| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Ten Percenter |
Posted - 10/15/2004 : 02:31:21
Frank Black fans avert your eyes ("the Ocean of Irrevelance that Frank now inhabits"??):
http://www.cokemachineglow.com/reviews/fbf_fbf2004.html
Sometimes I wonder what life would be like if I had never heard the Pixies. Where would I be without them? Would I like music as much as I do without the Pixies? Probably not. It’s a scary thought. Given the choice, obviously, there’s no way I’d part with the experience of hearing the Pixies for the first time. Because while there have dark moments between he and I lately (see the section about Disc Two of this set below), I’ve learned to accept the good with the bad when it comes to Frank Black.
On the one hand, he’s brought me hours of misery with some of his recent "material," but on the other hand he (along with the rest of the Pixies) changed every single perception I had about music. Surfer Rosa (1988) knocked my socks off. The first day I heard it, a crisp fall day during my freshman year of college, I walked to my classes with my mouth agape and couldn’t think about anything else. So I listened to it again. And again. And again.
The Pixies were one of the most amazing bands I’d ever heard, one whose total package was somehow better than the sum of its impressive parts: The jagged, jangling, roaring, surf-tinged, vaguely Spanish guitars; the impassioned cryptic, sci-fi or religious lyrics about a destitute world that were either screeched by Frank or breathily intoned by Kim Deal; the rock steady bass notes pouring out of Deal’s side of the stage, anchoring any theatrics Frank or Joey Santiago would venture into; the bone-chilling drums of David Lovering that made it sound like the walls were falling down around me; the melodic hooks that made everything stick together and always seemed to blindside me.
What forged those parts into something even better was a superb understanding of songwriting dynamics that few bands could boast. Their trademarked quiet-loud structure became the blueprint for most relevant '90s post-punk and rock (see: Nirvana and Radiohead), and that certainly wasn’t the only structure they employed or that’s been lifted from their library. They are a testament to the fact that it’s not how technically proficient a band is, but how inventive and imaginative. Over the last 15 years or so, almost everyone in the band's related genres (and even some not) have name-checked, referenced or ripped off the Pixies. And the truly amazing thing is that the original, oft-pillaged songs still sound fresh and vital.
So it was with great hesitancy that I decided to pick up this album of demos and re-worked classics by Frank Black Francis. Combining his early stage name with the name he used by the time Bossanova (1990) rolled around, Black seems to try to justify his re-hashing Pixies classics by combining them with early demos, as he explains in the liner notes. And to his credit, the first disc of demos from 1987, which supposedly pre-date the sessions at Fort Apache where Come On Pilgrim was recorded, is fantastic and worth the price of admission in and of itself. While not as revelatory as something like the Beatles Anthology, this first disc is something that I imagine will be almost as interesting to Pixies fans. Black rips through fifteen utterly essential Pixies songs with only an acoustic guitar and his versatile voice and a tape recorder. And it sounds fabulous. In a testament to his fine guitar playing, songwriting and impeccable vocal delivery, there isn’t much missing here from the songs that would go on Come On Pilgrim. To wit, the “Holiday Song” version that opens this affair sounds nearly as good as the version that would end up on their first studio release.
Other Pilgrim cuts like “Isla De Encanta”, “Caribou”, “Nimrod’s Son” and “Ed Is Dead” sound just as good (the telephone that rings in the background during “Nimrod” is a great reminder of the lo-fi manner in which this set was recorded). In other songs, it’s amazing how fully Black is able to flesh things out with his crude voice and not so crude guitar work. This disc doesn’t sound as much like a demo as a stripped down Pixies set. “Oh My Golly” and “I’m Amazed” are both slightly slowed-down and benefit from the more spare arrangement of the solo setting as opposed to the full on assault they receive on Surfer Rosa. An early version of “Subbacultcha” is actually quite different from the version that wouldn’t be recorded until Trompe Le Monde (1991), featuring a different chorus altogether. It’s the only major difference in a set of songs that illustrates the power a young Frank Black wielded more than anything else. He sounds like a young lion, wailing and roaring, complemented by deft guitar work that's not so much technically sound as disarmingly catch and well-timed. As I’ve said, it’s a worthy addition to any Pixies fan’s library.
Though I loath to mention it, there is a second disc in this set that was apparently recorded by the same Frank Black Francis fellow who furiously spat the first disk out 17 years earlier. And oh, what a difference 17 years make. The first thing you realized is how much deeper his voice has gotten over the years. Sounding as much like a drunk and tired Tom Waits as some odd pseudo-jazz band from Cool World, Frank reinvents Pixies classics like “Where Is My Mind?" “Cactus," and “Velouria” in truly frightening fashion as dirges with muddy techno faux-flourishes. Sounding like he’s backed by lurching whales in heat, Black answers that burning question---what would the Pixies sound like if they were cranky old men who were insane and thought the Bladerunner soundtrack was really good?
If I keep summoning movie soundtrack references it’s because I can only assume that Black and his new friends were going for something vaguely cabaret or theatrical. Sadly, the results sound more like the soundtrack to a bad '80s cop movie than appropriate or even interesting re-takes of some of the best pop songs ever penned. The bass lines are a flying ‘fuck you’ to the brilliance of Kim Deal--– they are soupy and flaccid enough to make a listener scream, “This ain’t no holiday!” The keyboards and trumpet appear far too often and too tastelessly to sanely try to reason what they would add to any Pixies song ever. Mostly, the songs are overproduced to such hilarious heights that I can listen with a smile and tell myself that this is what happens when bands get old. Mostly.
“Where Is My Mind?” is the second song in after a decent but foreboding version of “Caribou.” The familiar Kim Deal bass line is apparently done on a bass (albeit one with the reverb kicked way the hell up) but then keyboards wash in and a melancholy trumpet fills the void left by Santiago’s searing guitar riff. There is nothing that even tries to take the place of Lovering’s bone-rumbling drums. The trumpet strikes me as the most heinous way to violate this song (and almost every song of this 13 song set), but here it toots again as the keyboard tries to emulate the guitar riff and adds some bubble effects. “Where Is My Mind?” for fish? Who has any idea?
I’ve heard that record execs are slobbering over the chance to get the Pixies in studio again to record a new album. Apparently, Frank and the rest of the real Pixies have expressed some hesitancy at this offer, not wanting to fuck with their Holy Grail of Songs they left for fans the first time around. At first, I thought they had the right idea, but the fact that Kim Deal’s last record rocked (the Breeders’ Title TK, 2002) coupled with this year’s resurgence by bands like Mission of Burma, Morrissey, Sonic Youth and even the Fall had me thinking “maybe.” However, hearing this set of reworked Pixies classics---all similarly paced and similarly over-done---is more than enough to give me serious pause. And, really, it’s just as much an argument for the Pixies NOT to record a new record as anything else. Maybe the Pixies have one great record left in them, maybe Frank could let Kim take more of a lead (as she has clearly not drifted quite as far out into the Ocean of Irrevelance that Frank now inhabits), maybe the stars could align one last time…but, really, maybe its better not knowing.
-Sean Ford, October 13, 2004
"Fried food, cigarettes, no exercise, chest pain..." (Excerpt from the Angina Monologues) |
| 35 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| speedy_m |
Posted - 02/23/2005 : 13:29:21
Hey Dom, how ya been? Let me tell you how I'VE been. I'VE been listening to Andrew Bird (largely based on your review). This is a terrific album. I'd never heard of him before, but now I'll have to look into his back catalogue as well. Other recent listens: Feist, M Ward, and the new Spoon.
 Here comes a special boy! |
| langdonboom |
Posted - 02/17/2005 : 13:50:41
obviously I was addressing Frank's critical reception in general in my posts. I never said disc 2 of FBF was genius at all. Sorry if anyone was confused! I was referring to the "ocean of irrelevance" comment from the original post, the parting pot-shot the writer of the review flippantly tossed off which I took to be based on more than simply FBF, but somehow evidenced by it (dumb). I don't think FBF is genius, and if it is, I don't geddit! But I like it well enough as an experiment.
And I do think that the subtlety of FB's solo songwriting lends a lot to his critical dismissal. If you need examples of this, I can provide them, as I'm sure can many others on this site. I think its because his solo stuff doesn't jump up and scream 'ARTY' or 'ORIGINAL' like his Pixies stuff did. So he sins in comparison. That's my beef with critics like this guy above.
Anyway, welcome to the forum gougegouge.
|
| gougegouge |
Posted - 02/17/2005 : 12:34:20
quote:
Originally posted by langdonboom
To be specific -- the problem with the above review is judging Frank based on disc 2 of FBF -- that's just misguided, if not totally dumb. Then to chalk him up as "irrelevant" based on that avowed experiement, I find just lazy. Don't blame me if critics come off looking ignorant! It feels like the review has taken FBF to be just the most irrelevant release in a series of irrelevant releases (to use the writers terms). That is pretty much not getting Frank at all.
I'm not saying all crtical reviews automatically mean the music is genius due to its inaccessability, I'm saying that a large portion of the reviews of Frank's music in mainstream press (or even music sites like Allmusic, who I usually like) miss what's going on in Frank's music. He's not 'now' or 'with it' enough to warrant respect. That's my opinion, in this specific case of Frank Black, and I'm sure people who wrote those reviews believe what they're saying, and I certainly don't mean to paint all critical reviews with that broad brush, but this has been my experience with Frank's music and its critical reception. Sue me for thinking that if you criticise FB you just don't get it! The FBF experiement non-withstanding -- on that score, I'd advise a little perspective for the critics.
And I understand -- music criticism is hard. Its not easy to really get inside a work of art and connect to it on its own terms. Any human being brings many prejudices to his point of view and they can definitely get in the way of looking directly at what a work of art presents. I'm not trying to insult critics as much as describe the limitations of their job. When you have to meet a deadline or fill column space, some subtlety can get lost in the process. Its not an easy task at all, nevermind the rampant subjectivity of art in general. Some of Frank's albums didn't really click with me until MANY listens, even Teenager of the Year, which is surely one of the best rock albums of the 90s, if not more.
Those 'everybodys' you mention who love FB in my experience are doing so for his contribution to history, not for his current output. He's lauded as the man behind the Pixies and most of his fame and adulation comes from this. Notice how no review can ever not mention the Pixies, and usually just to compare negatively with the current album.
If I recall correctly, only after Dog in the Sand did Frank actually start getting some good reviews in the press, as people started talking about how "he's back!" and not snicker at his choice of genre. Go read some reviews on the first FB&TC's album and see how badly critics missed the boat. And then BLD and DW got some press for being two-on-one-day but those albums, too, got short shrift. This is what makes me think Frank's just not fashionable enough. But that shows you what good fashion is.
This is silly. Disc 2 is irrelevant. No one ever said anything about Frank's career being irrelevant. Frank's gotten plenty of positive press, and some would say apologist press because of the Pixies. The review isn't "judging" Frank based on one CD, it's "judging" the CD and finding it lacking.
To fault the review for mentioning the Pixies when the CD consisted of PIXIES demos by Black and PIXIES songs reworked by Black is a little thick-headed. If he'd reworked his own songs, most of which don't touch his Pixies stuff, and hey, I LOVE Dog in the Sand and TOTY, then the review wouldn't need to mention the Pixies. But since they were Pixies songs, it MIGHT make sense to mention the Pixies, no?
Saying that the album is "genius" that only you can understand is a bit of tenuous position, but, hey, go for it. Do you honestly still listen to this album? Ever? Please.
|
| dogjones |
Posted - 02/07/2005 : 05:02:47
...and not to mention frank just cut some vocals and 2 pale did the rest of the production...its not like he was in the studio for months cooking up a pixies one-man revival |
| dogjones |
Posted - 02/07/2005 : 04:59:34
im not a big fan of that 2nd disc, but to call some of the songs done on there missing traditional elements/feel and tampering with classics..gimmie a break, some of those originals sound pretty tin-quality crap as far as studio recordings go and not always in that quaint 'diy' quality. bad religion's first album is a classic, but seriously, its pretty crap sounding. no sound is untouchable and if youre gonna try to put across to a reader what's going on, why drag it around...they're frank's songs and its been well over a decade. the chance to hear frank actually singing rather than wailing and holding notes for as long as his breath will last is at least a fresh take on songs he wrote.
|
| langdonboom |
Posted - 02/01/2005 : 08:07:35
To be specific -- the problem with the above review is judging Frank based on disc 2 of FBF -- that's just misguided, if not totally dumb. Then to chalk him up as "irrelevant" based on that avowed experiement, I find just lazy. Don't blame me if critics come off looking ignorant! It feels like the review has taken FBF to be just the most irrelevant release in a series of irrelevant releases (to use the writers terms). That is pretty much not getting Frank at all.
I'm not saying all crtical reviews automatically mean the music is genius due to its inaccessability, I'm saying that a large portion of the reviews of Frank's music in mainstream press (or even music sites like Allmusic, who I usually like) miss what's going on in Frank's music. He's not 'now' or 'with it' enough to warrant respect. That's my opinion, in this specific case of Frank Black, and I'm sure people who wrote those reviews believe what they're saying, and I certainly don't mean to paint all critical reviews with that broad brush, but this has been my experience with Frank's music and its critical reception. Sue me for thinking that if you criticise FB you just don't get it! The FBF experiement non-withstanding -- on that score, I'd advise a little perspective for the critics.
And I understand -- music criticism is hard. Its not easy to really get inside a work of art and connect to it on its own terms. Any human being brings many prejudices to his point of view and they can definitely get in the way of looking directly at what a work of art presents. I'm not trying to insult critics as much as describe the limitations of their job. When you have to meet a deadline or fill column space, some subtlety can get lost in the process. Its not an easy task at all, nevermind the rampant subjectivity of art in general. Some of Frank's albums didn't really click with me until MANY listens, even Teenager of the Year, which is surely one of the best rock albums of the 90s, if not more.
Those 'everybodys' you mention who love FB in my experience are doing so for his contribution to history, not for his current output. He's lauded as the man behind the Pixies and most of his fame and adulation comes from this. Notice how no review can ever not mention the Pixies, and usually just to compare negatively with the current album.
If I recall correctly, only after Dog in the Sand did Frank actually start getting some good reviews in the press, as people started talking about how "he's back!" and not snicker at his choice of genre. Go read some reviews on the first FB&TC's album and see how badly critics missed the boat. And then BLD and DW got some press for being two-on-one-day but those albums, too, got short shrift. This is what makes me think Frank's just not fashionable enough. But that shows you what good fashion is.
|
| VoVat |
Posted - 01/28/2005 : 20:40:46
quote:
you make music critics come off as ignorant as possible...as if we don't put a lot of time and effort into doing the albums justice and making sure that first impressions aren't what we write about.
Considering how many cookie-cutter reviews I've seen, I get the impression that a lot of them don't. Or at least they don't SHOW that they do.
quote:
i'm talking about bands that have been around, working their asses off
What does how hard a band works have to do with the quality of their music?
"Reunion? Shit union!" |
| frank black conspiracy |
Posted - 01/28/2005 : 15:55:04
Sorry i'm so late in joining this thread, seen so many FBF reviews here I presumed this was just another to add to the collection.
But it's been one interesting read.
I agree with Sean Ford. The demos are a much welcome addition to my Charles Thompson collection. I knew the tape existed but i've been waiting so patiently for their release, to the point where I thought I'd never get to hear them. FBF is worthy of my attention for these songs alone. I'd have paid more just to hear Black Francis solo with his acoustic.
I must admit the second disc stays in it's case. Not the best, even if it only exists because CT didn't feel the demos were worthy for release by themselves (they are).
Hey Dom, so how you enjoying the board so far?
Just wondered if you or any of your colleagues have heard (unofficial) Honeycomb?
(apologies again all for butting in midway through your conversation) |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/28/2005 : 14:44:21
it's just so easy to throw critical apathy toward some of Frank's releases toward the critics themselves, as if NOBODY gets Frank Black. c'mon...NOBODY ignores Frank, he's loved by anyone who puts any value in rock history or anything remotely in that category. and, to go back to the beginning of this thread, i'd say Sean Ford "understands" Frank to a pretty thorough extent. To say that he's not understood because of his brand of "genius" is pretty pretentious and the oldest cliche excuse in the book. you make music critics come off as ignorant as possible...as if we don't put a lot of time and effort into doing the albums justice and making sure that first impressions aren't what we write about.
and I'm not talking about any cast-off "flavor of the month" as you like to call it, i'm talking about bands that have been around, working their asses off, and just haven't had the chance for any critical time. simply stated, if frank is going to make one side of a two-side release a divisive affair, then (especially die-hards!) should learn to live with this kind of criticism...especially someone who trumpets frank's genius as being so divisive in the first place. and maybe bands that don't have frank's status deserve attention for their albums that aren't as "inaccessible" but still deserve and pay off after repeated, close listens.
but to just blame this all on music criticism is dumb. it doesn't even approach the fact that, maybe, frank is not an impenetrable genius. that he did something that is not good. that he shouldn't be worshipped for failures as equally as triumphs. that "relevance" applies to consumers, not critics.
oh, and to imply that critics write reviews after one listen is possibly the stupidest thing i've seen on this thread. that and how frighteningly close you're getting to a "inaccessibility = genius" argument. |
| langdonboom |
Posted - 01/28/2005 : 13:34:33
sure, I understand that POV, its just that to my mind, Frank gets ignored by the cricits simply because he doesn't fit into an easily critiqueable sound/vision/fashion that makes him easy to pigeonhole and celebrate. I actually believe the subtlety of his genius (and his non-model apperance) go a lot longer way to explaining his 'irrelevance' in the mainstream music press as opposed to the inherant value and quality of his music. I simply disagree with your assessment of Frank's music per se, and your use of the word 'relevant' in general. That's all.
IE - lukewarm? I don't think so at all. At least not the 'real' albums like Show Me Your Tears was. I think its more likely that the flavor of the month is easier to pick out in a crowd than someone doing the kind of subtle rock n' roll that Frank has adopted in his solo work. Every one of his albums has required a few listens (EVEN from this die-hard fan) to really 'soak in' -- and each one on first listen sounded 'simple' or 'plain', though after livign with them they revealed such a deeper level of vision than much of what's been written about the Catholics reflects (ie "beer commerical music") and that to me is a sign of Franks greatness -- his non-immediate accessability, and the rewards repeated and careful listening to his music provides. This is bound to be bad for 'relevance' in a pop music (or even in a hipster/stylish) critical scene, since its hard to conceptualize, hard to write abuot after one listen with anything approaching authority, and hard to label in a way that makes for good copy. That's what I mean when I say relevance in that sense is irrelevant (to me). And that's why I think Frank deserves MORE not less attention. But the right KIND of attention. Simply because his music is great.
So you don't like Frank as much as someone else these days? That's cool! I like tons and tons of bands, too. But my feeling is that Frank's critical 'irrelevance' has more to do with the state of music criticism and the 'industry' than it does with the sounds coming out of his albums.
But the status quo is okay with me, as long as Frank gets to keep making records. Just don't tell me he's fallen off! He's really as good as he's ever been.
|
| Dom |
Posted - 01/28/2005 : 10:07:32
do i sense some sarcasm?
i was never questioning personal relevance...personal relevance is what makes music worth loving, and there's no way i can assume a certain artist to have a certain "relevance" in any other person's life besides my own...but "relevance" is "relevant" in music when people can't take criticism for the artist they love from someone who happens to be questioning this artist's status as an artist to be revered.
all i'm saying is that no matter how you cut it, there's a lot of music out there and only a tiny amount of critical attention to be doled out. no matter what people like to think, a lot of music lovers are influenced by critics and the press and media and all that. Why not give the attention to a new band that you believe has a phenomenal album, that NEEDS the attention, when the most recent album of one of your favortie artists--and MANY other's favorite artists--put out something that is simply lukewarm, that doesn't really appeal to you. That is where relevance comes in, when the whole scene is looked at relatively. Maybe that's sad, but I think that has to be kept in mind.
I've never said someone's personal relevance and preference doesn't apply, but that kind of inward perspective can only go so far. I love frank black...but at this moment in time...i love many other artists a lot more, many other artists that, maybe, could use my help. i'm not too worried about frank, he'll be fine and he'll continue to make good music. all i'm saying. |
| langdonboom |
Posted - 01/24/2005 : 09:27:48
I'd like to question the relevance of relevance in music. Doesn't the word really seem to mean 'popular' in the context presented above?
Someone please explain what relevance relevance has, since I find the art of Frank Black extremely relevant to my life, as much as or more now than ever!
Alienation confers freedom. Obscurity will keep you pure. Pray that you won’t be discovered young, so that you won’t be tempted to sell out early, or won’t be seduced by celebrity.
--THE PATH OF THE ARTIST |
| ColouredAir |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 12:48:34
Woahh There...I dont know how anyone can say that Frank Black has lost his voice. I saw The Pixies play in aug 2004 in UK and at first I was having doubts as to whether he would be able to reproduce the vocals but, my god, was I wrong. He absolutely blew the place away. I was lucky enough to have seen them play in the UK when they were 1st around and, as far as I could tell there really wasnt much difference.ABSOLUTELY AWSOME. As far as his solo career, FANTASTIC.
The more you listen to his solo albums the better they get. Frank Black in my humble opinion is one of, if not THE, greatest song writer that has emerged in the last god knows how many years,decades.
Just think what music would have been like without his influence, I dare to think. Also in regards to the 2nd cd of his latest release where the Pale Boys were involved, I read that Frank Black literally just went in to record some vocal tracks then he left and The Pale Boys were left to there own devices so how can you slate Frank for that?????????? |
| Cult_Of_Frank |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 08:50:33
An interesting thread, to say the least. I appreciate your persistance Dom. I'm not a huge fan of FBF either, but won't condemn Frank's relevance on the basis of what is essentially an experiment. What has he done in the last five years? He's put out some amazing albums.
Have you heard Dog in the Sand? Arguably one of FB's best, including his Pixies career. Show Me Your Tears and Black Letter Days were both stellar as well, if not quite on the level with DITS. Now, perhaps people are not talking about DITS or SMYT, I'll give you that. Pitchfork didn't even break an 8 for DITS, and barely passed (5.4) SMYT.
Does this, and a general lack of media attention directed at Frank, make his music irrelevant? Perhaps as a journalist, it does a little. If nobody's talking about or referencing it in their articles, then why would you? Of course the counterpoint to this is that if everyone subscribed to this "what's hot" style of journalism, then we really wouldn't have need for multiple reviews and publications. Music reviews are inherently subjective, and there's no escaping it. Some even embrace it. So to stick to "what's hot" or, to put it another way, what's relevant, instead of what you enjoy or dislike, strikes me as pandering. Philosophically speaking, of course, I'm not suggesting this is what you do (or what Sean does), but rather that this is the eventual outcome.
To me, I love those albums. I really do. This has nothing to do with idol worship and everything to do with music worship. I've loved, in varying degrees, every album he's output, which does smack of idolism, but it's also true. And while I didn't like FBF initially and only barely like it now (there are worthy moments, but it's just not my cup of tea), I also put in context that it's an experiment and he has umpteen good records behind him as well as a stellar one on the horizon (Honeycomb sounds great!).
The fundamental disagreement here seems to be our willingness to grant the artist leeway to try something off track and allow it even if it turns out poorly vs your unwillingness to do so. I think we view it as a spur rather than a new direction, just an offshoot. There's a lot less pressure and less importance.
I guess maybe we (well, some of us actually enjoy it, but for those that don't) think that the album is irrelevant, and it stops there. You question what this says of his career (making FBF relevant), and rightly so as a journalist. But that point is moot for us.
In any case, I'm rambling and probably not making much sense, but I more than welcome someone willing to critically discuss Frank's (or any artist's) music and agree that we need not wear blinders. But of course you can expect disagreement on occasion (such as with Sean's review).
 "Join the Cult of Frank 2.0 / And you'll be enlightened (free for 1.x members)" |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 08:48:48
oh, and by the way, a lot of the CMG staff hails from Canada...not to pigeonhole your huge country into one bland stereotype...but these guys do stand firmly behind canadian music, which it seems is a largely ignored region for really great stuff |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 08:44:43
naw, no worries about all the love for Frank...i can understand what it's like to love something so vociously and have some outsider supposedly strut in with something that sounds like an attack. ah well.
oh man, that's aweosme you liek the new Nick Cave...his last one disappointed me, but this double album is damn good! you should check out No More Shall We Part...a bit slower and deeply moodier, but it's good stuff.
other stuff? well, when the new Decemberists album comes out in March, i recommend that more than anything. i got a copy pretty recently and i've been listening to it non-stop...hopefully it'll spell big things for Colin Meloy and Friends. moreso, if you've never heard the decemberists before, i strongly recommend that...their Tain EP is just endlessly brilliant. oh, also, the new Iron and Wine EP that comes out in Feb is marvelous...all this stuff you could probably find through filesharing, which if you CAN find, go for it...but these two new works are too good to be content just downloading.
and i don't really know who miss ohio is. any other info on her? |
| speedy_m |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 07:38:27
I'm from freaking nowhere (Saskatoon, SK), and cool shows of any kind can be hard to come by. That's why I always hate to miss something good, even if I don't really like it. These shows aren't for a while, so I have some time to investigate the sounds of the plethora of artists you metnioned above. I think you were on about the "Subtle" album before, so I'll give that a spin. why? is coming with miss ohio's, I don't know who that is, but if it's anything like miss sixty, it'll be expensive and have little staying power.
Anyway, thanks for the tips, try not to get too hurt by the good kids of this forum; we just love our Franks, that's all. And keep the recomendations coming, I'm starved for some new music. Currently spinning: Nick Cave's latest. I like it! My first Nick Cave record. Today I am an old man. |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/11/2005 : 05:36:23
yeah, the top 60 thing was fun...maybe pushing it, but a lot of fun to be a part of, and here's to hoping we got some really good albums some press that they normally wouldn't see, well, next to the ones we've heard to death
and it depends with Magnolia Electric Co...are you into curling up in a corner in a smoke-filled room and getting cradled thusly? then, yeah, i'd recommend it wholeheartedly. i saw iron & wine, and i got severely cradled, one of the best shows i've ever seen...so Jason Molina's a lot liek that, only his songs sound even more all the same. but they sound good...i wouldn't pass it up.
as far as why? goes...eh...oaklandazulasylum was hit and miss for me....but Doseone is the freakin' MAN, and cLOUDDEAD should be seen just for him alone. have you heard Boom Bip and Doseone's "Circle?" or even the new Subtle album? I've heard Deep Puddle Dynamics is pretty spectacular too, and that even has Slug on it. but anyway, i dunno about where you're from, but it's been hard to find Dose around here, so take it while you got it. although why? did have a pretty cool collaboration with Fog...so it's not like the guy's nothing but a horribly annoying voice... |
| speedy_m |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 14:03:57
So, Dom, top 60, eh? Crazy.
Opinion, please: Magnoliec Electric Co. is visiting my little 'burgh. Is this a must see show? I've barely heard any of the mans music. Also why? are coming. cLOUDDEAD is pretty lost on me, should I give it another go? |
| VoVat |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 13:15:56
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by VoVat
Yes, that's kind of the point.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the point is that Fonz did it? huh?
Well, that's the origin of the phrase "jump the shark," which has become pretty common in this day and age. I'm sure you probably know that, but I thought it was a bit odd to point out this origin for no reason.
quote:
yeahm "ocean of irrelevence was a tad over the top...a statement too easily made...but just because this is a frank black forum doesn't mean it indelibly justifies blind reverence or personal offense...
I don't really think the phrase is THAT bad, but it's kind of insulting in that Frank is relevant to US. Maybe we're islands in this ocean of irrelevance, though.
Overall, I don't mind bad reviews, but I DO mind inaccurate ones.
quote:
i just think we need to question frank black's relevence...his idol standing. besides being with the pixies again, what has he done within the past five years that deserves such accolades and worship as the pixies obviously do?
Well, I think Dog in the Sand might be stronger than any individual Pixies album. That's just my opinion, though, and I realize I'm in the minority. I guess the thing is that Frank hasn't RECEIVED much in the way of accolades and worship as of late, but that doesn't mean he doesn't DESERVE them.
"Reunion? Shit union!" |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 09:53:27
except there's a difference between discussing the music and just getting offended because anything bad was said...yeahm "ocean of irrelevence was a tad over the top...a statement too easily made...but just because this is a frank black forum doesn't mean it indelibly justifies blind reverence or personal offense...
yeah, i'm defending sean because i agreed with him...but seriously, if you're going to get this offended by one review or by stuff i'm saying, then yes, you need lighten up
all i've been trying to say is that we need to question frank black's relevence now, and stop all this bullshit idol worship...i believe i've said that quite alot in this thread...being my "point"...but you failed to see that because you were too infuriated by some bad words toward frank...man, get a life
this wasn't begun as any kind of tarry of insults, but now it has because poor frank black had some bad criticism put his way! oh no! you had something renmotely constructive to say about how you like the second disc because it can act as pleasant background music, and how his voice sounds great...and that's fine, that's actually a way of looking at the disc that i hadn't thought about...but then you lost me after the shellac thing...plus, i think maybe you should reread the thread...but i doubt you could do it objectively at all, because i've supposedly insulted you and frank SO much.
plus, i don't think i ever called frank black's music irrelevent shit...i just think we need to question frank black's relevence...his idol standing. besides being with the pixies again, what has he done within the past five years that deserves such accolades and worship as the pixies obviously do? i'm sure some people would have examples, and that's fine....but instead there's just a whole lotta HOW DARE HE DEFEND SUCH FRANK INSULTS...
i realize this is a frank black forum...but there's also room for discussing things besides frank...why aren't you up in arms against that, Bluish Black?
but this is all ridiculous, and i'm sorry if i offended anyone...iu'm sure everyone's all irked and tired of this crap...so it can just be ended here: you're right Bluish Black, what was i thinking?
and by the way, just because i write music reviews doesn't mean i can't talk about the music in a thread populated by others that aren't "music reviewers"...because i write about music doesn't make my opinion any more valid than the next person that doesn't write about music...i just liek music a lot and i want to talk about it...sorry for invading your precious non-music-writer space...it was a bit compelling while it lasted
and the jab at the arcade fire dude being ugly was funny...plus, you ever see THom Yorke? what a horrendous looking fellow. but, fuck, if you say anything bad about his music i'll get really offended. |
| Bluish Black |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 08:55:34
I have been back through the thread to see what you were "trying to address in the first place" and all I can see is that you think the FBF treated disk sucks and that you want the forum to lighten up and not criticise your colleague Sean Ford's review of FBF.
If you think the treated disk sucks fine thats your opinion.
However Sean Ford wrote "...the Ocean of Irrevelance that Frank now inhabits...", and this is a Frank Black forum. I am surprised that you expect Frank Black forum members to take that comment lying down. We are on this forum because we think Frank Black's music is great. We don't expect everyone to like it but we are not going to agree with being told that we are listening to irrelevent shit! |
| Dom |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 07:19:50
quote:
Originally posted by VoVat
Yes, that's kind of the point.
the point is that Fonz did it? huh?
and with what Bluish Black said about remixes not being, inevitably, as good as the the original but still being able to enjoy them...well, yeah, of course...in fact, it's more than possible to like the remix even better...but that really has nothing to do with what i was saying or what i was trying to address in the first place
but that's really cool about being able to see Shellac....i guess i was just talking about him as a producer lately...he's done some unbelievable stuff, but once again, i think he needs to be questioned, like Frank does, for what he's doing now, because most of it's utterly questionable |
| Bluish Black |
Posted - 01/10/2005 : 02:14:53
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
PLEASE someone tell me WHY they like the second disc if they do, especially enough to get all hot under the collar if someone doesn't like it.
I like the second disk even though I was not expecting to.
I bought FBF for the first disk out of historical interest and it is fine it fits in nicely in sequence before the Purple Tapes (Come on Pilgrim and the Pixies (released on Cooking Vinyl)). I also appreciate Frank's sleave notes which give the whole disk an historical setting.
However I listen to the second disk more. I have it on as background music quite often and it is akin to a set of remix tracks you sometimes get with greatest hits disks these days. The fact the remixes are invariably not as good as the originals does not mean you cannot enjoy listening to them. I like listening to them and I also appreciate Frank's consideration to the fans that they should have a value for money product. Also I think his vocals sound particularly good on the second disk, and they remind me of a particularly good solo show I saw him do in Camden, London at around that time.
quote:
Originally posted by Dom
sorry man, but Steve Albini's lost it. he lives about ten minutes north of me. he's a prick. and The New Year was pretty bad (in my opinion
I saw Shellac in London December 2004 and they were ace. They sold out the Scala four nights on the run and the show I saw was the coolest thing I saw last year. The way they engage the audience with those question and answer interludes they do between the songs at those shows is one of the funniest things I've seen. OK not all down to Steve Albini but he was definitly part of the vibe.
|
| Ziggy |
Posted - 01/09/2005 : 05:17:14
Which 'live' album? |
| VoVat |
Posted - 01/08/2005 : 20:04:49
Yes, that's kind of the point.
"Signature quotes are so lame." --Nathan |
| Dom |
Posted - 12/31/2004 : 11:35:28
like what the Fonz did? |
| Jason |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 19:55:52
when internet rock critics start posting to your thread, your thread has jumped the shark. |
| Zsolt G. |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 15:46:35
Are you calling me ugly? Well watch out, because I live in Chicago too, and I'll kick your ass. I think Albini lost most of his cred after that Bush incident, and has been extra bitchy since then, in an attempt to try and win it back. Anyways, I get where you're coming from, didn't mean to lay it on too thick. I hate arguing music anyways. Honestly, despite the unsolicited hype(I doubt this was promoted any more than previous solo efforts, in fact it's on an indie)it got, FBF was meant to be forgotten. Case-in-point, much like that horrendous live album he made while still on 4AD, not a single reviewer bothered trashing that, because nobody cared at the time. In fact he was butchering the material from the venerable solo debut and Teenager of the Year. |
| Dom |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 14:42:42
Zsolt, thanks, for the welcome that is. But i don't ever remember saying i don't like frank black. in fact, i'm a huge frank black fan, both of his solo catalog and, of course, of his time with the pixies.
i better mention that my comment about frank being ugly was uncalled for, but it was in response to the comment of the guy from the arcade fire being ugly, implying it as if it's another reason to not like the band. who the fuck cares? does it take away from the music? no. if it does, you have some major problems to sort out. and then, of course, someone gets offended about me calling frank ugly, when i was just trying to prove a point. this isn't necessarily directed at you, Zsolt, but I think there's way too many people getting way too defensive here.
I came to have a discussion about music. I like this artist and I really didn't like his recent output, and I want to know why someone would like it if they did. not to lambaste them, but to hear or be aware of something i haven't recognized in earlier listens. instead, it's just a bunch of "oh, he hates FBF....why the fuck would he hate it? it's FRANK BLACK! he must not know what he's talking about" (once again, this isn't directed at you Zsolt). can't we just accept that possibly disc two sucks ass? i can accept that you guys really like it.
as far as my mick jagger comment goes, i was just trying to make a point about these "legends" and their relevance today. frankly, the Pixies reunion was supremely awesome, but Frank Black as an artist right now isn't that relevant at all. and then he puts out FBF, and i want even more to question his relevance. because that's what it should all be about...we can't let these "legends" get off scott free...we need to question their work and ask if they still deserve our praise after we've gotten done praising their "legendary" work. all this blind worship is just plain gross, but it's all i've seen here.
also, the cure and mick jagger didn't rerecord new versions of their classic songs. in fact, Charles deserves MORE inspection because of his choice. he's practically inviting us to examine our own obsessions...to examine our idea of whatever a "canon" of rock music should be. for that, i give him some ups, but when it comes down to it, it sounds, like i've said before, BAD.
so, i came here because i like frank black and i like his music. just so happens that one of my fellow staff members was getting ripped apart, so i wanted to defend him, because i agreed with him and i felt like he was being harpooned for dumb reasons. yes, dumb. i just want to talk about music like the subjective stuff it is...not as some set in stone series of bullet points about who's most important in rock history and why we should keep championing that person's works.
PLEASE someone tell me WHY they like the second disc if they do, especially enough to get all hot under the collar if someone doesn't like it.
oh, and Zsolt, sorry man, but Steve Albini's lost it. he lives about ten minutes north of me. he's a prick. and The New Year was pretty bad (in my opinion  )...as well as the newest Godspeed. |
| Zsolt G. |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 13:23:46
Hey Dom, It's nice to harass a professional rather than the usual riff-raff that we get around here. To clear the air, I agree that FBF was a bad idea. However, I must ask what you're doing around here, if you don't like FB? I can't imagine this site is too much fun if you're not a fan. However, this pro/anti FBF shit has been stewing here for some time.
I must say though that I disagree with your assesment of FB as irrelevant. The new Mick Jagger record sucks? How about since the the 80's everything they've done has sucked. I think music reviews are irrelevant if the only thing they review is what might be cool. Nobody gave a shit about Johnny Cash till Rick Rubin made him play a bunch of gay-ass songs, and gave him some snappy album covers. Not one of these shitty rags or online publications would have wasted ink/bandwith on FBF, if there wasn't a Pixies reunion happening. It's ironic that he had to put out the worst record (he's kind of actually apologized for it) of his career to interest anybody. But you can't base a review of his career on a throwaway bonus disc, and as a journalist, you ought to dig a bit deeper. Just because Frank is no longer "hip" doesn't mean he's lost his edge. If you want weird, Cult of Ray is weird as shit. If you want alt-country that isn't pretentious as hell try any of his newer stuff. If you want punk-pop that's actually good, try his first Catholics record. Sorry but all of these records are much better than anything the Breeders ever did (and I like them too), but of course anything that Steve Albini's grubby little hands touch is automatically genius. Frank's catalogue requires you put your pretentions and Pixies-worship aside and appreciate it as honest, guilless, and quality growth of the work that he started in a band that was too cool for school. Now when he starts recording sound-poems with Yoko Ono, I will bite my tongue, but in the meantime I am still justifiably optimistic about the quality of any future product from him, despite the bump in the road called FBF. |
| Newo |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 12:53:22
Ugly is in the heart of the messageboarder.
I do miss that CT doesn't sing in Castillian anymore. His pronunciation was really strange (or maybe just an American strain of it I'm unused to) but fun to listen to.
--
Democracy is the unwiped ass of a devilish con game. |
| Dom |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 09:48:02
..oh, and as far as how ugly the guy from Arcade Fire is..I agree...but no worries, he's married...so his lack of aesthetic quality won't ever affect his music or you.
I mean...THANK GOD his face isn't on the cover of the record. God only knows that would destroy the actual music. and just think of how ugly his children will be!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
...by the way, I saw the Pixies in November. Charles has gotten hugely fatter and is still uglier than sin. must be why the scond disc of FBF stinks. |
| Dom |
Posted - 12/29/2004 : 09:23:13
James, man, it's cool if you don't like the Arcade Fire...obviously all of this is completely subjective. I have an unhealthy obsession with the Talking Heads, and maybe that would predicate my love of Arcade Fire, but in all honesty, I really don't see the similarity...you're talking about a band that relies almost completely on arrangements (Fire), because, yeah, their melodies are pretty damn simple...but as for the Heads, they thrived on minimalism...even Remain in Light, as bigger and bombastic as it sounds than anything before it, could be considered the combination of a few small parts. that's what made they're stage show so spectacular to watch: simplicity pushed to the complete extreme, taking a ten-piece to play things that Byrne and Eno could do on their own. Even the way Stop Making Sense progresses suggests a forced move from the Heads's trademark minimalism. I'm guess I'm just wondering where you see the comparison, because I'm honestly curious. In the voice?
As far as FBF goes, I'm not sure if I really understand what you're saying...but I really don't think the second disc is fun or coherent at all. Yeah, that's my opinion (and i'm a bit embarassed to have my top album of the year match pitchfork's...but i wrote it beforehand! don't hate me), but I think we need to stop acting like these rock gods will always be rock gods when they do dumb shit at a time when their influence should be most vital. Mick Jagger's solo album from last year? blows ass. Radiohead's new collection of short whatever the fuck they are videos? boring. the cure's new album?..ehhhh...Regardless about how you feel about these artists...they're in the ranks of Frank Black as far as influence goes. We need to question them, and their music, and their choices and maturity. I mean, fuck, have you heard Talking HEads's "Naked"...now THERE'S what a band dissolving sounds like. God, does it suck. And frankly, if David Byrne mutilated Psycho Killer or Born Under Punches, turning it into some kind of prog nightmare, I would not be happy...and I would seriously question why the fuck he would do that. And even if he had a good reason, it wouldn't stop the song from (hypothetically) sucking.
I really have no problem with people liking the second disc...I'm just hoping that all this blind reverence will stop getting in the way of criticizing the work of an artist who needs to prove himself once again.....Because if any new Pixies records sound anything like Bam Thwok (yes, I know it's Kim Deal's song), I'm gonna lose all hope. We need to stop "hanging-on" when there's a lot more artists out there that need our attention and money more than the second disc of FBF.
And i'm sorry if i offended any fans. |
| JamesM |
Posted - 12/27/2004 : 16:56:19
Wait, wait, wait. The second half of FBF is shit and The Arcade Fire is great? A fun and interesting (if not all together coherent) is worse off than a second rate Talking Heads clone? Seriously, I'm a Frank hanger-on (anymore at least), and FBF did not crack my top 10 records this year, so uh, yeah. I guess this post is more levied against The Arcade Fire. Sorry!
Also, one of the dudes in that band looks like an uglier version of the kid from Napolean Dynamite.
-Jimmy M. |
|
|
