-= Frank Black Forum =-
-= Frank Black Forum =-
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 Frank Black Chat
 Here Comes Your Subbacultcha
 Science Proves New Pixies is Worse than Old Pixies

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.
To register, click here. Registration is FREE!

Format Mode:
Format: BoldItalicizedUnderlineStrikethrough Align LeftCenteredAlign Right Horizontal Rule Insert HyperlinkInsert EmailInsert Image Insert CodeInsert QuoteInsert List

* Forum Code is ON
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]


T O P I C    R E V I E W
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 01:06:20
Not about Pixies specifically, but this video interestingly shows the trend in music becoming worse and worse.

COMPRESSION is a significant topic in the video and probably the one most relevant to the Pixies, but also the trend to less poetic lyrics.

It has over 5 million views so maybe youíve seen it.


14   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
Sprite Posted - 11/21/2018 : 08:27:35
Originally posted by Bedbug

And of course I think the Beatles are overrated. Doesn't everybody?

Eh No
pot Posted - 11/21/2018 : 07:33:18
Not not dumb, just can't think of anything. It seems to be the way for musicians, hard to keep writing music as good as their early stuff. Other art forms by comparison don't seem to suffer from this unfortunately inescapable trend, ie. painting, writing, film directors..

Some musicians think they are releasing their best stuff ever. How often have you heard "back to form" when an old band releases their first album in years and you listen to it and it's just not. Noel Gallagher reckons his new stuff is his best ever, but he's a big headed twat.
Bedbug Posted - 11/21/2018 : 05:50:33
Sorry if Q2 was a dumb question, just kind of saying that if you like Frank Black, Bob Dylan, Ween, etc. you probably like the stuff they did pre-2018 better than what they are doing in 2018, or maybe even you like their 20th century stuff better than their 21st century stuff.

And of course I think the Beatles are overrated. Doesn't everybody?

But no, I don't necessarily think that more music means better music.
pot Posted - 11/20/2018 : 11:17:03
Music doesn't always have to be the same to sound the same.

Q1. Dunno but there's a lot that in years to come could become old time favourites. The Pixies were never my favourite band of all time until after the reformation.

Q2. *scratches head*
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 10:40:42
It is interesting that in our "infinite universe" there is a finite number of notes that can only be played so many ways. Is it all in the ear of beholder?

Of your top ten greatest artists of all time, how many are ones that millenials would consider to be current?

Of your favorite artists, how many are doing their best work now (as opposed to then)?

pot Posted - 11/20/2018 : 08:49:28
You have to remember also that there isn't an infinite number of different sounds or arrangements of those sounds. Modern technology of the post 60's and 70's electronic era made things a lot more interesting and varied, and some saw that as a bad thing and still do. Whether you do or not, with the sheer volume of music being produced and that has been produced over the past 5 or 6 decades it's difficult to be original now and so the record companies are always looking to promote new styles. Sometimes these are good, eg. grime and sometimes these are bad, eg. Clean Bandit. Right now we are blessed with bands and artists all over the world all working hard to produce (and play live) music from every kind of genre that has evolved from the music scene of olde, and there's always something worth listening to and always something from the past yet to be discovered. There is more music to entertain us than any of us could ever get bored with in ten lifetimes. There's so much music these days that I find it hard to fit in obligatory quiet time. Compare this situation to even just a hundred years ago: what music did we have to choose from then? Not much, bit of blues or jazz or classical or country folk and that was about it. Enough to keep people entertained but I can imagine people would have gotten bored with their record collections in those days, if they even had any. Go back a thousand years, what music was there then? Nowadays if you get bored of an album all you need to do is look around on spotify for something else you haven't heard.

I therefore would like to contest the above conjecture that music is worse now than it was in the 60's. How can music be getting worse if all the music that's already been is still there, recorded and available to listen to. Adding more recorded music to that library cannot logically make music in general worse. More music is better music.
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 06:56:16
I donít agree with the video 100% by the way.

I just think he makes some valid points in general that even apply to our team
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 06:38:18
Originally posted by pot

I think it might also have something to do with having greater expectations of his work if recorded and released under the Pixies, as opposed to solo.

Agreed, Iíve made this point many times.

If Frank Black released Indie Cindy I (we?) would like it better. Why?
Jeepster Posted - 11/20/2018 : 05:35:34
I donít think itís fair (and itís certainly not good scientific practice) to judge the quality of modern music based on the top 40 hits. There are loads of thoughtful, exciting, innovative musicians out there right now, you just probably donít hear them on the radio (which is the same as ever- There was plenty of crap on the radio back in the times weíre nostalgic about today). I think 2.0 is pretty good btw, with a few songs that could have fit right in on Trompe le Monde or Bossanova.

Q: Where do Pixies keep their instruments when they're not playing?
A: Debasement.
pot Posted - 11/20/2018 : 05:24:45
I think it might also have something to do with having greater expectations of his work if recorded and released under the Pixies, as opposed to solo.
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 04:06:32
The manís input from 87 to 94 is the G.O.A.T., not a doubt about it.

Everything after that is far superior to the rest of the world as well.

I just think they part of the reason 2.0 is not as good as it could be is the devolution of humankind.
picpic Posted - 11/20/2018 : 02:27:31
I don't know about other artists, but Black gave us 5 ultimate records in 5 years with the Pixies. And then a shitload of amazing records as Frank Black. And two very good records in 2.0 IMO.

All of his 1.0 stuff becam cult, which is of course absolutely impossible to override.

Many bands propbaly become worse and worse, but I don't think Black's efforts are following this tendancy. Less prolific for sure, but definitely not terrible. And some of the 2.0 stuff is up there with 1.0/solo stuff (yes, I really believe that !).

"Service Unavailable"
Bedbug Posted - 11/20/2018 : 01:45:15
I think the Pixies fell victim to the same stuff as everyone else. The decline of western civilization. Shorter attention spans, compression, less poetic writing, etc.

Bieber and Perry are just the banner children, but itís probably affecting everybody.
pot Posted - 11/20/2018 : 01:27:15
If he's going to make continual references to Katy Perry and Justin Beiber then yes he's got an argument, based on cherry picked science.

I say The Beatles are overrated and music has never been better than it is now.

As for the Pixies I think the overriding reason 2.0 isn't as good as 1.0 is simply the songs aren't as good.

-= Frank Black Forum =- © 2002-2016 Frank Black Fans, Inc. Go To Top Of Page
Snitz Forums 2000