Playing The Angel

Depeche Mode | Format: MP3 Download

Product Details

• Original Release Date: October 18, 2005
• Release Date: October 18, 2005
• Label: Reprise
• Copyright: 2005 Sire Records. Marketed by Reprise Records, A Warner Music Group Company.
• Total Length: 52:02
• Genres:
• ASIN: B00122N0GQ
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (343 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #33,987 Paid in MP3 Albums (See Top 100 Paid in MP3 Albums)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

217 of 248 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Their darkest... and possibly their best, October 18, 2005

By 

R O C K E T (The Twin Cities, MN) - See all my reviews
(VINE VOICE)   

This review is from: Playing the Angel (Audio CD)

It was not an incredibly difficult feat for DM to surpass the ironically-titled (yet underrated in my opinion) Exciter, but little did we know that they would surpass most of our expectations to this degree. This album rocks. Overall, it's their darkest album yet, especially following the somewhat sweet and tender mood of Exciter.

I don't normally do this, but here's a track by track:

1) "A Pain That I'm Used To" - A great intro track with definite NIN influence. Soft, dark, electronic beats that explode into a cacophony of loud guitars at the chorus. I heard this is going to be the second single.

2) "John The Revelator" - Influenced by a classic gospel track of the same name, this would have fit beautifully on Songs of Faith & Devotion. A heavy electro beat with Dave's preachy, aggressive vocals and a gospel choir that joins in at the chorus. My immediate favorite. I really hope this one becomes a single.

3) "Suffer Well" - The first of three songs written by Dave Gahan instead of Martin Gore (a first for DM). More than worthy of the Depeche Mode moniker, this is another favorite of mine. It's fast and catchy and very reminiscent of old-school pre-Violator DM. Reminds me of "Behind The Wheel."

4) "The Sinner In Me" - Another NIN-esque track. Dark and moody. Awesome synth line. I love it.

5) "Precious" - The first single. Also reminiscent of older DM - a very catchy song with a nice beat, a cool guitar part, and Dave's smooth vocals. For some reason I like this song a lot better within the context of the whole album. A very worthy first single. Many are saying it's one of the best singles of their career. I can't argue with that.

6) "Macro" - The first of the obligatory Martin Gore ballads. This is actually one of my favorites of his. The verses are kind of odd (which is typical of Gore), but I absolutely love the chorus ("see the microcosm in macrovision / our bodies moving with pure precision / one universal celebration / one evolution, one creation"). Severely underrated.

7) "I Want It All" - The next of the Gahan-penned tracks. It's strange and floaty and quite different from a typical DM song, but really good nonetheless. The beat is similar to Bjork's "All Is Full of Love" (which is one of my favorite songs, by the way).

8) "Nothing's Impossible" - The last of the Gahan-penned tracks, and definitely my least favorite of the three. It has an old-school feel, but Dave's vocals are a bit odd and monotone. It's not one of my favorites, but it's grown on me significantly and now I like it quite a bit.

9) "Introspectre" - A creepy little instrumental interlude. Could have been pulled right off of Radiohead's Kid A. There's not much to it. Eerie sound effects among minimal electronics.

10) "Damaged People" - The other Gore ballad. Slow, slightly creepy circus music with Gore's odd vocals. This has grown on me a lot, too, but is definitely one of the weakest tracks.

11) "Lilian" - An awesome, retro-sounding, fast-paced, catchy song about some spoiled, sadistic woman who likes to break hearts for fun. The sound is not stereotypical of DM, though, and I can't put a finger on why.

12) "The Darkest Star" - Another somewhat creepy slow song that's probably the darkest on the album. I didn't care much for it at first, but now I love it.

Since the release of Ultra, it's been my favorite DM album (even though many fans disliked it for some reason), followed very closely by Violator and Songs of Faith & Devotion. Critics keep saying Playing The Angel is their best since Violator. I really think, though, that it has risen up to possibly be their greatest masterpiece yet. Only time will tell if I feel the same way down the road, but right now that's where I stand.

62 of 73 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Let's be reasonable...., October 20, 2005

By 

Low-Ranking Reviewer "tell it like it is" (US of A) - See all my reviews

This review is from: Playing the Angel (Audio CD)

This ain't a 5-star release nor a "Violator", but anything less than 3-stars are probably from non-DM fans trying to get a rise out of real DM fans. The first half of the cd mostly contain the more 'upbeat'(as in mid-tempo for DM) songs that all sound really good and are immediately accessible, esp 1,2,3,4,&5. The second half mostly contain the slower songs which are less accessible and requires more listenings to in order to let them sink in and judge them on their own merits; and these are the songs that will probably make or break this release as either 'just another good effort' or 'slightly underrated classic'. All of us can agree to what an up-tempo song has to offer, but all of us will have a different take on a slower song that requires us to take in the lyrics and music more at our own pace.

People putting this cd down off the bat after one or two listens should not be taken seriously. This is a good release as it stands now, with a potential to be even better later down the road. But even if I don't find another personal favorite 'ballad' along the lines of "Somebody", "Home" or "Waiting for the Night" in the second half of this cd in the near future(i actually had trouble with those 3 on first listenings, now all three are personal faves esp "Home"); I still stand by the 4-star rating. For me, the first half is good enough to compensate for the second half. If only there had been a few upbeat 'bonus' remixes at the end to offset the slower second half this might've even been a 5-star release(but i guess that's what cd maxi-singles are for). Btw, is anyone else freaked out by the cd cover? Reminds me of the zulu/zuni(?) fetish doll from that "Trilogy of Terror" horror movie back in the 80's. Spooky.

39 of 48 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars A review of the production/sound quality only, October 24, 2005

By 

Kevin White (Keller, Texas) - See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)   

This review is from: Playing the Angel (Audio CD)

Stop! This short review is not about the merits of the new album, it's about the mastering job done by the producers. It's awful. The original recordings, which were probably quite good, have had all traces of impact, dynamic range, 3-dimensional space, etc. SMASHED out of them by the unbelievably heavy use of digital compressors and limiters.

I'm of the opinion that this was not the wish of the band, but a corporate decision made in the boardroom by the suits. It's amazing to me that one of the touted benefits of the CD Audio format, way back in the mid 80s, was excellent dynamic range. Don't tell the guy who mastered Playing the Angel. There is virtually no dynamic range present at all.

Don't believe me? Can't trust your ears? If you did purchase this CD or can borrow a friend's, you might bring it up in any wav editor or analyzer. You'll notice each song looks like a solid band, completely flat. There are no ups and downs whatsoever. Now compare that to virtually anything from DM's past releases, and you'll see the volume isn't as high overall, but there's vastly more variation in volume, and you can actually see the beats and the impact of the sounds.

Depeche Mode is a casualty of the current max volume arms race. Yep, it's "loud," but when the WHOLE THING is loud, when a drum (for instance) is not any louder than anything else, said drum loses all impact. When everything is as loud as everything else, there's no sense of space in the recording at all. This CD was mastered to get as close as digitally possible to the max loudness for the redbook audio (16 bit CD) standard at all times. And in fact at many many points it tries to go "over," which means there's digital clipping of the signal. This is not good distortion (like synth-created distortion or guitar amp distortion or even analog clipping), kids, this is ugly.

This is all particularly disturbing because in the past DM has had some beautifully recorded and mastered music. If your sound-producing devices are the stock ipod earbuds, or your $30 PC speakers, or the stereo in your noisy car, then this CD was made for you. If you have any sort of decent or hi-fi headphones/canalphones or speaker system, then you'll probably notice something just isn't right with this CD. Remember back to my review, and then think about how thin and one-dimensional things sound. I was very much looking forward to this CD, but I listen to music like this on nice equipment, and the poor sound is a hard pill to swallow. Somewhere under the oppressive compression is a gorgeous recording trying to claw its way out.

EDIT: two more points. I posted this elsewhere and people had some misconceptions. First, the compression I'm talking about has absolutely nothing to do with data compression as accomplished in conversion to MP3s. Completely different concepts.

Second, a lack of dynamic range due to poor mastering doesn't necessarily mean the production is slick, or dirty, or old or new. There are plenty of 60s and 70s recordings that are somewhat rudimentary as far as mic technology and recording techniques that nonetheless have a very good dynamic range. There are plenty of modern examples of very slick production that also preserves dynamic range, and modern "lo fi" recordings that have poor dynamic range.

It also doesn't mean much about the sounds the band made in putting their vision to tape. It can be the cleanest electronica, the gentlest acoustic folk, the purest classical female vocals, the grungiest indie rock, the hardest speed metal, or the twangiest Texas country. Dynamic range, or the deliberate destroying thereof, is a constant across virtually any type of music. In short, I'm in no way disparaging what DM did creatively or what they WANTED it to sound like, just the final delivery of that vision.

Maybe the SACD/DVD-A versions are better.