Originally posted by Sicnarf: Do you [RL] like anything that strays from the norm? (this isn't a jab, this is a serious question. I'm just curious to what you might listen to the you might consider experimental to some degree that you enjoy.)
He can defend himself, but I don't think your criticism of RL is fair. You can't generalize based on RL's liking or disliking one album from a non-mainstream artist. And, as it happens, he likes Califone. He just prefers Q/C. Maybe that album is more conventional than R & C, but Califone doesn't play-it-safe on Q/C, and it's hardly a mainstream recording.
Having said that, I think RL's dead-wrong about R & C. It's great (I've explained my reasons for thinking so upthread). "Pink & Sour," "Sunday Noises," "A Chinese Actor," and "Black Metal Valentine," among others, are catchy songs that hold together well, despite Califone's found-sound experimentalism. And these songs have (a weird) rhythm, surprisingly.
Yeah, I'm definitely a huge Califone fan, despite my dislike of their last 2 albums. Everything they did before that was great, and Red Red Meat did some pretty good stuff too.
By the way, is anyone else having trouble accessing the forums sometimes lately? After my last message, I went back immediately to edit it, and I couldn't even get back on the forums for 15 minutes.
Posts: 4012 | Location: NE Indiana | Registered: 14 April 2005
A couple of days ago, I used my saved link to Metacritic, and it said the site wasn't found. If you're trying to get to the forums and Metacritic proper seems down, Google metacritic forums and click on the top listing. That's what I did the other day, and I was on the forums in a second, even though I still couldn't get to the rest of Metacritic.
"Naked Woman, Naked Man Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
Posts: 12881 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004
I wasn't trying to be hyper-critical sarcastic. The comment comes from monthes of observation really. I'm sincerely interested and the questions stands: RL what do you find in your catalog that you enjoy and also feel is experimental to any degree?
I'm in agreement with Raving on Califones Roots and Crowns. One half of the album is great, the half that is conventional folky songwriter and the other half stinks, the more tripped out stuff. I can't stand Califone's songs that foray into that pyschedelic Dr. John Voodoo Gris Gris crap. It's a waste of time.
It's, like, positively brilliant. It trumps everything else this year.
The Oct. 19 print edition of Rolling Stone just rips the album (on the plus side, it did receive one more star -- 2 -- than Clay Aiken's new album). Anyway, I don't recall Rolling Stone being so harsh on an anticipated album, even an indie album, in a while.
Still, I'm going to give it a try, as I don't trust Rolling Stone's reviews.
It's, like, positively brilliant. It trumps everything else this year.
The Oct. 19 print edition of Rolling Stone just rips the album (on the plus side, it did receive one more star -- 2 -- than Clay Aiken's new album). Anyway, I don't recall Rolling Stone being so harsh on an anticipated album, even an indie album, in a while.
Still, I'm going to give it a try, as I don't trust Rolling Stone's reviews.
This album will definitely be an opinion divider. Some people will think it's godawful and others, like me, will think it's THE BEST OF THE YEAR.
Posts: 56 | Location: New Zealand | Registered: 17 September 2006
Originally posted by ericg75: They [RS] were prety rough on the Killers' Sam's Town. Deservedly so.
True. Now that I'm looking over the issue again, RS was also rough on the new Janet Jackson album, which is very much a mainstream, accessible record, so maybe I don't pay careful enough attention to their review patterns.
Originally posted by Thisheregiraffe: This album will definitely be an opinion divider. Some people will think it's godawful and others, like me, will think it's THE BEST OF THE YEAR.
I still haven't heard it, but I suspect I'm going to be of the former camp. I despised her last album, and although I've heard she's toned down her Minnie Mouse yelp, I've still heard a lot of comparisons to Bjork and Kate Bush, neither of whom I'm wild about (as singers anyway). Maybe I'll like it though. If I lower my expections enough (like I did with the Decemberists), I could be pleasantly surprised.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5355 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
quote: Originally posted by Thisheregiraffe: This album will definitely be an opinion divider. Some people will think it's godawful and others, like me, will think it's THE BEST OF THE YEAR.
I still haven't heard it, but I suspect I'm going to be of the former camp. I despised her last album, and although I've heard she's toned down her Minnie Mouse yelp, I've still heard a lot of comparisons to Bjork and Kate Bush, neither of whom I'm wild about (as singers anyway). Maybe I'll like it though. If I lower my expections enough (like I did with the Decemberists), I could be pleasantly surprised.
I hate Rolling Stone's reviews, and not simply because they've committed a great sin and trashed what is EASILY the greatest musical achievement of 2006. Let us not forget the acclaim RS bestowed upon those Britney albums...
Oh well, can't win everybody, I suppose...
------------------------------------------------------- Awkwardness happening to someone you love!
Posts: 863 | Location: Boston, MA | Registered: 14 May 2004
Originally posted by Platypus Quest: I hate Rolling Stone's reviews, and not simply because they've committed a great sin and trashed what is EASILY the greatest musical achievement of 2006. Let us not forget the acclaim RS bestowed upon those Britney albums...
Oh well, can't win everybody, I suppose...
Come on PQ. Don't single out Rolling Stone for Britney Fever.
I think Rolling Stone has a few staffers with some taste issues (Christian Hoard and I rarely see eye to eye. 3.5 stars for the new Bob Segar album???), but they seem to be getting a little better lately. I've seen a lot more indie stuff getting reviews, mostly positive. They've also been reviewing that stuff in a timely manner, not a month after everyone else reviews it, which seemed like the norm for awhile.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5355 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Originally posted by Platypus Quest: I hate Rolling Stone's reviews, and not simply because they've committed a great sin and trashed what is EASILY the greatest musical achievement of 2006. Let us not forget the acclaim RS bestowed upon those Britney albums...
Oh well, can't win everybody, I suppose...
Come on PQ. Don't single out Rolling Stone for Britney Fever.
I think Rolling Stone has a few staffers with some taste issues (Christian Hoard and I rarely see eye to eye. 3.5 stars for the new Bob Seger album???), but they seem to be getting a little better lately. I've seen a lot more indie stuff getting reviews, mostly positive. They've also been reviewing that stuff in a timely manner, not a month after everyone else reviews it, which seemed like the norm for awhile.
If it makes you feel any better, PQ, I just read that Joanna Newsom review only to notice that it was indeed reviewed by one Christian Hoard, who I previously diagnosed with a rare form of taste deficiency. So, don't get to worked up about that review. She's obviously no Bob Seger.
----- Stay gold, Ponyboy. Stay gold.
Posts: 5355 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
I listened to the new Newsom album once off hype.non-standard.net. It was five songs and 55 minutes long. The lyrics, from what I can recall, are what I'd imagine a female Bob Dylan about 30-40 years ago would have produced. The music is non-stop harp, with more string adornment.
Now, I don't think she can play as well as Harpo Marx, but her lyrics are definitely better. She certainly deserves another listen from me because even though I never moved away from the music, I hadn't really heard anything like it before, so to be honest, it played out more as background music. I have no doubt that if you just listened to it in the dark with your eyes closed, it would have far more meaning.
I wasn't really aware of her earlier album, but I liked her vocals. I'll admit that there were a few moments where something sounded slightly affected, but I'd say about a total of 30 seconds in 55 minutes. I'd probably not even notice it after a couple more listens. BUT, I love Bjork's vocals, especially on homogenic, so eric, take that for what it's worth, if anything.
"Naked Woman, Naked Man Where did you get that nice sun tan?"
Posts: 12881 | Location: Behind the Orange Curtain | Registered: 14 May 2004
OPB: mark f: Now, I don't think she can play as well as Harpo Marx, but her lyrics are definitely better.
It's funny you say that, cos I heard a radio show with JN some time ago where the DJ asked her about Harpo. She mentioned that the reason Harpo can make himself sound so spectacular and schmaltzy is that he's basically cheating. He often uses pedals that dampen any strings that aren't in a particular chord - like an autoharp. On the other hand, Joanna does all of her own stunts.
I also noticed the affected sound of her vocals on Ys. On a couple lines she seems to hold back and sound a little more 'formally trained.' My best guess is that that is at least partly due to the influence of Van Dyke Parks'. On the debut her vocals are much rougher (and perhaps a bit more natural to her, for whatever that's worth).
