Looking at the cover art of Diamond Dogs, it seems that the two females in the background are meant to look as differently from Bowie as possible. He has a sharply defined face and long, sinewy arms; their faces are blunt and they have short, stubby arms and legs. I wonder why this is?
Just a different looking mutant. Another example of "The Strangest Living Curiosities"....and twins as well.
A question to the Diamond Dogs experts... On this TV ad for the album, you can hear what I think is a slightly different mix for the Diamond Dogs title track. The guitar sounds quite different around 0:11-0:12. Does this mix exist anywhere, by chance? I think it's just an earlier, rougher studio mix, but I think I prefer this one...
I may have asked this elsewhere, but how does the 2016 CD remaster of Diamond Dogs stack up? I only have the 1999 EMI disc. Is it better than that?
Always stuck out on Scary Monsters like a sore thumb to me, I really dislike the song. I figure he either did it as a favor to Verlaine or to prop up his own hip, "with it" bonafides.
Here’s where it is in this week’s Speedway Bowie 1969-80 chart. Only Station to Station ever remains static 01 STATIONTOSTATION 02 LOW 03 DIAMOND DOGS 04 SCARY MONSTERS (AND SUPER CREEPS) 05 “HEROES” 06 LODGER 07 YOUNG AMERICANS 08 ALADDIN SANE 09 THE MAN WHO SOLD THE WORLD 10 HUNKY DORY 11 THE RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST & THE SPIDERS FROM MARS 12 DAVID BOWIE 13 PINUPS
Reminds me of something. Why did the music sound so often sped up in movies? Is it due to a transfer between two formats or something? It used to happen ALL THE TIME and it's always bothered me.
I love Diamond Dogs because Bowie's vocals are epic on it. It's sort of the last album where he was first and foremost the singer and the "frontman" ..... After this one, he kind of went for his voice sitting inside the music a bit more and it was about the totality of the music and the vocals as a fully immersed thing. But on DD, his amazing range and emotion are on full display.
This is one of my favorites. It was also the first album of his I heard in its entirety. I think it is better overall than Aladin Sane. I listen to it more than Ziggy, to be honest. I think this one and Hunky Dory are my top two, viewed as wholes. As in holes. Lol.
I strikes me as sounding more like the old vinyl, but with additional compression. It's one of the few of the latest round of remasters that I think is undeniably better than the Rykos, although I haven't done a careful A/B comparison. Yet.
Sometimes it's because of the NTSC -> PAL conversion from US to Europe, AFAIK. It's probably going to be better than the EMI 1999 (which were extremely processed). I'm doing a blind-listening test for Diamond Dogs, with samples from every available digital master, and it's probably going to appear this week or next week. It might help you choose your own favourite master.
Something clicked with me when I was listening to this recently. I had revelation with this album and now have a new found appreciation for this genius work. Changed my vote from pretty great to essential.
I recently listened to "Aladdin Sane" for the first time in a few years (RCA Japan disc). I was disappointed in my response. I thought I would enjoy it more after the absence. But I found the whole thing disjointed. It's like Bowie's real life rock-star record. It just wasn't there for me. So I put on Side 2 of "Diamond Dogs" hoping to connect to Bowie and feel that buzz. Yep, that worked!
Diamond Dogs is absolutely my favorite Bowie album, followed closely by Station to Station. Even though they're not thought of as a "trilogy", my favorite string of Bowie albums (and my favorite Bowie era) is Diamond Dogs, Young Americans, and Station to Station. This whole era was just Bowie face-down in cocaine with middle-fingers up in the air. Lots of risks taken, no f*cks given - and his music shined brightest in this era (imho) because of it.