It won't let me open the actual review yet, but here is the teaser on the front page:
"My Morning Jacket have refused to remain creatively static, a decision that's helped them map a clear and wonderful upward trajectory over their first decade, but does them few favors on their baffling new album"
pitchfork hates anything that gets popular or sounds like it was produced in a real studio--now all the little indie pitchfork robots can go regurgitate the review :-(
I agree Pitchfork isn't credible with reviews. I stopped reading them a long time ago!
Most of the time they don't even review the record, they just regurgitate some pretentious backstory on how something irrelevant to the record effects them but directly relates to their bad score. They are a pathetic publication when it comes to quality reviews. Although not too bad of a source for music news.
Ouch, 4.7?
This is actually a great sign for the band though, as it's a 100% conformation that they are now popular.
If this was an album that only 7 people knew about, I'm sure they'd give it an 11.
in the end of the day, they only gave Z a 7.something and none of their readers would go see them play...more room for me!
I knew this review was coming from the second I heard "Highly Suspicious" (which I love). I use Pitchfork to find good new music (Battles, A Place to Bury Strangers, and Fleet Foxes are a few bands I discovered through them); however, I always take their negative reviews with a grain of sand.
After a long string of descending reviews stemming from Tennessee Fire, it seemed like this was the album pitchfork was waiting for. I mean come on I love Evil Urges, doesn't make it my favorite jacket record but to deny its quality makes me want to fly to Chicago and set Juan's Basement on fire.
For those who can't be assed looking up Pitchfork....
QuoteIn interviews, Jim James has said he doesn't want My Morning Jacket to remain creatively static, or become victim to the sort of bland-ification that befalls so many lesser groups that emerge through the jam and festival circuits. He's lived up to his end of the bargain: A clear and wonderful upward trajectory can be easily mapped over the band's first decade, as their fanbase and creative scope expanded with the crowds and lineups at Bonnaroo, a festival with which they'll forever be linked.
As they grew, they pared back indulgences (like the thick song lengths of It Still Moves) and allowed fresh ideas to infiltrate (the first third of Z) while retaining a sonic identity distinctive enough to influence legions of worthy followers. Their 2005 psych/prog wonder Z-- not so much their Yankee Hotel Foxtrot as their The Soft Bulletin-- broke sharply with the Muscle Shoals might of Moves, but 2006's wonderful live double-album Okonokos re-framed and affirmed My Morning Jacket as what fans and critics had been saying since At Dawn: This is one of America's preeminent contemporary rock bands.
My Morning Jacket's latest album, Evil Urges, ends the mean streak the band's been on since 2000, and threatens to squander some of the widespread goodwill they've been steadily building along the way. There are few fiery guitar freakouts, folk-influenced melodies, soaring space-rock bridges, or psychedelic flourishes here; instead, the empty space is mostly filled with serviceable falsetto funk and glassy-eyed yacht-pop. Worse still is the band's decision to ignore the perfect past incarnations of James' Orbisonian tenor-- easily MMJ's most appealing component and one of the more breathtaking instruments in modern rock. At best, his voice is sorely underutilized here; at worst, it's mangled beyond recognition. After listening to Urges, I wonder if My Morning Jacket might just be satisfied following in the footsteps of labelmates Dave Matthews Band: nestling into a comfortable niche and aiming for the Starbucks carousel with rootsy New Age romanticism.
Any discussion of this record has to start with the eye-poppingly annoying "Highly Suspicious", a loud thud ending any chance Urges had to match the group's previous records. An attempt to merge the band's penchant for live quirkiness with James' long-simmering Prince fixation, the track sounds like My Morning Jacket's version of a Phish novelty. The song reduces James' voice to a grating squeak, which cowers in the presence of the obnoxious, caricatured chorus. The song's libertarian undertones ("Wasting all your time on drama/ Could be solving real crime") sound like they could stretch to resonate with the hydroponic crowd or those who fret about warrantless wiretapping, but I cringe thinking of an entire amphitheatre singing along to "peanut-butter pudding surprise" unless they're at a Ween show.
At the moment, even a not-very-political band like My Morning Jacket can't resist using their biggest stage yet for a bit of message-driven oratory. James has said, "Evil Urges is about how all of these things that you've been told are evil really aren't, unless they're actually hurting something or somebody." Cool, but the title track, a lighter version of "Suspicious", neuters a righteous sentiment by burying it underneath a jammy funk pastiche. The simultaneously effortless and calculated "I'm Amazed" is breezy and naïve enough to trigger the unconscious sing-along reflex, but the refrain ("Where's the justice?") is utterly ambiguous. Similarly, "Look at You" wastes a perfectly good pedal-steel on a goofy hybrid of the sensual and civic, praising "a fine citizen" as "such a glowing example of peace and glory," as if James were a state senator awarding citations to volunteers. "Sec Walkin'"s refrain of "demon eyes are watchin' everywhere" may address his existential angst at omnipresent security, but the song's Quaalude-smooth soul vibe-- for real, it's a Grover Washington sax solo away from the PA system at Von Maur-- make it seem more like he's content to just keep on truckin'.
Soft rock isn't an irredeemable genre category, and there are some pretty good singles that have been tagged with it. James and his band have professed their affection for such sensitivity in the past, on tracks like "I Will Sing You Songs," which successfully filtered a timid emotional tone within the band's own style. Not so much here. In a live context, prefaced with an extended ironic monologue, Make It With You is fun. On record, several times over, from a singer more accustomed to disguising his elliptical, oft-nonsensical lyrics with grain-silos full of reverb, it's incongruous and awkward. "Thank You Too!", with syrupy strings courtesy of arranger-to-the-stars David Campbell, is readymade for the bride and groom's slow dance (save the line "you really brought out the naked part"). The strings trill, dramatically rising and falling on the loner's fantasy "Librarian", as James quietly crushes on, and quietly stalks, the female behind the desk, turned on by her listening to "Karen of the Carpenters" on AM radio. It sounds like a very well-produced Dan Fogelberg song, until James drops "interweb" on us like a sack of dirty socks. Thankfully, there's no couplet about him texting her on his "Crackberry" lol.
Still, James' tender side also leads to Urges' best moments, which bookend the album. Nicely sequenced after the title track at the start of the record, "Touch Me I'm Going to Scream, Pt. 1" is the perfect sequel to Z's sly "It Beats 4 U", down to the songs' similarly insistent, live/synthetic drum patter, and the way they isolate James' voice in a chilly emotional purgatory, only to be cracked with passion: "I need a human by my side, untied" is vulnerability done right. James is smart enough to know when he's got something good, and he ends Urges with an eight-and-a-half minute dark disco reprise of "Touch Me", slowly taking shape as the solemn, steady "Smokin' From Shootin'" fades out. With its patient, synthetic gleam slithering around James' lusty hoodoo, "Touch Me, Pt. 2" is My Morning Jacket's Moroder moment, bringing a highly frustrating record to a close with the line "Oh, this feeling is wonderful/ Don't turn it off." If it hadn't been such an exhausting ride to get there, I might not want to.
Pitchfork gave In The Aeroplane Over The Sea 10. That's all you need to know about the hipper than thou Pitchfork. The reviews system is a joke anyway. I mean what's with all the decimal point bullshit? It's bad enough reducing an album to 5 potential stars or a mark out of ten but decimals? And Karen Carpenter is used as a reference to body image disorders in Librarian but then the reviewer would know that if they'd really listened to the album instead of massaging ones own ego with this oh-so-typical-of-pitchfork 'review'. I'm sure the reviewer already has it laminated and filed away in their special folder. I mean does anybody really take notice of Pitchforks reviews? I use it for news mainly.
Pitchfork is pathetic in my eyes.
First of all, they rated At Dawn, Z, AND the Tennessee Fire all lower then they did BOTH Band of Horses Albums.
Not to mention Fleet Foxes, a band that whether they want to admit it or not, has taken a large part of its sound from My Morning Jacket, they give this copy cat band's EP an 8.7 when I thought it was decent, but only had one really stand out song. Then they ended up giving their newest album a 9.0... an album that is in NO FUCKING WAY as good as the earlier MMJ albums it steals from in many ways. I mean they gave At Dawn a 7.1... an album that honestly is miles ahead of Fleet Foxes in song writing ability and overall quality.
All this shows is what someone else already said, this place is all about whats "cool" to like in the indie world. They try to set themselves apart as the "cool" reviewing place, but what they end up doing is making horrible judgments in favor of saving their stupid image.
I kind of expect this from them, especially when I saw that Fleet Foxes album getting a 9 when I remember, oh yeah they've never reviewed MMJ that highly. THAT album is overrated.
Terrible. [/end rant.]
I've been anticipating this for weeks. It's like he wrote out a great review and then cut out anything good he had to say (except the last paragraph) and cut the score in half. Even if this wasn't Pitchfork, I can't take any review seriously if the author says, "lol".
That being said, I think its the only bad review I've seen.
I was expecting this. After seeing the recent Fleet Foxes review, I picked-up their new album. Once I was able to get over the striking similarity to Jim's singing, I saw what it was that brought the high Pitchfork rating. It's the lyrics.
My love for MMJ is pure. But to quote a great song, "it's just the way that he sings, not the words that he says." I have never spent a lot of time focused on MMJ's lyrics. Some music I enjoy because of the words, stories and poetry. Other music I enjoy purely because of the delivery, emotional content and the feeling it evokes. I don't enjoy MMJ any less because the lyrics don't move me.
As for Pitchfork's Evil Urges review, I think they have some very valid and specific criticisms. I happen to disagree with the review, but my disagreements are on an entirely subjective basis. Many of the songs they don't like (I'm Amazed, Sec Walkin, Evil Urges) are my favorites. But as much as I like them, I understand why the reviewer does not.
I think it is a fair review and an honest take on a very different MMJ album. Considering the high regard in which they held Tennessee Fire and At Dawn, is it really surprising that they don't like this new direction? I don't think so. Like I said, I really like the new album. But I also find myself occasionally nostalgic for the sound of the early records. Luckily, no matter what they are doing now, I can always go back and listen to the old stuff whenever I want.
http://2008.sxsw.com/blogs/mu.php/2008/06/09/the_sxsw_aggravator_my_morning_jacket_s_
well put mr. jackson.
pitchfork's reviews are always like this. oh well. :)
QuoteBut I also find myself occasionally nostalgic for the sound of the early records. Luckily, no matter what they are doing now, I can always go back and listen to the old stuff whenever I want.
Or you can listen to Fleet Foxes. Ha.
Actually I really like both of Fleet Foxes releases.
I disagree with you. Because if this was some other bands first new album on Sub Pop it would have got a much higher review in my mind. The only song I can see someone having a truly valid criticism of is Highly Suspicious, but music reviews aren't supposed to be about what was in the bands sound and being nostalgic.
Let me put it this way, they gave The Field's latest album, an album of repetitive dance beats a 9, and they gave el Gunchio an 8.7. AND worst of all They gave FUCK BUTTONS an 8.6, these are just a few of the newer reviews that in my mind are ridiculous and only given because of an overall image Pitchfork tries to give themselves. Listen to any of those albums and you'll see what I mean. Also, you cannot tell me it's because that music is from this genre or that, music should be reviews on one scale, not on different scales for different styles.
Once again, terrible review brought on mostly by the popularity MMJ will get from this album. Read the review, they are already trying to compare it to Dave Matthews Band. Sad.
QuoteQuoteBut I also find myself occasionally nostalgic for the sound of the early records. Luckily, no matter what they are doing now, I can always go back and listen to the old stuff whenever I want.
Or you can listen to Fleet Foxes. Ha.
Actually I really like both of Fleet Foxes releases.
I like them too, I just think they are overrated... and I think it's unfair and pretty silly that they reviewed them so highly when MMJ was doing that type of sound (overall, not exactly mind you) 7-8 years ago.
Fuck Pitchfork.
4.7 out of 10
Nice.
I'm commenting specifically about the criticism in this review, not about how Pitchfork rated other albums which I don't like. I don't ascribe any motivations to the reviewer, and I don't care to speculate about hypothetical scenarios in which they would have received a better rating. I think the reviewer did a good job of evaluating the record as it is. They review it in the context of the band's other releases, but that is to be expected.
Again, I think it is possible to disagree with the reviewer's opinion about the enjoyability of the record and still acknowledge that it contains fair criticism.
I noticed that 4.7 is also the exact score they gave the new Weezer album.
Yeah, he did a great job reviewing it.. Using "lol." In his review, comparing Jim James to Dave Matthews because he is on his label, and that reason only. Bullshit rhetoric in the first 3 paragraphs, and still managed to NOT find the time to review two of the songs on the album. (Aluminum Park and Remnants)
Stop with the bullshit and open your eyes, stop trying to be Mr. P.C. review guy.
This may be the worst review that I have ever read.
Quote
Worse still is the band's decision to ignore the perfect past incarnations of James' Orbisonian tenor-- easily MMJ's most appealing component and one of the more breathtaking instruments in modern rock. At best, his voice is sorely underutilized here; at worst, it's mangled beyond recognition.
Umm...mangled beyond recognition? He's always been able to do this with his voice, there aren't all that many effects on it this time around.
Quote
After listening to Urges, I wonder if My Morning Jacket might just be satisfied following in the footsteps of labelmates Dave Matthews Band: nestling into a comfortable niche and aiming for the Starbucks carousel with rootsy New Age romanticism.
That made no sense whatsoever. Dabbling in funk and disco is not exactly a comfortable niche.
Quote
but I cringe thinking of an entire amphitheatre singing along to "peanut-butter pudding surprise" unless they're at a Ween show.
Looks like somebody forgot how to have fun.
Quote
Cool, but the title track, a lighter version of "Suspicious", neuters a righteous sentiment by burying it underneath a jammy funk pastiche.
Seriously, what do you have against funk???
Quote
The simultaneously effortless and calculated "I'm Amazed" is breezy and naïve enough to trigger the unconscious sing-along reflex, but the refrain ("Where's the justice?") is utterly ambiguous.
You seemed to praise ambiguity in just about every other review you've done.
Quote
Similarly, "Look at You" wastes a perfectly good pedal-steel on a goofy hybrid of the sensual and civic, praising "a fine citizen" as "such a glowing example of peace and glory," as if James were a state senator awarding citations to volunteers.
Come on now. Are those even the right lyrics? And if they are, do you really think they'd have such a shallow interpretation?
Quote
The strings trill, dramatically rising and falling on the loner's fantasy "Librarian", as James quietly crushes on, and quietly stalks, the female behind the desk, turned on by her listening to "Karen of the Carpenters" on AM radio. It sounds like a very well-produced Dan Fogelberg song, until James drops "interweb" on us like a sack of dirty socks.
Ah, Pitchfork, can't take lyrics that are outdated by 10 years but love ones that are outdated by 200? ::)
Quote
lol.
NO! BAD PITCHFORK!
Also, great article from real student journalist who have had real training to write real material at one of the best journalism schools in the country had this to say about Internet reviews, citing Pitchfork specifically, and how obtuse and ridiculous the writing style is.
http://www.idsnews.com/news/story.aspx?id=50460&comview=1
QuoteHave you ever met one of those people, one of those "Oh my God, you're telling me you don't light candles in front of a Bob Dylan shrine in your dining room every night at 6 p.m." people?
It doesn't have to be Dylan. Believe me, I'm not out for him specifically. (I don't want an angry mob of stoners with big musical aspirations knocking down my door later today.) This artist could be interchanged with any iconic group or artist, such as The Stones or Led Zeppelin or Paris Hilton.
I know you know who I'm talking about. You've probably met them at some friend of a friend's party, and they were undoubtedly wearing a vintage-looking plaid button-up and Coke bottle glasses. These are the people who want to make you feel bad for not sharing a similar interest in who they view to be the musical equivalent of an orgasm.
And there are people like that for every form of media out there, not just music. I, for example, always seem to attract film students who think that I was born on the planet Zozar for never having seen a single "Lord of the Rings," "Star Wars" or "Harry Potter" flick. (I'd just rather watch "Legally Blonde" on TBS again, honestly.)
Anyway, these high-falutin' people are often the people who end up as reviewers for popular Web sites and magazines, and the problem is that they often create sentences like this:
"In a scene as self-reflexive as this, backlashes are the order of the day, but even still, there are signs – such as the increasing use of 'blog house' as an eye-rolling pejorative, recent records by Calvin Harris, Does It Offend You Yeah?, and Ghostland Observatory, and the parallel rise of Balearic-feeling dance as a worthy substitute – that this world might be slipping under the weight of its own ubiquity."
That's actually an excerpt from a review of the latest Cut Copy album featured on pitchforkmedia.com, a popular music Web site. It could just as easily have been a review on the latest Lunchables product or the soundtrack to "Bio-Dome." I mean, I'm sure there's a handful of people reading this who do understand more than 35 percent of that sentence. I am certainly not one of them. I am on the other side of that hypothetical fence, watching the "Rock of Love 2" season finale and eating non-organic vegetables.
Yeah, most hilarious part of that review is the fact he tries to portait the new sound as trendy outright. stating Sec' Walking sounds like it could be in your local Von Maur... really now, COULD IT?
The Dark, yeah I think the dude doesn't get that a lot of the songs are about a higher power of sorts, Look At You is a perfect example. This song isn't about a Senator, It's about the lord up above. Most songs on this album can easily put God in there as the major theme... I'm an Atheist too and I know that... and don't care.
QuoteYeah, most hilarious part of that review is the fact he tries to portait the new sound as trendy outright. stating Sec' Walking sounds like it could be in your local Von Maur... really now, COULD IT?
The Dark, yeah I think the dude doesn't get that a lot of the songs are about a higher power of sorts, Look At You is a perfect example. This song isn't about a Senator, It's about the lord up above. Most songs on this album can easily put God in there as the major theme... I'm an Atheist too and I know that... and don't care.
I cannot stand pitchfork. I actually have to get a dictionary sometimes when I read their reviews as I can't understand half of what they are saying, and I have a college degree. Seriously, who they fuck talks like they write? You 2 are right, I just don't think the guy got it. Ditto on the religious leaning and when I heard Look At You the first time, that was exactly what I thought of.
I never ever trust pitchfork for reviews. That's why you should always read from several different sources. Your truth is somewhere in between. Or better yet, listen to the album and ignore the reviews until you've let the album soak in. I often wonder how many times some of these "writers" actually listen to the album before they write up a review.
I went to lunch just now and thought long and hard about this review. This notion that MMJ should just regurgitate TTF/AD/ISM over and over again is ridiculous. How special would those three records be if every record MMJ made sounded like them? How much of an audience would the band have after ten or twenty years of rehash?
I call it the NRBQ syndrome. No hate on NRBQ, none at all, just a lot of their records start sounding the same after a while. I firmly believe that Jim and co. are way too creative and special for all that. I'm not lighting any candles at 6 p.m. or anything :)
Not to mention that if they DID do that, pitchfork would rip them apart for doing, "the same formula as their previous three records."
It's a lose-lose situation.
Quote
Not to mention Fleet Foxes, a band that whether they want to admit it or not, has taken a large part of its sound from My Morning Jacket, they give this copy cat band's EP an 8.7 when I thought it was decent, but only had one really stand out song. Then they ended up giving their newest album a 9.0... an album that is in NO FUCKING WAY as good as the earlier MMJ albums it steals from in many ways. I mean they gave At Dawn a 7.1... an album that honestly is miles ahead of Fleet Foxes in song writing ability and overall quality.
[...]
I kind of expect this from them, especially when I saw that Fleet Foxes album getting a 9 when I remember, oh yeah they've never reviewed MMJ that highly. THAT album is overrated.
Terrible. [/end rant.]
Look, I respect opinions, but at least work to get your damn facts straight. Fleet Foxes aren't a fucking copycat band and won't ever be. Does Robin Pecknold sound like Jim? On first listen, yes. How many times did you spin this album? Once, twice? Maybe three times? The comparison died about two times through Sun Giant for me. Maybe it takes longer for others who are intent on pigeonholing these guys into a Jacket rip-off.
How have they ripped off from Tennessee Fire or At Dawn or It Still Moves, pray tell? I'm trying hard in my mind to think of a moment in their full-length that struck me as not original, not distinctly Fleet Foxes' sound. The beginning of "Ragged Wood" has a distinctly M. Ward vibe to it, but it doesn't just copy--it takes a good sound and good feel and creates its own atmosphere around it, taking that classic M. Ward rhythm section and morphing it into something all their own.
In all honesty, I think Fleet Foxes' self-titled full-length gets a much better rating than any Jacket album because it's concise and one hell of a powerful declaration from a brand new band. The Tennessee Fire is *gasp* not very noteworthy as a debut album in the sense that it doesn't just smack you in the face with "oh wow" most of the time. It does, however, have those moments in it that just floor you. Fact of the matter is that it's not concise, it doesn't have the greatest flow in the world, and it takes some time to get into. Do you disagree?
Once again, I'll reiterate: Robin Pecknold sounds
nothing like Jim if you'll just listen. His voice carries tones and rasps that are signaturely his, and phenomenal for a barely 21-year old. Jim's voice was hardly so full in comparison on TTF. That's not me hating Jim--that is the truth of the difference between their vocal development. If I'm wrong, please point it out to me. But I'm pretty sure Jim's voice didn't really pick up it's full footing until At Dawn, and it feels like he's pushing more towards a low tenor, high baritone as the years grow--especially after hearing them live, it feels like he's losing some headroom with it.
Robin on the other hand is very much a low tenor and has a much easier time hitting that upper chest voice range, opting not to take himself too high in it, which is fair. It takes balls to go for I Think I'm Going To Hell heights, especially when your voice really isn't meant to go that high naturally. That'll wear a man out, but damn does it translate onto an album. That said, listen to "Innocent Son", "Tiger Mountain Peasant Song", or "Oliver James"--tell me you can't hear him playing the beautiful subtle aspects of his own voice there.
Copycat my ass--this guy can write
and sing, and it's genuine as hell, and it's giving Evil Urges a run for its money on my favorite album of the summer.
If the people who reviewed these albums spent more time actually listening, I think they might have something worth reading. I can picture these critics putting the cd in their stereos and taking notes on a piece of paper rather than sitting back, smoking a joint, and taking in the music before they come to conclustions. These people are robots with no connection to human emotion, and have no ability to really feel music the way we do. I don't have time to review music like these drones because I actually listen to albums several times so that I can capture the meaning.
In short, these people don't like music. These are the same types of people that work for most major record labels, they don't like music, they use and abuse music to make a name for themselves or to make money. Or in the case of pitchfork, they give good ratings to the bands that will be their buddies so that they can feel hip. Fuck these people. Music isn't supposed to be hip or cool, it is supposed to bring joy and make you feel good and make you feel a connection with the core of human emotion.
I disagree man, sorry. Fact is they do sound like MMJ, if you would have read my post I didn't ever say it was exact. However, they are riding the coat tails of the sound MMJ made successful and has just now started to really get many bands mimicking it. I've listened to the album several times and I can say that it definitely is different, but it's still a band taking their sounds from another because of recent trends in the music world.
Also, I disagree fully and think Tennessee Fire is a much better album. I also think nothing sounded like Tennessee Fire at the time it was made, but several things sound like Fleet Foxes. The reason is because it is once again cool to add reverb to your vocals, folk rock is once again cool, plaid and beards are once again cool. MMJ was doing all of that before it was cool in todays music and have since moved on to bigger, different sounds. From the way you are defending Fleet Foxes it's obvious you loved that album, which is fine, but to act like its this new unique sound just because you cum when you hear it is ridiculous. Sorry.
Fleet Foxes are nothing more then a trend follower, that does not make their music bad, but it hardly makes it creative in the way MMJ was when they wrote their early material.
This is in response to the crazy rant about Fleet Foxes, I agree with you saying that Robin doesn't sound like Jim especially after the initial listens but claiming they are extremely original just doesn't cut it for me. The more I listen to them (and its quite it bit since I picked up the vinyl release of the full length and ep last week) the more I hear influence from CSN(Y), touches of Beach Boys (harmonies), and other 60's & 70's folk acts. They really aren't doing anything new, they are just re appropriating things from the past and I might add, doing a good job of it.
I believe that I read in an interview with Robin that he said he should probably not use reverb again on his vocals in response to all the criticism he has received for sounding similar to Jim.
...I just read that review.....pretty much they hate everything that isnt Deerhunter (not that I dont like that band too though)......it is a crock of shit that they can just rip that record to shreds......honestly though, who didnt see it coming.....
typical of pitchfork...
Quoteit's giving Evil Urges a run for its money on my favorite album of the summer.
Copycats or not, it's a damn good album.
QuoteQuoteit's giving Evil Urges a run for its money on my favorite album of the summer.
Copycats or not, it's a damn good album.
But is it better than At Dawn? That is the MMJ album I think it takes from the most...
I could even pick out songs that sound like At Dawn songs.
QuoteQuoteQuoteit's giving Evil Urges a run for its money on my favorite album of the summer.
Copycats or not, it's a damn good album.
But is it better than At Dawn? That is the MMJ album I think it takes from the most...
I could even pick out songs that sound like At Dawn songs.
Go for it. I really would like to hear your input because I haven't really gotten that vibe from any of them as of yet. I could maybe hear Oliver James being a bit like something, but at the same time, it's really its own song.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts.
I'll use songs from any MMJ to make it easy.
Meadow Lark - It Smashes Down easily comes to mind, maybe even hopefully.
tiger mountain pleasant song - Bermuda highway, don't need to say much else.
he doesn't know why - death is the easy way
blue ridge mountain - sounds like hopefully too
oliver james - sounds like one in the same or i needed it most in the sense its a low acoustic muddle of just the singer and his guitar completely, no other effects, long out winded sound with repeats several times tons of reverb.
quiet houses - lowdown, just more acoustic and less catchy.
I could go on and will if you want me to. just ask.
It's a little harder though because MMJ actually brings the rock more often and has much more eclectic variety throughout their albums, unlike the fleet foxes s/t.
In fact listening right now and comparing it sounds even more like At Dawn/ISM type mmj, just less rockin for the most part, more acoustic and more hymnal sounding, that's their large differences.
Again, I like fleet foxes, but I'm sorry they just really seem to be following the new reverb folk rock trend MMJ made successful. Watch how many more bands pop up sounding the same way too, nothing wrong with it, its just not original. To be honest I kind of like it because I love that type of sound and hope it never goes away but thats how music works, trends come and go and the bands die with them for the most part. I am only saying all of this because I hate how people try to defend fleet foxes and make it seem more original then it actually is just because they enjoy it. That and I cannot stand that fleet foxes is using MMJ sounds and getting better reviews then MMJ did from these bullshit critics back 6 years ago.
I think the offensive 'LOL' was more in relation to the crackberry and interweb speech. If you look at the context it is pretty obvious.
That being said, the reviewer was a total douche.
That being said, I can see where he was coming from.
That being said, some of his arguments are not totally invalid.
But he is still a douche.
lol.
Now I think the dude sounds like Jim quite a bit (at times) but I don't see the connection to the music at all.
I went to the Black River for vacation this past weekend and listened to the full length about seven times sitting in a lawn chair "down by the river". So sweet. On one day, I had to go back to the cabin to lay my son down for a nap and gave my old man my ipod and told him to listen to the fleet foxes. Later on when I saw him, he said, "You have got to burn that Fleetwood Fox for me!" ;D It reminded him of Simon and Garfunkel.
Also, they could pass for any trendy indie kid clique across the U.S.
(http://i30.tinypic.com/2zhmczr.jpg)
Doesn't mean they follow trends in their music at all though, AT ALL.
People compare band of horses to MMJ too, but I think they sound much less like MMJ musically.
Oh also, heh from one of the websites I frequent a lot.. great forum base. dude had this to say in a fleet foxes thread I just read... funny.
QuoteI'm usually not a fan of when people get all personal in NMD so I'm about to be a huge hypocrite but here goes:
FUCK the Fleet Foxes.
I know two of the guys personally and I'll be damned if Robin Pecknold (the lead singer/main songwriter) isn't one of the biggest dicks I have ever met. Literally everything about him is a contrivance - from the way he stopped shaving/showering to the back-to-nature aesthetic present in his lyrics - it's all a deliberate attempt to create an 'interesting persona.' There is absolutely nothing honest about the way he writes music, and he thinks waaaaaay too highly of himself for someone so young, talented as he is. He doesn't want to be part of the new Seattle music scene, nor does he want to be part of the new folk scene that shares a lot of musical influences and signifiers because he wants to be a scene unto himself. And that shit pisses me off.
And that inauthenticity totally ruins the music for me. At the end of the NMD authenticity debate a couple of weeks ago, I sort of came out on the side that authenticity didn't matter as much as I thought it did. But what if you know for a fact that music is calculated and deliberate and totally fake? Because it ruins it for me, and all I feel when I listen to Fleet Foxes a lot of the time is anger, when I should be feeling joy at their pretty melodies and harmonies.
Even without all of that backstory, though - it really bothers me that the band decided to use the exact same kind of reverb on their vocals as My Morning Jacket does - granted I love reverb as an effect, but there is such a spectrum to choose from and experiment with and they went with the Jim James preset. And that just sort of goes to show that there really isn't anything original or exciting about the music they're making. They know their way around a melody, to be sure, and they know how to use their voices to great effect, but aside from that what can you get from Fleet Foxes that you can't get somewhere else? Also, there are five totally forgettable tracks on the full-length and there is no reason why they couldn't have ust not released the EP and replaced the weaker tracks on the album with the EP tracks to make something much stronger, but they wanted more hype.
ugh, sorry about that
This is on a paid forum too where you can potentially get banned for coming into a thread and saying stuff like that, shows how much he wanted to say it.
I'm done after this but some more people had comments too about this band:
QuoteSad to hear a negative story about the singer/band as I'm completely digging the album. Blue Ridge Mountains is an exceptional track and the album flows very, very well. I've been listening to this, the new Shearwater and the 6-months in advance leaked Deerhunter record and it holds its own. Although I have to say, Deerhunter's Microcastle is without a doubt the record of the year.
Also, the MMJ comparisons are accurate.
QuoteJust as an expression of solidarity here, I have never met any of these guys in person but I got the exact same vibe from their record. I definitely catch a strong feeling of 'musical tourism', a lot of it feels far more calculated than I believe this kind of music should.
QuoteI discovered these guys and Jim White within the same week. It was an explosion of folky goodness in my ears.
There's definitely enough distinction between Fleet Foxes and Band of Horses and MMJ in my mind--I think a Fleet Foxes show would put me to sleep, while MMJ put on a great show (Jim James and Andrew Bird on the same stage at Bonnaroo 06 :was amazing).
Fleet Foxes serves as music for writing papers to--it's profound yet ignorable. My two favorites on the track are "White Winter Hymnal" and "Blue Ridge Mountains."
QuoteI went to the Sasquatch! Festival this year in which they played twice - once at noon to open the weekend and once because The National had difficulty getting over the Canadian border. They played pretty much the exact same set the 2nd time (not like they expected this, I'm sure). They were very chill, very peaceful, with pretty much zero energy throughout. The only song I knew by them was White Winter Hymnal, which was cool live - really, all their songs were "cool" live. All the vocals had the "I Know You Rider" feel to it.
The next day, I passed by the Seattle Sound magazine tent and they were on the cover. The other day I got a "Holy shit, you saw the Fleet Foxes live?" from a hipster-chick when she asked me about the festival. I really, really don't see what the hype is all about, but they're not bad, so I'm not confused when people like them.
QuoteQuoteQuoteit's giving Evil Urges a run for its money on my favorite album of the summer.
Copycats or not, it's a damn good album.
But is it better than At Dawn? That is the MMJ album I think it takes from the most...
I could even pick out songs that sound like At Dawn songs.
No, its not better than At Dawn. I just think good music is good music. I'm not bothered by the fact that it sounds similar to one of my favorite albums ever.
QuoteI'll use songs from any MMJ to make it easy.
Meadow Lark - It Smashes Down easily comes to mind, maybe even hopefully.
tiger mountain pleasant song - Bermuda highway, don't need to say much else.
he doesn't know why - death is the easy way
blue ridge mountain - sounds like hopefully too
oliver james - sounds like one in the same or i needed it most in the sense its a low acoustic muddle of just the singer and his guitar completely, no other effects, long out winded sound with repeats several times tons of reverb.
quiet houses - lowdown, just more acoustic and less catchy.
I could go on and will if you want me to. just ask.
It's a little harder though because MMJ actually brings the rock more often and has much more eclectic variety throughout their albums, unlike the fleet foxes s/t.
I suppose I can hear some of that, but none of those stuck out to me. If you go in looking for comparisons, you'll find 'em. If you go in looking to enjoy new and good music, you'll get it. I think these guys are great, and I think your comparisons are for the most part a big stretch. The reverb, I'll give you that. It's very signaturely Jim's style of reverb. But it fits the music very well, no?
I've done enough fuckin arguing today.
I really liked the one Fleet Foxes song I've listened to, and don't necessarily think their use of reverb is ripping off My Morning Jacket. They're clearly two different bands; i've heard that Fleet Foxes are really low-key and mellow live, while My Morning Jacket is obviously not so. As for what TFowl said about their inauthenticity, that's just unfortunate and certainly puts a negative spin on my impression of them. i do find it a bit useless to evaluate a band based on how "genuine" they are because (unless it's blatantly obvious or you have personal experience) how do you really know? but regardless, seems like the bands that are all about image are the ones that get the initial attention and hype, but die out as the next trend comes along. we will see about fleet foxes.
a little more pitchfork-bashing:
QuoteMy Morning Jacket have refused to remain creatively static, a decision that's helped them map a clear and wonderful upward trajectory over their first decade, but does them few favors on their baffling new album
QuoteAfter listening to Urges, I wonder if My Morning Jacket might just be satisfied following in the footsteps of labelmates Dave Matthews Band: nestling into a comfortable niche and aiming for the Starbucks carousel with rootsy New Age romanticism.
there's a contradiction for ya.
And by the way, i'm new to these boards. hi.
QuoteI've done enough fuckin arguing today.
Yeah, fuck it.
Like I said, I like them, I just see them riding a trend wave... that's all.
Watch how many more bands sound like this kind of stuff in another year if it keeps gaining popularity and acclaim.
Pitchfork's staff are not music fans but rather a bunch of website geeks.
Hey Terrance Trousers, good catch on the contradiction. Oh, and welcome!
Welcome Terrance Trousers!
Quote
I like them too, I just think they are overrated... and I think it's unfair and pretty silly that they reviewed them so highly when MMJ was doing that type of sound (overall, not exactly mind you) 7-8 years ago.
Fuck Pitchfork.
while i agree, fuck Pitchfork...
i gotta say, i prefer the Fleet Foxes full length to Evil Urges. i was spinning it from the moment it leaked (3+ months prior to Pforks review fwiw). saw them back in March and they were absolutely stunning and gorgeous live. the whole "overrated" thing is a bit silly, because bands have no control over that, so to rip on a band for that is kinda pointless imo.
as for FF's influence from MMJ, sure there's a lot of similarities between Robin & Jim's voices, but go see them live, they owe way more to CSNY w/ those gorgeous 4 part harmonies than MMJ.
i'd consider Radiohead consistently one of the most overrated bands of the last 15 years, yet they're also one of my absolute favorites, so just goes to show you what little the word "overrated" truly means.
Quote
This is on a paid forum too where you can potentially get banned for coming into a thread and saying stuff like that, shows how much he wanted to say it.
gotta say, that's total fucking bullshit. Robin is one of the nicest guys i've met honestly. what a horeshit and jaded/jealous raving rant that guy posted. the whole assumption by music listeners as to what is or isn't "authentic" or "sincere" is one of the most overused and weakest cop out excuses in music criticsm.
and for you to claim that their sound is all the sudden "trendy" is kinda hilarious. a few bands doing it, and all the sudden it's trendy? how was what MMJ was doing w/ TN Fire or At Dawn all that original honestly? At Dawn has always sounded like a long lost Neil Young & Crazy Horse record to me. (as amazing as it is, it's one of my top albums of the '00's)
we all know how bullshit Pitchfork's reviews are, so why do you even give a shit? did you honestly expect them to give it higher than a 6? i didn't (and fwiw, i'd give it a 7.8 on Pfork's scale)
You know what, at this stage of the music game everything's pretty much been done already.....so every new band is gonna sound like something or other. Sure, Fleet Foxes have 'borrowed' from MMJ and a lot of older music, and I was bigtime skeptical of them at first but their songs totally resonate with me......for others they may not. I just really love that sound and vibe.
As far as the 4.7 from Pitchfork, I think this album takes awhile to sink in and show it's total depth......so this review is probably a one-listen reaction.
their review is seriously the only overall negative one i've read period.
QuoteQuote
I like them too, I just think they are overrated... and I think it's unfair and pretty silly that they reviewed them so highly when MMJ was doing that type of sound (overall, not exactly mind you) 7-8 years ago.
Fuck Pitchfork.
while i agree, fuck Pitchfork...
i gotta say, i prefer the Fleet Foxes full length to Evil Urges. i was spinning it from the moment it leaked (3+ months prior to Pforks review fwiw). saw them back in March and they were absolutely stunning and gorgeous live. the whole "overrated" thing is a bit silly, because bands have no control over that, so to rip on a band for that is kinda pointless imo.
as for FF's influence from MMJ, sure there's a lot of similarities between Robin & Jim's voices, but go see them live, they owe way more to CSNY w/ those gorgeous 4 part harmonies than MMJ.
i'd consider Radiohead consistently one of the most overrated bands of the last 15 years, yet they're also one of my absolute favorites, so just goes to show you what little the word "overrated" truly means.
Maybe he is nice, fuck if I know.. I just thought it was funny. I could see it from pictures of their band, but maybe they are pretty cool dudes. Maybe he met him when he was wasted or something, you know how people are then....
Also, Radiohead is not even close to my favorite band, but i'd hardly say they are overrated. They deserve their acclaim.
Quote
As far as the 4.7 from Pitchfork, I think this album takes awhile to sink in and show it's total depth......so this review is probably a one-listen reaction.
That's what I think too. Most people, including me... had a big WTF? face when they first started listening to this. I can say though that it's great after a few listens. Most MMJ has been this way for me though, I liked a few songs when I first heard At Dawn back in the day, but as I longed for more material I explored the record more and more and ended up liking it all. Then I got Tennessee Fire once I realized I loved At Dawn.
What I don't understand is how people just can't enjoy Highly Suspicious for what it is... a fucking awesomely fun and hilarious track.
Quote
Also, Radiohead is not even close to my favorite band, but i'd hardly say they are overrated. They deserve their acclaim.
they deserve acclaim, yes, but when you have tons of people saying they're basically 2nd in line only to the Beatles, well then, i can't help but ::) and ;D and think those people are a little :D and :o
QuoteI've been anticipating this for weeks. It's like he wrote out a great review and then cut out anything good he had to say (except the last paragraph) and cut the score in half. Even if this wasn't Pitchfork, I can't take any review seriously if the author says, "lol".
I dont know why, I thought that part was funny.
But yeah, fuck Pitchfork I mean, it's just a review.
QuoteQuote
Also, Radiohead is not even close to my favorite band, but i'd hardly say they are overrated. They deserve their acclaim.
they deserve acclaim, yes, but when you have tons of people saying they're basically 2nd in line only to the Beatles, well then, i can't help but ::) and ;D and think those people are a little :D and :o
well radiohead are a signficant band that will probley be regarded as one of the most important and relevant rock bands of all time. And i think thats true but i dont think any serious music critic has put them second in line of the beatles.
QuoteYou know what, at this stage of the music game everything's pretty much been done already.....so every new band is gonna sound like something or other. Sure, Fleet Foxes have 'borrowed' from MMJ and a lot of older music, and I was bigtime skeptical of them at first but their songs totally resonate with me......for others they may not. I just really love that sound and vibe.
As far as the 4.7 from Pitchfork, I think this album takes awhile to sink in and show it's total depth......so this review is probably a one-listen reaction.
Right on, on both counts.
Hell, it took a really long time for Strangulation to grow on me. Their minor songs take a lot of work, because they're so damn charged. I love "Dondante" something massive, but I can't listen to it because of what it does in me to hear it. It's huge, powerful, raw, but I just can't listen to it. Like "Strangulation" I can't listen to either out of that lonely drop-dead-need-someone context.
That's hard to deal with, especially when you're supposed to take an objective view towards the art you're a critic of. Weird stuff.
"If It Smashes Down" is just weird, but it somehow made sense relatively quickly when I picked it up in January and everything was coated in snow in the Chicago suburbs in '05. The hard part about the album was that it was so long that I felt like I never really found the second half of it. It does meander in the middle, but once you find all the little nuances it makes sense.
And to whoever said it, the Fleet Foxes album is just something that resonates. Can't explain it, but it's not really something you can fake either. The liner notes speak as though from someone a whole lot older than he is. An old soul, I suppose. The music is fitting, and I can see him labeled pretentious for it--but his music is truth as to his own soul, and as it stands I can't not find Robin Pecknold legit.
And Angry, what
is the deal with Highly Suspicious? Are these the same people that hated WAWM?
QuoteAnd Angry, what is the deal with Highly Suspicious? Are these the same people that hated WAWM?
Better than that, I bet its the same people who hated Into The Woods because of the circus-y jingle to it and the absurd lyrics. If they hated Into The Woods, they're gonna
despise this record until it finally, inevitably grows on them.
One part of the review that I do agree but I think is overstated pretty grossly is that the high-pitched squeeling voice can get annoying. Only two tracks are done like this, though. Highly Suspicious and Evil Urges.
The second thing I agree with is that the reverb is sorely missed. That was kind of their signature back in the day and I really hate to see that be phased out.
Hopefully we'll get more posts like this in the future b/c one thing this board is surely missing is objectivity! Old timers like me will pretty much like anything MMJ puts out, but I believe fresh reviews like Pitchfork will allow me to really put some perspective on what the new direction is all about!
Thanks Pitchfork! And thank you all for being such wonderful people!