It seems like a lot of songs will slip into a beautiful groove with their lovely distorted guitars, hinting at something epic when all of a sudden the vocals come in and completely deflate all the beauty and harmony they've built up in the song prior. Listen to "Errand Boy" for an example.

I'm not sure why this particularly bugs me about this album as I really enjoyed Weirdo Rippers, which did pretty much the same thing. I don't know.

quote:

Originally posted by BlackGravel:
Don't say "us" to try and rally everybody. I didn't say everybody was acting this way.

I'm taking your advice disengaging with you. Score another one for BlackGravel.

I hate to be a party pooper (I know, I am) but let's squash this and get back on topic, quick.

I like the album; it's great.

I ok the album; it's good.

does anybody else remember celebrity jeopardy on SNL, where "bjork" hits things on the podium and calls it music? that's what this thread reminds me of.

now to go and listen to Nouns, so i have something to contribute to the discussion!

(i really liked weirdo rippers though, for the record)

I meh this album; it's alright. I dig a few of the songs but... it was said earlier that noise is good if it serves the music, and I think the noise on this record mostly is there to distract from the fact that most of the songs are pretty average. Also I'm afraid I find the singer's dry, always same sounding voice fairly unappealing.

I think I'm so undecided on No Age because they can't seem to decide what sound they actually want. Rather than sounding like they're blending the noise with pop songs, they seem to be fighting between the sounds.

Maybe that's why I prefer Clipd Beaks, Liars, and HEALTH to No Age.

quote:

Originally posted by JGlass:
Maybe that's why I prefer Clipd Beaks, Liars, and HEALTH to No Age.

I do as well. Iran is another band I would add to that.

Hell, I could Neptune and Fuzz Against Junk too. I like that there's been an influx of this stuff in the past few years.

I hate the "post-punk revival" garbage though.

There seems to be a lot of division on this band, but I really think they're one of the more exciting bands out there right now. HEALTH and Clipd Beaks are great too. No Age is just more of a catchy, accessible side of that realm. Great album, one of my favorites this year.

Noise bands like No Age and especially Health, rely on pure noise and volume to cover up the fact that they don't have much musical chops. Liars are the same way to an extent, but they use noise a bit more melodically (Drum's Not Dead) than these bands. I personally hate the vocals for No Age. I completely agree with whoever said that they completely deflate the building beauty of some of the tracks. Just my opinion, however, and musical tastes are highly personal so don't flame.

Saying that they do it to cover up a lacking of "music chops" is insane. Having seen No Age, Liars, and HEALTH live, I can attest to the fact that they play the hell out of their instruments. Aside from that, the percussionist for HEALTH is incredible; also, the members of HEALTH grew up playing in bands, have been playing their instruments for a very long time, and play a hell of a lot. Anyone who can manage to do that and still "don't have much musical chops" is pretty incompetent.

You're missing the point of the music dude, sorry.
Harrison still owns McCartney though.

P.S. No Age and HEALTH aren't Noise or Noise bands. Just an FYI.

I don't like to make this direct a suggestion, but anyone who can even type "Harrison owns McCartney" with a straight face would have to be one thousand percent retarded.

The following facts dispose people who want to be cool to say things like the ones being said here:

*He doesn't/didn't take himself half as seriously as George or John (people for some reason like that shit - see Jim Morrison, Bob Marley, Robert Plant, any number of other frathouse idols)

*Fell off after the Beatles

*Recorded a lot of dorky post-Beatles music

*Is a dork (but really it's because he genuinely didn't give a fuck. Unlike those who preen and pose and run their mouths and call that "not giving a fuck")

*Didn't as outwardly or obnoxiously proclaim allegiances to psychedelic, drug culture or "The Revolution"

*Made a song about "Freedom" recently, was then bizarrely (and wrongly) lumped in by some with Bush-sympathizers

*In his old age came to look like a puffy, stodgy, generic, dead-eyed Englishman

*Isn't dead yet

And so, we arrive at bullshit like this. That's the beginning, middle and end of it.

BUT HOW GREAT WAS HE REALLY in the context of the Beatles?

*Paul was both the member with the most pop sensibility AND more of an experimental force in the band than any of the others: he had a fascination with the Avant Garde and pushed both George and John in similar directions.

*He came up with the string part for Day in the Life, the most memorable part of the best song Lennon ever wrote

*Played the guitar solo on Taxman, the best part of one of the best songs Harrison ever wrote, and probably the most badass and ahead-of-its-time piece of guitar playing the band ever came up with (and not played by Harrison - and neither was the one from While My Guitar Gently Weeps) AS WELL AS the incredible bassline (he was an amazing bassist...as you should know)

Wrote more of the Beatles' best songs by himself than Lennon and Harrison put fucking together. You wouldn't know it of course, because Yoko Ono demanded Lennon not only be included on innumerable songwriting credits for songs Paul wrote absolutely by his goddamned self, but be ahead of the slash between Lennon/McCartney.

It will be funny to see the spluttering, blindly regurgitated, myna-bird style "BUH WHA HOW COULD YOU SAY MORE EXPERIMENTAL LENNON'S BEARD WAS DIRTIER BAH BLUH BAH" responses. Knock yourselves out.

The sad fact is that people (children) hate on Paul because he doesn't and didn't go out of his way to be eccentric or fashionable. The End.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BlackGravel,

I've only listened to it a few times through, but I don't really get this album. I'd rate it about 6.5 to 7.0, because there are some interesting sounds and effects but there are almost no enjoyable melodies or harmonic progressions; the songs just sort of stagnate.

Gravel seriously at least make a halfhearted attempt to stay on topic..

I can't say I get this album much either. It just doesn't really do anything for me if I listen to it.

I thought I'd hate this album, but I rather like it. I think it kind of fizzles out after "Sleeper Hold", but all-in-all, it's good.

quote:

Originally posted by JGlass:
You're missing the point of the music dude, sorry.

Pretty much. Technique and aesthetic go hand in hand.

Actually i hate mccartney because of his new album and that goddamn smirk on his face at starbucks. but i hate starbucks too so i guess...i dont know but yeah i mean these bands have technique, its just that without any real melodies its hard for me to listen for more than a couple of songs don't you love run on sentences.

Well, the more you listen the... easier it gets? I used to enjoy a lot of music like this but I could only listen to a few songs before having a headache. Now I know how to listen to this type of music and thoroughly enjoy every minute of it.

The reason people seem to not enjoy new things is that they don't take the time to find out how to enjoy them properly and give them a fair shot.

P.S. Every band that has been mentioned so far has plenty of melody in each track but they bury them using various effects and techniques... that's part of the fun. Picking out buried sections makes the music a lot more interactive.

of course there's always the problem of when you have a headache already....