Hi Sean. I apologize about the troll remarks. It seems you're outspoken which i respect. I have to be frank in saying that anybody that devalues The Beatles provokes sincere confusion and head scratching on this end, but we're all entitled to our opinions. How did George Martin carry the weight of the Beatles? (no pun intended) And if you're using him as their sole artistic crutch, why not through George Emerick in there? Honestly, a music fan who discredits the Beatles is picking his own fight. There are bands I loathe but still respect their artistry and can't deny it in any way shape or form.
Ah Gene Simmons, poster child for why rock and roll has tarnished its reputation with overwrought cock posturing and empty headed lyrical sentiment. Nirvana crapped on that cliche. KISS are cool for being KISS and have their merits, but that clown makeup lout loves to slag off bands that matter and at the end of the day, even Bleach era Nirvana had something to say, as opposed to KISS's party anthems.
On a serious note (going all grandpa again), the shock value allure here is so staged, so obvious, so pointless, so worthless. Bands go to SXSW to give the world songs, music, something worth believing in, something worth fighting/dying for, blood, sweat and tears, not a trainwreck and vomit. Please tell the girl not to try and sell her desperation along with her soul.
But on a serious note, personal distaste for Tyler the Creator aside, one would think he would be mindful of safety in light of SXSW's tragic events. A good entertainer knows the balance of chaos and restraint and I say 2 deaths and scores injured constitutes putting the brakes on any foolish stunts that could result in injury.
Triangle, what a stupid comment. Stereogum highlights the best undiscovered bands in indie culture as well as giving faithful exposure to indie stalwarts, along with great think pieces, essays, ect. Don't take on the 'gum, ya shlemiel .
Sean, you trolling? I can't think of a more uninformed opinion so stubbornly ignorant of the highest order then yours. This picture seems to sum up my thoughts in a playful way=
http://perform-360.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/you_serious_clark.png
I agree with your comment. Consider The Beatles. They retained the magic and wonder of melody and pop smart sensibilities, but were able to expand their sonic palette a bit. I really enjoyed Coldplay's 2 records after ''A Rush of Blood to the Head''. I can't fault them for being true to themselves. But the first 2 albums reflected, at least lyrically and in some of the more searingly beautiful and somber bits, artistry of a high order that was compelling in its sweep. I think for that reason I enjoy their first 2 albums the best. It seemed very honest and tinged with sadness. I'm with you though that they should never compromise who they are. they write great rock/pop songs. I guess I just miss the darkness of ''Trouble'' or ''Politik''.
Coldplay are a very talented band and Chris Martin has written some great melodies. Their first two records border on minor classics. But, my sincere and nonjudgmental complaint is their artistic refusal to be edgy or to take artistic risks. Their latest record seems to hint at breaking out of safe zone/formula, which is nice and a welcome change of pace. It is easy to hate on many bands (Maroon 5, who yes, suck) but despite our taste preferences, their is no denying that bands I might not like (Mumford and Sons, ect.) still are inherently talented, if unquestionably bland, corporate and safe. I would love to see Coldplay recapture the darkness that made their first 2 albums special. I haven't bothered with them since :Rhianna cameos on a Coldplay album will do that. But, I agree with Chris and Chuck. Confusing cool with great is a blurred line. Taylor Swift is not cool in my eyes, but to some, she writes great melodies. I'm not highbrow enough to negate that fact, even if taste wise I'm not digging her tunes. So, for a recovering music snob (perhaps there are more brooding in the shadows here on stereogum), I've learned that no matter how much a band or song invites a cringe worthy response based on taste, sometimes the talent needs to be recognized, regardless.
Gut reactions are honest. The cool thing is sometimes great things grown on you. This album has the great ingredients for a strong grower. It's slow and hypnotic, but palpable. I only heard it once on a laptop, but I'm interested in another listen and I think I'll even enjoy it more the next time around.
I really liked this. This was my first exposure to The War on Drugs. I could hear whispers of Bruce Springsteen, Dire Straits and Bob Dylan. I thought it was fantastic. Whoever said this was driving music on here was absolutely accurate. After only listen, I'm really impressed. It sounds like a great lost album from the 80's. Thanks Stereogum for profiling it and the band too. I've heard of this band but never really gave them a thorough call to attention until this album. A fine album it is too.
I listened to it in full before my first trip ever on an airplane when I was a teenager. I thought it was the most thrillingly produced album I'd ever heard, and to some degree, I still do. Flood and Trent were a formidable match. The production and intensity are almost unparalleled.
I lost major interest in coldplay after their last record, but at the same time, their first 2 albums were VERY strong. They have it in them. I hope they really have embraced their adventurous side and moved into more aggressive/darker/experimental territory. Chris Martin has written some great melodies, but it would be nice to have them couch the songs in something that has more bite.
For me, downvotes for personal convictions about artists or music serves to reinforce that I'm on the right track...or that I'm on the wrong track and need to give something/somebody more time. I was pretty relentlessly against Kanye West for instance, because I always interchanged his personality with his records. But then I listened to Yeezus, and enjoyed it. I loathed the misogyny and banal lyrics, but at least was able to think for myself and reevaluate something on my own terms. If I've ever slagged certain bands on the board (and gotten downvoted) then sometimes I've had to question that maybe I'm wrong and flat out ignorant in my distaste.
Downvoting can also make people more civil. If you post obnoxious comments or are a music snob, a good old donvote an take the wind out of your sails. Upvotes don't really matter to me as much, unless it's a cool meme I've posted :P The whole upvoting/downvoting system can make one wiser and more tolerant of dissent I think. I just upvoted you by the way :p
that one feller, Scott and others (myself included) have actually talked to Michael_ outside of the Gum forums, and kind of gotten to know him. He's a good guy in a lot of pain. He's not a straightforward dick or troll, just somebody who sometimes uses misguided judgment, and goes overboard sometimes. If Michael can play by the rules here, then let's not throw out the baby with the bathwater. Michael is a gifted writer and music enthusiast and when he filters himself, adds a lot to the board.
That's cool and gracious of you guys. Michael_ is a good writer and genuinely has a passion for music. I've talked to him outside of the gum a few times and he's a sincere down to earth guy who has a great ear for good music. I'm sure he realizes what he said was wrong and I genuinely hope he'll respect those boundaries. His personal issues don't give him a free license to harass Gum staff or cross the line like he did. That said, he's one of the few members on the board here that genuinely know their music and (usually) adds to the conversation by provoking good points or counterpoints about a subject, (albeit when it's not on the case of a Gum writer). Hope you play by the rules Michael_.
P.S. My rant has nothing to do with the Challenger disaster sample obviously. As far as that's concerned, in a way it was in poor taste. So is much of today's pop though, so it balances itself out.
Hi again Blochead. Very well said. It's actually refreshing to talk to a 'gum commentator/conversationalist with conviction. I think having a sweeping long range artistic vision is paramount to the merit of the art created. Trent Reznor lived and breathed ''The Downward Spiral'' as an auteur/visionary only could, handing in the master tapes to Interscope thinking it had no driving single, and not really caring whether it did. His psyche was melded into every nuance/fiber of that album and 95% of what you heard came right out of Trent. Capitol Records were crushed over ''OK Computer's'' decidedly anti-corporate rock sound, but Radiohead were interested in making art and not some ''Creep'' retread so they gave the finger to Capitol. And of course those records put a big old dent in music history.
The Beyonces of the world only hint at my disdain for what music has become for today's music listening generation-a soulless machine that thrives on 15 minutes of hype until it deems itself irrelevant by fading out of the spotlight and/or by selling fewer and fewer units. And conversely, I loathe many major labels for the most part. Not every one is a soul sucking vampire, but in this industry (at least major label), if you wanna sell records, you have to bring in the song doctors, the hip producers of the moment, then concede to the direction the label wants and be guided to look and act how the soulless machine wants you to be. Puppetry at it's finest.
A dear friend of mine was offered a chance to work with a well known producer and label. His vision for a record that was a throwback to The Beatles/Bowie meets The Cure went out the window and instead collaborators, label peeps (big label peeps at that) and song ''doctors'' ensuring polished hit singles were going to chart the course. In 30 seconds, he decided that homie don't play that game. And he dodged a bullet. I know this is a tangent that doesn't exactly fit into the Beyonce as art spectrum, but I just loathe corporate rock/pop and this generation of collaborators, song doctors, major label meddling (musical communism) and an orgy of mega-producers on one record, all because an artist either needs the cred to be relevant or simply doesn't have the talent/vision to do it themselves. Kanye West may think he's a genius, but at the end of the day, I'd challenge Kanye West to go into a studio by himself, lock the door and use absolutely no outside musical production, songwriting, collaborating assistance or additional instrumentalists to make a record. Prince did it singlehandely, so the purported ''Prince'' of our generation should be able to do the same thing. I actually like some of Kanye's music though, so I'm not hatin', just proving a pretty valid argument on what constitutes art (and what doesn't) in my ''high on my horse'' opinion.
Anyway, I could go on and on with why I feel musical integrity is being destroyed by today's bottom barrel standards and big industry meddling, but that would require a convo over some coffee. And Grimes is awesome :) She wrote and produced ''Visions'' by herself. She's the one that deserves Beyonce's spotlight.
Her production is incredible. The tracked vocals are killer, the off kilter rhythms great and everything in the mix is so well placed. Everything is just expertly crafted. Early contender for one of 2014's best records? Yer.
Hey Blochead. For the record, I do agree with you. I've been realizing that I'm a highly opinionated individual, but the passion and conviction inherent to that is because I call a spade a spade. The emperor has no clothes in much of indie rock circles. Hipster affectation abounds. Hipster affection for bands that can't even write a decent melody abounds. And the ironic love affair with pop stars is annoying. I don't dismiss pop music, but the last time pop music and art truly went hand in hand was with ARTISTS like Bowie and Prince. Not only did they have something to say, they could write their own songs, play their own instruments and didn't rely on the circle jerk paradigm of major label handouts, i.e. ''hot'' producers, guest writers, collaborators. Someone on here, I think r and r, wanted me to enjoy pop on its level. That's fine. But with all respect to what Beyonce does (and she is talented), I could never be bothered in the slightest to elevate her music to anything other then label agenda/corporate fluff. EMA, Grimes, PJ Harvey-man, that's girl power art: Genius level art and one could argue some pop appeal. Anyway, yeah I'm a music snob in some ways. Nothing irks me more then to see people mindlessly overpraised. Pop as art-cue The Beatles, Bowie, Springsteen, Nirvana. Radio friendly in some ways, but alarmingly abrasive in their own right and they had something to say. I love Stereogum and enjoy the writing, reviewing and appreciate the opportunity we 'gummers have to voice what we feel about music. That's how I feel about this. Major labels prostitute talent and agendas and try to package a product as something aesthetically genuine. Unwrap it, take it out of the box, enjoy it for what it is and then do whatever you want with it. But don't insult those of us who refuse it to be taken as art. Now where's the Tylenol.
Comments