My short response to one of Black's comments.

Pulp>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Arctic Monkeys

They haven't produced anything that is the caliber of Different Class.

quote:

Originally posted by just indie:
i wouldnt say arctic monkeys are incredible, but they certanly are a very good band. i enjoyed both albums, liking the 2nd one slightly more than the 1st. i wouldnt say they are better than the smiths (yet), but i feel they are better than pulp.

You can't be serious... I really like how catchy and surprisingly technical (for an nme band) the Arctic Monkeys are but they haven't had half the great output that Pulp has; Pulp's released more classic albums than the Arctic Monkeys have released albums.


And yes Shadrach, I thought the first album was completely inane and repetitive, but Favourite Worst Nightmare is a much more mature release.

I said "piece of shit UK acts like Arctic Monkeys" - pretty obviously not denigrating any musical output from the area. I'm fucking exhausted of pointing out obvious things. Really.

And maybe "piece of shit" IS a little sharp. They're a pretty good band for one of your friends to be in. I'd tell people I met "hey I know this guy Alex, they've got this band called the Arctic Monkeys. Stupid name I know, but they're actually pretty alright. Show saturday, they'll be on around midnight. Can you be on the list? Uh probably not."

I'd go more in depth about the band, but I'd probably veer back into hating them. Honestly it seems anything under 20 with a pronounced accent can bang out the most derivative and disposable sub-Franz Ferdinand dreck and get on the cover of something else.

Duncan, you get a very little bit of leeway because you also appear to be old and married, but don't make a comparison like that again. That was downright embarrassing.

quote:

Originally posted by BlackGravel:
I'd go more in depth about the band, but I'd probably veer back into hating them. Honestly it seems anything under 20 with a pronounced accent can bang out the most derivative and disposable sub-Franz Ferdinand dreck and get on the cover of something else.

See, this is your main problem. You have the inability to discuss anything because you (for some reason) have the inability to separate your feelings and have a rational discussion. Rationality is far from your strong suit.

I agree that their first album was absolute garbage-- trendy in every possible way (your typical NME band). But, I'd say that their sophomore album more than made up for it with a solid album of diverse, well-written tracks. Could you please explain to me all the ways in which this album was so derivative? Because it's upbeat? Because the singer has an accent? Because they make rock n' roll songs? Well surely, you're right that all three of those things have been beaten into the ground.

i politely disagree chamb

Well thanks for the great addition to the convo!

Hey, at least he does it politely.

When and if Arctic Monkeys are able to make a song as good as "Common People" or "The Fear", I'll be glad to hear it. At the moment they lack the maturity in their lyrics that gives Pulp their bite.

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

quote:

Originally posted by Chamberk:
Hey, at least he does it politely.

When and if Arctic Monkeys are able to make a song as good as "Common People" or "The Fear", I'll be glad to hear it. At the moment they lack the maturity in their lyrics that gives Pulp their bite.

"Common People", "The Fear", "Pencil Skirt", "F.E.E.L.I.N.G.C.A.L.L.E.D.L.O.V.E.". "Pink Glove", "This Is Hardcore", "Cocaine Socialism", "Mis-Shapes", etc. etc. etc.

There's a reason Pulp are one of my favorite bands even if I hate Brit Pop.

I had and have no extramusical reason whatever to dislike the Arctic Monkeys (aside from their name, and I like lots of bands with stupid names). I did download their second album. The first track almost seemed to be about to radically redeem the band, but then at 27 seconds in the song started. A more nauseatingly predictable little London dance rock riff I hadn't before heard from anyone but uh the Arctic Monkeys. On their previous album. It's the kind of chord progression that could be a shitty James Bond theme with a little retooling. I didn't listen to the rest of the record, not at all. SO, all the tracks after that one on Favourite Worst Nightmare (which is dumb enough to be an Ashlee Simpson album title) I can't officially account for.

The omnipresent references to Turner's "lyrical prowess" are the other thing that really bewilders me. The quasi-cockney right-there-in-your-face accent is the only thing that's mildly interesting about anything this young man has to say, and that aspect spends about eight seconds morphing from fascinating to annoying.

"I can't take my eyes off the t-shirt and ties combination"

WHOA he's just eviscerated the fashion-and-hype driven industry! And he's so young! It's not like every fucking band that was ever obviously a part of these trends attempts clumsy commentary on the same come their second album.

Elsewhere it's understandably callow but not understandably trite relationship and friendship politics, heavy with UKisms like "wind-up" and thoroughly uninteresting narratives about how WELL these tossers know the whole London-club-SCENE-thing.

WOW! They actually recognize that there is disappointment and messiness in the party scene?

WOW! Turner has a (contrived) jadedness and even puts meaningless references to American towns like San Francisco in his songs! It's like he's older than he is

And the music - a'right Alex...I've got this Specials thing I've worked out, yeah? It's a bit obvious, but we've got a move a bit away from the Parklife and low-rent Clash thing, and this bit would be blinding on that first song. (that was whichever jagoff pinches the riffs talking to Alex. So maybe it's Alex himself, talking to himself in a mirror. Seems like something he'd do.)

Also WOW! They have a DRUMMER who plays well! (can you name a band who doesn't?)



Anyway, all this tripe seems sufficient to hypnotize the press (and that not even completely - read some of the reviews that seem to have been written by the kind of people who don't do things like call them "scrappy" because the music they make is NOT VERY GOOD:

"This is the new big British band? This is barely inspired enough to make it off campus."

It has that special ring of truth, because the Monkeys sound so much like a band you do see perform in the cafeteria at a technical college, and they're so unimpressive you feel bad for them and their obviously dead-end career. They're a thoroughly uninteresting musically third-string britpop/dance-rock band that has gotten by on their "story," their youth, and the fashionability of their pretend-unfashionableness. That's all.

I fear I've gotten carried away one more time. I spent at least a few hours last night trying to explain to a handful of burnouts why Tool sucks. Maybe you can understand my lingering frustration.

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

Although I don't disagree with you about the Arctic Monkeys, but you did write this, correct?

quote:

Originally posted by BlackGravel:
I've been thinking about this lately: I'm gonna go ahead and say that nearly every single time someone says a band "sounds" like another band, they're full of shit and totally wrong. Why do I think that? Because they always ARE wrong! Two bands, even bands that use all the same instruments, have vocalists that are the same age and sex, are from the same city, have the same "influences" and can be categorized in more or less the same way will eight times out of ten sound NOTHING ALIKE in any practical or meaningful way.

Everyone's so excited whenever they've found a make-believe chink in my armor.

I referenced to other bands exactly once, and that was in the voice of someone from the Arctic Monkeys. Even if that hadn't been the case, it was a reference to a specific song (View From the Afternoon - I don't remember why I said "first song" maybe this imaginary conversation was at a point before they'd gotten the tracklist down), specifically the "Bear that in mind" bridge type part. Why am I explaining myself.

Read other things first. Find out all the reasons you will be wrong before you post. Even if we could foregone all the above, I'd be one of the cases provided for with "NEARLY every single time."

Hey man, I like Tool.

Regarding this: "There has been endless discussion on what Indie is supposed to be - Is it a form of music?, record label status?, etc..." we have endless discussion about indie here. Here is a grand list where, at least, the word "indie" is in the thread title.

Also, when someone creates a topic, can everyone at least make an effort to stay on topic. We have far too many off-topic discussions going on here.