Review Summary: Cafe Tacuba's sophomore album was one of the most inventive and quirkiest albums of the rock en Español scene.
Cafe Tacuba are one of the bands that emerged from the Mexican alternative scene in the early 90s. Their music has aged well throughout the years setting them aside from their contemporaries (Caifanes, Maldita Vecindad, Molotov). Cafe Tacuba formed in 1989 in Mexico City. They instantly gained a following with the release of their debut/self-titled album in 1992. In their debut, they incorporated a variety of music styles including Mexican folk, dance, and punk. However, 1994 was Cafe Tacuba’s biggest year yet with the release of their ambitious sophomore album Re.
To start off, Re contains 20 tracks which may seem lengthy, but most of them are short and flow very well throughout the album. The album opens with “El Aparato” ("The Device”) that besides having a folky feel It's also reminiscent of Indian music. “La Ingrata” (The Ungrateful One), became one of the band's most popular songs for its notable Mexican “Norteño” style and catchy verses. “El Borrego” (The Sheeple) shows the band's punk side with its fast distorted riffs and nonconforming message, “I’m an Anarchist, I’m a Neo-Nazi, I’m a skin head and an ecologist etc”. “Las Flores” (The Flowers), a personal favorite, is a quirky yet poetic love song that features a prominent melodica line. Another song in a similar vein is “El Baile y El Salon” (The Dance and the Ballroom) that progressive for its time talks about two gay men falling in love on the dance floor.
Overall, this album has good songwriting and impressive production by Gustavo Santaolla. It's eclectic, innovative, and left a lasting impact in Latin rock music.
I guess this feels a bit track by trackish (which sput generally looks down upon, and for a good reason imo) but you do justify partially in your opening paragraphs. Id say try and describe how the album sounds and what works/doesnt work with less specific examples, perhaps describing what you think the albums general stages sound like without referring to specific songs in the track by track way you did
Overall tho, a good review especially for a first one
I am amazed that this got reviewed finally! One of the loveliest albums ever recorded. Great first review. Just work on the length and paragraphs and it is great. For help, take proofread help from contributors. Looking forward to read more from you.
So, this review is not a bad first review, so don't take the following too hard, because I'm going to focus on the things I didn't like. Also keep in mind that I'm not a great writer by any means, so take everything with a grain of salt.
First of all, I didn't like your summary, specifically I didn't like that you copy pasted a sentence from your review into the summary box. Imo you should go through the extra effort and come up with something else. Something poignant, a favorite lyric, a short sentence that let's me know how you feel.... This sentence from the review those kinda summarize your opinion, but it does so pretty awkwardly.
"If Pitchfork has at least one review of this amazing band then why not Sputnikmusic?"
This sentence has nothing to do with the rest of your review, and feels very disjointed. I would take it out. It belongs in the comment section, no the review.
You describe the first four tracks of the album (well) and don't talk a lot about the rest of the album. Obviously you shouldn't review all 20 tracks, that would be a horrible, looooong review. Imo you should try to talk about the album as a whole, while using particular songs to highlight what you thought overall. The way you did, makes it seem like you ran out of things to say after four tracks.
The pro/con list shouldn't be there at all. It's entirely unnecessary, instead of listing some points at the end of your review, who are really not that connected to your review, you could just take those points and mention them in your real review, and really talk about them.
WARNING: My english sucks, so maybe I'm not the best person to be doing this. However...
"Consequently, the album gained the status of being called 'the equivalent of the Beatles White Album for the rock en español movement.'"
-Unless this is meant to provide the context necessary for a subsequent argument, this tidbit is completely useless and only makes you sound like fanboy who failed to actually give this album an honest listen. As for the highlighted fragments: (1) Sounds redundant; literally, being called something is being given the status of, and the album "gained the status of being called the equivalent of the Beatles' White Album" by who? Critics? Fans? The media in general? And (2), missing a ' (typo lol)
"...listeners of fine music in general."
-(I'm an Opeth fan, actually)
"The album's diversity in genres..."
-This is kinda redundant, since there's barely any other aspect of the songs that could give diversity to an album (song length? titles?)
"Since Re contains a fair amount of tracks; I’m going to briefly review tracks I feel exposed the different stages of the album."
-This is very common amongst reviews here, but I find it bothering anyway: we're not children, why do you feel the need to tell us what you're gonna' do next? (Also, I did notice you actually just track-by-track'd the first 4 songs of the album, don't lie to us)
"I’m going to briefly review tracks I feel exposed..."
-Expose*, since the songs still exist, and they still expose blah blah...
"The album opens up with the track 'El Aparato' which translated in English means 'The Machine'."
-DEVICE
"The lyrics in this song..."
-of*
"The fourth track, 'El Borrego' (The Sheep), differs greatly from the previous track because of its misanthropic nature. We could call this a speed metal song..."
-C'mon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNTuvl75gkY
"You might think Cafe Tacuba is trying to appeal to certain group,"
-Why? Nothing you've said so far could lead us to believe that.
"when in fact, they’re mocking all those people or 'sheep' (sheep is a derogatory Spanish term for people who do everything they're told to)"
-It's used in the same way in english too...
"Without a doubt, 'El Borrego' is a heavy track that shows the band’s darker side, but songs like 'Las Flores' show the complete opposite."
-(Now I'm being really picky but whatever) How does the latter statement contradict the former? No olvides que "pero" es un conector adversativo...
"Mexico's norteño�* roots;"
-Mexico has norteño roots? Also, I think that semi-color shouldn't be there...
"It was unique to embrace the foreign influence of Alternative rock and Punk, as long as it was blended with authentic Latin sounds."
-"As long as it was blended with authentic Latin sounds,"and it wouldn't be unique any other way... Are you sure that that's what you're trying to say?
"Re's 20 tracks illustrate a band discovering the grand achievements it was capable of."
-they were* (they're a band, remember)
