Brian Eno is the man!  With a varied history of musical works and affiliations, Eno’s resume is as impressive as any in the business.  Yes, he may raise an eyebrow from some person unknowing of Eno’s pedigree, but that doesn’t change the fact that Eno is THE man!

And so, with great excitement, I can tell you that on November 13 in the US markets, Warp Records will release Brian Eno’s first solo album since 2005’s Another Day On Earth.  The album is named Lux and is planned for CD, DD, and 2LP (180g) gatefold.  (The 2LP set is scheduled separately for December 11.)

AS bonuses, the gatefold CD softpack, as well as the 2LP set will add four prints to the mix.  In addition, the LP set will offer digital download rights.

Lux will feature four compositions, all titled after the name of the album.  The tracks will total approximately 76-minutes in length:

  • Lux 1 (19:22)
  • Lux 2 (18:14)
  • Lux 3 (19:19)
  • Lux 4 (18:28)

If you’re as excited as I am for a continuation of Brian Eno ambient, then mark your calendars for November 13, (December 11 for the 2LP set).

By MARowe

6 thoughts on “Release Piece – Lux – Brian Eno”
  1. Great news – Eno by his standards – has been quite prolific over the last few years, and never disappoints. The ambient angle always intrigues me, remembering Apollo in 1983.

  2. A bit off topic but:
    The 2012 remasters of Roxy Music’s catalog is getting good reviews. A box set of all 8 albums and 2 bonus discs. Not a victim of the loudness wars this time around.

    1. Please be very cautious with the Roxy Box set. I have it, and to my ears, the earlier remasters are far superior. Each album has a muffled, overall sound that is akin to cotton in your ears. The detail is there, but it is not as warm or as inviting. You also do not get the original covers except when they were originally gatefold. There is also no booklet or any information about the set included. There are no lyrics either. The two disc set of bonus tracks is the only bright side in my opinion. I felt I threw my money away on this one, and I am a huge fan of RM. I think the reviewers that do like it do not have the older issues to compare it to – I do. Listening is in the ear of the beholder – all I’m saying is that if you can hear it first, it would be a good thing.

      1. Just figured I’d throw in my two cents (and further derail this thread!) about the Roxy Music box. First of all, let me say that I wholly agree with Mr. Metcalf’s recommendation that one try and listen to the set (or at least sample it) prior to buying. If you already have the album catalog and the ‘Thrill of It All’ box, pretty much the only ‘new’ things you are getting are the extended and 7″ versions on cd. So it might not be worth it. That said, I do have the ’99 remasters (as well as the earlier cds and vinyl lps), and I prefer what I hear on these new editions. Certainly the mastering volume is lower, but isn’t that part of the point of the so-called ‘flat masters’? What you give up (which I don’t think is a loss at all, mind you) is the artificially inflated decibels of the last set of remasters. But what you gain here is, first, that there is no clipping of the tracks (at least in the waveforms I’ve looked at), which happens all over the ’99 set; and second (though related), the sound doesn’t distort at higher volumes. While it may come down to personal preference and playback equipment, for me, i prefer to have all the sound and to control my own volume. BUT, given the price of the set and the overall scarcity of bonus material, I absolutely don’t think it is a ‘must buy.’

  3. Thanks. I originally became interested in this box when it was supposed to be high resolution but that never happened. I’ll take your advice and try to compare first. The 1999’s were done in HDCD?

  4. Yes – and just as another comment – I think they are some of the best remasters of that vintage. It is rare to have a 70s band, remastered in the late 90s, not be improved by a 2012 remaster, but there it is. I am probably not saying anything you haven’t heard before, but there seems to be a glut of remasters coming out that are simply taking the master tapes and repressing the CDs. Though they are technically remasters, I think fans of good audio are expecting a whole new set of sound standards, and that is not always the case. I am being very cautious about Machine Head coming soon. I never felt that a good job was done on it the first time around, though the Roger Glover remix was much better to these ears. A major classic album like that should sound like it was recorded yesterday, but keeping the warmth and analogue quality of the past. Steven Wilson knows what that means. Aqualung was a triumph. He remixed it, but kept it alive, and then when it was remastered, it transferred perfectly.

Comments are closed.