So basically DCFan, you're labelling anything you don't know how to classify as post-rock, which isn't really accurate. I wouldn't necessarily know how to classify Gnarls Barkley, but I wouldn't call it post-rock.

This has gotten totally ridiculous. Okay look Animal Collective is not a post-rock band. Post-rock and instrumental music aren't necessarily the same thing. Lots of classical music is instrumental but it isn't post-rock. I think Slint and Mogwai, specifically Young Team share many commonalities and Slint IS generally considered post-rock. Sometimes Stereolab has also been lumped into this group, although they have clear ties to the "motorik" basslines of groups like Can and Stockhausen. Don Caballero is the textbook definition of math rock, you ask anyone that works for a music magazine what math rock is and odds are that 9/10 of them will use Don Cab as the quintessential example. Although many groups can be different things all at once, I agree that post-rock has a more strict definition than just "I can't classify it so it goes here." Sometimes it can be hard to quantify what the exact definition of a term is, but whether or not we agree on that is beside the point. I'm going by the other journalists in my field and if you read any of the following magazines/websites: Pitchforkmedia, Spin, Alternative Press, Cokemachineglow, Tiny Mix Tapes, Stylus, The Wire, Mojo, Uncut, or even Rolling Stone, they all label groups like Slint, Mogwai, and Godspeed You! Black Emperor post-rock and I have not once heard that term used to refer to a band anywhere close to resembling Animal Collective. The usual reference point I've seen in reviews is Mercury Rev's earlier work which is pretty psychedelic. If you really want to argue about post-rock go back a couple of months and read an article on Pitchforkmedia about 90's post-rock groups by Nitsuh Abebe called "The Lost Generation" and then we'll talk. I'm tired of hearing weak arguments from people who haven't read up on their subjects.

Slint and Tortoise are considered the first-ever "post-rock" bands. All Music Guide says so, Simon Reynolds (who coined the term, one of the most pretentious music subgenre names EVER) says so, too.

Its musical roots are from psychedelic/progressive rock and aspects of jazz in the '70s, but with a more lo-fi, indie-rock approach in the late '80s/early '90s. Sonic Youth, arguably, did a one-off, post-rock song with "Teenage Riot" before Slint or Tortoise cut records, and its pretty much agreed that Slint's "Don, Aman" (who created the "vocal post rock" school) and Tortoise's "Djed" (who created the "strictly instrumental post rock" school) solidified the subgenre in the early- to mid-'90s. I would be remiss if I didn't mention Low here, either. Through the slowcore subsubgenre, they prevented the post rock movement from becoming a geekfest of pedals and improv noise.

As an aside, there are plenty of obscure bands from this era which exist in the grey area of indie rock turning into post rock: Lorelei, Rodan, Chavez, Polvo and so on. Each of these bands took sides on whether or not they would have vocals or not, solidifying the two different schools.

From there, Mogwai took it in a whole other direction. They seemed to add a touch of the concurrent early-'90s shoegaze movement (My Bloody Valentine, Ride, Lush, etc.) into their brand of post rock. They also, it seems to me, had heavy metal in mind, too. That could just be my bias.

Mogwai was representative of non-American bands who had picked up on post rock. Keep in mind most, if not all, post-rock bands in the subgenre's beginning were American. Mogwai were from the U.K. (Scotland), Godspeed from Canada, Sigur Ros from Iceland and even, later on, Mono from Japan. All of these bands (except for Mono) started in the mid- to late- '90s. Post rock, like many genres and subgenres, has undergone a transatlantic, intercontinental and even international exchange through its evolution.

As of the beginning of the '00s, more post rock bands popped up with new styles and better production, making for new possibilities: Explosions in the Sky, Saxon Shore, Unwed Sailor and so on. This decade has also seen post rock fused with metal. Bands like Pelican take Mogwai's metal jones and kick it up a couple of notches, whereas Isis (no doubt inspired by Mogwai, but mainly by Neurosis) come from a metal direction and play sharper, heavier post rock with a revenge. The recent rise in popularity of (God help me) "post metal" is the cause of veteran bands like aformentioned Neurosis, the Melvins and even Tool.

As you can tell, I've written lengthy articles on this subject before and thought I could inject some knowledge into the proceedings. It's been my recent obsession to get more people I know into instrumental/post rock, and to ween them off traditional song structures and plain-jane rock music with lyricis as opposed to atmosphere. Frankly, if you ask me, I think post rock is just the new prog rock. That's just me.

I don't know "Post Rock" from "Post Toasties", but this sounds like another instance where honest emotions and thoughts are more important than labels. Anyway, that's my worthless two cents, so carry on...

quote:

Frankly, if you ask me, I think post rock is just the new prog rock. That's just me.

Definitely Yay! While most of your comment speaks to how I feel in general, this specific thought caught my attention because I've thought the same thing for a while now. I'm not asserting that post-rock and prog are the same thing, but there are distinct similarities in the two. The willingness to experiment with longform compositions is just one relevant aspect that comes to mind.

jonathanbrigsby, obviously you disagree with me, as you said you are "tired of hearing weak arguments from people who haven't read up on their subjects," but seriously, there's no need to condescend here.

For one, I have read up on the subject, and my only point is that I've read a number of sources labeling bands as post-rock, when the bands are hard to classify that way (when using the original definition of post-rock). This has occurred so much that I think the genre has really expanded. You obviously disagree, but I feel like I made some fairly good arguments. And really, my only stance on the issue is that the genre has lost some meaning.

For example, Pitchfork (the mighty pitchfork! ) has labeled Don Caballero as post-rock. See their review of American Don

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/record-reviews/d/don-caba...o/american-don.shtml

Lastly, my opinions on Animal Collective are only as follows: NO, they're NOT a post-rock band, but they have some songs or certain sounds that are characteristic of post-rock in that they (1) are very texture-driven, rather than riff oriented, (2) they write some music that is focused on highs and lows, building on tension, and releasing that tension, and (3) they often write pieces of music rather than traditional songs. Now, you all may still disagree, but I don't need to read some stupid music source for me to hear those kind of similarities in groups that are labeled post-rock. I don't need to READ that....I fricking HEAR it.

Wait. You just used a Pitchforkmedia quote to your advantage and then turned around and called them stupid. That doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Hearing is a very personal and subjective thing. You can hear something in a specific record that noone else hears, and so can I. When you go about defending this position as more than opinion is where I have a problem. There is a reason for reading up on your subject, which you seem to value and discredit in the same post. This is why after gathering information from several sources and coming to a general concensus where one can see the overall arc of opinions that I made my statement about post-rock. I'm certainly not trying to disqualify your opinion, because it is exactly that, an opinion. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

As far as the Don Caballero thing goes. I challenge you on that as well. Here is the exact quote from Pitchforkmedia writer Matt LeMay, not the opinion of the magazine but that of a specific reviewer in which he says:

quote:

The band combined the driving, distorted guitars of heavy metal with the intricate arrangements and percussive elements of post-rock.

He did not call them post-rock but asserted that they had elements of post-rock just like your Animal Collective statement. Having elements of something and being it are entirely different. In another Pitchfork review for Don Caballero offshoot band Battles, another writer inadvertently calls Don Caballero math-rock by saying that Battles has members of Don Cab but they're not math-rock."

But seriously, we could argue back and forth all day about this. As I said before, maybe we should just agree to disagree.

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

jonathan,

not to split hairs here, but this is the quote i was referring to in the Pitchfork review:

"But even with all its weaknesses, American Don still has the one distinct advantage of being a Don Caballero record. Of the countless bands trying their hands at instrumental post-rock, Don Cab may be the best at giving the rock equal billing with the 'post."

And really, I wasn't trying to say that Don Caballero is post-rock. I was really just trying to say that people have said it. I agree with you that it's more calculated math rock. But I was just trying to say that so many people/sources have called all sorts of bands post-rock, which takes away from the genre's meaning.

The only reason I brought up other sources, and gave credit to music sources is to demonstrate this point. Yes, I do read up on it, and like you said, people should do that before making their opinion.

And I'm also not trying to take anything away from those sources by discrediting them. I was just using them to make my point above (about the genre of post-rock).

What I was trying to say (and maybe I didn't do so very eloquently) is that these sources have expanded the genre beyond it's original meaning. And so, because it's been expanded, then it can be argued that other bands (like animal collective and others) who share similar characteristics (described in my last post) in songwriting, or who have certain sounds/songs that are similar, could be lumped into the genre as well. Whether it's right to do so or not, I don't know. But it's something that I hear, and so, if I hear the similarities, then it's just my opinion.

Lastly, I think my whole argument about these other bands is that they share certain elements....I think every band that has been mentioned in this thread is very unique (except for Explosions in the Sky, who i think rip of Mogwai to the nth degree), and so all we have to compare are similar elements. Clearly, we disagree that some of these share elements. That is fine. I respect your opinion. I shared your opinion in other instances (note, the Appleseed Cast thread).

Anyway, agree to disagree. cool.

Cool.

To resurrect the thread, post rock is definitely an all-purpose name for some people for "I-don't-know-what-the-fuck-this-is rock."

I've heard Aloha, Belle Orchestre, the Arcade Fire and now (in this thread) Animal Collective and Don Cab referred to as post rock. All of it. Its kind of a big smorgasborg for some people, and that's ok. Maybe they aren't really serious music fans, or maybe just not genre devotees.

These are the same people, however, who use "emo" as an all-purpose term without knowing its historical or musicological origins. We can't all be braniacs on the nerd patrol, however, so whatever. The internet does these kinds of knowledge gathering things for us, but that wiki article is busch league. I remember visiting some website a year or two ago that had a big database of post rock band's names. I think the wikipedia article ripped it off, too.

Damn I wish I could find that link.

quote:

Originally posted by Yay!:
These are the same people, however, who use "emo" as an all-purpose term without knowing its historical or musicological origins. We can't all be braniacs on the nerd patrol, however, so whatever.

"Emo" has evolved and changed quite a bit over the last ten years, and there are multiple definitions of the word. I assume you're talking about more recent usage of the word, where people are talking about bands like Gratitude or The Forecast, who have pretty much no relation to hardcore punk. It's just a different genre with the same name, not misuse of your precious term.

Emo as a term seems to have been co-opted as of 5-7 years ago and now it just doesn't mean the same thing as it did in 90's when bands like Sunny Day Real Estate and Mineral were considered emo or in the 80's when the term was coined to describe bands like Rites of Spring who were basically just post-hardcore. I don't know if it's necessarily being misused in the present tense so much as the definition has changed because of the fact that the term was "taken" by mainstream magazines and misused so often that it has now come to have a different meaning. In my personal opinion, most of the bands that are called "emo" these days: My Chemical Romance, Thursday, Fall Out Boy, Taking Back Sunday, etc. are just bad pop punk for mall kids. Maybe this is a discussion for another thread though.

quote:

Originally posted by jonathanbrisby:
Maybe this is a discussion for another thread though.

It is, and I'm sorry I said the "e word." It was the best and most recent example of subgenre misnomers, of which, I could think. The name's actually become so omnipresent in pop culture that it actually was a question on Jeopardy (non-Rock 'N' Roll Jeopardy, mind you!) a couple of years ago. Needless to say, when I saw it on TV I couldn't believe it.

When "post rock" gets on Jeopardy, only time will tell. Maybe when Sigur Ros, Mogwai or Explosions in the Sky become as popular as Pink Floyd, King Crimson or Yes?

On that note, barring the obvious answer of Sigur Ros, who do you guys think is the most mainstream viable of post rock bands? Which could you hypothetically foresee hearing on classic rock radio or being reissued by some label like Rhino in 30 years?

I gotta go with Explosions in the Sky. They're probably my favorite post-rock band, and they don't mess around and let 10 minutes go by during their songs without anything happening like Godspeed and others. Their albums aren't 75-minute marathons either. They aren't as abstract (I would say as boring) as Tortoise, and they aren't as noise-oriented as the Wind-Up Bird and the like. I could see them gaining lasting widespread popularity.

The only thing I worry about with them is if they're good enough songwriters to keep going. It's been 3 years and they still haven't come out with another album. I've read that they've been trying and they just aren't satisfied with anything they've come up with. Kinda makes you wonder if their first few records are all they had in 'em.

Of course, I by no means am a post-rock junkie, and there are many I haven't heard.

I would definitely agree that the Wiki article is pretty weak. For instance, I had no idea that Stereolab was ever considered post-rock. I think it just demonstrates the point that post-rock has started to encompass anything you can't classify.

I was definitely not trying to imply that Wikipedia is the end-all-be-all source. In fact, I think the way Wikipedia works is that they either take things from other random websites to create their own, and I think people can't constantly add things to change definitions, etc.

I really just don't think that any post-rock band could really hit that kind of success. I think it's too contemplative and requires too much patience to listen to for anything mainstream. i think too many people want short, to the point songs with easy and identifiable hooks.

That being said, I think Mogwai has been a pretty good pillar of success. They play at fairly large venues when they tour.

Yeah, I'll also go with Mogwai for being the most likely to ever achieve any kind of mainstream success. They use vocals where other groups like Godspeed You! Black Emperor, Explosions in the Sky, MONO, etc. are primarily instrumental. That being said, it would take something like the transition Yes made in the 80's with a radio hit like "Owner of a Lonely Heart" to make Mogwai a household name. Going back to that whole progressive rock comparison, take King Crimson for example as well. You never hear any other King Crimson song on the radio unless it's "21st Century Schizoid Man."

quote:

Originally posted by DCFan:
I really just don't think that any post-rock band could really hit that kind of success. I think it's too contemplative and requires too much patience to listen to for anything mainstream. i think too many people want short, to the point songs with easy and identifiable hooks.

Definitely true at the moment, but you have to remember that it hasn't always been like this. I really don't know much about music history, but, wasn't there a time when more contemplative music was popular, when 3:00 generic pop songs weren't the only thing that gained mainstream popularity? I think we're still on a trend away from that sort of thing, but it could change, and something like post-rock could maybe break through then.

Yeah, maybe somebody like Bill and Ted (from Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure) will come around and change the course of history with really inspirational music.

Here's to hoping that something changes!

Sorry for the digression....i saw the opportunity....and i took it.