coldplay are better and way less overrated than animal collective

Not a fan of either but I just realized this today while listening to the new Coldplay cd in a friend's car, and I thought about how many people I've encountered who will get bent out of shape over boring overrated music like Coldplay but not boring overrated music like Animal Collective. This perplexes me because I would totally take Viva La Vida over Strawberry Jam (horrible) or Merriweather Post Pavilion anyday.

(Panda Bear solo is better than either tho)

http://gammablog.com/gammablablog/images/3-04/3-20/speak-truth.jpg

you were otm until you repped for panda bear

*newsflash* indie kids AND your mom have bad taste in music.

pretty sure this is all just because Coldplay actually sell a lot of records

http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q188/anjoderapina/0000048.gif

i have not heard viva la vida, but in terms of that ac, yeah considering the hype its major whatevz. couple tracks are cool, everything else on that record leaves me cold. as far as coldplay being better or delivering MORE idk about that. or what sseward said

*newsflash* indie kids AND your mom have bad taste in music.

― scott seward, Saturday, May 16, 2009 2:41 PM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

http://www.ontopmarketing.com/images/web_graphics/OTM%20logo%20(darker).gif

i've tried to avoid the MPP and animal collective threads as much as possible but if this is the designated animal collective/MPP diss thread then i'm in

There's nothing wrong with Coldplay, except that the compositions are boring and they're just spinning their wheels at this point. Animal Collective still hold lots of excitement to me (even though when I don't like their stuff I hate their stuff).

coldplay is boring. even their name is boring. it sounds like globs of wet clay being dropped on the sidewalk. plop, gluh.

i've never heard anything by animal collective

standard indie backlash. would rather listen to Animal Collective than Coldplay any fucking day of the week and i'm not even much of a fan.

"i've tried to avoid the MPP and animal collective threads as much as possible but if this is the designated animal collective/MPP diss thread then i'm in"

i'm in if we get to include the new tortoise album too.

I liked Coldplay's first big single (Yellow, I think). I thought their sound progressed and developed on their big full-length album (the one with Clocks). But then they just stopped developing; the next songs went nowhere new, and returning to the same sound was just a dead-end (that's not always the case with a band, but Coldplay doesn't have a sound I want to hear regergitated over-and-over in new songs, without development).

And they seem like tools.

ive had my fun tormenting the animal collective fanboys on ilx def but fuk nothing is worse than coldplay

"high speed" is a very good song

There's nothing wrong with Coldplay, except that the compositions are boring and they're just spinning their wheels at this point.

^^ I'd say such holds true moreso for Animal Collective.

both bands are fond of funny little costumes.

Wow. I'd say the full, rolling-downhill sound of MPP sounds very little like the acid-folk of Sung Tongs.

(xp)

Yeah, that's true about the fuzzy costumes. Grow up, Coldplay and Animal Collective!

both bands got 3 and a half stars for their most recent albums in rolling stone.

both albums were reviewed by will hermes.

coldplay have a roadie named lincoln. animal collective have a roadie named kennedy.

Coldplay=great and terribly underrated
Animal Collective: OK and maybe slightly overrated.

So.... Yes....

Viva La Vida Loca or Ricky Martin and All His Friends

Coldplay have the potential to be great, but they'll never fulfill it.

Chris Martin was extraordinary on that Faultline track.

They need to sound less like Coldplay, and not ballad it up in the club.

this video is cuter than animal collective:

a thing i like is way better and way less overrated by someone somewhere i'm talking about than a thing i don't like

I sort of wish it was Coldplay who'd made an entire album with JLC rather than The Killers/Keane. "Viva La Vida" is my favourite thing of theirs, I think (though it's faux-JLC rather than real-JLC).

I think Coldplay were worth hating circa "Yellow" when they seemed like part of a bloated movement of overly earnest mopey UK rock with occasional falsetto vocals. The more this movement has fallen away (starting from "Rock is Back!" in 2001) the less hateable they've seemed (though the self-parodying nadir early singles from X&Y obscured this fact for a while).

Comparing the two bands doesn't make an awful amount of sense to me. They appeal to (largely) different audiences, and the trajectory Animal Collective have taken has been markedly different.

It makes more sense to compare Animal Collective to Flaming Lips and MPP to The Soft Bulletin. Which undermines Animal Collective's rep for edginess as much as comparing them to Coldplay does.

animal collective - mildly interesting with hints of potential
coldplay - incredibly boring with hints of not-completely-sucking

^^^sound about right to me

i'm with the original poster for what it's worth - i neither hate nor love coldplay but some of there stuff is decent-to-good, and the eno-produced viva actually got several plays out of me (a rare feat for almost anything but 5 star/mic classics) while i just don't see why anyone likes animal collective at all.

actually they both have this sort of inoffensive edge to them that makes them sound sort of similar somehow...

And they [Coldplay] seem like tools

Er, yeh, think this is actually the crux, innit? If Chris Martin wasn't such a tool, I'd feel a lot happier about saying stuff like "there are tracks on that last Coldplay album that are fucking awesome". It's not even like I can explain what's so toolish about him -- there are plenty of bigger bell-ends in music, after all. I think it's the unappetising mix of earnestness, egotism and petulance ...

... pretty sure this is all just because Coldplay actually sell a lot of records ...

er, and this.

animal collective have always been massively polarizing. now they've reached a certain level of recognition, the rising number of people who hate them now are getting annoyed by the equal increase in people that are stanning for them.

I suspect it's a little fallacious to talk about AC and CP as if they exist in totally different spheres of existence. I bet their fanbases crossover way more than you'd expect - if only because Coldplay's fanbase is just so fucking BIG. I know a handful of people, professional, well-paid people in responsible jobs, generally, who are now in their late 30s / 40s / even early 50s, who consider themselves educated and cultured and aware, who like both. And I laugh at all of them for having fucked-up shit-sensors. Both bands suck.

you were otm until you repped for panda bear

― autobahn mi (The Reverend), Saturday, May 16, 2009 9:38 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

^^

find it v difficult to get annoyed by coldplay. they're tolerable at their best and barely existent at their worst, even chris martin's wet blanket voice is ignorable. he doesn't seem that annoying to me, there are worse. animal collective, otoh, are so bad that i would find it difficult to take the opinions about music of anyone repping for them seriously. really have rarely heard music that bad before - and it's all musical cuz i know nothing about their personalities, my out-and-out loathing of most acts tends to have that personal element to it but w/animal collective it's purely musical. there is nothing good about what they do and i have no idea what people get out of it.

yeah the thread is a weird comparison and probably just any old excuse to hate on AC but i am all for more of those, tbh.

or to put it another way, when we say of a piece of music that it makes us feel sick, that's generally hyperbole; but animal collective's music actually does make me feel genuinely physically ill and nauseous, it's like being seasick. v unpleasant.

Aye, I'm with lex on the physical reaction; I find listening to AC very physiologically uncomfortable it gives me an instant headache.

Panda Bear's massively preferable to AC, but still not someone I'd choose to listen to of my own accord.

*cue soaring falsetto WAAAAAAAAAAAAA and sparkles*

Aye, I'm with lex on the physical reaction; I find listening to AC very physiologically uncomfortable it gives me an instant headache.

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, 17 May 2009 08:54

To me that's pretty much the point of Animal Collective at their best - to be psychedelic in the true sense of the word, rather than psychedelic in the 'sound a bit like the fucking Beatles in '67' regular sense. But it's understandable that this makes them a love/hate kind of band.

I have trouble kicking up any emotions / feeling either way about either of these bands. Liked some of AC's earlier "freak" stuff enough, haven't fucked w' em since '04 or '05. Coldplay are pleasant enough.

i dunno if i can take seriously the opinions about music of anyone who hates either of these bands that much. my coldplay dislike is more frustration at the level of their success against the sheer mediocrity and general dreariness of their sound. but it's a consistent effect whereas with AC they've done some stuff i don't like at all but musically, artistically, whatever...MPP has qualities i like (but is marred by other things) and they do a lot of different things. as a piece of relatively inventive pop music 'My Girls' would be in my year top 20 (but may drop because the lyrics and lyrical repetition annoy me more as time goes by).

I don't think psychedelic music should be a painful experience.

"I know a handful of people, professional, well-paid people in responsible jobs, generally, who are now in their late 30s / 40s / even early 50s, who consider themselves educated and cultured and aware, who like both. And I laugh at all of them for having fucked-up shit-sensors."

hey, know any unemployed people? lower class? don't expect them to have good music taste? fucking weirdo.

and "shit sensors", really. You like Super Furry Animals.

If you were a friend I could overlook taste differences but as this is the internet I'll just be all contemptuous towards you instead like a shitty little teenager would. You're in your 30's?

or to put it another way, when we say of a piece of music that it makes us feel sick, that's generally hyperbole; but animal collective's music actually does make me feel genuinely physically ill and nauseous, it's like being seasick. v unpleasant.

― lex pretend, Sunday, May 17, 2009 8:53 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Aye, I'm with lex on the physical reaction; I find listening to AC very physiologically uncomfortable it gives me an instant headache.

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, May 17, 2009 8:54 PM (2 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Whoa. And Animal Collective of all bands, reading these posts you'd think we were talking about Pruriant or something. I can't think of anything that does that to me, except for that time my friend made his stereo generate these subhuman bass notes we couldn't hear and I got a stomach ache. It was weird, you could see the speakers going totally crazy but could hear nothing...ohh but then my stomach!

chill, dawg

Aye, I'm with lex on the physical reaction; I find listening to AC very physiologically uncomfortable it gives me an instant headache.

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, May 17, 2009 1:54 AM Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Panda Bear's massively preferable to AC, but still not someone I'd choose to listen to of my own accord.

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, May 17, 2009 1:55 AM Bookmark

I have even more problem with Panda Bear than the band proper as far as physical discomfort goes.

now curtis did u really have to start a whole thread for this challop

sorry, "chill, dawg" was directed at fandango

i like coldplay ok, as radio-fare. sort of like the 21st century supertramp. naturally I've never heard animal collective.

so shoot me now.

http://static.flickr.com/102/311520176_15cc62df6e.jpg

I guess one fun thing about being an Animal Collective hater would be that they offer so many different types of thing to hate.

Coldplay are consistent enough that they wear you down, hating on the same thing for years starts to seem boring and pointless after a while.

The first things I read about Animal Collective definitely made me want to hate them. I think Andy Battaglia stanning for them all the time prevented this from happening, he's one of those people I just expect to be right about things.

Of course the stuff that gets written nowadays is mostly pretty painful too.

"I know a handful of people, professional, well-paid people in responsible jobs, generally, who are now in their late 30s / 40s / even early 50s, who consider themselves educated and cultured and aware, who like both. And I laugh at all of them for having fucked-up shit-sensors."

hey, know any unemployed people? lower class? don't expect them to have good music taste? fucking weirdo.

and "shit sensors", really. You like Super Furry Animals.

If you were a friend I could overlook taste differences but as this is the internet I'll just be all contemptuous towards you instead like a shitty little teenager would. You're in your 30's?

hahahahaha

I'm in my 30s by two days.

I'm not implying that "professional, well-paid people in responsible jobs, generally, who are now in their late 30s / 40s / even early 50s, who consider themselves educated and cultured and aware" should have good music taste - far fucking from it in fact; I'm implying that they're too old and busy and out of touch to have good taste and that AC are their current token nod towards keeping up with the hipsters and that I find it super funny when they say "are you going to see The Hold Steady?!" to my girlfriend.

(I don't know many unemployed people actually, no; but the ones I do generally listen to a load of hippy shit and spend all their time at free festivals.)

If you really think SFA are shitty and AC are great, well, bully for you. But I think you're loony.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v165/noodle_vague/ScarJo_popcorn.gif

*waves some pom-poms* Go Nick! Go Southall!

They should tour together as the Super Furry Animal Collective.

Based on their last couple of albums, SFA and AC are sort of merging into the same band, so I don't really understand how someone could despise one and love the other to such a degree.

I'm not really taking most of the vitriol on this thread too seriously, it's obviously just a overreaction to the mountains of hype given to MPP, it's impossible to imagine people hating AC so much just six months ago. That said, AC in May 2008 = rated just right, AC in May 2009 = overrated, Coldplay = underrated because they have a handful of singles that are pretty damn great, and any band that films a Depeche Mode tribute video with Anton Corbijn is OK in my book.

Don't care for either really. With Coldplay I'll put on the CD, think, "Oh that's nice," and then put on something else. I have the same reaction with Animal Collective. What gets me is why people think AC are edgy and innovative, don't hear that at all.

Supertramp are better than either. My challops for the day.

MPP ain't edgy and innovative, it's a hypermelodic piece of electronic pop-psych that hits and misses in equal measure. Every AC record seems to hit big and miss big in varying proportions. But I'd rather that than the middling mehness of Coldplay.

Hit to death in the motherfuckin' future head

I totally love most of MPP, but can equally totally get how other ppl (eg lex) can get physical reactions against it. Don't give a fuck about "edgy" or "psychedelic" or anything, MPP just pushes my buttons like lol Enya or "Life in a Northern Town" or something. A slight "other pop universe" thing.

SFA's records are mixed in a way that makes them listenable. Also, they can write songs. Also, no oscillating "psychedelic" headache noises.

"too old and busy and out of touch to have good taste"

what?

if ILM proves anything it's that people can live and breathe (or at least make a permanent pose of..) being "into music" and still like total crap indiscriminately.

Maybe a more eclectic, nonsensical, inconsistent variety of crap than they otherwise would but still turd. Of course that's just my opinion and I try for the most part to just think of it as different tastes, move on/ignore, not judge them for it.

SFA are the audio equivalent of lukewarm porridge to me, sorry. Unexceptional, barely ever interesting, not to mention colossaly shallow.

But hey, I'm fine with other people liking them...

I have to be if the alternative is pipecocking every bastard thread on the internet mentioning them to shore up my sense of aesthetic superiority and sensitivity over other "stupid" people.

I know a handful of people, professional, well-paid people in responsible jobs, generally, who are now in their late 30s / 40s / even early 50s, who consider themselves educated and cultured and aware, who like both.

this is cos you're british btw

this thread is mostly as bad as reading the football forums on bbc

Oh I don't doubt that.

I also know plenty of people in that demographic who AREN'T out of touch. And they generally don't like AC!

The thing with AC is that I want to like them - have for years, and have tried and tried and tried. All the ways that people describe them make me go "that sounds interesting, I want to enjoy this, it sounds like fun", and then I try and listen to the records. And each time, without fail, it hurts my head and I fucking hate it. That's why I think I'm such a pipecock about them - I want to believe but can't, and I feel like it's all some big cosmic joke on me. If I just didn't care it'd be fine.

x-post with Ronan.

From your other posts on the group, I'm guessing you don't like Animal Collective because they're too treble-y and don't have a low-end to their sound, is that right?

That would be a fair criticism. I just appreciate other stuff in their songs.

the thing is Nick, I sort of felt similarly until the last record.

But now I'd say I "quite like" them and am looking forward to investigating retrospectively.

I don't feel any shame in admitting I might not have "got it" before, any more than I felt the need to keep plugging on until I did... I just listened to something else.

I also never felt the need to say "GOD you people must be moronz!! UGH UGH *spit dummy*" 20 times a week on every single Sung Tongs/Feels/Strawberry Jam thread at the time mind you.

Perhaps you should try not caring more.

Most Unwanted Scrobbles

These tracks were most frequently deleted by the Last.fm community from their scrobbles in April 2009.
1 play preview Lady GaGa – Poker Face
dance, pop, lady gaga, electronic, party, female vocalists, poker face, catchy, sexy, dance dance
2 Katy Perry – I Kissed a Girl
pop, female vocalists, pop rock, katy perry, rock, i kissed a girl, catchy, dance, sexy, hot
3 play preview Britney Spears – Womanizer
pop, britney spears, dance, female vocalists, circus, womanizer, sexy, britney, catchy, party
4 play preview Lady GaGa – Just Dance
dance, pop, electronic, lady gaga, female vocalists, just dance, catchy, party, dance pop
5 play preview Britney Spears – Circus
pop, britney spears, dance, female vocalists, circus, sexy, hot, electronic, britney
6 Britney Spears – Piece Of Me
pop, dance, britney spears, female vocalists, electronic, sexy, 00s, female vocalist, american
7 Katy Perry – Hot n Cold
pop, katy perry, dance, female vocalists, catchy, hot n cold, pop rock, rock, american, 2008
8 Rihanna – Disturbia
pop, dance, rihanna, female vocalists, rnb, disturbia, party, catchy, 2008, r&b
9 Coldplay – Viva la Vida
coldplay, alternative, rock, viva la vida, alternative rock, british, britpop, pop, indie
10 play preview Paramore – Misery Business
rock, pop punk, female vocalists, alternative, paramore, emo, alternative rock, punk, pop rock

roll on 2010, seriously.

if ILM proves anything it's that people can live and breathe (or at least make a permanent pose of..) being "into music" and still like total crap indiscriminately

yes, I totally agree with that. people worship much crap here. This 'Down With Dictatorship of Good Taste' attitude has gone too far

TESTIFY BROTHER

From your other posts on the group, I'm guessing you don't like Animal Collective because they're too treble-y and don't have a low-end to their sound, is that right?

Um, whatever else you criticise them for, their new stuff is about 70% low end. They seem to have put a lot of effort into having silly wobble-your-kidneys bass.

i would agree that coldplay are a frustrating band. frustrating because when they're good, they're very good, and yet the majority of their records are still dominated by utter crap. it's hard not to be frustrated by the sheer amount of missteps.

animal collective don't do much to get a reaction out of me, good or bad. until MPP, i don't think i've ever been so indifferent to a record, even after repeated listens. i didn't find it had any depth to it--- everything revealed itself during my first listen.

as a side note, i just saw animal collective last night, and while i can safely say that their performance wasn't as boring as their new record, their "psychedelic" visuals were pretty laughable and lame. i know you're psychedelic, you don't need to show me. it seemed a bit much... kinda like the flaming lips.

maybe you can't call it a "misstep" when the majority of a band's work is crap. perhaps the good songs are missteps?

I'm not actually hearing that low-end that a few people have gone on about, definitely not to the extent of it being "70%" of the sound!

It's not so much the lots of treble, not enough bass thing, though, that puts me off - it's a haziness, and in-distinction to the sound; there's too much of it, and not enough of it is in focus. And when it swells up its like these big metallic discs spinning at oblongs to each other and it hurts.

Also, the voices.

Supertramp are better than either

^ This.

I also never felt the need to say "GOD you people must be moronz!! UGH UGH *spit dummy*" 20 times a week

^ This.

indie kids AND your mom have bad taste in music.

Newsflash: moms usually have no taste. Well, mine doesn't.

Oh come on, people, this is ILM; sometimes it's FUN to hate.

It's more fun to commute.

If anything I hate Coldplay just as much as Twilight. I can see there's some (cough) good sides to'em but overall I just wanna vomit.

if ILM proves anything it's that people can live and breathe (or at least make a permanent pose of..) being "into music" and still like total crap indiscriminately

And pray how long did you need to figure that one out?

I think my problem with AC is the same as my problem with The Cardiacs (or what I've heard of them)- it's the maximalism, the urge to fill every nanosecond and every millimeter of the mix with sound. I can't separate the elements to enjoy any of it.

We're all just intellectualizing our gut enjoyment (or hate) of something.

I think some intellectualizing would be a good thing.

Also Summertime Clothes is just a rubbish version of Life In The Empire State by Mercury Rev.

any band that films a Depeche Mode tribute video with Anton Corbijn is OK in my book

Even better if you put a different song on the audio part of it, of course. :-D

a challopy and surprisingly negative thread imo

I was all ready to be like, YEAH! to this thread, but then I realized that I haven't even bothered to listen to the last albums from either band. All in all, it seems like the sort of discussion that my brother-in-law would try to corner me for, only he'd be defending Animal Collective against some imagined criticism on my part and I'd be petulantly trying to think up something about Coldplay that would let me argue my way out of having to talk about 'em. "Well, Brian Eno likes them more. Do you know more than Brian Eno and Gwynyth Paltrow?"

And then I'd try to stuff a lot of cake in my mouth so I couldn't say anything else.

A++ thread. I hope this goes for many more posts. (Even tho I've really got nothing to add that I haven't tired myself out saying on other threads.)

a challopy and surprisingly negative thread imo

The title does say: "less overrated".

"a challopy and surprisingly negative thread imo"

It's got a way to go before it reaches this level of challopy hostility.
Poptones Goes Bust: Your Views Please - Here's My Considered Analysis

I'm not really taking most of the vitriol on this thread too seriously, it's obviously just a overreaction to the mountains of hype given to MPP, it's impossible to imagine people hating AC so much just six months ago.

Panda Bear is the worst music I've ever heard.

― The Reverend, Thursday, December 13, 2007 4:39 PM Bookmark

Yes I would choose Coldplay over Animal Collective. Thanking U, Curtis.

Also, Curtis, you are my hero. Have you finished doing an album yet? Because you deserve to be a very famous, influential pop star.

how can ppl feel such vitriol towards panda bear? it's largely very pleasant music at worse imo

coldplay have more amazing songs tho

Panda Bear gives me almost the exact feeling of being carsick.

I think my problem with AC is the same as my problem with The Cardiacs (or what I've heard of them)- it's the maximalism, the urge to fill every nanosecond and every millimeter of the mix with sound. I can't separate the elements to enjoy any of it.

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Sunday, 17 May 2009 16:57 (4 hours ago) Bookmark

lol @ me-bait

(i completely refuse to even touch this one)

didn't u guys have anything better to do with yr sunday?

I had something better to do, but I read this thread instead. I feel a little guilty, but ultimately I'm okay with the choice.

now curtis did u really have to start a whole thread for this challop

― rip dom passantino 3/5/09 never forget (max), Sunday, May 17, 2009 6:15 AM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I wanted that http://i136.photobucket.com/albums/q188/anjoderapina/0000048.gif factor

standard indie backlash. would rather listen to Animal Collective than Coldplay any fucking day of the week and i'm not even much of a fan.

OTM.

Whoa. And Animal Collective of all bands, reading these posts you'd think we were talking about Pruriant or something.

Also, this is OTM. You people are nuts if you're feeling carsick or seasick or nauseous listening to Animal Collective. At least if you're talking about AC being headache-y you ought to reference Here Comes the Indian or something. The more recent albums are in no way uncomfortable to listen to.

And obviously, the sonic maximalism that Nick refers to in his posts? That's almost entirely the point, in my view. There are lots of records that fill up every spare inch of space with sound. Then again, I don't recall Nick being much of a Loveless fan... but, you know, he likes that Manitoba record, Up in Flames (no worries, I love it too) and honestly I don't see how the production on that one is all that much different from Merriweather.

I'm a Prurient fan & "seasick" is a great analogy for how Animal Collective make me feel

The fact that people keep saying "but you like Manitoba, who basically sounds exactly the same as AC" is the single most frustrating thing about AC, because they don't sound remotely alike to my ears.

I like Loveless plenty. I don't buy for one second that this means I ought to get AC anymore though. I'm pretty sure Ned doesn't either!

Can't music be 'headache-y' for different reasons---*hardcore* or whatever genre? Hell, that first Alanis record is harder for me to listen to than any Corrupted record I've ever heard. And it's *the sound* of it that hurts me. All high-end, no bottom end.

The more recent albums are in no way uncomfortable to listen to.

Because you speak for everyone?

Nick is speaking for himself, which is a sensible position. MPP makes him feel uneasy. It makes me feel uneasy, too, and perhaps for different reasons than a Prurient record would make someone feel uneasy. How is that not admissible again?

To me, it's that overwrought & saccharine sound hammering endlessly throughout the entire album. It's like being force-fed all sorts of sweets indiscriminately.

I'm a Prurient fan & "seasick" is a great analogy for how Animal Collective make me feel

― umma doomie (Curt1s Stephens), Monday, May 18, 2009 7:13 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Definitely a great analogy. At first I was felt sympathy for anyone so delicate that a brightly colored band like AC would make them physically ill, but, well I'm still suspicious. I suppose this just comes down to inability to relate on my part, but it really sounds a bit overstated and mad from over here.

Neat related story a kid I used to know told me when visiting home from college: At work one day his boss told some of her employees, "You kids might think I'm just old and lame, but my son is actually a famous noise musician!"
"Umm, really? Who...?"
"He puts out albums under the name Pruriant."

was felt=??

You get it.

You kids might think I'm just old and lame, but my son is actually a famous noise musician!

^^^too long for a display name :(

but he's only a noise musician because she repressed him to within an inch of his life amirite

For the record, Animal Collective really and genuinely irritate me every time I hear them, with their lack of songwriting discipline, developing musical narrative or tonal shift. Plus, their melodies are ultra-simple, their rhythms rarely anything other than basic, and their sonics muddy. That nagging acoustic guitar/chanted vocal "tribal ritual" shit tires very quickly for me. It strikes me as reaching for some sort of musical nirvana it is in no way equipped to achieve. Sorry, but that's my honest assessment.

Plus, their melodies are ultra-simple, their rhythms rarely anything other than basic, and their sonics muddy. That nagging acoustic guitar/chanted vocal "tribal ritual" shit tires very quickly for me.

If I didn't know better, I'd think you were talking about "Sung Tongs" here, not anything they recorded in the past five years.

why do people who dislike things feel the need to go on some 100 day voyage of discovery/understanding. here's a newsflash, you probably don't like it for some dumb fucking indie reason that you refuse to admit to yourself, just like everybody else.

Animal Collective are shit with no redeeming value.

Coldplay are shit but didn't they look nice in that French Revolution gear?

I sorta AM talking about Sung Tongs :P

I mean, I've only heard ST, Feels and MPP, but none of them have emerged from a frantic morass of chanty piffle, albeit that the electronics and loops quotient has risen.

i actually agree w/every word of lj's assessment of AC :/ they sound like a bunch of primary school kids.

also, the asher roth/lady gaga/la roux threads are full of people being negative and going UGH over and over again - AC fans should just accept that their band is on the same level as those acts and stop complaining about the haterz

I'm not sure WTF you are trying to say there, but comparing AC to Lady Gaga is just o_0 on many levels.

thanks lex for putting the idea of GaGa singing over AC shimmering synth jamz in my head. i owe you big.

as bad as that would be, it'd probably be an improvement on both

why do people who dislike things feel the need to go on some 100 day voyage of discovery/understanding. here's a newsflash, you probably don't like it for some dumb fucking indie reason that you refuse to admit to yourself, just like everybody else.

― Local Garda, Monday, May 18, 2009 2:01 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Because some people wont stfu about why we should like it?

Also the insinuation that my, or anybody else's, dislike of AC is due to "some fucking dumb indie reason you refuse to admit" is pretty a; offensive and b; idiotically fucking wrong.

AC have been this year's beneficiary of "we must like this because it has been decreed". The exemplar was Andre Paine's review of them live in the Standard in January - he gave them four stars despite admitting they were a) boring and b) tuneless ... Full review below.

An Animal Collective show feels like an event, especially when it’s the first night of the tour and coincides with the release of their ninth album, Merriweather Post Pavilion. The record is a dizzying, sample-strewn, psychedelic experience. Yet this gig wasn’t a typical promotion of a new release. It often sounded as if they were making it up as they went along.
Their combination of layered electronic noises, distorted guitar and mysterious vocals lacked the new album’s accessibility but the band from Baltimore managed to get the audience in a trance-like state. There were some longueurs but occasionally we got shades of Beck, while the surging synths threatened to go Goldfrapp.

Essentially, this was an experimental set and their bloody-minded approach meant some of their really decent tunes weren’t always recognisable.
They came good in the encore, with the electronic swirl and overwrought vocal of Banshee Beat, reminiscent of some of the finest electronic film soundtracks.

I like Loveless plenty. I don't buy for one second that this means I ought to get AC anymore though. I'm pretty sure Ned doesn't either!

Hi there! (I mean, I understand why AC exists and all, they just don't work for me.)

i feel so alienated from this thread because basically no one i know talks about, let alone overrates, animal collective. so i imagine ones feelings about this band are probably going to have a lot to do with your social circles and media your read. and maybe if all of your friends are overrating animal collective and all the mags you read are doing it too, you should find new friends and read new magazines?

some people won't stfu about why we shouldn't like it

yeah really AC barely exist for me whereas Coldplay are stupidly everywhere - no contest in terms of who to hate more!

what movie stars are dudes from AC likely to marry?

i feel so alienated from this thread because basically no one i know talks about, let alone overrates, animal collective

This is basically it - I know I know people who like them to one degree or other but the idea of anyone getting in my face about it to the point where it would be even mildly annoying is... not easy to envisage. I'd say that most of my friends have left-of-centre tastes, I mean if we were OK with Animal Collective being deemed 'left-of-centre'

Also because the thread is retarded

At least if you're talking about AC being headache-y you ought to reference Here Comes the Indian or something. The more recent albums are in no way uncomfortable to listen to.
― I just wish he hadn't adopted the "ilxor" moniker (ilxor), Monday, May 18, 2009 3:04 AM (8 hours ago)

agreed. i think the recent surge in their popularity is a testament to this. their new stuff is much more "danceable," familiar, and simply a lot easier to listen to than their older material. that's not to say though that MPP isn't cringe-worthy or vomit-inducing for other reasons.

Plus, their melodies are ultra-simple, their rhythms rarely anything other than basic, and their sonics muddy. That nagging acoustic guitar/chanted vocal "tribal ritual" shit tires very quickly for me. It strikes me as reaching for some sort of musical nirvana it is in no way equipped to achieve. Sorry, but that's my honest assessment.

― BIG CHOO-CHOOS aka the steamtraindriver (country matters), Monday, May 18, 2009 8:50 AM (2 hours ago)

OTM.

I've not heard Here Comes The Indian, nor would I want to if its more headache-inducing than MPP.

some people won't stfu about why we shouldn't like it

― kamerad, Monday, May 18, 2009 10:46 AM (1 hour ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i guess the implied question in my post is, like, "who?" i dont doubt that some media outlets/people are overrating the album its just that... who i am the people i hang out with and the blogs i read etc etc animal collective doesnt have much of an impact. and on ilm id guess that the anti-AC faction outnumbers the pro-AC faction 2 to 1. im just sort of interested in this universe--a universe i apparently am not a part of--where this band is so huge, and its fans so irritating, that this vitriol is warranted!

i mean im playing dumb here and i dont listen to the kind of music that would mean i had a lot of exposure to AC fans, but, seriously yall, lets get a quick sense of perspective

Max speaks eloquently for me here too. I mean, I adore MPP and everything but shit, I don't see it as a particularly big cultural deal -- and while I appreciate it's not to everyone's taste, it's as easy to ignore as, umm, any other new and pretty-insignificant-in-the-general-scheme-of-things release.

I'm not quite sure why a couple of people are working themselves into a frenzy about how much they hate it when the vast, vast majority -- not just on ILM but in the big wide world -- don't give a shit either way.

(Then again, I'm still reading this thread, so who's the knob?)

wow some people have wimpy sensitive heads/ears

This thread makes me feel seasick. Wau wau fucking wau.

btw just to make my biases clear i think MPP is an OK album but not really 'my thing' and also im already mad at myself for taking this thread seriously

That's one of the joys things I hate joys of ILM.

I bought the damn AC album on emusic b/c I was convinced this album didn't exist after the long thread a few months back with all the "leaks" and the ridiculous cover (which turns out to be real I think?). I've tried listening a few times and I'm not still sure that the album isn't a joke, albeit a very minor one. That's not to say that I like or dislike it. I gave it a few listens and mostly found it woozy and blurry, indistinct, hard to latch on to. I don't remember anything besides dislocation and a few dumb lyrics. Whereas something like The Soft Bulletin (since that came up on this thread) or SFA are just classic rock bands with a slightly broader sonic palette than, say, Blur. I don't see the comparison.

Basically I am confused what happened.

animal collective are the most important band in the history of music fyi

http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/animalcollective/merriweatherpostpavilion?q=animal%20collective

My god, an album got good reviews. That's ... that's ... earth-shattering.

lolololol

Oh my god, and now I can't move for hearing it. It's everywhere. My mother is listening to it. My 10-year-old nephew is listening to it. My boss, my girlfriend, that bloke over there ... they're all playing it non-stop and I CAN'T TAKE IT ANY MORE.

Oh, hang on, no they're not. Nobody gives a shit other than a few music obsessives on an internet discussion board. As we were.

Who's more wankerish; the loverz or the haterz? I think it's pretty close to even.

you know what? i'm going to listen to MPP once more, right now. just in case i was totally wrong.

u were only wrong not to be listening to it already

Who's more wankerish; the loverz or the haterz? I think it's pretty close to even

Maybe so -- although I've not actually read very many of the glowing reviews because, y'know, music writers and that.

But somehow waxing lyrical about something always makes a bit more sense than getting fizzingly irate about it.

Maybe that makes me a hippy cunt. I dunno. Or care enough to be posting on this thread when I should be leaving work and getting a bus home.

the premise of this thread still doesn't make sense to me at all. animal collective is totally avoidable and therefore not annoying if you don't like them, coldplay is pretty ubiquitous.

I think the reality of it (in the UK at least) is that it received a decent level of hype, then didn't amount to much? I mean, I heard My Girls on Zane Lowe once (O SHIT), but then it didn't actually chart, and the album sat at #26 in the chart for one week. I consider myself educated and cultured and aware, and I haven't seen anything about them in the notable media for a few months.

p.s. Scik, do you think that 'the insinuation that my [your], or anybody else's, dislike of AC is due to "some fucking dumb indie reason you refuse to admit"' is any less 'a; offensive and b; idiotically fucking wrong' than the insinuation that people only like Merriweather Post Pavilion because they're somehow out of touch? Because I haven't seen to try to understand it otherwise.

i feel like they really upset the applecart by not being originally from somewhere in europe, in which case the ppl who comprise each faction might be forced to reverse stance. i mean they sort of did work out a euro POV in their own way, but kinda too late
arcade fire were smart enough to get just outside of US before launching, strokes went to euro boarding school etc

p.s. I'm listening to MPP now and am willing to be an utter wanker to defend it. Even if I somewhat accept the criticism (although only kinda see it as a criticism) that it's all surface.

(that first sentence there looks very humourless. it isn't, i swear.)

It's given me a very unpleasant mental image, certainly.

WHY AM I STILL HERE? FOR FUCK'S SAKE

here? on earth? to listen to animal collective imo

like, "in the flowers" is a typical example of where this record fucks up - it starts rly quite intriguingly - the first minute is kinda unpredictable and psychedelic, and the melody is unfixed, langorous - then we get plunged into dull knees-up thumping and all is :-/

and then "my girls", despite a fairly neat tempo shift early on, is just dull dull dullsville "here be three-note keyboard motif" "here be posi-vibe harmonies" "get happy PLEASE!" repetitive edgeless meandering sry

like you hear the first 20 seconds of every song and know how all of it is going to go

on i trudge

what movie stars are dudes from AC likely to marry?

All are happily married, I believe.

I have never heard Animal Collective.

like you hear the first 20 seconds of every song and know how all of it is going to go

You could say the same about pretty much anything. Louis, stop listening critically for new things to hate. Just crank it, stop posting to justify your opinion while you listen, and get back to us when you're done. A liveblog lends itself to criticism, so don't enable yourself.

But somehow waxing lyrical about something always makes a bit more sense than getting fizzingly irate about it.

otm

this "one man's struggle" bullshit that accompanies big albums is seriously a waste of everyone's time. big deal, you don't like a record that got some acclaim, speaking from experience I know it's an utter waste of time to spend the next 9 months wringing your hands and wondering why at every possible opportunity.

people like records for far more interesting reasons than they dislike them.

in the immortal words of kevin lord bozelka, unclench, unclench, unclench

"guys eyes" isn't too bad i suppose

pfft tho it's not sinking in or making me sit up

ronan is kinda otm tho and i am uncomfortable doing this because i swore i'd be positive in 2009

Supertramp are better than either

No, but Supertramp >>>> Animal Collective and the "Crime Of The Century" album > any Coldplay album.

But then, Supertramp were FANTASTIC at their best!!!!

indie kids AND your mom have bad taste in music.

Nope. Indie kids and your mom both have great taste in music. Hip-hop kids and metal kids have a terrible taste in music though.

yeah, all done. hasn't held my interest and that's at least the third listen-thru. let each man pick his poison i guess, but the sheer weight of blood-and-thunder "this and Kid A will define the decade" critspeak genuinely pains my heart

no you are pain bcz of not loving animal collective: best music its not yr fault it just means yr life is a pale shadow of mine

i tht guys eyes was quite gd, does that mean i have SOME life plz say yes

certain talk here might be somewhat interesting if it applied to albums discussed a lot on ilm, like this one The Studio - West Coast. as it is it seems sort of like some bizarre case of sour grapes

well i like to play each album on its perceived musical merits regardless of whether it is an ilm fave - so if i think an album is not great (MPP) i say so, and if i think an album is stunningly good (west coast) i say so as well tbh

there are so many negative threads about so many things on ilx, but only AC fans get upset about it

lol

only AC fans, right, sure

I find generally that people dislike things for far more interesting and discussion-worthy reasons than they like them. Where's the interest in loads of people sitting around going "isn't X great!" "yeah it's great!"?

that's bullshit

i could point you to any number of fascinating positive threads where ilxors go on at length about why they love a certain album, band, sound, genre, what have you

SOME PEOPLE NEED TO GET 1 LIFE AND STOP POSTING 'BOUT SHIT THEY DON'T LIKE WHY AM I EVEN READING THIS THREAD LAFJLWEIPOIHGOIHA30788888888888 HN097ur

*cue soaring falsetto WAAAAAAAAAAAAA and sparkles*

lol ned i just spat soda all over. damn your sense of humor.

x-post yeah nick cos that's the full limits of what people say when they like a record. "i like this/this is great"

srsly this thread has zero to do with either of the bands involved. that's the other frequent characteristic of negativity on music, it melds into sameness far more easily than positivity. not that you can't have a good negative review but it's seldom of the "oh i still don't like this, here is my aging manifesto" endless circle that goes on post-internet

and for the record it's completely irrelevant which band this thread is about

ANYWAY I bought a copy of MPP on actual CD earlier today from Amazon cuz I had birthday voucher money leftover so maybe I'll RITUALLY BURN IT AND VIDEO IT AND POST THE VIDEO HERE AND THEN DRINK YOUR TEARS, ANIMAL COLLECTIVE PUSSIES or maybe I'll just force myself to like it a bit through over-exposure.

I find generally that people dislike things for far more interesting and discussion-worthy reasons than they like them. Where's the interest in loads of people sitting around going "isn't X great!" "yeah it's great!"?

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Monday, May 18, 2009 3:02 PM (4 minutes ago) Bookmark

not tryin to be a jerk but this is something coming for the guy who posts "best band ever" every time the long fin killie thread gets revived.

THEY ARE, THAT'S WHY.

lol that is very interesting and discussion-worthy

please nick start a taking sides thread about who we should dislike more -- the boredoms, daft punk, or my bloody valentine. that would be very enlightening

daft punk duh

Yeah, Daft Punk. Duh. Doesn't even need a thread.

this and Kid A will define the decade

Jesus. Has anyone ever said that? They need chinned.

OMG this thread

100
Delusions of Adequacy
What’s more important is that Merriweather Post Pavilion is not just one of the finest things you’re going to hear in 2009 but that it should sit well next to albums like Kid A on lists of the best music made in our time.

guys

just fyi--no one requires you to give a shit about music critics opinions

that popcorn gif upthread has totally rekindled my interest in scarlett j by the by

Also, the Appetite For Destruction vs Joy Division thread. I fucking hate Joy Division too, and I'm glad he died, and I think all their fans are wankers, did I say that, btw?

i think we are all forgetting the elephant in the room here: the thread is abt coldplay

nick

i think the elephant in the room here is this thread is on ILM what do you expect

i'm a bit confused here-- i'm no fan of AC's new stuff, but the first couple of albums are something else, in a really excellent way. even 'Feels' live was excellent, it was just a shitty overproduced record.

but Coldplay? there can never be enough hatred thrown at these fuckers.

lol ned i just spat soda all over. damn your sense of humor.

Part of my evil plan.

Sick Mouthy is, quite unusually, being a huge dickbag in this thread.

The original version of Don't Panic on the Blue Room EP is really wicked and sweet and I probably prefer it to any single AC song even though I own several AC albums and no Coldplay albums.

why do you own albums by a band you hate?

"and the "Crime Of The Century" album > any Coldplay album."

hell, just the song "school" alone is better than anything coldplay has done.

If Animal Collective actually sounded like a bunch of primary school kids making music I would probably like them better

what music is good

Cos I don't actually "hate" AC, I REALLY WANT to like them and keep trying, and my girlfriend, who I live with and share a record collection with, likes them. Hence we own several of their albums.

(I don't actually hate JD, either, btw, I just don't "get" them.) (But, y'know, anything for shits and giggles on the most overwrought thread this week.)

"I REALLY WANT to like them and keep trying"

why? there is so much good music out there to listen to.

link or it didn't happen

listening to 'In The Flowers' now for only the third or fourth time. i guess the drums coming in at 2:32 would be a dealbreaker for many (basically whenever they bring in Noisier elements...whereas a lot of Noise fans probably think this is too soft/compromised). the not-great voices don't bother me so much. i like the rest of it OK.

http://img507.imageshack.us/img507/1717/titledeadlypie.jpg

"I REALLY WANT to like them and keep trying"

why? there is so much good music out there to listen to.

― scott seward, Monday, May 18, 2009 8:34 PM (6 minutes ago)

Because, as I've said before, people who love this stuff describe it in a way that reminds me of stuff I love, and that makes me want to get whatever it is that they get from this.

yeah, i here you. i actually listened to coldplay for the first time cuz someone said they sounded like talk talk!!

i tried for awhile to like of montreal, but they are one of those bands that make ME seasick. or at least a whole album of them does.

Yeah, Nick makes a lot of sense there. On paper, AC certainly tick a lot of boxes. If I based my opinion on what's written, I'd love them!

Am now gonna spend a fruitless half-hour working out what the most TT-esque Coldplay song is.

Of Montreal are weird, in that (regarding the last album) I don't much like the individual tracks, but I think it works pretty nicely (even very well) as an ensemble piece.

As a Cardiacs nut and a fan of all things knotty, noisy and clusterfucked, I can't confess to much musical sickness. Fantomas did their best with Suspended Animation, but I ended up loving it. Would be open to any challenges on this subject.

See, I found the total opposite with that latest Of Montreal disc. I found it to be an overwhelming mess when I tried to swallow the thing whole, but I liked the individual tracks much much better when they popped up on shuffle.

Most TT Coldplay song = first 45 seconds or so of X&Y. It's like the opening of SoE updated for an ADD audience and played on a keyboard and sampler rather than trumpet & whateverthefuck.

I think it's Of Montreal who I also dislike for headache reasons. Hissing Fauna?

Edit; yes it is - a quick google con firms this. Interesting what you get as a first hit if you typo the album title.

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en-us&q=hissing+faunua&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

I think my issue was that no one track sounded complete, sounded fulfilled (with the possible exception of Triphallus, To Punctuate!), but in each others' contexts they became parts of an unpredictable, slightly unhinged and certainly effective theme-park ride. I like messes, if they're sincere.

Anyway, here's me approx 25 years ago, dressed as fucking Zorro.

http://photos-h.ak.fbcdn.net/photos-ak-snc1/v4392/130/61/612271830/n612271830_2298047_2625806.jpg

yeah, i think in small doses i can take of montreal okay.

justice definitely makes me ill. and they make my teeth hurt. all that french treble-core does.

yeah i can't get near that sound at all tbh

hey I just checked out "Strawberry Swing" off Viva La Vida on nothing more than a whim and hey - it's actually ok! not very TT mind

what little Justice I've heard hasn't appealed much.

I probably like Animal Collective on the whole more than I like Coldplay, but Coldplay have a few singles that I like just as much as, if not more than, my favorite Animal Collective songs.

Louis, have you ever heard Cerberus Shoal's Bastion of Itchy Preeves album? I was just listening to it the other day and I am always amazed by how ambitious and beautiful it is. and how so much indie-whatever music sounds so...small in comparison. more people need to hear it.

http://www.bwscd.com/scd/thumbs/march2004/nei32.jpg

never heard OF it let alone heard it but I will of course give it a listen now! ty scott, plz do this more often!

cerberus shoal are dope

If you like Cerberus Shoal you might like their spin-off band Big Blood. They sound a little like a backwoods string band playing psycho-krautrock. Their stuff is pretty easy to find on the intertubes

both of those bands are the illest. i discovered cerberus shoal for myself after buying the alvarius b. split record of theirs for 10 cents in a thrift store. rather amazing find.

I'm not actually hearing that low-end that a few people have gone on about, definitely not to the extent of it being "70%" of the sound!

I suppose in my defence, my perspective is skewed by being right in front of one of the speaker stacks when they played in Dublin a few weeks ago. And also articles like this one from Sound on Sound (a great magazine) and this one on the producer.

Also also, the word 'overrated' has outlived its critical usefulness and should be banned for a while - it's just there to give the illusion of objectivity - I can't remember the last time I saw it used to mean anything deeper that "some people like this, but I don't, ergo, vis-a-vis, ipso fatso"

I didn't mean for it to mean anything deeper than that. I just started this thread to deflate some of the frustration that's been pent up inside of me about the way people hype music these days

I totally disagree with the notion that people who dislike stuff do so more interestingly than people who like stuff - but I wouldn't say the reverse either.

The truth is a lot of people talk about music in a really boring fashion whether they like the music or hate it.

But I would say that generally the practice of negative criticism results in boring generic uninsightful writing because we tend to think more carefully about the exact worth of stuff we rate than stuff we don't. A critic is usually likely to spend more time thinking about whether she wants to give 4 stars out of 5 or 4.5 stars out of 5 to an album she loves, and less time thinking about whether she wishes to give 1 star or 1.5 stars to an album she hates. And this extends to the writing. Of course much of the best criticism results when a critic really likes something but is bothered by flaws that obstruct their enjoyment, or when they ultimately dislike something but see lots of potential or sympathetic qualities in it. And good positive music writing takes this form even when it's being very positive: off the top of my head, all my favourite rave reviews in Tom Ewing's Popular series still commit themselves to saying what the song does very well indeed, and what it does less well - i.e yes, it works, but how, why?

There's a second connected issue here in that usually people are more likely to claim that something they dislike has no redeeming qualities than they are to claim that something they like has no flaws. Partly it's the same impulse at work, but it's also that critics (pro and amateur) recognise that total unnuanced adulation is probably gonna look more like an abandonment of their critical responsibilities (insofar as it ends up looking like a press release) than a scorch-the-earth hatchet job will.

I have done a singles review column in a local rag almost every week for the past eight years. This can be a tedious chore at times because 90% of the stuff I receive I listen to twice and then never again. But it's probably killed off any desire I have to thoroughly hate something. Even with an artist like Lady Gaga, who I'm very critical of, I still can name at least ten things I like about her.

I imagine this kind of equivocal stance strikes many people (critics and otherwise) as kinda boring, old man thinking. Concomitantly I can never really take unalloyed hatred / "this music makes me want to vomit" claims seriously; even if they are true they don't feel true to me.

Finally, w/r/t reviews saying e.g. "this album is a pinnacle of modern culture alongside Kid A", we should acknowledge that these reviews are written by people who are not yet ready to engage in honest, meaningful criticism (if they ever will be). Pretty much all semi-popular music attracts its share of awful criticism.

I'm more likely to be worked up where either a) the artist is engaged in the creation of bad writing about them (see Lady Gaga); or b) where the entire discourse surrounding the artist seems wrongheaded. I don't think this is the case with AC, though certainly they do benefit from the blinkered assumption that indie-rock is the only music worth caring about, a misconception that still circulates amongst the less intelligent lower levels of the rock crit fraternity like sludgy run-off in a gutter.

^^^this dude's presence on ILM is like some sort of Sword of Damocles for this kinda thread

that last line!

I just started this thread to deflate some of the frustration that's been pent up inside of me about the way people hype music these days

To my mind this thread's more disappointing because of the unchecked kneejerk hatred for music I suspect some posters here of having. I mean "Coldplay suck" is honestly becoming so utterly inane a thing to say I am getting sick of hearing it. Yes, they wrote some plodding turgid songs and I was never a fan - but the new album actually has some suprisingly lovely stuff on it. Shoegazery, even.

Hoos saying "well I just gave Swings a listen and hey its ok!" makes me think "Coldplay suck" is just Something One Says regardless of ever having listened to anything beyond "Yellow" and "Clocks".

Ridiculous.

that was me btw

Oh haha sorry. Stupid joek usernames =)

haha yeah louis that's been confusing me too

I actually had a good half-hour of listening to Coldplay! I have gone at them savagely in the (recent) past on here but there are a few decent-to-good tracks in their repertoire, mostly on the second half of Rush

probably about time I adopted a new moniker tbh

let's try this one

hmm this is harder than i thought

http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/NewAnswersControllerServlet?boardid=48

let's keep it trad

No one liked my Sylvia Blapp one ;_;

I did actually mentally remark upon that one's goodness!

If this thread were about Cerberus Shoal, I'd endlessly recommend the split disc with Herman Dune and the new Larkin Grimm record.

i still own a rush of blood to the head. ok record imo.

I don't mind Coldplay. Latest album was their best by far.

never heard a coldplay album in full but i think the only single by them that i actively hate is "In my place" and the rest of them range from boringly pleasant to pleasantly good.

the one AC track i've heard didn't make much of an impression.

my friends all like coldplay & i got into it thru them circa 'rush of blood.' 'yellow' was a guilty pleasure single for me when it dropped

The truth is a lot of people talk about music in a really boring fashion whether they like the music or hate it.

― Tim F, Tuesday, 19 May 2009 00:26 (10 hours ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

I'm saying nothing...

probably best

chance would be a fine thing

Tim OTM as usual there.

Trust Tim to ruin a great thread by coming along and being entirely reasonable and correct.

W/r/t Tim's post, I've always felt that while often the only interesting reviews are the even-handed ones (this is good with these bad things, or bad with these good things), too often that's a way of playing safe too. There is such thing as a great, or a bad, album and a particularly timid critic might try to dodge making a substantial claim by giving the rote, "This does A good, it does B bad." I generally prefer to read criticism that takes itself seriously enough to make a leap once in awhile. A.O. Scott does that often enough for my tastes. There's one or two films a year he unabashedly loves, even when the critical consensus isn't necessarily lining up behind him. That he actually has films that come out that he loves helps me take him more seriously than if he was simply lukewarm on everything.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, yes, I agree with what Tim wrote AND I think sometimes the kind of criticism he's promoting can be a cover-up for a critic too afraid to champion something he finds really great, or just so bereft of opinions that his criticism always seems to take the middle road on a work of art. I very much disagreed with whoever gave Clap Your Hands Say Yeah a 9.0 in PF, but it took guts to stump for a band that wasn't already recognized as genius.

interesting point--see i can get behind ao scott when he does this because i've read enough ao scott to pretty much understand where dude is coming from. tougher to build that relationship with a random p4k guy to the point where i could respect his opinion of cyhsy even if i didn't agree with it. more likely i would be like "u are a moron"

There is such thing as a great, or a bad, album and a particularly timid critic might try to dodge making a substantial claim by giving the rote, "This does A good, it does B bad."
― Mordy, Tuesday, May 19, 2009 1:53 PM (7 minutes ago) Bookmark

i think it depends on the writer's voice and what they end up doing with pointing out the good and bad. if they're just like... "here it is" then that's a pretty weak statement in my mind. but if they take A and B and synthesize them to make a good point, then i think that kind of review is justified. it might be a gutsier move to be very unsympathetic in your position about a record, but i think a review is always better if you acknowledge the opposing view.

perhaps "unwavering" might've been a better word choice than "unsympathetic" but you get the idea.

snarky uber-negative takedowns are usually bullshit even when they're otm

so are 100% positive nothing-is-wrong-with-this-album reviews, of course

it's fucking easy to rip a record to shreds, I think it was Orwell or someone similar who said "the language of invective is stronger than the language of praise". it's v true.

tougher to build that relationship with a random p4k guy to the point where i could respect his opinion of cyhsy even if i didn't agree with it. more likely i would be like "u are a moron"

Depends on the reviewer. I've read Pfork for long enough (since 2002-ish) and often enough that when a review comes from the writers whose tastes I most overlap with and/or respect, say Mark R. or Dominique, that I'll sit up and pay a bit of attention to anything they champion.

The majority of Pfork writers I don't pay extra attention to, but there are also those writers whose name at the bottom of a review gives it more credibility to me. So I'd say it depends more on the individual writer than the website.

Granted, I don't recall who wrote the CYHSY review and frankly couldn't care who wrote it. That band is awful.

I read it since 2000

yeah i do try to pay attention to who writes p4k reviews when i think the writing is good. the cyhsy 9.0 review by br1an h0we is bland tbh.

the moral may be: don't read reviews

Orwell was a happy writer.

the moral may be: don't read reviews

See also: Read all music criticism with a critical eye.

the moral here is: listen 2 animal collective: best music or u will be dead inside 4 ever

waow.

suffer suffer for love
and joy for heaven

"the moral may be: don't read reviews"

or just read mine exclusively. i'll never steer you wrong.

Hey, who friended me on facebook recently? Some ILXer friended me, but since they have a joeks name, I have no idea who it is. (How did I know they were from facebook? They have PFM writer on their employment list and we share a friend with Ned.)

That's everyone on Facebook.

I wouldn't advocate even-handedness so much as... a realisation that goodness or badness is always a complex thing. Even-handedness suggests a careful tallying of good points and bad points. Whereas the truth is that sometimes what is bad in a piece of music came very close to being its best quality, and vice versa.

This is why I referred to Tom's Popular reviews - even when he gives records a 9/10 or a 2/10, he's not simply engaging in a rant for or against them. There's an acknowledgment that what feeds into the enjoyment (or non-enjoyment) of a piece of music is complex and frequently contradictory.

I like to think of records as putting forward a strategy for winning the listener over, and sometimes you look at the strategy and think, "with different weapons, on different terrain, and against a different target, this strategy would have triumphed. Instead it fails dismally." Or alternatively, the record has all the elements pointing in its failure, but fails to combine these into a strategy that can achieve victory.

The problem with a lot of really negative blanket dismissals is that they treat the music in question as very monolithic, a single thing worthy of hatred. This is kind of inevitable given most people aren't inclined to spend a lot of time listening to and thinking about records they don't enjoy.

Needless to say, someone like Lex, who writes excellently on pop/r&b/dance music etc, lacks his usual sophistication when talking about, say, Animal Collective. He can't get close enough to the music to shed light on it (even in the form of cogent negative criticism) - his overwhelming across-the-board nausea stands in the way.

(this is why, often, the best really negative reviews are written by people who are fans of other music by the artist or group - this gives them a vantage point from which they can talk about the "failed" piece of music in a much more nuanced fashion)

In a different way, people who are too beholden to certain patterns of thinking about music - the r word being the most famous example - get close enough to the music to witness and experience what it is doing, but can't break it down. The critic who thinks that Merriweather Post Pavilion is a shining paragon of the spirit of experimental rock bursting back to life has experienced the success of its strategy, but sees it less as strategy and more as reasonless divine providence.

I meant, "the record has all the elements pointing in its favour"

(this is why, often, the best really negative reviews are written by people who are fans of other music by the artist or group - this gives them a vantage point from which they can talk about the "failed" piece of music in a much more nuanced fashion)

This is very very well said, Tim. It's difficult to take someone seriously in a criticism if they are just kneejerking because they dont like that band or even genre at all. Worse if because of this they've not even bothered to give what they're blasting more than a cursory listen.

...which to return to the topic, is what I suspect some here are doing with both Coldplay and AC.

(ugh I cant say AC, it always means the... other band, to me)

critics have hated lots of good bands. led zeppelin, yes -- who cares?

if you're reading this board, you do (to at least some degree)

this thread inspired me to listen to MPP for the first time. there are a lot of shrill frequencies that are kind of icky on headphones, but so far I like it better than Strawberry Jam. was a HUGE fan of Feels and Prospect Hummer EP. i'd probably put Feels somewhere on my top 20 of the decade list.

I'm always surprised how much people hate bands I love, even calling them unexceptional, boring and lukewarm. Opinions are wwwwwwwwwwwwweird...

I wouldn't advocate even-handedness so much as... a realisation that goodness or badness is always a complex thing.

And saying that something makes your ears hurt doesn't contradict that. Our physical, subjective experience of music =/= discourse about music. Music is an actual physical entity --- yes, JUST like food (I know we've been through this) --- and I don't think there's anything intellectually dishonest about pointing out that one has a strong physical reaction to certain sounds in the same way one can have a physical reaction to say, green peppers. It's not about some silly "agenda" like some other posters have suggested, or about having "wimpy" ears.

While I understand such visceral statements are less interesting to read as, say, more subtle descriptions about why "the sushi didn't taste as delightful as it could have" or whatever, you do sometimes make it seem like one has to be so "even-handed" to the point of being indiscriminate; as if having an ethos or prefered musical signifiers makes you somehow dishonest.

good post.

fantastic post, tim

and same to you, turangalila, but i'd counter that i want my friends and critics i read to be able to analyze their visceral reactions, not just state them. why does this particular piece of music make you feel the way it does, even if the way it makes you feel is especially bad? and tim, as someone who also enjoys the lex' writing, i don't necessarily think he's guilty of this oversight per se; most of his little rants about stuff he hates are posted to this message board or livejournal rather than his actual reviews (from what i know, at least).

feel weird talking about the dude when i'm sure he won't bother to open this thread, tho. someone tell him to post something if he wants

I'm with Turangalila, unsurprisingly; I'd love to be able to be even-handed about Animal Collective, as I've said on many, many occasions, the descriptions of what they do appeal to me massively, but the reality I find really phenomenologically unpleasant. This isn't about thinking their songs are rubbish or trying to wave some ideological hammer to prove a point; their records are really physically unpleasant to me. Why this is I'm not 100% sure but I think it's almost certainly down to the way they're recorded and mixed. Thing is that if I mention this certain people accuse me of waving an ideological hammer again!

On the subject of Coldplay, though, their third album I don't like sonically at all; the last one is much, much better; but I still don't give a shit about them because I don't like Chris Martin's voice or lyrics, and I think rhythmically and melodically and in terms of general song structure and arrangement they're unsurprising and unexciting. Occasionally they do something gorgeous or interesting or charming (Clocks, that shoegaze bit on the new record, Don't Panic) but one song in 20 isn't enough.

i like animal collective better than coldplay in theory, but in fact i can't call a single animal collective tune to mind (when i think of them, all i get in my head is pixies and squirrels spinning metal pie plates), while "yellow" and "viva la vida" leap forward unbidden.

mostly tho who cares about either of these bands?

(i do like spirit they've gone..., which is more like skeletons spinning pie plates. but i still couldn't tell you how any of it goes.)

Turangalia, sticking with the food analogy, would you bother with a food critic's review if he or she wrote "well because the chef used nuts I came out in a nasty rash and couldn't breathe and had to go to hospital, so, yeah, not good food. Zero out of Five!"

Like, I believe that they really regretted eating that food and won't touch it again! I'm not saying the reaction is dishonest. But as commentary on the food it doesn't get us very far - except perhaps providing a warning to other people allergic to nuts. And you and Nick may find some level of solace in both being allergic to the nut-equivalents in Animal Collective - but it just doesn't strike me as a very interesting conversation to have in and of itself - though it may provide a starting point for an interesting conversation. A strong visceral physical reaction is all well and good, but it's up to the writer to put meaning into it. And what we're talking about is not the relative worth of one's reactions to music - which is just an impossible and pointless thing to rate - but the relative usefulness of how we describe and analyse those experiences.

Of course where the food analogy breaks down is that taste and allergy are separate things, whereas their equivalents in music-listening are not. Music may be a physical entity but our senses are not scientific implements. When we see, hear, taste or feel something unpleasant we are putting it into discourse, and while I don't believe that discourse can exhaust experience I don't think the answer is just to throw up our hands either.

That's not to say that my reaction to a strong chili-based dish is discursive and not physical, but it is to say that it's both: there are all sorts of reasons why I might sweat through a dish that was probably too hot for my liking, without roundly criticising the dish as poor, whereas I might not hold back if I had a dessert which seemed to me to contain too much sugar. In both cases there is too much of a particular ingredient for my liking, but somehow with chili dishes I'm inclined to think "no, complaining about the excess chili makes me look like a blinkered novice westerner"; conversely, having a preference for sugary foods is frowned upon anyway, so complaining about an overly sugary dessert seems appropriate. Over time, despite some slightly unpleasant experiences with excessive chili, I start to genuinely enjoy it and my mouth and throat feel less punished, and dishes I would have once not dared sample become favourites. Isn't this both a physical and discursive process?

Similarly, when it comes to talking about music, complaints like "it's too trebly" or "it's too overstuffed" or indeed "it's too sugary" tend to be stated without elaboration and with (dare I say) a certain air of complacent certainty, because we all know that these are objectively bad things.

Whereas if someone said "this album has too much bass", the critique would seem kind of empty or at least vulnerable to attack, because you can already hear the rejoinder, "but too much bass is never enough - this is clearly a problem with you." At least, this would be the case around here.

Accordingly, within the whole range of types of music that a person might find unpleasant, they mostly resort to the "this racket hurts my ears" complaint when they feel that they're on solid ground, that there's a certain type of consensus they can appeal to. Hence, in the lore of popular culture, we witness this complaint being leveled by parents against their thrash-loving children, by quiet homebody types against the hoons invading their backstreets with sub-woofers pumping out hip hop etc.

What this cliche recognises is that we mostly use this physiological argument at the precise point where we can no longer see any discursive relationship between the world we inhabit and the world the listener inhabits. It's a shortcut for saying "not only do I dislike this music, I simply wouldn't know where to start trying to like it. Certain qualities pose an insurmountable obstacle for me." (Hence Nick's reference to AC being "phenomenologically unpleasant" is unwittingly spot-on - after all, isn't phenomenology asking the question "how is it that the interpretable, mediated process we call experience comes to be experienced as immediate?")

Such a complaint is perfectly valid. Though, again, it becomes more interesting when the complainant starts to talk about what those obstacles are and why they're obstacles in this particular interest e.g. see Frank Kogan's Boney Joan rule.

To the extent that I am advocating "even-handedness" it would be in accordance with Frank's rule - being a recognition that any particular element or quality that can be considered a force for good in one piece of music can be considered a force for evil in another, and vice versa.

Exposure can make one just as amenable to too much sugar as to too much chili, surely? Hence stories like this - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8056028.stm - about people who drink 4-10 liters of cola a day. Likewise if you listen to anything enough, you can grow to like it.

I'm busy now but may try and write more later. Anyone know (Louis?) where I put the post about Animal Collective being like a giant butterfly?

But no matter how somebody explains why they like or don't like a particular musical element, it's never going to be all that revealing about anyone but the critic themselves. To use the food example, you can explain to me all you want about how your childhood trauma prevents you from liking strawberries, or how you taste subtle undertones in celery that I do not, but it's not going to reveal to me why you like celery and I do not in any way that I can ever truly understand. Anyone can turn their visceral reaction into long-winded wanking, but why, exactly? I prefer the visceral in a lot of ways. I don't find that reading the Boney Joan rule helps me understand or care about why Frank doesn't like Joan Baez, or helps me to hear what he hears. You can play an endless loop of "But why?" to every explanation of preference. I explain that I don't like apples because they are too sweet, you ask me why I don't like sweet things. Even if I manage to explain that, you still don't really understand why I taste an apple and don't like it.

you don't like apples?

So Melissa, are you saying that after years of talking about music on ILX you have no idea why or how other people like/dislike stuff?

Why talk at all then? What, precisely, are you hoping to share or discover?

http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i181/PaisleyMoons/apple.jpg

"Exposure can make one just as amenable to too much sugar as to too much chili, surely? Hence stories like this - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8056028.stm - about people who drink 4-10 liters of cola a day. Likewise if you listen to anything enough, you can grow to like it."

Absolutely, my point was that there might be reasons apart from the physical reaction itself that might cause us to attempt to change that physical reaction over time - i.e. we're not slaves to our physical reactions, though sometimes we might feel like we are.

haven't got time or inclination to do more than speed read this but it seems essentially what's being said is beware the "i don't like this therefore it's no good" critical trap.

if you learn to trust a specific critic or writer then following them is usually a good idea until they start coming off the wagon (which they always do) and you learn that as a listener and consumer you have to keep abreast of the fact that critics and writers, like all humans, are fallible. in the end as with everything it's down to you. you can't be perfect and listen to everything that ever comes out - but you can try and that's the fun and revelation of it.

brief and to the point, as i wish tim would learn to be.

My best friend gave me the best advice
He said each day's a gift and not a given right
Leave no stone unturned, leave your fears behind
And try to take the path less traveled by
That first step you take is the longest stride

brief and to the point, as i wish tim would learn to be.

― Dingbod Kesterson, Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:43 AM (11 minutes ago) Bookmark

yeah no doubt you'll find a huge contingency of people also clamoring for tim to be more like you

jordan if you were more like me as I wish you were you would soon realise that this is so

Why talk at all then? What, precisely, are you hoping to share or discover?

Music that I wouldn't otherwise have heard of that I might like; not necessarily reasons to like music I otherwise do not like.

I am attempting to change the physical reaction, for the reason that I don't like not enjoying music that people (who I trust) tell me they think I'd enjoy. The downside of the physical reaction is that I now question whether I trust the judgement of the other people!

Don't Brussell Sprouts have a certain compound in them that only certain people can taste, and which, if you can taste it, tastes like sewage?

My stance with AC, apart from when I'm deliberately winding people up, is "this hurts me, I don't like being hurt, I can't tell whether it's good or bad".

I'm verbose by nature, Marcello, but I think your summary is referring to a rather different issue. The argument I'm having with Salvador/Nick/Melissa/etc. is less about whether one person can be "right", but rather what "it" is that we are seeking to be right about. In many ways they're advocating a very k-punk-ish argument, which is that music operates directly on the body and bypasses the brain, such that any reasoning about why we like/dislike something is ultimately a set of post-facto justifications that get us no closer to the truth. I say that the two are mutually implicated: you can't have one without the other, and you can only approach one through the other. It's a very technical point obviously and I can see why the discussion bores some people.

Though I imagine your objection is more of the "tl;dr" variety.

"Don't Brussell Sprouts have a certain compound in them that only certain people can taste, and which, if you can taste it, tastes like sewage?"

This is why the food analogy is always a bad one. The people who use it always fall back on scientific/chemical reasoning that bypasses ordinary perception altogether.

So Melissa, are you saying that after years of talking about music on ILX you have no idea why or how other people like/dislike stuff?

Why talk at all then? What, precisely, are you hoping to share or discover?

The short answers are "yes" and "I don't".

But to be less glib, I will have to say that quite specifically after all these years, I don't think I have any understanding of what you like/dislike in music at all. I've always admired your writing, but I have to say that I admire it aesthetically, as writing. I have no idea what makes you tick/what turns you off/whether you prefer a minor or a major chord, because you do a whole lot of obfuscating to avoid the visceral. If you like a song, I have no idea if I'll like it as well. I might enjoy what you write about it and the way you turn a phrase, but when it comes down to it I have no idea what you love about music.

I have a pretty good idea of what Nick likes even if I don't agree with it. The how is actually much less important to me than the what. Because "how" is illusory, "how" asks me to read your mind. "What" gives me a roadmap, a way of understanding how your mind and mine might overlap.

These days I don't expect to share or discover much about music by talking about music, at least not here.

the trouble with you tim is you assume that there is such a thing as "truth." this is not chambers.

Marcello let go of the fact that i've studied law. My argumentative style is much closer to crappy postgrad arts student than law student or lawyer.

In my post above, I was attributing a belief in "truth" to the argument I'm against. Actually I agree with you that - whether or not such a thing exists - it's not worth positing it as a holy grail.

OTOH I do believe in the possibility of there better and worse ways to talk about what's going on when I enjoy or don't enjoy music. I expect you do as well.

"Don't Brussell Sprouts have a certain compound in them that only certain people can taste, and which, if you can taste it, tastes like sewage?"

This is why the food analogy is always a bad one. The people who use it always fall back on scientific/chemical reasoning that bypasses ordinary perception altogether.

― Tim F, Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:05 AM (4 minutes ago)

I'm pretty damn sure that there are scientific/chemical reasonings that bypass "ordinary perception" altogether with music too, is the thing; music isn't magic, it's not sorcery, the human body and brain does react to soundwaves in predictable ways, and I'm pretty sure that with investigation that empirical reasonings can be found.

Big lols at the idea that Marcello is less verbose than anyone.

I'm very much in agreement with Melissa's last post.

A singer in a band once said to me that "music journalism is just finding clever ways to say whether you do or don't like something".

with AC and more specifically with MPP it's the bang bang bang YOU MUST LISTEN/HAVE AN OPINION hype overdrive that turns me off. whereas my "truth" is that there's a thousand and ten things currently happening musically that are orbiting around my mind right now and, you know, AC are just not one of them. why should they be? reading all the chaff that's been written about them i'm no closer to getting an answer.

they're not bad for what they are and i appreciate what they're doing and why they're doing it. they're ok. nothing more, nothing less. if other people are moved and touched by them then fair play. but let's go back more to people finding out about great music for themselves without the big promo push.

Didn't know Tim had studied law - suddenly some things make a lot of sense!

X-post agree with Marcello there to an extent.

fwiw i agree with nick here about the sonics on MPP. the modern lurgi of trying to cram too much "information" into every song instead of letting it breathe. one could call it tim finney rock ;-)

does it really matter at this point why people care about animal collective? sheesh

but let's go back more to people finding out about great music for themselves without the big promo push.

― Dingbod Kesterson, Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:17 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

so lemme get this straight - you want people to find out about music but once enough people care about that music that the band garners a promo push we should all stop caring? okay

I don't think that's what Marcello said at all; certain people, when they find out my issue with Animal Collective (which generally manifests itself as me saying "don't like them, don't like their sound" rather than going into phenomenology and empirical acoustic experience or whatever), look at me like I'm an alien.

you know, I really like Animal Collective

Tim, I mostly adore your writing, but seriously. No. You're arguing with a straw man, not with any of my actual premises, which you have weirdly derived from my simply stating that the idea that sound can't be uncomfortable---to the point of not finding it an interesting/worthwile endeavor to adorn our discourse about it describing ways in which it could be more palatable---is patently ridiculous. It's also weirdly condescending on your part.

the modern lurgi of trying to cram too much "information" into every song instead of letting it breathe

Yeah, none of the free jazzers never did this. Animal Collective stuff *is* excitable, ecstatic... for me it's what they're about, what they're trying to communicate. I don't see how stripping stuff away and being more tasteful would enhance that much.

but let's go back more to people finding out about great music for themselves without the big promo push.

― Dingbod Kesterson, Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:17 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark

so lemme get this straight - you want people to find out about music but once enough people care about that music that the band garners a promo push we should all stop caring? okay

― oj da hoosman (J0rdan S.), Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:22 AM (3 minutes ago)

maybe this guy should read this band's wikipedia page or something, like MPP is their ninth album, also a good few eps/singles/tons of online live things. I'm pretty sure that their popularity now comes from the fact that they were a band a lot of people found for themselves over the last nearly ten years

Turangalila, in fact, all along, what I've said is that the position you've put in bold usually doesn't make for evocative/interesting criticism. My post that you initially took issue with was me saying that the problem with outright "allergic" dislike from a writing perspective is that it's hard to get past treating the music as a monolith (e.g. "TOO MUCH CHILI"). This is fine for a one-liner in a thread like this (and note that at no stage have I come charging in here seeking to defend MPP); it usually starts to flag after 500 words however.

I'm not saying you have an obligation to unpack your opinions.

I wouldn't expect someone who was gasping over excess chili in their meal to be able to tell me if the garlic had been burnt slightly.

Turangalila, in fact, all along, what I've said is that the position you've put in bold usually doesn't make for evocative/interesting criticism

And I happened to agree with that in my first reply to your post is my point. I also think the reason you came across as particularly long-winded in your reply was that you were attributing premises which didn't correspond to what I was replying to. It was this weird mix of implied accusations of cartesian dualism and a denial of cognitive mediation that I'd never stand for.

woah guys, lets not say things we can't take back!

lol

But to be less glib, I will have to say that quite specifically after all these years, I don't think I have any understanding of what you like/dislike in music at all. I've always admired your writing, but I have to say that I admire it aesthetically, as writing. I have no idea what makes you tick/what turns you off/whether you prefer a minor or a major chord, because you do a whole lot of obfuscating to avoid the visceral. If you like a song, I have no idea if I'll like it as well. I might enjoy what you write about it and the way you turn a phrase, but when it comes down to it I have no idea what you love about music.

I have a pretty good idea of what Nick likes even if I don't agree with it. The how is actually much less important to me than the what. Because "how" is illusory, "how" asks me to read your mind. "What" gives me a roadmap, a way of understanding how your mind and mine might overlap.

These days I don't expect to share or discover much about music by talking about music, at least not here.

― Melissa W, Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:08 AM (25 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

waht

tbf I wonder why you are talking about music here then...?

whether you prefer a minor or a major chord,

poll

Minor obv

Yeah, none of the free jazzers never did this. Animal Collective stuff *is* excitable, ecstatic... for me it's what they're about, what they're trying to communicate. I don't see how stripping stuff away and being more tasteful would enhance that much.

there are plenty of free jazzers who did this all the time nick as well you know. but as with all music what you don't play or say is frequently as important, and sometimes more important, than what you do. stripping away the excess fat isn't the same thing as becoming tasteful. the problem with AC is that i'd quite like to hear their songs but find it difficult to do so because there's so much obfuscatory fiddling going on around them. if they love brian wilson so much then they ought to listen to pet sounds and learn about perspective and economy when it comes to arranging music.

they claim to not really have any interest at all in the Beach Boys

but when it comes down to it I have no idea what you love about music.

u know "Tim F" = "Tim Finney" rite

for another non-beach boys instance there are about a million things (well, ok, a dozen) going on in "i am the walrus" but nowhere does the track feel constipated or suffocated by excess of ideas. maybe it's just a question of having or finding the right ideas.

yo dudes, u can have as many silly reasons as you want for dismissing AC -- not enuff like the beach boys, dont master their records with the 400$ headphone listener in mind, have a stupid name (my reason) -- but going on & on & on about it like "omg arent they so bad??" is bad discussion

i mean its certainly ok if its funny, i.e. when the autogoon cru lolz @ asher roth, but yr talking about a band a lot of ppl want to discuss musically & just constantly repeating the same "THIS SUCKS BECAUSE THEY LIKE UNPLEASANT FREQUENCIES" is like zzzzzzzz

The two ways that I keep trying to listen to Animal Collective:

1; at work, off my Mac, through a set of JBL 2.1 speakers, at that low-level "I'm working and want some sound, either something ambient so I can concentrate or something I want to get to know so it can seep in via osmosis" way. So not paying close attention, just hoping to have catchy bits snag into my brain and make me want to revisit and take in properly. Generally, after 10-20 minutes, I find that I can't concentrate properly on the task in hand because my head's buzzing unpleasantly a little. I guess like tinnitus without the actual sound, just a kind of physical muzziness across the front of my head.

2; at home, through my whizzy headphone set-up, with an off-board DAC, a dedicated headphone amp (both of which add "analogue warmth" to the sound), and then into my big comfy AKGs. Close listening. Only I find I can't pay close attention to the music with AC, even this way - the edges of individual sounds are blurred, like they're out of focus, and there are so many elements out of focus that I can't even get a sense of the bigger picture (i.e. the song as opposed to the individual elements of the mix); meaning I can neither enjoy it on a sensual, psychedelic, "wow sounds are cool!" level, nor can I just take in the songs and enjoy the rhythms / melodies / etc.

Why do I have this reaction to their records? Does everyone? I have the same reaction pretty much to Sung Tongs and Feels and Strawberry Jam, so it's not just MPP. I don't know that it's about "unpleasant frequencies", but if it is, why are they attracted to them? I want to discuss them musically but can't; this interests me, but I'm not interested enough in writing for writing's sake (which I suspect Tim is, for instance) to get as verbose as he does.

multiple x-posts: I'm not trying to accuse you of anything Turangalila (though my summarising yours/Nick's/Melissa's position collectively did this inadvertantly - maybe the reason I'm not short and sweet like Marcello is that it starts to make me less careful). If anything, the longwindedness of my post was intended to carefully delineate my issues with "scientific"/physical explanations of dislike from the accusations of intellectual dishonesty you'd discerned in my previous posts.

Though to some extent merely bringing in the food analogy implies stronger cartesian-split style arguments than the one you appear to want to make.

I dunno, for me peak period AC is all about a kind of incoherence or inconsistence. Some of the best moments in their catalogue involve elements not fitting, or melodies that jar really strangely. I kinda think their absolute love of tinny trebbly production is sortof charming, especially in light of the recent steering of the band into freakfolk/pop-ambient fusion. Can't be bothered searching for it, but on some other thread Dominique said he liked Here Comes the Indian because it sounded like they were "on the verge of bursting into flames". There is a certain ad-hoc improvisatory feel about AC that necessitates an approach of hyperactive overproductivity, stylistic shifts and yeah, rubbish production standards. Still, I think that while their stuff isn't exactly beautifully mixed and mastered, their championing of Ariel Pink is kindof revealing. That fucked-tapes aesthetic most prevalent on Hollindagain seems like their trying to make this kind of fake archival music, like a pop noise canaxis or play.

peak period = Hollinndagain - Sung Tongs 4me btw

my feeling with ariel pink is exactly the same. cut the crap and let the songs speak for themselves. some of these songs are great! they don't need the fx/pseudo-weirdness because these feel grafted on rather than organically growing from the source of the song or its underlying emotion.

tim - the reason you're not sweet and short like me is because you're not a journalist trained to summarise arguments at a paragraph-long glance.

when young jeezy was first breaking i couldnt stand the thinness of a lot of the production, now thin tinny southern bedroom production is basically all i listen to, & im probably the worlds biggest zaytoven stan

i think sometimes its just a hurdle & once u cross it you realize it wasnt really a hurdle at all, or sometimes its just too tall for you to cross

if i'm honest when I first started listening to older music that wasn't crazy compressed I thought it was too quiet and not flashy enough

early jeezy production is as good, truthful and valid as son house or derek bailey really. all (or mostly) in real time, happening in and of the moment. as opposed to farting about with the weirdfreak button on protools as though it makes you george antheil.

xpost Tim F

No, it doesn't. We just happen to know less about sound qua sound ontologically/epistemologically than we do about food, like Nick pointed out, but it still stands that they're *just as physical* (which is ALL that I was saying). I was emphasizing the physicality of it all to avoid falling into reducing musical experience *exclusively* to discourse about music, which I think sometimes you come REALLY close to doing when avoiding the visceral too self-consciously. I understand why you do it, fwiw, though, and I think that's part of why your writing works so well as writing.

I dunno, for me peak period AC is all about a kind of incoherence or inconsistence. Some of the best moments in their catalogue involve elements not fitting, or melodies that jar really strangely. I kinda think their absolute love of tinny trebbly production is sortof charming, especially in light of the recent steering of the band into freakfolk/pop-ambient fusion. Can't be bothered searching for it, but on some other thread Dominique said he liked Here Comes the Indian because it sounded like they were "on the verge of bursting into flames". There is a certain ad-hoc improvisatory feel about AC that necessitates an approach of hyperactive overproductivity, stylistic shifts and yeah, rubbish production standards. Still, I think that while their stuff isn't exactly beautifully mixed and mastered, their championing of Ariel Pink is kindof revealing. That fucked-tapes aesthetic most prevalent on Hollindagain seems like their trying to make this kind of fake archival music, like a pop noise canaxis or play.

― ❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉Plaxico❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉ (I know, right?), Thursday, May 21, 2009 10:54 AM

This I find this idea quite interesting; I guess I read many of these points as being signifiers of the psychedelic, though, and for me psychedelic music is VERY much about physical / sensual experience - I find fidelity to be a necessary ingredient of psychedelia, perhaps.

I'm very, very much against duality of body and mind.

If I'm honest I think a lot of uncompressed old music is too quiet and not flashy enough, too, and it's certainly not an appropriate production method for every type of music (I've never said it is), BUT, clarity and fidelity are key to me, and compression when overdone removes all the physicality I love about music because it stops me being able to hear the bits I want to hear.

Haha I can't really identify with Melissa's comment at all because if there's one thread I see running through most of Tim's writing it's him trying to theorise and articulate why a given record works on a visceral level. Possibly it helps that I mostly read his writing on either dance music or shiny commercial pop where the bottom line is "how does this sound facilitate the act of dancing with large groups of girls?"

Which in that case is surely *functional* and not visceral, Matt?

See I only come across Tim on here, and have to say that I agree with Melissa.

I'm vaguely feeling that music writing which tries to explain why people like something is just a failure 99% of the time, and that only stuff that tries to describe and contextualise works.

I think the reason I think the connection with Ariel Pink kindof points out this hauntological obsession with the decay of the medium. The physicality becomes more the physicality of the tape/record than of the recorded music. Its an aesthetic that displaces the fetishisation of the live performance with that of the record of it so that the record becomes a totemic index of the real event. It seems something that Noise is particularly attatched to as a strategy esp with the object-fetish strange object usb/floppy/limited tapes/cdr culture that is so prevalent, seems the corollary of record collector music, all good music in the past etc. A kind of provisional music that withholds itself intentionally maybe.

(sorry to keep talking about AC here and not coldplay/why tim is a rubbish poster)

How much is Boards Of Canada's "mildewed photo" approach to sonics related to that?

Noise culture isn't something I know anything about, I must confess; it seems very exclusive and alien to me, and I've always been far too much of a loner to get into any subcultures at all.

Kinda think that the Jane records (panda bear and scott mou) are the ideal entry into AC (berserker/coconuts)

Which in that case is surely *functional* and not visceral, Matt?

I'm not sure the two can be neatly separated especially when describing WHY something works. It's about working out what the catalyst is for the visceral reaction and then working out whether it works for you. The function is kind of the end point really. I'm not expressing this particularly well but I am specifically talking about posts like this that are full of theorising but also with the "and this is why it really works for me" thread running through.

I don't think functional/visceral can be split that easily Nick - a description is an explanation if someone reads it and thinks "yeah that sounds like something I'd enjoy." - ha xpost!

Turangalila, with regard to the food metaphor you are right - it's only what we don't know about how music works that makes it different from food. But this is why I don't like it as a metaphor: it's too easy to assume that the stuff we don't know will turn out to be exactly the same as for food, and tends to underrate the way in which the visceral experience of food doesn't just happen by itself. I wanted to stress this not because you don't know it, but because I thought it was worth stressing.

(also, I don't think you're implying a cartesian split, but I do think the metaphor now carries baggage, primarily from the many many times people have tried to make variations on the pop = fast food argument)

I was actually gonna make the same point as Matt - I sort of see a lot of my own writing as roundabout instructions for dancing. This is functional, visceral and discursive: you simply can't chop it up into separate categories. Dancing itself is a kind of critique: you're saying (deliberately or otherwise) that a certain use of your body is appropriate to the music.

Dancing itself is a kind of critique: you're saying (deliberately or otherwise) that a certain use of your body is appropriate to the music.

― Tim F, Thursday, May 21, 2009 11:36 AM (5 minutes ago) Bookmark

great line

Is that line not backwards, though? Is it not that the music is appropriate to a certain use of your body?

yeah, but that's criticism in a nutshell then

You've lost me. I can't do talking about criticism.

Well it's reciprocal I think: sometimes when a track comes on and I'm dancing I will think "...and I know exactly what manner of moving goes with this!"

(I was saying something similar to this re MC Shantie on the funky house thread: he seems to choose which particular chant he's going to use based on something he hears in the music. You know which tunes he really likes because he saves his best rhymes for them and delivers them more urgently)

There's actually a very obvious split here between communal listeners (Tim, myself, Deej, maybe Jordan) and individual listeners (Nick, Melissa, maybe Marcello) and I'm not sure there really needs to be. The comment I particularly disagree with is:

I'm vaguely feeling that music writing which tries to explain why people like something is just a failure 99% of the time, and that only stuff that tries to describe and contextualise works.

I suspect if it fails, it's more a failure of the writer than a problem with the endeavour itself. It's like the difference between a good DJ and a bad DJ is that the good DJ knows exactly when and how to push people's buttons and they can do that not just with one or two people but with hundreds of people at once.

There's that innate sensibility there that's common to most great bands as well, a lot of the music writers I like reading the most are better at articulating that sensibility (to take it away from the dancefloor, "why does this Radiohead song do its job so much better than this very similar Radiohead song?")

it's much easier to describe and contextualize than it is to be right about your explanation - i think that's why it's a failure 99% of the time - when someone can do that explanation consistently than they have transcended as a critic but very few people can

People only succeed if you agree with them, though...

The communal / individual listener split is a very, very good point.

does something really need to explain why something is good exactly? I think the best criticism opens your eyes to new ways of seeing a piece of music, in a way that actually brings that way of seeing alive. This can be about music that you enjoy as much as is possible already or music that you hitherto thought was shite.

there's a couple of writers i love because i'll agree with 90% of what they say but more importantly when i disagree, they've reasoned this well enough for me to not mind at all

there's also a couple of writers i love-to-hate because of their tendency to push their (imo wrong) opinions (often built on v flimsy subjection i.e. it saddens me when they've formulated their 'truth' based on such narrow or close-minded perception) so aggressively. cult of personality tho innit.

sadly this comparison cannot really be satisfyingly analogous to Coldplay vs Animal Collective (only that the former is "boring" and the latter "challenging")

Aye, agreed.

x-post.

I also think that the individual listeners are possibly more prone to over-emphasise the extent to which their reaction to a piece of music is unique to them* whereas if you put a few hundred Radiohead fans in a room and play Radiohead to them very loudly the chances are they'll be responding in similar ways.

*Of course it is unique for any number of reasons, chiefly individual associations with the music, but the best bands know how to tease these associations out and make them more affecting.

Like U2?

does something really need to explain why something is good exactly?

sure it does - i don't like MPP really but i understand it in the context of AC's career and i know what it sounds like - what i want to know is why people think it's better than other stuff that they've done (or, personally, why it's better than strawberry jam) so if someone's not willing to articulate why they (or 'people') think the album is good then i'm kind of just left out in the cold in terms of what i'm reading

think the best criticism opens your eyes to new ways of seeing a piece of music, in a way that actually brings that way of seeing alive.

explaining why something is good can do this

okay, what about criticism that persuades you as to the rubbishness of something, is that bad criticism?

People only succeed if you agree with them, though...

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy), Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:57 AM (3 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

why do u think this?? understanding why tim responds the way he does because he writes about it tells me one thing: how tim responds the way he does. why on earth would i expect it to always align w/ me?

if anything, simply describing music is becoming less & less effective as a strategy for writing about it because ppl have access to 'how it sounds' immediately.

a lot of the time I just read about music I really like in order to find out more music like it

okay, what about criticism that persuades you as to the rubbishness of something, is that bad criticism?

― ❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉Plaxico❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉❉ (I know, right?), Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:06 AM (46 seconds ago) Bookmark

no this would be particularly good criticism probably - it's not to say that if someone explains why they think something is good that it can't be seen as bad criticism - i.e. i've never read a good argument in favor of asher roth - or that if you agree w/ the person that it's automatically good - i.e. i've read tons of boring and wrong-headed arguments about why lil wayne is great, and i agree that he's great - it's just that i think the most thought can be provoked out of writer and reader when the writer is trying to explain why something is good

on a very basic level the problem is that most music writers don't know enough about music, i.e. on a technical level. have recently been re-reading max harrison's a jazz retrospect and what strikes me as so great (and refreshing) about it (as it did when i first read my dad's copy as a wee laddie) is the fact that he is able to go into very precise detail about what happens in a piece of music and why it happens and bring both logic and emotion forth from his analysis. likewise there's plenty to argue with in revolution in the head but imac for all his faults did a very real service in terms of explaining the chordal and harmonic structures of the beatles' songs and everything that happens in any specific recording.

in terms of opening the reader's eyes this sort of writing does work because there's an structural basis which actually gives writers' explanations some credence. it's a pity there's not more of it about now (i guess there's some in the rest is noise - which i'm looking forward to reading - but the talk from speedreading seems to be largely historical and cultural rather than technical as such (which doesn't mean that no strict analysis isn't in there; i just need to read it properly).

but of course dry technical explanations only go so far since the writer has to have a persuasive and perhaps inevitably argumentative character. a sense of humour helps too but not the snarky whacko guardian music type.

what 'problem' is there? seems to me a lot of ppl on this thread enjoy reading lots of different sorts of writing about music

How much is Boards Of Canada's "mildewed photo" approach to sonics related to that?

I suppose how I'd see the distinction lies in a similar realm to what I think you were getting at with all that physical/sensual experience. With Boards of Canada it always seems disembodied, like the whole thing is half remembered, the weird haze of invented nostalgia for something never experienced. In the case of something like Campfire Songs or Sung Tongs, the record almost seems like a scar of something real, something necessarily uncapturable through recording. Its interesting, because in a way this approach almost seems to give up before it starts, as thought it is making music around making music, almost incorporating the act of listening back into the music, the half remembered bits and blurs and slippages manifesting in disjointed fragmented performances and grainy lo-fi production.

So BoC is... a memory of a recording (or an attempt to conjure that sensation), and AC is a recording of a memory?

I've had Feels on, btw, and I've got that headache thing going on once again; as much as anything there are a lot of quite prolonged, upper-bass tones that might be causing it, I think.

I think its more that for BOC memory is something abstract and for AC it is something real/unreal

What's unreal if not abstract? Or vice versa.

The unpleasant bass tones are really prevalent in Banshee Beat and Daffy Duck. They're causing definite pain from temple to temple. I don't think it's something that I can get accustomed too, either, is the thing.

I don't think anyone can explain "why music is good", but they can explain why music can be good.

Jordan's point here is obvious-but-worth-repeating: the fact that there is no objective proper reaction to music doesn't mean that we can't react to it in substantially similar ways, and anticipate how other people will react.

On The-Dream vs Ne-Yo thread deej said a couple of times "Tim will adore this album" several months before I actually heard it, and surprise surprise it ended up my favourite album of last year.

When I describe my enjoyment it's in the hope that others will maybe recognise something in that description, either an actual enjoyment or a potential for future enjoyment. And if they don't enjoy the music (or don't think they will) maybe they'll get something out of it anyway (e.g. "yes, I've felt exactly that, only about this other record").

sorry about my last couple of posts they're pretty bad posts even by my AC stanning standards :-/

I think its more that for BOC memory is something abstract and for AC it is something real/unreal

Maybe BOC tap into a collective memory, whereas AC are exploring more individual stuff?

Collectivism is obviously quite an important part of AC though (it's in the name); but maybe it's more specific? Exclusionary?

I think the "memory of a recording"/"recording of a memory" distinction is a neat one.

More specifically, I think BoC give off that sense of intangibility that you get with memories you've half forgotten, like when you hear a song or smell something and you recognise it (and it prompts an odd sense of content-less nostalgia) but don't know what it is.

Whereas I think with that era of AC it's more like being thrown back into the memory but not understanding it.

With BoC meaning is obscured by the passage of time and the acquisition of knowledge; whereas with that era of AC it was more like meaning is denied because more time and knowledge are needed.

i don't understand the idea that sound/visceral experience is a somehow invalid or too subjective way to talk about music. i agree that you can do a better or worse job of describing it, but when you have a band like animal collective (or, say, times new viking, or the-dream) where the construction of the sound is at least as important as the melodies, voices and lyrics, then i don't know how you can sensibly talk about it without getting into its aural aesthetics or whatever you might call it. i think the comment about how not enough music writers know enough about music is plainly true, but in this case it's not just a matter of not being able to talk about chords or harmonic strategies or whatever -- it's really that we don't have a very good vocabulary for talking about sound, the ways it's constructed and layered, the ranges of high and low and middle (i.e., we mostly just tend to say "high end" or "low end" or "middle range"), all of these parts of the musical experience that interact with the more fundamental aspects of songwriting, singing and music-playing. and with a band like animal collective, who are conceived and constructed as a sonic experience -- or a set of sonic experiences -- that tends to leave critics grasping for an endless series of metaphors that skirt the edges of talking about why and how it works (or doesn't).

also, in the moments when i like animal collective least -- which the new album is full of -- they remind me sadly of rusted root. ("sadly," because i don't like being reminded of rusted root.) another band whose sound irritated me on a visceral level.

yeah, definitely agree with that - we've come a long way (and yet in some senses no way at all) since the sixties and this all needs to be taken into account (though really should have been in stockhausen/varese's day since the technology may have changed but its utilisation probably hasn't).

whether acts like the dream and AC actually deserve that sort of treatment (since neither significantly floats my boat) i'll leave to others to decide.

Da Capo here we come!

i prefer forever changes myself boom boom

OTM, the timbres of "Revelation" always unsettled me... that and the fact that it's shite

As soon as you talk about sound with any conviction people call you an audiophile and shun you.

I should know.

many music journals would do well to follow the example set by Hi Fi News who give two sets of ratings for all the cds they review; one for artistic quality and the other for recording/sound quality.

it depends on how much importance you place on it eg to what extent the parameters of execution devalue the concept. but even when you try to argue that a piece of music is (partly or entirely) bad because of how it sounds someone else will likely argue the opposite xpost

Of course it would be "If you like the recording/sound quality of this CD then you'll like the recording/sound quality of these CDs" or "The recording/sound quality of this album influenced/ was influenced by the recording/sound quality of these albums"

also i think ben watson still reviews cds for Hi Fi News, which is another example that many music journals would do well to follow.

So that's where he went

Going out with a bang and olufsen

Except that audio people laugh at B&O.

As soon as you talk about sound with any conviction people call you an audiophile and shun you.

The fear being that you're actually Lou Reed

i believe AC do use Benson amplifiers...

rock are better and way less overrated than hip hop. that hippity hoppity hurts my ears! unpleasant frequencies!

not nearly enough geir on this thread

The ever germane geir.

Germane music lost it's way when it abandoned the melodics of Werner Von Beethoven for the harsh clangs of Einsturgruppenfuhrer Neubauten et al

... sorry Marcello, stealing your shtick there

for a minute there i thought you were doing david "hello thaar" jacobs...

then he went all Pete Murray...

"A vote for Labour is a vote for Communism. May God have mercy on your soul if you vote Labour"
(Pete Murray at the 1983 Tory election rally)

many music journals would do well to follow the example set by Hi Fi News who give two sets of ratings for all the cds they review; one for artistic quality and the other for recording/sound quality.

the only problem there is the implication that they can be separated. in some cases, yes -- you can say that magic is a middling bruce springsteen album rendered unlistenable by crap production. but in the case of, e.g., animal collective (and psychedelic music in general, tho obv. not only psychedelic music), "sound quality" is a deliberate and inextricable part of the "artistic quality." or think about the first wu-tang album and the absurdity of segregating its sound from its art.

I don't think AC's music would be altered beyond intention by just... mixing it a bit better.

maybe not, but the way it's mixed is a deliberate artistic choice (and a totally valid thing to talk about from a critical perspective).

i'd like to know AC's actual views on mixing and other technical areas

http://thequietus.com/articles/00971-animal-collective-interviewed-merriweather-post-pavillion-baltimore-and-dirty-hippies

It was interesting for me that I was given your new album on the same day I was given the last Cure album (4:13 Dream) and I spent all weekend listening to them back to back. It was interesting because The Cure album is probably the most over-compressed thing I've ever heard in my life and it is impenetrable because of it, to the extent that it's hard to differentiate between tracks. But with your album, even though there is so much more going on on it, it is so much easier on the ears. Do you have a philosophy that makes you keep the recording process quite simple?

Dave: "I think we're very fortunate in a way with recording. We're very conscious of how our music is produced and we pretty much are the producers and we have a hand in everything. But also the people we work with - right down to mastering and mixing - has an old school… I don't really want to say anti-internet way of approaching mastering a record but everybody is aware that our music has a lot of dynamics to it I guess. And we like to preserve that dynamic because we are primarily a live band, even though we appreciate and like to be in the studio in a way our music is created for us playing live."

Brian: "But when we play live we like to have the loud moments and we like to have the quiet moments and if we compress everything there is none of that and it doesn't feel natural. We like our music to feel natural basically."

Dave: "Now basically all the engineers we work with mastering and recording are against the 'loudness war' as everyone seems to be calling it. Especially in the mainstream commercial radio where there seems to be a school of thought that the louder a piece of music is the bigger the impact it will have on listeners just because people are listening to music so fast these days and moving from one thing to the next so quickly that there was this idea for a while that if in the middle of all this information your thing would be the loudest that people could hear then people would stop and listen to it for a while. You see that with the Metallica record and I don't know about The Cure album but there seems to be a backlash against it in America, where even non-musical sources such as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times have started writing articles about the downward trend in audio quality in music because of the digital loudness in competition. We've always worked with people who saw that coming."

Brian: "We didn't really start out to be the type of people who are like 'Oh, it must be as loud as it can be - just crank it!' you know? We've always been more about having dynamics and quiet and acoustic stuff and stuff that's a little more crazy. We never really even thought we had the amplifiers to actually do that to start with. And from that point of view we like to keep that thought process intact as we start to make new music."

all of which would seem to indicate that AC probably work better as a live act.

thanks nick, that's kinda what i expected

SUSpected, rather

Yeah it's an intuitive thing rather than any conscious quest for perfection. I do get the feeling that the records sound like they do by accident rather than by design, they just want to get all the sounds down. Kind of like when you do an exam paper and you just regurgitate all the stuff you revised in one big disorganised splurge of an answer. But it's totally in character, and as such is a valid approach, so I don't have a problem with that.

That's really interesting (the Quietus quotes) because... well... I don't hear it as a live or natural sound at all. Or... maybe I do, but it's the kind of live sound that puts me off going to gigs. Yes, there are obviously louder bits and quieter bits in songs, and dynamics are great and all, but my beef with compression isn't just that it irons out dynamics, it's that it crunches fidelity, blurs aural focus.

I don't have a problem with the philosophy that's been outlined, NickB, the "cram it all in" splurge thing, I just... because of the way the music makes me react my assumption is that they're just not that good at executing it. Which is unfair because it's obviously a subjective phenomenon I'm experiencing (although clearly not unique).

"because of the way the music makes me react my assumption is that they're just not that good at executing it."

this is how i feel. whenever i have listened to animal collective my opinion is always the same: i just don't think that they are very good at what they do.

which is why i don't have any strong feelings for or against them. i just listen to other stuff by people who are really good at what they do.

I'm conflicted though, because, as mentioned, so many people seem to get so much from it, and it's not that it's just a genre that's not to my taste, that I could be not bothered about and ignore, it's that this, superficially at least, screams "I am aimed at, nay, perfect for, the unique demographic of Nick".

could you just sort of... get over that?

perhaps they made it as a cruel joke on you personally

no doubt they're laughing right now

is there actually anything out there that sounds like MPP (forget the way they sing/vocals, i mean instrumentally) but better? i guess i'm interested in something as hazy as 'Holiday' production-wise (keeping the bells and chimes, layered droning etc. but with little if any cap doffing to Noise) but with stronger euphoric vibe, approaching pop...and more synthetic than say Caribou. a tripper Tough Alliance would be a related thing.

If I just got over it, who would Ronan have to bitch at like a little girl?

louis, pipecock, marcello

x-post is calling someone a little girl supposed to be insulting?

You baby.

hahahaha

stop bitching at Animal Collective like a resplendent quetzel

ronan and i are tight

yeah i've not bitched at lj like a little girl in recent memory....

wait til he moves in

just saying, if nick got over it, LJs still there to bitch at like a little girl, if you wanted

good to know.

lolololol blueski

i think i was once referred to as "ilx's girlfriend" :(

maybe you could clean the fucking kitchen once in awhile

Better than being referred to as ilx's little girl though

is there actually anything out there that sounds like MPP (forget the way they sing/vocals, i mean instrumentally) but better? i guess i'm interested in something as hazy as 'Holiday' production-wise (keeping the bells and chimes, layered droning etc. but with little if any cap doffing to Noise) but with stronger euphoric vibe, approaching pop...and more synthetic than say Caribou. a tripper Tough Alliance would be a related thing.

― Hard House SugBanton (blueski), Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:19 PM (1 hour ago) Bookmark

gang gang dance, high places, pocahaunted, Deradoorian?

Gang Gang Dance is a good example of an ILX-feted contemporary electronic rock act whose music gets it right where MPP got it wrong, IMO.

ggd are getting the kudos just as they hit their stride, whereas ac just got noticed on the way down from their best work

what I don't quite get is how this record came out, got straight 9's etc etc, a couple of people brought up KID A (i.e. "like a KID A for the end of the 00's...") and they broke a little bit more mainstream (bars & coffeeshops might play AC now there is a bit more explicit hint of dance/bass in there) a touch of commercial progress, some immediate snarking went on and maybe every now & then a thread may get bumped for someone to say "i saw them LIVE! it was good, but I was OF COURSE already a fan.." and a few people might say "it's ok, not all that, prefer the earlier stuff"

a couple of months later, the only people REALLY still actively discussing it, and bizarrely obsessed with it's reputation (with critics, tastemakers, hipsters, populous) are the haters?

Everyone else has kind of got a life, moved on, once in a while might wonder how it'll place at EOY poll time but otherwise....

MPP is a pretty kickass record imo, brothersport is maybe their best song.

I guess if this thread can stem all the other threads being polluted by bullshit, by gathering all the poor impulse control ppl in one place Marissa Marchant style then fair enough it has reason reason to exist (and be at the top of page all week long W.T.F.ILX? )

i kinda blame grady/roxy for about 70% of ilx ac backlash btw

or move to http://www.ilxor.com/ILX/NewAnswersControllerServlet?boardid=58

feh.

I've never heard a single one of these bands.

Some AC songs but no gang gang dance yet. i think the thing that puts me off about animal collective every time is the band name.

fandango atm you are the worst kind of butthurt and i say that as someone whose butt has been hurt aplenty

I just listened to some of M.P.P. while playing I.S.S. and it was G.O.O.D.!

Would I like G.G.D.?

i think you'd get on fairly well with them, yes

high places, pocahaunted, Deradoorian

i'll check these out thanks. gang gang i see as different enough from AC i guess - more rhythmic/beats/loops-based, less psychedelic?

" this is how i feel. whenever i have listened to animal collective my opinion is always the same: i just don't think that they are very good at what they do.

which is why i don't have any strong feelings for or against them. i just listen to other stuff by people who are really good at what they do."

OTM.

altho Pocahaunted is srsly a much worse name than Animal Collective

Gang Gang Dance are another band like AC for me where I just can't understand why people are so apeshit over them.

altho Pocahaunted is srsly a much worse name than Animal Collective

I'd be ashamed to go out with a name like that

LJ I just think the haters are seriously overestimating the kudos to be personally gained by tattooing "HEY STRANGER! I STRONGLY DISLIKE THIS BAND FOR THE FOLLOWING VALID IMO REASONS!! GOURANGA!!" on their foreheads and charging into anyone with ears until NO ONE IS LEFT IN DOUBT as to their feelings.

Everyone else is just like... dudes wth?

It's an easily ignorable indie band, not a behemoth of a cultural movement changing life itself, it's not punk vs. prog, there's not that much at stake, it's er... ok not to like it you don't really need to keep on saying it. ta.

does anyone know of a good tattoo removal service

it's not punk vs. prog

punk vs. prog wasn't even punk vs. prog

this thread has been about a lot of things today u guyz

man, this thread, so many pointless challops....

I like Animal Collective, they've been consistently interesting since Sung Tongs at least and despite some missteps here and there just from a production/compositional standpoint I find their material engaging. The one Gang Gang Dance album, Saint Dymphna, I downloaded (at the behest of ILM) was fucking horrible, just a mess of half-shaped ideas badly executed, don't really see the comparison at all.

I only know Coldplay from their inescapable singles and don't find anything interesting about them. They aren't actively irritating in the way that, say, Katy Perry is, but I don't really have any use for innocuous stadium balladry.

It's an easily ignorable indie band, not a behemoth of a cultural movement changing life itself, it's not punk vs. prog, there's not that much at stake, it's er... ok not to like it you don't really need to keep on saying it. ta.

also, this. Animal Collective is probably on the radar of like 2% of the total US listening population.

I liked that God Put a Smile upon your Face single

anyway like I said, with any luck this thread might keep all the shit posts in one shit place now.

feel free to bump all previous threads with same AC anti-stanning in just to be an unfunny set of penises tho'

I had been a total AC stan up until Strawberry Jam which is not really that bad but when I heard Fireworks for the first time I was pretty fucking disappointed. MPP took a while, but it put me back in.

such gorgeously poignant observations by fandango. especially considering the latter half of the thread had little to do with ac. weird how he always shows up when "retarded" threads comes up. asshole.

you know this thread was pretty alright until he showed up actually

dont know if ive mentioned this before, but once i ran into whiney g. weingarten at an animal collective concert

did you pounce on him?

irl sb

but when I heard Fireworks for the first time I was pretty fucking disappointed

whyzat? Fireworks still stands up for me as one of their high points, even though Strawberry Jam as a whole is a bit of a step down, more in terms of being unsatisfied by the, uh, sound-world and headspace it creates than songwriterly issues, I guess.

Nick, I wonder, have you heard Danse Manatee? I worry for what they could do to your head when they're trying to fuck you up with weird frequencies.

Yeah, Danse Manatee is brilliant, I hated it forever and now I kinda love it, not that I play it a ton.

perhaps because it pisses me off that ILM is so awful most of the time these days (more than it used to be IMO), often due to the "contributions" of some posters who should/used to know better.

carry on anyway! I'm sure the thread will get on fine and sorry if I interrupted.

besides, the idea that I'm capable of influencing any of the negative posters on here is laughable. I'm a total minnow in ILM terms compared to some of the big "internet personalities" on here. If someone wants to call me asshole though fine, I'm beyond caring about someone thinking I'm a knob for pointing out horrible behaivour. I mostly just try not to post at all now.

and yeah i'll try harder (auto-writing joke).

I don't really love Coldplay, but agree they're overhated I suppose. Happy now? back on topic whatever.

http://www.allenbukoff.com/newwavepsychology/objects/BrowniePointBackXL.jpg

thanks I guess, I'm not looking to be liked but I don't take any delight or pleasure in being (internet)hated either though.

I wasn't aware I'd got your particular goat up so badly tbh, but my last 6 months of ILM posts have probably been generally crude, combative & bitter so it's hardly surprising someone's taken dislike, Oh well :/

Turangalila fwiw I'd like *someone* to voice an opinion on the Dirty Projectors/Bjork stuff... I haven't dared listen yet :(

also, this. Animal Collective is probably on the radar of like 2% of the total US listening population.

― Wrinkles, I'll See You On the Other Side (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, May 21, 2009 12:53 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark

2% seems generous imo.

Merriweather Post Pavilion The Billboard 200 13
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Canadian Albums 25
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Independent Albums 2
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Internet Albums 13

dunno what % that is :/

13 is pretty high, America is way alt.

Did their album even go top 40 in the UK?

Animal Collective is probably on the radar of like 2% of the total US listening population.

The same people who believe in "enhanced interrogation techniques," displaying the Ten Commandments on public buildings, and Mitt Romney.

I think it's pretty clear that AC garner hate above and beyond because they represent for better or worse an entire set of impulses within (let's call it) indie-rock, and they have been made flag-bearers for that sense of restless innovation that sillier critics and fans believe belongs uniquely to their patch.

Not everyone hating in this thread does so for the above reason, and probably no-one hates only for this reason, but I think it's what lifts the level of ire overall to a point where unusually large amounts of negativity can be sustained.

It's a lot like how Tom used to describe anything that was over-praised for being a hammy, overly-weighty "dynamics"-filled version of itself "the GYBE! of <x>"

I think Tim is right. What's funny about such hate, however, is that Animal Collective is hardly representative (sonically and otherwise) of the "status quo" indie rock bands that have been abundantly present this decade. They are atypical of indie rock itself, but have been championed by indie rock fans and critics. But I don't think their music or overall approach fits the indie rock tag.

I'm pretty sure the hate for AC exists just on this thread.

There's a time I would have bothered to search for the evidence contrary to that claim, but instead I'll just believe that I dreamt the last 6 months instead.

ahhh much better.

I like how Coldplay is one of the most boring bands of all time and their name really fits that.

I love Animal Collective but i can see people not liking them because of the vocals for the same reason they might have a bad reaction to quirky indie comedy movie X.

You're right, I also hated Punch Drunk Love and suspect I would have hated Garden State. (I kinda think The Shins are over-rated too.)

But who knows—it took me roughly 15 years of listening before I was like, y'know, Pet Sounds really is a pretty decent album. And I still think Sgt. Pepper is kinda a crap record. So AC might just be made for people who aren't me, and I'm pretty much fine with that (I mostly only pop in because frequently folks recommend bands that are similar, but that I enjoy for whatever reasons.)

Merriweather Post Pavilion The Billboard 200 13
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Canadian Albums 25
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Independent Albums 2
Merriweather Post Pavilion Top Internet Albums 13

dunno what % that is :/

That #13 debut was the result of 24,684 copies moved, which is 0.008% of the U.S. population.

(Obviously, they've added to that figure since then, and lots of people have illegally downloaded the record, but let's not get ahead of ourselves.)

That's interesting, I loved Punch Drunk Love almost in spite of myself. And I was similarly deeply sceptical of Animal Collective and was very surprised when I discovered I really liked them. That particular comparison feels right to me for some reason.

I just meant at times I think they can come across as quirky in a very self-aware way. I like them cos this doesn't really bother me a whole lot and I can find things in their music that have depth and beauty beyond their surface eccentricities. But I can see people thinking its too gimmicky to approach.

That #13 debut was the result of 24,684 copies moved, which is 0.008% of the U.S. population.

but 100 percent of the population of boca del mar, florida.

(unincorporated)

punch drunk love is great fwiw

dont know why im still reading this thread

i do like 'my girls'

animal collective easy. i don't even like them that much but i have sung tongs and it's kinda cool, if you want a sorta stoner campfire jamboree vibe...

basically i could totally see listening to that album of my own accord and would never really waste the time listening to coldplay. even though clocks is pretty dope.

dont know why im still reading this thread

Kidding, right? This thread is gold.

stuff like this is pretty tight for animal collective though, cuz damn i remember back in the day they just seemed to be like the folky goofball band that my noise dude friends liked, like ppl who buy angels of light records and stuff...so i guess they blew up big enuff to be like a hated in the nation indie strawman type thing, like arcade fire or shins, so they must be doing okay money wise, good for them.

Would I like G.G.D.?

― Sickamous Mouthall (Scik Mouthy)

Oh fuck yes. This is coming to you tonight, Mr. Mouthy, along with that Cluster album.

That #13 debut was the result of 24,684 copies moved, which is 0.008% of the U.S. population.

Zipf's Law u r a bitch.

Cluster>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>GGD

haha obv, but ggd is good

cluster>>>>>most cunts to be fair.

Both of these bands are doing the same thing in different ways: pining for the death of a mode of communication they were/are infatuated with. All of the things that music meant/could mean in their experience are now impossible and past.

Animal Collective approach this dilemma from an "organic" (or one could say - and I have said - half-assed), submissive angle. In the most flattering terms their music can be said to be praying for Music as defined and experienced in their lives and now comparatively dead/gone/lost. And whatever technical or sonic arguments you want to make can be put down to Doing Their Best/Being True to Themselves. Personally, their failings in this area make them unsatisfactory Trappists for the Old Days of comprehensible release, reception and review cycles.

Coldplay have struggled to embody those days directly, to deny that arena rock is a ghost and that you can't have your own tour plane and play in front of tens of thousands of people every night for three months. And...they have succeeded in denying and totally surpassing the loser-dom of music criticism. They are doing all of the things that huge rock bands have done since forever ago. A great number of people clearly want them to do and be that thing. But people only seem to want the descendants of U2 to be that thing. Which is very odd and hard to figure out.

Animal Collective's success and renown is thanks to the fractious insecurity of people who use music as a component of their identity. I think this truth is becoming so self-evident and worrisome that, as mentioned above, the "haters" cannot stop hating. What they're actually doing is working through the uncomfortable itch that possibly none of the music they're so hotly contesting means dick in the scheme of things. And this hurts Animal Collective doubly because their audience is that fickle, and primarily concerned with familiarity - with being able to discuss the band, rather than acquire and/or submit to them as Fans.

Coldplay are the sonic and behavioral embodiment of the opposite mindset, of consumer satisfaction. They give you what you want - yearing verse, crashing chorus - more succinctly than anyone else out there. And that does not preclude their music being beautiful and emotionally resonant. The emotional responses to both bands are the same. One is just better at getting to the point.

oh, you're a treat.

Wanting to sound like U2 is not a bad thing if you make better music than other people who try to rip them off, just like wanting to sound like awesome '60s psych is not a good thing if you make worse music than other people who try to rip it off

rip it off and start again

I must admit, having been playing MPP loads more now I have the CD, that it's growing on me. Still a vague headache dread, mind.

That may be because I'm expecting nastiness and thus clenching too tight.

http://www.whydidigowrong.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/invasion-of-the-body-snatchers-donald-sutherland.jpg

At the risk of sounding like an uncultured luddite, what is that still from? I know its from a film I should know well, but I don't.

don't look now?

'79 version of Invasion of the Body Snatchers

hahahahahahahahahahaha

er '78

Ah, thanks. I saw that version when I was really young, I remembered getting a very familiar feeling when it first popped up as a meme but I could never place it.

Guess that makes me an idiot, huh Sick?

What, like me?

No, just felt like you were being a bit of a dick the other day on a couple threads. Usually you are one of the few ILXors with posts that I regularly enjoy reading.

cee-oh-tee-tee OTM on Animal Collective's fickle audience hurting them. those sales numbers up there seemed pretty low to me considering how much i see written about them and how 'they've blown up' now and all. good thing they've got a successful tour going!

I can see the cultural significance of giving Coldplay props for being huge overblown rockstars. But if you take them for that -- and here's where I've realized the brilliant pairing in this thread -- they represent a traditional music industry hedonism and this is definitely something of the past and not the future.

lol @ Coldplay being the new Warrant

But if you take them for that -- and here's where I've realized the brilliant pairing in this thread -- they represent a traditional music industry hedonism and this is definitely something of the past and not the future.

If somebody is living in the past, quotes like this one shows that dance/hip-hop fans more than "rock" fans are the ones that do so. They seem to think the world is still in 1991, and haven't realized that the genres they thought were dead in 1991 have been alive and kicking since the mid 90s and probably always will be.

no genre will ever be dead

except what animal collective are, god willing

Animal Collective are every genre.

fuck music imo

― note: any and all comma splices in this post are intentional (Curt1s Stephens), Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:23 AM (2 months ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

shit is a lost cause, evacuate

― note: any and all comma splices in this post are intentional (Curt1s Stephens), Thursday, March 19, 2009 3:24 AM (2 months ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

No, just felt like you were being a bit of a dick the other day on a couple threads. Usually you are one of the few ILXors with posts that I regularly enjoy reading.

― homage is parody gone sour (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, May 22, 2009 6:28 PM (Yesterday)

My apologies; my dickhead days are far fewer and far between now, but they still occur.

I'm actually quite enjoying this record now. Still think Strawberry Jam's pretty much unlistenable shite, mind.

no it really is

So I opened MPP up on my (much neglected) proper big hi-fi earlier on. I've not really listened to anything on the big rig in ages, for various reasons, but today we got rid of a sofa we'd been waiting for to leave, and it mean that the speakers were in free space again.

And... I feel like a fucking prat now... I take back pretty much all I said about MPP earlier. It was fucking magical. This is the strangest relationship I've had with a record ever.

!

Zipf's Law u r a bitch.

― caek, Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:39 PM (2 days ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

Well, more like no one buys records anymore:

1 SWIFT*TAYLOR FEARLESS 62,575
2 BEYONCE I AM...SASHA FIERCE 50,927
3 NICKELBACK DARK HORSE 45,031
4 WEST*KANYE 808S & HEARTBREAK 39,234
5 TWILIGHT SOUNDTRACK 33,066
6 COLE*KEYSHIA DIFFERENT ME 31,275
7 SPEARS*BRITNEY CIRCUS 30,825
8 FOXX*JAMIE INTUITION 30,270
9 NOTORIOUS SOUNDTRACK 28,989
10 CAREY*MARIAH BALLADS 28,670
11 VARIOUS NOW 29 26,554
12 BIRD*ANDREW NOBLE BEAST 25,741
13 ANIMAL COLLECTIVE MERRIWEATHER POST PAVILION 24,684

lol that probably means i have to like it too now ;-)

enjoyed some beers tonight

i meant nick southall coming round to it, because i am his padawan or whatever it is someone said

and yeah, beers were very much enjoyed. great night.

god bless...this mess

how about you? mixed feelings about the rugby, or Irish solidarity?

What a funny turn of events. I had a similar experience to Scik's with Closer years back. YAY music.

It's no good at all. It's like someone thought oh I know what techno lacks, riverdancing

i think it's more like they thought riverdancing lacked techno.

the hey-nonny-nonny-ness of the melody at the beginning of brothersport is just so wrong!

I dunno, for me it doesn't really bring to mind images of Frodo clutching his waistcoat and bobbing up and down, but if it did I might not mind that.

Right at the start of In The Flowers is someone very quietly going "riverdance, riverdance, riverdance"??

I think what this benefitted from most, to me, was 3d space, proper stereo-imaging. See fig.1.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v236/njsouthall/animalcollective.jpg

Fig.1.

I had been listening to this on the Zeppelin, which has a sound image represented by the pink loop; timbre is ace, bass is phenomenal, but stereo-imaging is pretty pants simply because it's all in one place.

Playing it back on the big hi-fi, and it goes like the yellow and blue loops, and suddenly all this tightly-packed, unfocused mess is pulled outwards and upwards and it goes from being headache-inducing to very fucking psychedelic indeed and also extremely euphoric, which is what everyone was saying but which I was totally not hearing. The loopy riff at the start of Summertime Clothes! When it's swinging left to right across all that space! Wow. Better than Mercury Rev now.

As much as "getting" MPP, this has also meant that I've rediscovered my hi-fi, which I love dearly and have really neglected since last July when we got the Zeppelin; all my listening's either been on the Zeppelin or next door on my headphones or little speakers, or else at work, and stuff often does just need to be listened to through big speakers that are far apart so you can pull things apart and hear it all properly.

I'm now playing it through my AKGs which I don't think I'd done before either, and they have a pretty massive soundstage too, and I'm hearing / enjoying a lot more here too. Still think it needs the speakers over headphones, though, for full impact, which isn't my usual preference. Getting slight headache off this, too.

Also time of year was probably important here too; this came out in january, having leaked in November; it's a summer album, it needs the windows open.

Wait till you hear the Patrick Wolf album if you think this is a bit Frodo-dancing.

I should probably mention that part of the motivation for sticking it on the hi-fi was the fact that my little sort-of brother-in-law managed to spill a glass of water over the hi-fi in the night on Friday/Saturday, and I wanted to see if it still worked.

I admit I enjoy these road to Damascus conversions of yours, Nick.

I think this was the most painful so far! But, y'know, sometimes that's what's wicked about music, having something you'd dismissed suddenly open up to you.

Nick Southall, can I come to your house and listen to your stereo?

Yeah sure, but wait a couple of weeks until the other half of the sofa arrives.

interesting really. i don't think i know what it's like to only get/like a record after hearing it on a big/good enough system.

It feels like a salad of elation and embarrassment.

Curtis I wrote you an email. Please look for it. Thanking U.

So glad I persevered with MPP. This thread may be a little tense at times but it did a great job of pushing me to try again. I pretty much flat-out love this record now. Still occasional headache issues but lessening, and there's a sense that it's worth it now.

next stop - get lex to like it ;)

hell now i feel confused

It feels like a salad of elation and embarrassment.

Dare I ask what the appropriate dressing would be.

I think my objections stand; Scik has a way of liking anything if it sounds good, and no man can have that much stereo hardware and not find a means of making pretty much anything into a cavern of aural bliss

;)

Also time of year was probably important here too; this came out in january, having leaked in November; it's a summer album, it needs the windows open.

Mouthy, thanks for the "conversion" report, very interesting stuff. And I'll second the comment above, which is very OTM. I need to pull Merriweather out again, it's been a couple months since I've played it.

I realize I still owe you that Cluster record and will have it to you shortly.

Not wanting to sound like Geir, but a big pull here is the melodies, actually; they're just, like, sung backwards, and buried underwater. But when they get in your head... If people covered these songs in bog standard indie pop fashion with a touch of synth this'd be Geir's favorite record ever. Or not.

i'm no coldplay fan, but MPP is try-too-hard-y. A couple songs work, but these dudes need to reign their shit in a bit more and stop being so annoying in that look-how-goddamn-clever-I-am sort of way.

sometimes that's true. but it's also true that coldplay should press outward a bit more and stop being so boring in that we're-writing-comfortable-MOR-songs-in-the-prime-of-our-career sort of way.

haha i had this thread bookmarked for some reason

trying too hard vs. not trying hard enough

yep. i'd say that's actually the debate in a nutshell.

i think you guys are trying too hard on this thread, whereas i'm all chris martin just chilling out thinking about poverty and watching my wife blog

chris martin, you need better hobbies.

i also write songs

the indie band trying to be coldplay is grizzly bear.

i also write songs

really? that's exciting. can you share the lyrics of one of your "song compositions"?

i'm writing a song discouraging ppl from eating burgers due to the carbon footprint. i've got my researchers looking up cattle farming in south america but its a bit of a ballache tbh, might just let my wife sing one of the songs she's written, she's got a new perspective on things

'sing' = intone, 'songs' = blog entries

i think the proposition in the thread title stands a very good chance of being true. i won't wager on it for a few years, though.

Coldplay are trying perfectly as hard as they should. Trying to be as creative as possible without ever losing sight of the catchy singalong choruses that should always be the essence of quality pop music.

otm

Someone needs to take over the songwriting duties from Mr Martin. That would be the first step.

these dudes need to reign their shit in a bit more

Really? To those who've heard Here Comes the Indian, Danse Manatee, etc., I'd wager that MPP is pretty reigned in already!

I will gain an appreciation for Anco by listening to the live audience recordings available for free on archive.org, y/n?

doubtful, somewhat dependant on the era of the recording.

Trying to be as creative as possible without ever losing sight of the catchy singalong choruses that should always be the essence of quality pop music

coldplay, the latest in a long line of acts carefully crafting catchy singalong choruses.

I GET KNOCKED DOWN BUT I GET UP AGAIN THEY AIN'T NEVER GONNA LET ME DOWN.

or GET ME DOWN or whatever chumbawumbawumba says in that stupid, catchy singalong chorus.

if you asked me to list defining characteristics of Coldplay's music, "catchy singalong choruses" would appear somewhere after "can act as a substitute for fire"

Trying to be as creative as possible without ever losing sight of the catchy singalong choruses that should always be the essence of quality pop music

UNIIITED UNIIITED UNIIITED WE STAND

So you're saying that Chris Martin is smokin' hot, right?

xpost

coldplay only started learning to write catchy singalong choruses on Viva La Vida and they still aren't that catchy or singalong

I'm saying you haven't had steak until you've had one charbroiled using "Clocks"

coldplay only started learning to write catchy singalong choruses on Viva La Vida

Um...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAME8GDRTfI

said "catchy singalong choruses", not "catchy singalong verses"

yeah - "Yellow" does not have a chorus per se

? Of course it does, the completely indecipherable bit starting at 1:30 is the chorus

the completely indecipherable bit starting at 1:30 is the chorus

This sounds like something people would say about AnCo!

Maybe the two bands have waaaaaayy more in common that we're willing to admit?

no. they have less.

BOTH SHIT

TRUE

in fairness, the only ppl who don't shit are folks with colostomy bags

THEY STILL SHIT, HI DERE, THE SHIT IS JUST IN A DIFFERENT PLACE

why am i yelling about shit

why am i yelling about shit

New ILM board description?

"Yellow" is a pretty MPP song really.

MPP is saved by its wacky sonics not because they're wacky (or "clever") but perhaps because it prevents them from seeming so obviously recuperable for marketing purposes, which I think is what haunted pretty much all of Coldplay's catchier songs until "Vida La Vida". I'm not quite sure why "Vida La Vida" escapes this and is so obviously good - I suspect it's because for once the verses feel really... what's that word when you're simultaneously poised/tense/bouyant like a diver about to jump? Anyway that rather than simply stomping the pre-chorus-build into you.

Sounding like an ad campaign doesn't upset me because of lol advertising per se. It's more that sense that the song feels depersonalised even before it is depersonalised (see also Travis's "Why Does It Always Rain On Me", which I've always thought is even worse in this regard; typical chart-pop doesn't suffer this problem for reasons that should be obv to all by now). In the case of "Yellow" the very first time I heard it I immediately imagined how I would feel when hearing it soundtrack an ad campaign for some charity appeal in five years time, which meant any reaction to the song had to pass through an unpleasant time/space continuum.

AnCo will fall into this trap as soon as someone learns how to use "My Girls" to soundtrack ads for milk supplements for babies.

suppliments obv.

pedantry here ok but: if it were "Vida La Vida" it might be excusable. It's "Viva La Vida," though, which makes Coldplay the English Lenny Kravitz.