Arcade Fire on NPR haha

FUGAZI -- NPR's Madeline Brand talks with Ian Mackaye of Fugazi, a seminal punk rock band. Their new album is called End Hits It's their ninth album in the last 11 years... and as they've done from the beginning, they've recorded and sold their records themselves, shunning the record industry. The band says you can be artistically and economically independent and still succeed. (10:30)

Or, of course, considering the album's title...

Really, though, death or no death, Funeral is an incredible album and is deserving of a mention on NPR. Shit, they play Four Tet in between shows.

Oh fuck off, emo boy!

i think he was talking about some kind of subtle emotional core that the arcade fire strikes in young people these days that has contributed to their popularity -- however i'm pretty sure what made them popular was ... well ... pfork

But I'm sure they didn't expect *so many* people to ask about it because they didn't expect the album to be this big.

right, but i'm pretty sure that, relative or not, their popularity was definitely a talking point in the interview.

sorry, didn't mean to inundate the thread with idiot pfork talk - go back to talking amongst yourselves

This is just good shit. I wish Ryan Schiririeber hated it, that way I could enjoy my favorite album of the year in peace.

There's so much undue weight heaped upon the "Pitchfork Record of the Year."

Oh, and Broken Social Scene is BORING on record and even worse live.

maybe this year but explain the universal disregard for the rapture long before PFM put it at #1.

Call it Arcade Fire backlash-backlash.

the rapture was number one, but the hype was all on bss. besides, both of those albums were SNORES. i think the difference this time around -- and, also in the case of turn on the bright lights two years ago -- is that the record they're throwing bones at is actually good.

bottom line: while what pitchfork has to say about a record may matter a bit more than other outlets, we overestimate their sway.

BUT, really, i'm only undercutting that bottom line by having this discussion.

-- daria g (daria_gra...), January 6th, 2005. (daria g)

I just found it funny that I went to check the non-punk-rock thread and this thread was right below it on my new answers list..

not that I like it at all, but still.

but, uh, haven't they gotten a big multimedia push? Seeing as we're talking about them due to pitchfork?

did the postal service license out their songs for comercials or anything?

hello, soundtracks!

but, uh, haven't they gotten a big multimedia push? Seeing as we're talking about them due to pitchfork?

I think he means more like ads on radio, TV, mainstream non-music mags, stence. as snarky as it's tempting to be, I doubt Merge bought the Pitchfork review.

If you count Pitchfork, blogs, minor magazine coverage and NPR to be major media outlets, uh sure.

But I mean major television and radio exposure.

xpost

The Arcade Fire should look into getting one of their tunes in an iPod ad.

I think the truth is that there is something particular about them and their particular style that is pretty unique. It's not just same-old indie rock. Also, this year there wasn't that much good indie IMO. There are only a couple really new-sounding indie records I've heard in the last many months and funeral is one of them.

Well, most any indie-ish artist is a cult artist, but The Fiery Furnaces seem as though they've been designed for maximum cult worship on virtually every level of their existence.

That's an interesting point, but how so? Because they're not interested in promotion, or because they make albums that reward obsessive, repeated listenings and comparisons between versions, or something else?

Personally, I hope the Furnaces could reach beyond the cult because I expect more from listeners. One reason I was glad they cited the Who as an influence for Blueberry Boat is that it implied - or I inferred - that the album wasn't that strange, that it wasn't any more unlistenable than the Who and that rock didn't have to be defined as narrowly and simply as, say, the Strokes, or Jet. That being complicated or original in rock didn't mean you had to go in a ghetto. Imagine if instead of the Who, they said they were influenced by, I dunno, the kind of experimental/classical artists that Jim O'Rourke likes to namecheck ... I don't get that kind of exclusivity from them. But I could be totally missing your point.

I mean - I know about them. I have read things about the way the two albums differ. And I would like to hear Gallowsbird's Bark. I'm just not desperate to at the moment, which is odd, when I love Blueberry Boat so much.

Based on the buzz so far, the Shins are maybe a good example of a band whose level of fame they could possibly attain, but I'm curious to know what makes them different from, say, Broken Social Scene, another band I kinda liked whose Pitchfork rave prompted articles about the site's tastemaking powers.

yes, i would agree that the FFs are all of those three. but i would also add "vastly, vastly annoying" on the end. i've got "single again" stuck in my head right now, and it's driving me insane.

i don't like fun music, but the FFs are obviously bloody good at what they do. believe me, i tried very hard to like them, but the effort began to make me twitch and gibber.

emotionally overwrought

absolutely. but then i love that kind of thing.

Bingo, but they also are very prolific and release a lot of music that falls through the cracks on rare compilations and singles, have a fairly unique persona as a band, and make it sorta necessary to collect live shows. It is often necessary to do actual research in order to fully understand their lyrics. I can't think of anything that they do that doesn't inspire obsession, really. It's music made by and for OCD types.

Yeah, I'm very protective of the Fiery Furnaces. They are my favorite non-Malkmus band ever.

I think that Eleanor is pretty genuine and straightforward, though.

Personally, the Fiery Furnaces totally bore me. They kind of remind me of Phish, especially "1917," but with Patti Smith for a chaser. The songs are obviously made by capable and smart people, but they just make me feel manipulated and annoyed. I didn't like the Unicorns either, who are in the same genre of weird meta-music made by musicians with OCD.

How do the Arcade Fire compare to all those Elephant 6 bands that never really crossed the Atlantic?

is he wrong, then? i have to say, i've heard enough GYBE! copyists to last me a lifetime, but from what's being said there's a lot more to them than that.

It's not as good as the Arcade Fire though!

try the first song from this show. but listen to the whole thing because the change toward the end is awesome. if you don't like it, don't bother with any more because if this live stuff won't get you into them, nothing will.

I saw the Arcade Fire at Mergefest, when Lou Barlow opened for them. It was before the record came out, and before I was aware of non-Chapel-Hill-based-Merge-employee-fueled hype. And, jesus, they put on the best show I saw last year. The gang-choruses, the Parry guy beating on the wall, the fucking WAVE OF SOUND that is "Wake Up," Regine's voice cracking all the way through "Back Seat." There was just a godHONEST vitality and vibrancy to their music.

This was the second time they'd played in Chapel Hill, and most people missed them the first time through. Word of mouth, Barlow, and well Mergefest brough a lot of kids out. It was really one of the only shows I've seen when the crowd was unfamiliar with a band and sort of unengaged at the beginning of a show, but dancing their asses off by the end. It’s a testament.

On the other hand I have the distinct advantage of having a dad who likes Jane's Addiction, Depeche Mode, Pulp and other bands the dads of 30 year-olds are not supposed to listen to. Plus, he has actually said to me on more than one occasion "I don't see why there's such a stink about Green Day's 'street cred.' Who cares? Dookie is really good."

I'd do it, but I'm tired of talking about both and tired of reading about both.

http://stream.qtv.apple.com/qtv/toolshed/merge/arcade_100.mov

It obv. isn't as good as seeing them, but gives an idea of their live show, which imo is better than their records. Also, when they started out, they were much more folky/quirky and joyous but gradually became more loud and intense. You can sort of hear their "old" sound on the ep. Had I seen this video about 2 years ago I would have been completely shocked. I can understand the backlash against them, but I also understand the excitement/buzz (and I think it's genuine) cause I felt it myself.

As an aside, I've neither seen nor heard the Fiery Furnaces live, though I have seen footage of the Arcade Fire and downloaded a Canadian show, which I enjoyed. I look forward to seeing them the next time they come through Chicago, but Fiery Furnaces I think I'd only catch out of curiosity or completism.

Also, to tell you the truth, despite it all I look forward to what the Fiery Furnaces do next more than the Arcade Fire. Also also, at their best the Arcade Fire for some reason remind me of Elf Power, who I like. Maybe it’s just because the band looks similar.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=3908030

one google,
m.