Rumor Scott Rodger (Maverick/Quest): Bonfire of Teenagers scheduled for Feb. 23, delayed by featured artist

BFFFE472-6D40-4091-ABB2-5E1A898902D8.jpeg
764E84D2-F0E7-415B-9FB3-DF3D68D90CC9.jpeg

Scott Rodger of Maverick/Quest management took to Twitter responding to claims about BOT’s cancellation. According to Rodger what’s going on behind the scenes is legal trouble with a featured artist (must be Miley?) who was supposed to go uncredited for legal reasons. Morrissey announced their feature on his blog, which led to a delay as they have to scrub the vocals from the album and replace them.

Rodger gives a release date of February 23rd 2023 and no indication that that is off.

“Morrissey’s album was due for release in Feb 23. It will come out but Morrissey himself put out a statement in his blog that the album “featured” another artist who didn’t want to be credited and thus the artist’s label blocked the release. Nothing to do with Capitol.”

“The artist who did backing vocals will be taken off and replaced. That takes time especially as you hit Christmas. When you say fight, sadly it doesn’t work that way. The other label, Columbia, legally blocked it. They’re within their rights to do so.”



 
At the very least it’s preposterous that anyone’s suggesting a complete redo of an album session because some backups gotta be switched out.

It's just a pipe dream. It almost certainly will not happen, but it's not unheard of. After all, the Smiths ditched their Troy Tate recordings and re-recorded with John Porter. (And Morrissey still doesn't like the results). Paul McCartney didn't like Phil Spector's production on Let it Be and remixed it to his own satisfaction thirty years later.

Maybe Morrissey will have a change of mind on Bonfire before it's too late—or before thirty years pass by. The Watt production may've sounded good, in the moment, back when Miley Cyrus was holding his hand as they listened to it together sipping soy milk hot chocolates in the mixing room. But now he might be realizing he made a mistake. Who knows? It's a forum dedicated to a singer. Let people speculate and hope for things.
 
Last edited:
It would be interesting. And if BoT was redone, would be great to have both versions.

Yes, it would be great to compare and contrast. He might want to call the de-Wattified version "Bonfire unlit," instead of taking his titling cue from McCartney, because "Teenagers ... naked" would be inappropriate.

But, unless a label is going to pay to have the album re-recorded, or even remixed, Morrissey himself most likely won’t be putting the money up to do it all over again.

All too true. He'd have to be profoundly dissatisfied, and so far he doesn't seem to be.
 
BOT isn’t being held up because the production isn’t any good. The album has hit a delay because Miley now has a record company that won’t let her appear on it. That one song is being recut without her.

I don’t get these thoughts that the whole album should be reworked. We‘ve heard one song and, yet again, Morrissey fans just aren’t happy. He would be slated if he didn’t write new material, he would be slated if he did, he would be slated if he used the same producers and he is being slated by using someone new.

I think the last few weeks Morrissey has shown why record companies don’t want to touch him with a barge pole. This is the reason it takes months for him to secure a deal and even when he does he throws it away. What he needs is super strong management but he won’t allow that.
 
I don’t get these thoughts that the whole album should be reworked. We‘ve heard one song and, yet again, Morrissey fans just aren’t happy. He would be slated if he didn’t write new material, he would be slated if he did, he would be slated if he used the same producers and he is being slated by using someone new.

The song itself is great; the issue is strictly with the production. It really does sound jarring. If it was just paint-by-numbers and did the song a modicum of justice, I doubt many here would be complaining.

It is, admittedly, just one song. But it would be pretty unusual if one song on an album sounded underwater and auto-tuned, while everything else sounded perfectly normal. There's typically a uniformity in the production.
 
If it was just paint-by-numbers and did the song a modicum of justice, I doubt many here would be complaining.
This is the only point I would really disagree with. I’ve been coming here a very long time and Morrissey fans complain at everything, including paint by numbers production!!!

I don’t listen to a lot of modern music, I have to suffer it when in the car with my wife and kids and the voices today sounds totally unnatural to me, maybe these people simply cannot sing. Morrissey still sounds amazing to me, even in Rebels. I think the backing vocals have had treatment but I don’t hear a great deal done to M’s voice.
 
This is the only point I would really disagree with. I’ve been coming here a very long time and Morrissey fans complain at everything, including paint by numbers production!!!

We must have very different experiences of the forum. I remember when Dog on a Chain came out, I was aghast that Morrissey had made, essentially, an electronic/industrial/techno-bop record, but it felt like a lonely opinion to have. Many on here seemed perfectly pleased with it. If anything, I find Morrissey's fans to be overly generous towards his work.
 
The song itself is great; the issue is strictly with the production. It really does sound jarring. If it was just paint-by-numbers and did the song a modicum of justice, I doubt many here would be complaining.

It is, admittedly, just one song. But it would be pretty unusual if one song on an album sounded underwater and auto-tuned, while everything else sounded perfectly normal. There's typically a uniformity in the production.
Jarring? So dramatic.
 
We must have very different experiences of the forum. I remember when Dog on a Chain came out, I was aghast that Morrissey had made, essentially, an electronic/industrial/techno-bop record, but it felt like a lonely opinion to have. Many on here seemed perfectly pleased with it. If anything, I find Morrissey's fans to be overly generous towards his work.
I really like Dog on a chain!

The best example of my point is all of this yearning to get the lads back together, bring back Steve Lillywhite, aaah we all miss Boz, aah Boz and Alain were great together, get rid of Jesse. It’s all crap. When the lads were together everybody moaned about them producing chug rock, Morrissey music that was almost scripted.

Everyone has their opinion is I do respect that, it would be a boring world if we didn’t. The only point I have tried to make today is that the album isn’t being reworked or held up for production reasons, it isn’t going to be recorded again. Let’s hear the album before anybody writes it off.
 
Jarring? So dramatic.

It's just a word choice. How else am I supposed to convey that it's strange to hear Morrissey's voice sound so pinched and compressed? There's nothing "dramatic" or "pearl-clutching" about this. It's a negative opinion. They occur all the time.
 
We must have very different experiences of the forum. I remember when Dog on a Chain came out, I was aghast that Morrissey had made, essentially, an electronic/industrial/techno-bop record, but it felt like a lonely opinion to have. Many on here seemed perfectly pleased with it. If anything, I find Morrissey's fans to be overly generous towards his work.
Agreed that Dog is a dire, dire album. It sounds like a really bad Killers album, that is trying to sound a bit like New Order.

I genuinely don't understand why some fans like it so much, and I say that with all sincerity and genuine interest in why some fans like it. I've tried many times to listen to it and like it, but it's just so bad, much worse than stuff that is considered some of his worst stuff from 1991 and 1995-1997.
 
BoT cannot be reconstructed. With what we know about Ha Ha Harlem, Watt has devised some cunning sounds to give it its distinctive atmosphere. Iggy’s vocals are also in the mix. Let’s not pretend that a bottom up rework is reasonable.
 
Agreed that Dog is a dire, dire album. It sounds like a really bad Killers album, that is trying to sound a bit like New Order.

I genuinely don't understand why some fans like it so much, and I say that with all sincerity and genuine interest in why some fans like it. I've tried many times to listen to it and like it, but it's just so bad, much worse than stuff that is considered some of his worst stuff from 1991 and 1995-1997.

Depends what you love him for, I suppose.

I like the drama he brings to a song. And the mix of gothic & camp - with authentic emotion (which is innovative enough to make him an important artist no matter what trauma he's going through).

But, maybe a classic Indie fan wouldn't be in to it.
 
Depends what you love him for, I suppose.

I like the drama he brings to a song. And the mix of gothic & camp - with authentic emotion (which is innovative enough to make him an important artist no matter what trauma he's going through).

But, maybe a classic Indie fan wouldn't be in to it.

I love The Smiths, I love The Cure (who dabbled in electronic) and New Order, both of whom I've seen live. I like Depeche Mode, Joy Division. I like electronic music, punk, ska, reggae, metal, nu metal, Mozart, Bach. Please don't patronise me with the "classic Indie (sic) fan" stuff. My tastes are extremely varied.

Dog was just a bad album, and it wasn't a Morrissey album. It was a poor attempt at doing what other artists have done better and for many more years, with greater degrees of success. It wasn't innovative in the slightest. It was hackneyed, lacking originality and just generally lazy. As I said earlier, it sounded like a really bad Killers album. Overproduced, lots of silly electronic noises and poor lyrics (which is a shame).

It was just a dull, middle of the road album, for dull middle of the road people.
 
You can endlessly talk about how the sound of the album will turn out. Let's wait for the release date and check it out. After all, Morrissey is still capable of surprising
 
I love The Smiths, I love The Cure (who dabbled in electronic) and New Order, both of whom I've seen live. I like Depeche Mode, Joy Division. I like electronic music, punk, ska, reggae, metal, nu metal, Mozart, Bach. Please don't patronise me with the "classic Indie (sic) fan" stuff. My tastes are extremely varied.

Dog was just a bad album, and it wasn't a Morrissey album. It was a poor attempt at doing what other artists have done better and for many more years, with greater degrees of success. It wasn't innovative in the slightest. It was hackneyed, lacking originality and just generally lazy. As I said earlier, it sounded like a really bad Killers album. Overproduced, lots of silly electronic noises and poor lyrics (which is a shame).

It was just a dull, middle of the road album, for dull middle of the road people.

So you want it to sound like a classic Morrissey Indie album.
 
The album was recorded aaaaages ago. Going back and stripping out Miley's vocal might not be so straightforward unless Watt has kept all the original mix element tracks to hand. Even then, the track has presumably gone through various mastering procedures which would have to be rolled back and redone. I'm sure it's do-able, but it might involve a bit more time, effort and money than just hitting 'mute' on one track.

It wouldn't surprise me if there might be a standoff between artist and label as to who's going to pay for this to either be remixed or an additional license fee to Columbia. Capitol Records might be justifiably narked that they've paid money to license a recording that they now can't legally issue (and doubtless Miley's presence would have been a big draw in the first place).
 
So you want it to sound like a classic Morrissey Indie album.

There is no classic Morrissey indie album. All of his solo albums, singles and b-sides have different sounds including (but not limited to) jangle pop, rockabilly, glam rock, classical-lite, rock, flamenco, post-punk, slow sweeping ballads. There's even some reggae sounds thrown in. They all worked because he had the right musicians and right producers. Have you actually listened to any of Morrissey's music pre-Dog? You'd understand that there is no "classic Indie (sic)" Morrissey album if you'd truly been listening to his music.

Dog was a poor album because it's a sound that just doesn't work with someone like Morrissey, with his musicians or his producers. Good for him for trying to sound like New Order or Depeche Mode or The Cure or whoever, but it's just not something that he suits, and the results were poor.

As I said, it's a middle of the road album for middle of the road people, with poor taste in music. Either that, or they just uncritically support anything he produces, without a single sign of independent thought.
 
There is no classic Morrissey indie album. All of his solo albums, singles and b-sides have different sounds including (but not limited to) jangle pop, rockabilly, glam rock, classical-lite, rock, flamenco, post-punk, slow sweeping ballads. There's even some reggae sounds thrown in. They all worked because he had the right musicians and right producers. Have you actually listened to any of Morrissey's music pre-Dog? You'd understand that there is no "classic Indie (sic)" Morrissey album if you'd truly been listening to his music.

Dog was a poor album because it's a sound that just doesn't work with someone like Morrissey, with his musicians or his producers. Good for him for trying to sound like New Order or Depeche Mode or The Cure or whoever, but it's just not something that he suits, and the results were poor.

As I said, it's a middle of the road album for middle of the road people, with poor taste in music. Either that, or they just uncritically support anything he produces, without a single sign of independent thought.
or they just have different taste to you.
 
Tags
bonfire of teenagers

Trending Threads

Back
Top Bottom