Originally posted by m.leland: There are three other identical threads. The only thing more useless than lists of music you haven't heard is repetition. It's in the forum guidelines, and this thread should be closed. If the thread were started by someone new to the board it would've been done already.
That's all I'll say on the subject. Carry on.
I don't get it. Are you a junior forum detective? Are we wasting space on your server? I thought the goal of forums like this was to engender interesting discussion of a topic. That's exactly what is going on here. I'm new here, but I don't think the mods go around gleefully shutting down threads they find repetitive. If you don't like it, then don't read it. And where are these other three "identical" threads? The only similar topics I've found are "overrated or underrated bands" and "albums that you heard but didn't like...or did." Both of these are different from what's being discussed here. They're also less active.
Leland's point (which I agree with) has nothing to do with bandwidth or space, but more to do with the proliferation of very similar topics. I don't think the criticism has anything to do with who started the thread, and more to do with making it possible for people to keep up with the posts they want to keep up with.
For my money, the critically acclaimed stuff I didn't listen to in 2005 was practically everything on the TinyMixTapes year-end best-of.
There were also plenty of critically acclaimed thing that I DID listen to, but didn't care for. Some of the years big hitters (Sufjan, Broken Social Scene, Wolf Parade, CYHSY, Antony, The New Pornos) were lost on me.
Posts: 3875 | Location: ATL, GA | Registered: 25 May 2004
Well, going my Metacritic, I didn't hear any of these: Vashti Bunyan, The Earlies, Six Organs Of Admittance, Isolee, Edan, The Books, Richard Hawley, Jens Lekman. Heard limited amounts (samples) from: Wolf Parade, My Morning Jacket, Lightning Bolt, Go! Team, Bright Eyes, Antony And The Johnsons, Clap Your Hands Say Yeah, M.I.A., Broken Social Scene, Animal Collective, Spoon, Sigur Ros..
Am interested in: Wolf Parade, Sigur Ros, M.I.A, possibly Go! Team, possibly My Morning Jacket. I'm pretty sure Bright Eyes is a hit and miss thing with me. I love a couple songs from him.
I know I'm going to get roasted for this but here goes. As much as I truly love reading everyone's posts, the hyberbole just has to stop. Example: Sufjan Stevens's album is constantly praised as "classic" or "groundbreaking" or some other stretched-out term, yet, in my opinion, it is merely a good solid album with some good solid songs.
I'm not sure who's posting here, but I have to think the range falls somewhere between 18 and, say, 23. I'm 33, and all this music deemed "classic" or perfect 10's has been done before, by many.
I think "we" all get caught up in thinking- and I know this point has been made before by several of you - that if Pitchfork or Tiny Mix Tapes or whoever thinks it's good then we should think the same, and I'm guilty of it too.
Again, I mean this in the nicest way possible because I don't want to make waves. But Sufjan Stevens's album, which I liked, would have been better had it been cut in half, mainly the latter half- that's when the album really tailed off. But, hey, this is what it's all about, right? Cook me.
Originally posted by purple: I know I'm going to get roasted for this but here goes. As much as I truly love reading everyone's posts, the hyberbole just has to stop. Example: Sufjan Stevens's album is constantly praised as "classic" or "groundbreaking" or some other stretched-out term, yet, in my opinion, it is merely a good solid album with some good solid songs.
I'm not sure who's posting here, but I have to think the range falls somewhere between 18 and, say, 23. I'm 33, and all this music deemed "classic" or perfect 10's has been done before, by many.
I think "we" all get caught up in thinking- and I know this point has been made before by several of you - that if Pitchfork or Tiny Mix Tapes or whoever thinks it's good then we should think the same, and I'm guilty of it too.
Again, I mean this in the nicest way possible because I don't want to make waves. But Sufjan Stevens's album, which I liked, would have been better had it been cut in half, mainly the latter half- that's when the album really tailed off. But, hey, this is what it's all about, right? Cook me.
I agree, Purple. I fail to see anything particularly groundbreaking about Sufjan Stevens' work aside from the gimmick of recording an album for each of the 50 states. I don't hate "Illinois", but I can't say it's the masterpiece it's been made out to be either. There were other albums of the neo-folk genre released this year that I enjoyed far more.
----- We were wasps with new wings, now we're bugs in the jar.
Posts: 5479 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
It's a neo-folk masterpiece to me, and I'm standing by that. I hate when people say that just because they weren't moved by the album, they think that others can't call the Sufjan a masterpiece.
BTW, I certainly don't go by Pitchfork or Tiny Mix Tapes, for either my likes or dislikes.
This message has been edited. Last edited by: MattD,
Originally posted by MattD: It's a neo-folk masterpiece to me, and I'm standing by that. I hate when people say that just because they weren't moved by an album, they think that others can't call the Sufjan a masterpiece.
I didn't say others couldn't call it a masterpiece, I just said I didn't see it as one. I don't see where it's any more impressive lyrically or musically than other neo-folk releases from Bright Eyes, Devendra Banhart, or Bonnie "Prince" Billy and Matt Sweeney.
----- We were wasps with new wings, now we're bugs in the jar.
Posts: 5479 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
The post before yours said that "it has to stop." That's the kind of thing I was talking about. I see Sufjan as better than Bright Eyes and Devendra Banhart. Sufjan's album is a creative take on Illinois IMO. I thought I'd see more cliches about Illinois at first. But I respect those who didn't like it as much as I did.
Originally posted by MattD: The post before yours said that "it has to stop." That's the kind of thing I was talking about. I see Sufjan as better than Bright Eyes and Devendra Banhart. Sufjan's album is a creative take on Illinois IMO. I thought I'd see more cliches about Illinois at first. But I respect those who didn't like it as much as I did.
BTW, I'm 29 - not in the age range mentioned.
I should let Purple defend his own statement, but I think he was referring to a lot of people in here loosely throwing around terms like "Groundbreaking" and "Classic". We were dicussing this in another thread somewhere, but it's impossible to tell whether an album released in the past couple years is "Classic". Only time will tell on that one.
----- We were wasps with new wings, now we're bugs in the jar.
Posts: 5479 | Location: Michigan | Registered: 19 June 2005
Well, he specificially mentioned Sufjan's album. I agree about calling everything groundbreaking or classic. But if something is a masterpiece to me, I'm not afraid to say it.
For clarity's sake, I was only using Sufjan's album as an example. I could've used a host of others, but, for whatever reason, I didn't. That's all. My whole point is why can't something be merely good. Why does it have to either suck or be great? I think perception brainwashes us as people.
It's only when the critics are reviewing a new or new-to-me artist that I pay the most attention. What I look for them to tell me is just the basics: what type(s) of music is the artist performing here; who is this artist most comparable to (if anyone); and what is the general mood or beat of the songs. With so many new artists and artists I've only heard about in the marketplace, there's not a lot of time to explore reviews and samples. Maybe this basic info I seek isn't the best way to research, but it's what has worked the best for me through the years. Plus, I admit there's a lot of music that I may want to discover but my tastes are not ready to accept yet.
When the critics diss some album I enjoy, I consider it their loss not mine. Maybe their tastes in music are not ready for what they don't like. That's the beauty of music, it's timeless and doesn't scold you for not acclaiming it when it first entered the musical world.
Posts: 8892 | Location: State of Insanity | Registered: 22 September 2005
We can agree there. Sometimes critics turn me on to new music. I also check reviews if I can't tell how much I like a new to me artist from what I've heard. Some critics really do try, and I just chalk things up to a difference of opinion. But other critics seem to have an agenda and really just like to hear themselves talk.
That's why when I really love something, it's my opinion alone.
If something I haven't heard of gets good reviews, I try to hear samples from the album, mull them over a few times, then decide whether I want to buy them.
But, sometimes there's a situation..there's somebody whose previous work I liked, but I'm worried they won't be able to make another good album. If it gets good reviews, then, I might buy it automatically, and if it gets bad reviews, I'll try to hear samples first.
For instance, Kate Bush. I like Hounds of Love, but I wasn't sure what she'd do after 12 years of retirement, so the good reviews Aerial got made me buy it.
--
And, purple...I've heard a great deal of the most critically acclaimed music from 1964-now. And I can't think of anybody who's doing quite the same thing as Sufjan Stevens is doing. It's true he's not inventing a whole new genre or anything, but he's got 'his thing', his little niche of the musical soundscape nobody else has travelled so successfully.
It's way too early for me to call it a 'classic', but if you're going to play the 'age/experience' card...I don't think it's fair to say that nothing new is being done in music today. The people who are calling Sufjan Stevens 'groundbreaking' aren't your high school MTV types who don't see music as having existed before 1992; most of them have heard all the same classic music you have.
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005
I've heard a great deal of the most critically acclaimed music from 1964-now. And I can't think of anybody who's doing quite the same thing as Sufjan Stevens is doing.
I've thought that the Sufjan albums really rip off Van Dyke Parks's albums with pretty weak results.
I also think he's basically covering very similar ground to Jim White, but I think Sufjan's songs are a lot less enjoyable.
Sufjan's great, but I don't think Illinois was the best album this year (at least, not my favorite). I'm not sure if he'll ever have a true 'classic' that people will still be writing about in 20 years. Why? Because he makes an album every year, and they all sound similar to me (though Illinois is the best). Which is fine, and I'm sure that his sound will evolve significantly over the course of his next 48 albums. But I don't think he'll ever really have a statement album like Exile on Main St or Pet Sounds or Remain in Light, especially if he comes anywhere close to his stated goal. But hey, there's something to be said for consistent greatness, which is certainly what we can reasonably expect from him for years.
Non sequitur: I don't like his God-squaddery either. Religious themes are fine, but I think he goes a little overboard sometimes, like with "The Transfiguration," in which he transfigures Seven Swans' gorgeous coda into praise music.
I've heard a great deal of the most critically acclaimed music from 1964-now. And I can't think of anybody who's doing quite the same thing as Sufjan Stevens is doing.
I've thought that the Sufjan albums really rip off Van Dyke Parks's albums with pretty weak results.
I also think he's basically covering very similar ground to Jim White, but I think Sufjan's songs are a lot less enjoyable.
I'll have to look into those two then. What albums do you recommend?
Sufjan's probably going to end up my #2, behind The Woods. I don't know if I'll consider it a classic eventually or not...I'd give it maybe a 25-50% chance, right now.
Posts: 1783 | Location: Around Boston. | Registered: 24 February 2005
As for Sufjan being a classic, I'm not sure. It does have that potential. It certainly will remain one of my favorites.
Yes, there is that very rare time I check reviews when I'm not sure an album by an artist I know is good. But it takes super-special circumstances. I trust the artist's record with me a lot.
Metacritic Forums 
