| Author |
 Topic  |
|
speedy_m
= Frankofile =
Canada
3581 Posts |
 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
- FB Fan -
18 Posts |
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? |
|
|
|
Dom
- FB Fan -
18 Posts |
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 |
|
|
|
Cult_Of_Frank
= Black Noise Maker =
Canada
11687 Posts |
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)" |
|
|
|
ColouredAir
- FB Fan -
United Kingdom
1 Posts |
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?????????? |
|
|
|
langdonboom
= Cult of Ray =
USA
260 Posts |
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 |
Edited by - langdonboom on 01/24/2005 11:46:07 |
|
|
|
Dom
- FB Fan -
18 Posts |
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
= Cult of Ray =
USA
260 Posts |
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.
|
Edited by - langdonboom on 01/28/2005 13:38:15 |
|
|
|
Dom
- FB Fan -
18 Posts |
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. |
|
|
|
frank black conspiracy
~ Abstract Brain ~
1126 Posts |
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) |
|
|
|
VoVat
>> Denizen of the Citizens Band <<
USA
9168 Posts |
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!" |
|
|
|
langdonboom
= Cult of Ray =
USA
260 Posts |
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.
|
Edited by - langdonboom on 02/01/2005 08:17:35 |
|
|
|
dogjones
- FB Fan -
USA
142 Posts |
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.
|
|
|
|
dogjones
- FB Fan -
USA
142 Posts |
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 |
|
|
|
gougegouge
- FB Fan -
1 Posts |
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.
|
|
|
|
langdonboom
= Cult of Ray =
USA
260 Posts |
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.
|
Edited by - langdonboom on 02/17/2005 13:52:27 |
|
|
|
speedy_m
= Frankofile =
Canada
3581 Posts |
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! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Frank Black Francis review: CMG
