Rock/Soul/Progressive

Music critics are some of the most pretentious pricks known to man. Here is my reasoning:
In effort to broaden my horizons while also following the rules of the radio station, I’ve decided to feature one new album a week. For this week I was thinking of featuring Los Campesinos! who are a Welsh band that have gotten much attention and an A from the AV Club. However, I was also hoping to shed some light on the album/band I’m featuring and so I was gathering reviews from other outlets such as the NME, Drowned in Sound, and Fake DIY. This was obviously a bad idea because now I’m not going to be featuring Los Campesinos! and I think music critics are pretentious pricks with sticks up there asses and a God complex to beat the bands.
First we have Drowned in Sound. The reviewer, Dom Passantino, starts the review by bashing the demise of Britpop and then goes on to bash the Kinks. Now, I know I’m prejudice against anyone who bashes the Kinks, but I’m willing to accept such a bashing if it makes sense. And yes, I also understand the most people in Wales identify themselves first and foremost as Welsh and then British, but this does not mean they are somehow immune to what’s happening on the rest of the island. Making Wales out to be France is idiotic and claiming that someone from Wales could never be influenced by one the of the biggest names in rock (not just British rock) is even more idiotic. Culture permeates and can not be avoided, no matter how much wish it weren’t so. In making a claim otherwise you are showing cultural ignorance of the top order. So that’s Drowned in Sound.
The NME spends the first paragraph of it’s review talking about how good music goes beyond genre and how “indie” music is “more a mindset than a musical style, and one that values ideas, imagination and anti-sexist, anti-racist ideologies above record sales and profit margins.” The reviewer then goes on to say that musically the album is boring but lyrical provocative in that it sticks to the above mentioned epitaphs. Los Campesinos! are, as they say “a band to believe.” Just like every other indie band.
Thus far I’ve got pretentious culturally ignorant prick and bollocking grandiose prick. Let’s see what Fake DIY and the AV Club have to say about it.
AV Club: Twee!! But the good kind like Belle and Sebastian twee. Also, those lyrics, oh they are to die for.
Fake DIY: Lyrics!! And happiness!!! Hurrah!!!
So two pretentious and two taking the thing at face value and not reading into the album or bending it around to fit the reviewer’s views. As you can see music critics come in two forms: Pretentious dicks and people who actually enjoy music. Yes I analyse the Kinks and Kaiser Chiefs to death, but hypocrisy is my middle name and the Kinks were born to analyse. Kaiser Chiefs are another matter.

Original post by imnore

This past summer I giddily read that Panic! at the Disco was no more. Of course the writer’s at Drowned in Sound were just playing with my mind and the band had merely gotten rid of the exclamation point and had not, as I thought, disbanded. Little less than six months later here I am, listening to them. It’s odd how the world works.
Panic at the Disco’s new album Pretty. Odd. is a complete rip off. It seems that the band listened to everything the Beatles ever recorded and decided that they were going to do the same thing. In one album. Add to the mix an orchestral arrangement to every track and you have Pretty. Odd. Now the last three sentences might sound like I’m going to rip the album to shreds, but I generally don’t listen to things I don’t like and so I’m just as shocked as you when I say, completely ripping off late-era Beatles with orchestral arrangements works for this group. This is not to say that the album is brilliant (the Beatles did it better) or terribly original (the Beatles did it better) but Pretty. Odd. is peformed by a band whose last tour was a circus. Literally. So over the top theatrics and vocal harmonies work incredibly well and make for an album that’s fun and completely radio friendly.
I know nearly zilch about Panic! at the Disco nor do I know much of anything about Panic at the Disco. The only thing I know about the band is that they got bottled two years in a row at the festival(s) formerly known as Carling Weekend and that in 2006 they lost their original bassist. I’ve never listened to more than a snippet of their first album and so have no idea whether Pretty. Odd. is an improvement, complete departure, or typical sophomore album. However, I do know that the band seems to employ nonsensical lyrics to make a point about typical rock band song topics. They have catchy hooks and choruses that lure in the listener like a fish to bait. Vocal harmonies are in heavy use and can be heard in every single song on the album, save “I Have Friends in Holy Spaces” which instead pretends that it’s from the late 1920’s/early 1930’s. All in all it is what I’ve said before: A radio-friendly singles-laden album that hipsters in NYC won’t feel too bad saying they own. It is neither brilliant nor horrible, merely passable in a good way.

Original post by Anglo-Audiophile: The Reviews

This past summer I giddily read that Panic! at the Disco was no more. Of course the writer’s at Drowned in Sound were just playing with my mind and the band had merely gotten rid of the exclamation point and had not, as I thought, disbanded. Little less than six months later here I am, listening to them. It’s odd how the world works.
Panic at the Disco’s new album Pretty. Odd. is a complete rip off. It seems that the band listened to everything the Beatles ever recorded and decided that they were going to do the same thing. In one album. Add to the mix an orchestral arrangement to every track and you have Pretty. Odd. Now the last three sentences might sound like I’m going to rip the album to shreds, but I generally don’t listen to things I don’t like and so I’m just as shocked as you when I say, completely ripping off late-era Beatles with orchestral arrangements works for this group. This is not to say that the album is brilliant (the Beatles did it better) or terribly original (the Beatles did it better) but Pretty. Odd. is peformed by a band whose last tour was a circus. Literally. So over the top theatrics and vocal harmonies work incredibly well and make for an album that’s fun and completely radio friendly.
I know nearly zilch about Panic! at the Disco nor do I know much of anything about Panic at the Disco. The only thing I know about the band is that they got bottled two years in a row at the festival(s) formerly known as Carling Weekend and that in 2006 they lost their original bassist. I’ve never listened to more than a snippet of their first album and so have no idea whether Pretty. Odd. is an improvement, complete departure, or typical sophomore album. However, I do know that the band seems to employ nonsensical lyrics to make a point about typical rock band song topics. They have catchy hooks and choruses that lure in the listener like a fish to bait. Vocal harmonies are in heavy use and can be heard in every single song on the album, save “I Have Friends in Holy Spaces” which instead pretends that it’s from the late 1920’s/early 1930’s. All in all it is what I’ve said before: A radio-friendly singles-laden album that hipsters in NYC won’t feel too bad saying they own. It is neither brilliant nor horrible, merely passable in a good way.

Original post by imnore

There is currently something of a soul revival occurring in the UK right now. Granted this statement is based on data from the imperfect British singles/album chart(s) and only based on this weeks charts. Also I’m basing most of the above statement on the popularity of exactly two artists who fit the classic description of soul and one who won the British version of American Idol and technically is a R&B artist, though as anyone who’s taken this class can tell you, labels mean nothing. Nonetheless there is in fact a small soul revival occuring in the UK and it all started with a song about rehab.
Due to the severe lack of coherance in my brain, my evidence for this statement will be made through YouTube videos.

Leona Lewis wouldn’t let me embed her video, but she still has great pipes.

Did I mention my evidence was a bit scant? Eh, it’s the beginning of something. All three ladies have top 10 albums and top 15 singles at the moment at least in the UK. Leona recently hit number one in the US singles chart. So there you have it. The entirety of my argument for the UK’s soul revival. This entry turned out a lot better in my head…

Original post by Anglo-Audiophile: The Reviews

There is currently something of a soul revival occurring in the UK right now. Granted this statement is based on data from the imperfect British singles/album chart(s) and only based on this weeks charts. Also I’m basing most of the above statement on the popularity of exactly two artists who fit the classic description of soul and one who won the British version of American Idol and technically is a R&B artist, though as anyone who’s taken this class can tell you, labels mean nothing. Nonetheless there is in fact a small soul revival occuring in the UK and it all started with a song about rehab.
Due to the severe lack of coherance in my brain, my evidence for this statement will be made through YouTube videos.

Leona Lewis wouldn’t let me embed her video, but she still has great pipes.

Did I mention my evidence was a bit scant? Eh, it’s the beginning of something. All three ladies have top 10 albums and top 15 singles at the moment at least in the UK. Leona recently hit number one in the US singles chart. So there you have it. The entirety of my argument for the UK’s soul revival. This entry turned out a lot better in my head…

Original post by imnore

There’s this neat little thing you can do in Microsoft word that’s called “autosummarize.” This nifty little gadget will take the seven-page research paper you’ve written on the Kinks and summarize the thing to your specifications. For instance you can ask the auto summarizer to summarize said paper to less than 500 words and it will do it. It’s really quite cool.
Here’s the 499 word summary of my Kinks research essay. I would post the whole thing, but it’s a bit long, even for me.

Why Kinks Matter:
A Look at the Impact of the Kinks on British Rock Music

In 1964 the band formerly known as the Kinks, and then the Ravens, and finally again as the Kinks, released a song titled “You Really Got Me” as their third single and third try at chart success. The song, which came from their self-titled debut album, became the band’s highest charting single up to that point, reaching #1 in the UK Singles Chart and #7 in the US Billboard Hot 100. The song, recorded at Regent Sound Studios for the Pye label and produced by Shel Talmy, also became the song the Kinks are best known for and proved to be the template for much of the band’s early success. The group played a mix of covers and original songs written by Ray Davies, along with the occasional song written by Dave Davies. The particular style of the Kinks, as noted earlier, was that of basic rock and roll fervor. The band, thanks to lead guitarist Dave Davies, specialized early on in fast, aggressive guitar lines punctuated by Ray Davies nasally intonation and London accent. Lyrically, once Ray came into his own as a song writer, the band’s songs focused on life as experienced by any British citizen, but from a very cynical point of view. Occasionally the band would slip into a more melodic and acoustic style, which can be heard in some of their best known and loved songs. In the late 1970’s however the band gained new attraction due to a handful of extremely popular bands covering some of their earlier hits. The most notable of these bands were the Jam, who covered “David Watts” (Marten, Hudson). Like the Kinks, the Jam focused in on everyday British life with a penchant for fast paced, heavy on the guitar, songs. Like most of the Kinks’ slower song, the Jam used an acoustic style to accent the irony of the tenderness found within the songs. Blur, Oasis, and Pulp all claimed the Kinks as a major influence in their music, with Blur being the most musically related to the Kinks, Oasis being the most related to the Kinks in band structure (specifically the fact that they had two warring brothers in the band), and Pulp being the most lyrically related to the band (Marten, Hudson).
However the band’s Kinksian influence can be heard particularly well in their 1994 album Parklife. Within the album the listener can hear the two distinct styles originated by the Kinks, namely that of the hard driven guitar style and the softer acoustic style.  lyricsmania.com).

Original post by Anglo-Audiophile: The Reviews

There’s this neat little thing you can do in Microsoft word that’s called “autosummarize.” This nifty little gadget will take the seven-page research paper you’ve written on the Kinks and summarize the thing to your specifications. For instance you can ask the auto summarizer to summarize said paper to less than 500 words and it will do it. It’s really quite cool.
Here’s the 499 word summary of my Kinks research essay. I would post the whole thing, but it’s a bit long, even for me.

Why Kinks Matter:
A Look at the Impact of the Kinks on British Rock Music

In 1964 the band formerly known as the Kinks, and then the Ravens, and finally again as the Kinks, released a song titled “You Really Got Me” as their third single and third try at chart success. The song, which came from their self-titled debut album, became the band’s highest charting single up to that point, reaching #1 in the UK Singles Chart and #7 in the US Billboard Hot 100. The song, recorded at Regent Sound Studios for the Pye label and produced by Shel Talmy, also became the song the Kinks are best known for and proved to be the template for much of the band’s early success. The group played a mix of covers and original songs written by Ray Davies, along with the occasional song written by Dave Davies. The particular style of the Kinks, as noted earlier, was that of basic rock and roll fervor. The band, thanks to lead guitarist Dave Davies, specialized early on in fast, aggressive guitar lines punctuated by Ray Davies nasally intonation and London accent. Lyrically, once Ray came into his own as a song writer, the band’s songs focused on life as experienced by any British citizen, but from a very cynical point of view. Occasionally the band would slip into a more melodic and acoustic style, which can be heard in some of their best known and loved songs. In the late 1970’s however the band gained new attraction due to a handful of extremely popular bands covering some of their earlier hits. The most notable of these bands were the Jam, who covered “David Watts” (Marten, Hudson). Like the Kinks, the Jam focused in on everyday British life with a penchant for fast paced, heavy on the guitar, songs. Like most of the Kinks’ slower song, the Jam used an acoustic style to accent the irony of the tenderness found within the songs. Blur, Oasis, and Pulp all claimed the Kinks as a major influence in their music, with Blur being the most musically related to the Kinks, Oasis being the most related to the Kinks in band structure (specifically the fact that they had two warring brothers in the band), and Pulp being the most lyrically related to the band (Marten, Hudson).
However the band’s Kinksian influence can be heard particularly well in their 1994 album Parklife. Within the album the listener can hear the two distinct styles originated by the Kinks, namely that of the hard driven guitar style and the softer acoustic style.  lyricsmania.com).

Original post by imnore

This past week celebrated the beginning of festival season. Yes folks, this past week/end was South by South West or, as it’s lovingly called, SXSW (which translates to the first name given, which is what everyone says when referring to the second.) Anyone who is anyone, or wants to be anyone, in the indie music industry flew, drove, and possibly swam to Austin, Texas for a four day love fest. And thus began festival season.
At this point I feel I should mention that I’ve labelled myself, and others who know me have labelled me, as a bitter old so and so. I’ve been to exactly one festival, and only for a day, and nearly got sun poisoning. When put into this context, along with knowledge that I believe all the really important festivals happen in Europe, the upcoming rant will become a bit more logical. So yeah, onto festival season.
Festival season, oddly enough, starts and ends in Austin, Texas. SXSW, usually in March, begins the whole affair and Austin City Limits, usually in early September, ends the season with a bang (and predictably scorching weather.) In between you have a good number of festivals on the west coast, a smattering in the middle of the country, and a handful on the East Coast, usually towards the end of the season. Meanwhile over in Europe, everyone parties every night, especially if they’re in Ibiza, and every weekend there is a festival. Maybe even two festivals in you’re lucky. (Did I mention the bitterness?) Europe is the main hub of festival season, as I’ve pointed out before, because its weather is much cooler and…its weather is much cooler. (My other statement would have been incredibly mean and possibly not at all true. I do have some dignity.) But by having festivals every weekend, this leaves North America in a lurch. Summer is the time of the year were most major tours occur, predictably because the audience the music industry is supposedly catering to is out of school, but since most bands promise their souls to European festivals that leaves exactly one week for them to tour North America and there’s a very good chance that the day they come to your city is a day you have work/school/final exams/life. And while there are some festivals in the States (as I’ve pointed out before), most of the really important ones occur at least a hour and half drive away from Virginia and at the most the cost of a round trip plane ticket, plus hotel, food, merch, and festival pass expenses.
The last time I wrote about festivals (I’ve already given you the link twice, I’m not doing it again) I focused on the history of a handful of festivals and not at all on my complaints with festival season. In general I think festivals are a great thing. I don’t particularly like them, but they does allow a much larger audience to experience many, many, many live bands over a period of 1-2 days (SXSW and Austin City Limits being odd in their length) for a fairly reasonable price (if you don’t include hotel, travel, food, and merch expenses.) However, if you can manage to get yourself to a festival, you’ll be spending most of your time in an open field in the middle of the summer, and if you’re particularly lucky and end up going to the Pitchfork festival, you’re in Chicago, which is like being in Texas but without the dry heat. Only the Europeans, or Americans who can get over to Europe, are saved from the horrible weather. Instead, on the Continent they get reasonable weather in open fields, if you’re in the UK reasonable weather and rain, or if you’re in Ibiza, a club scene to die for (and who really cares about the weather if you’re sleeping through the day?). So, if you take away the weather, the long lines to get into the festival grounds, and the ridiculous cost of everything, festivals are pretty cool. Now if only I could get my TARDIS to work…
(Half way through writing this, I realized I’d already written a rather extensive, less bitchy, entry on festivals. Now, at least, you have all the mean nasty thoughts I was thinking when I wrote the first one along with all the information that can be found in that entry. Also I feel I should point out that Asia also has a handful of festivals during the season, but Asia, as well as Australia and all its buddies, are consistently overlooked in tours and I’ve already got a whole continent to worry about, I don’t need another.)

Original post by Anglo-Audiophile: The Reviews

This past week celebrated the beginning of festival season. Yes folks, this past week/end was South by South West or, as it’s lovingly called, SXSW (which translates to the first name given, which is what everyone says when referring to the second.) Anyone who is anyone, or wants to be anyone, in the indie music industry flew, drove, and possibly swam to Austin, Texas for a four day love fest. And thus began festival season.
At this point I feel I should mention that I’ve labelled myself, and others who know me have labelled me, as a bitter old so and so. I’ve been to exactly one festival, and only for a day, and nearly got sun poisoning. When put into this context, along with knowledge that I believe all the really important festivals happen in Europe, the upcoming rant will become a bit more logical. So yeah, onto festival season.
Festival season, oddly enough, starts and ends in Austin, Texas. SXSW, usually in March, begins the whole affair and Austin City Limits, usually in early September, ends the season with a bang (and predictably scorching weather.) In between you have a good number of festivals on the west coast, a smattering in the middle of the country, and a handful on the East Coast, usually towards the end of the season. Meanwhile over in Europe, everyone parties every night, especially if they’re in Ibiza, and every weekend there is a festival. Maybe even two festivals in you’re lucky. (Did I mention the bitterness?) Europe is the main hub of festival season, as I’ve pointed out before, because its weather is much cooler and…its weather is much cooler. (My other statement would have been incredibly mean and possibly not at all true. I do have some dignity.) But by having festivals every weekend, this leaves North America in a lurch. Summer is the time of the year were most major tours occur, predictably because the audience the music industry is supposedly catering to is out of school, but since most bands promise their souls to European festivals that leaves exactly one week for them to tour North America and there’s a very good chance that the day they come to your city is a day you have work/school/final exams/life. And while there are some festivals in the States (as I’ve pointed out before), most of the really important ones occur at least a hour and half drive away from Virginia and at the most the cost of a round trip plane ticket, plus hotel, food, merch, and festival pass expenses.
The last time I wrote about festivals (I’ve already given you the link twice, I’m not doing it again) I focused on the history of a handful of festivals and not at all on my complaints with festival season. In general I think festivals are a great thing. I don’t particularly like them, but they does allow a much larger audience to experience many, many, many live bands over a period of 1-2 days (SXSW and Austin City Limits being odd in their length) for a fairly reasonable price (if you don’t include hotel, travel, food, and merch expenses.) However, if you can manage to get yourself to a festival, you’ll be spending most of your time in an open field in the middle of the summer, and if you’re particularly lucky and end up going to the Pitchfork festival, you’re in Chicago, which is like being in Texas but without the dry heat. Only the Europeans, or Americans who can get over to Europe, are saved from the horrible weather. Instead, on the Continent they get reasonable weather in open fields, if you’re in the UK reasonable weather and rain, or if you’re in Ibiza, a club scene to die for (and who really cares about the weather if you’re sleeping through the day?). So, if you take away the weather, the long lines to get into the festival grounds, and the ridiculous cost of everything, festivals are pretty cool. Now if only I could get my TARDIS to work…
(Half way through writing this, I realized I’d already written a rather extensive, less bitchy, entry on festivals. Now, at least, you have all the mean nasty thoughts I was thinking when I wrote the first one along with all the information that can be found in that entry. Also I feel I should point out that Asia also has a handful of festivals during the season, but Asia, as well as Australia and all its buddies, are consistently overlooked in tours and I’ve already got a whole continent to worry about, I don’t need another.)

Original post by imnore

In the past few months I’ve rarely concerned myself with the deeds and don’ts of the music industry. I’ve had more important things to deal with, mainly doing well in my classes and trying not to have a melt down. In fact it would take something pretty horrendous (or KC doing anything) for me to get worked up enough to write about. Well, Vampire Weekend has done just that.
As frequent readers of the blog will know, my big thing (besides CDs being released at the same time on both sides of the Atlantic) is how frequently a band tours the States. Most of the bands I focus on mainly tour Europe and Europe. They make few and infrequent excursions to the American continent (and I do mean the whole thing) and make very little effort to build up any kind of fan base over here (and then they complain about it.) This is true even with certain American bands who feel that building up a fan base in Europe is more important than building one in their home country. So when bands cancel American tours (even if said tours are really just three dates) to work on their next album it annoys me a little. As I’ve stated before I can deal with “fake” medical reasons for cancelling tours, but the example I’m about to present to you just makes my blood boil.
Vampire Weekend has cancelled three gigs so they can play on SNL. Some might argue that it’s an excellent idea, that playing on a nationally broadcasted show is a brilliant way to get their music across to everyone, that I’m just being a stick in the mud. Yeah, explain that to the people who thought they were going to get to see the band live and in person. Seeing a band on a crap TV show were they perform two songs does not make up for a live performance were they might play, oh, maybe all of their songs and you don’t have to pretend to enjoy the comedic stylings of the SNL troupe. Sure, they’ve rescheduled for June, which means that the money those fans spent on tickets hasn’t gone to waste, but cancelling three tour dates for a cumulative eight or ten minutes on a show that a relatively small number of people watch. (I can’t actually substatiate that last statement because I’ve no clue how to find viewer numbers. If somebody can point me in the right direction, that would be very much appreciated.)
So what’s the bottom line folks? Tour before television. Tour, tour, tour, tour, tour. And then tour some more, preferably in the US/North America.
On a lighter and more vain note NME will be launching an American version of it’s “highly influential” (there exact words are “the world’s most influential”) awards show this April. The article goes on to say that the show has helped launch the careers of many important acts such as The Killers, Pete Doherty, Arctic Monkeys, Kaiser Chiefs and My Chemical Romance (yeah, they really said MCR.) The whole thing is just so obscenely vain it’s actually funny in a way. Sadly I don’t know enough about popular or current musical acts to help skew the voting, but god I wish I did.
Ta!

Original post by Anglo-Audiophile: The Reviews