getting old, but truth doesn't age! And it truly does sound better.

J. Carter's picture

The Bonus Tracks are on the vinyl also. Just an FYIcool

J. Carter's picture

I don't share Mike's enthusiasm about the sound quality on this album but the material and sound quality are both pretty good especially on vinyl. I wish they would stop limiting the digital versions of the album. That is the only reason in my opinion that the vinyl sounds better here.

mauidj's picture

This is one of Bowie's best. Right up there with Scary Monsters and Heroes. Great songs and lyrics. And the sound is fine by me. Not sure what all the bitching is about regarding it or the review?

thomoz's picture

I would take exception to the notion that ProTools itself would impart any character or limitation to the drum sounds on the record. Sure, DSP effects or the choice of D/A converter might, the computer sound card or microphones, the mic preamps, even the mixing board (if one was used at all, which it likely was since they were bouncing to and from tape on a frew tracks). Also the choice of bitrate might constrict the transients,  more bandwidth being better. The same factors also come into play when recording vocals and (as an owner of the vinyl myself) I have to say those sound pretty good here.

Comparing the vinyl to the cd (which came with the purchase) I noticed that the vocal and saxophone, some of the upper frequency character of the bass and the piano sounded slightly more lifelike on the vinyl. This is one release where even the cd sounds pretty decent.

The one reader here who did NOT like the sound (of The Next Day) - I wonder if he is altogether unfamiliar with Bowie's 1976-80 output - this new album sounds like THAT and nothing like Man Who Sold / Ziggy / Aladdin Sane / Pin Ups, all of which have a wide-bandwidth sound that no Bowie recordings since have matched.

Just for a laugh, I threw on the Sound And Vision 1990 vinyl box and gave it a listen / comparison to the new release, and the mastering on that set (Dr. Toby Mountain) has NOT improved with age - back to my 3-lp French "Berlin, Portrait Of The Artist" box for that material! (laughs)

I really love the new record. Post 1988: I liked 'Outside', 'Heathen' and 'Reality' a lot too. 'Tin Machine 1' was a stellar release. 'Earthling', 'Hours', 'Black Tie/White Noise' and 'Buddha of Suburbia' were just okay for me - I never listen to them these days.

X