by digimarsh on Sun May 09, 2010 5:06 am
i was too young to remember when this album came out , but when i got into the band a few years later i started to gather as much info on the band as i could. I do remember reading some music press articles and album reviews on the adolescent sex release.Before i go onto say what i recall it's worth noting that the band were not really flavour of the month with the music press especially in the early years (good looking ,but talentless ect ,you know the sort of thing).
Ok, as legend would have it after the band first recorded the album it was presented to the record company executives and they hated it,(apparently), and ordered it to be re recorded, it wasn' t what they were looking for in terms of mass appeal.They were looking to break the band into popular music culture i imagine cashing in on the image that they quite clearly had.
Now some articles i read suggested that ,the new version of the record contained other or session musicians on it and went onto suggest that the bands lack of musical expertise was at the root of the original problem and so on.This version of events was not universally endorsed but i had heard it more than once. The one thing i always pondered on the subject was that the album sounded very different from it's follow up release(O/A) ,which actually contains material from the early days (love is infectious,ect) and is closer in construction to probably what the band really sounded or wanted to sound like at the time.This does not mean that rumours surrounding the re recording are true or that the band had any 'help' recording adolescent, but one thing is for sure, the band at the time were very unhappy with the finished version and quite firmly distanced themselves from it some time later.