Jake Bugg: Another Reason to be Optimistic
by Bob Schwartz
Jake Bugg is another reason to be generally optimistic.
Some of us—maybe you—use pop music to get through the bad days and times and to celebrate the good. But part of the time, including now, if all you hear is what’s at or near the top of the charts, you might be a little charmed but a lot discouraged. Where is that something to tickle your ears, touch your heart and tap your feet, mixing originality and talent with that secret musical sauce?
It does come along; see earlier posts about Lorde. Once again me catching up with those who already got there, here’s Jake Bugg. Unlike Lorde, who is now seventeen, he is much older. Last year he recorded and released his second album, Shangri La, at the age of nineteen.
You can read all about him, and I could write all about him, but you know my motto: It’s in the tracks. So listen to both albums whole if you can. Below are links to a few sample tracks, but like a lot of new artists, the work is genre blending/mashing/smashing, so please try not to category listen.
His biggest track, from the first album, Jake Bugg, is Lightning Bolt. From the new album, released in November, There’s A Beast and We All Feed It (“There’s a beast eating every bit of beauty and yes we all feed it.”). And for those who want less beat, more ballad, Broken .
Is he a next really big thing? Who knows, but whatever the charts and awards say, we are all a little better off with this music around.
Bob Schwartz 
I think Jake Bugg is too overrated. When I first heard his first album, I thought it was ok, but then I discovered that the most of the songs were written by Ian Archer and not by Jake. In fact you can instantly hear the difference between songs Lighting Bolt and Fire, that seems a song even Justin Bieber could write.
It’s just a singer (a bad one) not a singer songwriter like the press tend to describe him, definitely not the new Bob Dylan, maybe the English John Mayer.
Try King Krule or Laura Marling, definitely more sincere than Jake Bugg ;)
As for the “new” designations (Bob Dylan, etc.), note that the post steers clear of the cliche. That runs the risk of being an unhelpful shortcut that avoids real listening.
As for the songwriting comment, that is the stuff not just of a post but of an article or a book. The whole singer-songwriter “problem” goes back to before the Beatles and Dylan. Up to then, there was mostly, though not exclusively, a split between those who wrote and those who performed/recorded. Then starting in the 1960s many artists and bands wrote (or stole) for themselves, whether they were good/great songwriters or not. At the same time, a corps of professional songwriters still thrived (and still does). Being a singer-songwriter was and is a badge, not only creatively, but financially. Admittedly then, collaborative songwriting, which isn’t always balanced 50/50 or even 20 artist/ 80 collaborator, doesn’t have the PR or fan value of being a singer-songwriter. But there are hundreds of exceptional tracks, even those that have credit controversies, that I wouldn’t change a note or word of, no matter who wrote it.
The bigger point is that Jake Bugg really does sound original, which doesn’t mean anyone has to like what they hear. In some ways this is an amazing time for music: literally anyone who has something to say and play can be heard globally, immediately. The irony for me at least is that with so much music, when I listen to the top of the charts, much (not most maybe, certainly not all) is unlistenable, either because I’ve heard it before or because I never want to hear it once. So when something comes along that doesn’t sound like everyone else, whoever wrote it, however annoying some find the voice (note: Jake Bugg’s vocals will change), that is a good thing.
Thanks for the comment.