A certain amount of arrogance is cheeky and endearing.
Then there's the kind where the talented musician in the band announces their departure and solo album. And starts talking about finding God and becoming a modern day Prometheus.
I can't put my finger on when the transition happened but it was somewhere just before the Lex interview for me.
Is this like when that band you liked suddenly got popular so you didn't like them anymore?
Or is it more like when Roman from Party Down met that girl who was "really into Sci Fi" and she started talking about Lord of the Rings and then he berated her with the difference between Fantasy and Sci Fi?
Is it? I'm a fan, but my perception is that for most people their career started and ended with Creep, and not only that, but the "you're so very special" cut of Creep.
After a few years, the members of REM all changed instruments. This was because they thought they sounded too "polished", and wanted to get back to the sound they had when they were still struggling to master their instruments.
I think part of the idea was that in an actual band that has been a band for a while, they usually find a way of working together that includes "difficult conversations" and saying no, and sometimes listening to one person's vision rather than tiptoeing around egos.
Oh, it certainly is the context. Nirvana had its beginnings and appeal by being uninterested in success and only played to a niche as "their" group. When Nirvana suddenly became wildly successful, that group felt betrayed.
Nirvana is the perfect example of what I was talking about.
It's the intensity of it that strikes me. It's not just a matter of not liking their new stuff. I've encountered many folks that are basically mad the band changed directions. Almost as if the band owes it to the world to keep producing the same sound.
Not sure when Blink-182 was ever too cool for anything. If you listen to their concert record, you'll see that they did not take themselves very seriously.
Everyone seeks approval. I don't understand what slight Blink-182 did to you or the other people on this board that you would feel schadenfreude towards them -- normally such is reserved for people who have done you ill.
I genuinely feel like listening to Discovery on my discman on the bus in high school helped define who I am as a person.
On the one hand I find this news horribly disheartening, on the other hand I am thrilled to see them go out on top. They have never had a bad album, and I’m my opinion they only got better as they went.
My entire late 80's high school days were pretty much just listening to Marillion over and over again until my Walkman would wear out the cassette and I'd have to get another copy. Just something about Fish's brooding bitter anger appealed to my angsty teenage mind. Once Fish left though, they quickly moved away from what I was interest in listening to.
These days the one prog album I seem to keep going back to is "Tales From the Lush Attic" by IQ, although "Relayer" by Yes has been getting some good play lately.
I'd assume they're using the Erik Prince/Constellis business model, taking some time off and getting the band back together under a different name to do the same work.
The first thing to realize is that there are 4 main phases of Pink Floyd, and can be considered different bands:
1) the Syd Barrett era. They were a psychedelic pop / experimental band, led by charismatic singer / songwriter / guitarist Syd Barrett. They had 1 album (Piper at the Gates of Dawn), and several singles. I like this era a lot. Try listening to Arnold Layne, Lucifer Sam, See Emily Play...
2) Middle period - after Syd went nuts, they brought in Dave Gilmour to replace him. Everyone tried their hand at writing songs, and it took some time to get their footing. This is a more introspective, laid back period, and when they did those sound track albums people are talking about. They were in the top 40, but not really stars yet. The culmination of this era was the movie Live at Pompeii.
3) Roger Waters era - bass player Waters wrote an entire album of songs about madness and alienation, this was Dark Side of the Moon, their most popular album, which propelled Pink Floyd to the top of the charts. Waters had developed into a genius song writer, but with each successive album, became more domineering and difficult to work with. These albums tended to be ambitious concept albums, dark and disturbing, in contrast to the laid back vibe of the previous era. The last 2 Waters albums, The Wall and Final Cut were essentially Waters solo albums, and at the end, half the band had departed.
3) Dave Gilmour era - Waters went solo, and expected the band to end, but Gilmour decided to bring back the 2 ousted members of the band, and continue as Pink Floyd. This period isn't very interesting IMO.
So my personal tastes: I find The Wall and most of the Waters-era albums kind of overpowering and negative. I prefer the Barrett stuff, as well as Live at Pompeii. YMMV...
A great example is referenced in the n+1 article itself: the tale of Travis Morrison after the breakup of The Dismemberment Plan. The band's Pitchfork reviews were always positive, so one would assume that the debut solo album of its principal songwriter and singer would at least be in the ballpark. Instead, it famously received a 0.0[1]. This single review killed Morrison's solo career[2]. He ended retiring from music (though the Plan reunited for an album a couple years ago).
Then there's the kind where the talented musician in the band announces their departure and solo album. And starts talking about finding God and becoming a modern day Prometheus.
I can't put my finger on when the transition happened but it was somewhere just before the Lex interview for me.
reply