post rock

[Tony L]

I have 'Happy Songs for Happy People' & 'Rock Action' and I'm not too bothered about either - so is it worth me trying 'Come on Die Young'?

Probably not – I definitely prefer CODY to Rock Action, but both are unmistakably Mogwai. I haven’t heard Happy Songs.

Mogwai are, by a mile, the loudest live band I have ever heard – they are irresponsibly loud, they make Motorhead sound like a unamplified folk trio. They are the only band I’ve seen who could actually play so bloody loud you can’t focus your eyes as they are rattling! Even with my Etymotic ear plugs in I had severe ringing the next day. This actually puts me off wanting to see them again!

Tony.

 

[sideshowbob]

I'm probably wrong, but I prefer Mogwai's Young Team to Come on Die Young, mainly because it has "Mogwai Fear Satan" on it, which always struck me as their best choon, despite having flutes on it.

I nearly bought a ****ing Champs record today, but decided not to as I'd already bought far too much other stuff.

-- Ian

 

[fatcat]

I have read this and the kruatrock threads with great interest and great amusement.

I realise a lot of people enjoy listening to so called krautrock and post rock but there are a lot of people who enjoy Daniel O’Donnel or Russel Watson. If that’s what turns them on, fine. I personally don’t like krautrock (except for Doro Pesch), Daniel O’Donnel or Russel Watson.

The thread has unfortunately taken a turn for the worse. I sense it is being suggested that post rock is superior to proper rock.

It is being suggested that flamboyant guitar solos are not a good thing. Anybody who has heard Richie Blackmores solo on Space Trucking on the Made In Japan album would laugh at this suggestion.

I have not listened to any post rock but my opinion of Faust and Can are they similar to modern artists. They are not true musicians just as modern artists are not true artists.

I suspect they are not capable of playing music in a group, in a cohesive manner. If you analyse the music, each instrument is playing a different (I nearly wrote tune then), at different speeds, with no respect to each other. It takes very little talent to do this.

I heard a program on the radio about Copeland a few years ago. They played When The Saints Go Marching In, then another well known song. They then played both songs at the same time. They then played a Copeland piece of music. It was virtually identical to When The Saints Go Marching In and the other song played at the same time.

There are no vocals due to the fact it would be pretty difficult to sing along to no tune.

 

[Tony L]

I have not listened to any post rock but my opinion of Faust and Can are they similar to modern artists. They are not true musicians just as modern artists are not true artists.

Ok, lets define this more scientifically: how many notes per bar do you have to play to be a ‘true musician’? Is wearing a codpiece and leather trousers important?

I suspect they are not capable of playing music in a group, in a cohesive manner. If you analyse the music, each instrument is playing a different (I nearly wrote tune then), at different speeds, with no respect to each other.

This is called counterpoint, and is also rather popular with people who play jazz (I won’t call them musicians as they probably don’t play enough notes).

Tony.

PS I've nowt against Purple, I've got two copies of Made in Japan (the DCC audiophile cut and the purple vinyl anniversary remix issue), but I see it as a very different thing to Can and Faust, certainly no better or more skilful.

 

[sideshowbob]

I know that Faust would be deeply offended if anyone told them they were musicians.

-- Ian

 

[lilolee]

 

[fatcat]

Things are going well this evening, just sat down at the computer when my daughter returned from Manchester with the new DIO CD. Only listened to a couple of tracks. So far superb, you may be pleased to know so far all guitar work has been slow moody riffs.

Is wearing a codpiece and leather trousers important?

I’m glad you mentioned this. I suspect you consider rock music to be represented by Wasp, David Lee Roth and Spinal Tap. This is not actually true. However it is irrelevant. Just imagine you listened to a CD and think it is brilliant, if you then find the CD was made by leather clad codpiece wielding hippies would you change your opinion of its musical merit.
I read a review in Q of a live Deep Purple CD. NOTE CD. Ritchie Blackmores performance was described as being CAMP. How on earth can anybody LISTEN to a CD and describe one of the musicians as being camp.

how many notes per bar do you have to play to be a ‘true musician’

This is not important at all, if you appreciated rock music you would realise the truly memorable elements of rock music do not involve super fast playing. Have you ever heard Heaven or Hell, When a blind man cries, Rock Candy or Beethoven’s 5th.

I personally can’t listen to the likes of Joe Satriani.

All rock music is not the same. I like some rock groups and strongly dislike others.

This is called counterpoint, and is also rather popular with people who play jazz

I don’t believe Krautrock is Jazz. It appears to me at times to be a combination of rock and jazz. The problem is some of the (nearly wrote musicians) artistes are playing rock some are playing jazz, AT THE SAME TIME.

PS I've nowt against Purple, I've got two copies of Made in Japan (the DCC audiophile cut and the purple vinyl anniversary remix issue), but I see it as a very different thing to Can and Faust, certainly no better or more skilful.

I have just reread your previous post. I still have the impression you where implying krautrock is superior to rock music. It is unfair to say one genre of music is superior to another. You obviously appreciate Deep Purple, you may appreciate other rock groups. I suspect there must be krautrock or post rock groups you dislike, they can’t all be brilliant. There must be some rock groups you prefer to some krautrock groups.

I know that Faust would be deeply offended if anyone told them they were musicians.

So would many music lovers

 

[sideshowbob]

I don’t believe Krautrock is Jazz. It appears to me at times to be a combination of rock and jazz. The problem is some of the (nearly wrote musicians) artistes are playing rock some are playing jazz, AT THE SAME TIME.

Maybe I've missed something, but why would that be a "problem"?

Attacking music you don't understand simply because you don't understand it is a bit daft (unless it's opera, obviously, which is fair game).

-- Ian

 

[Tony L]

I’m glad you mentioned this. I suspect you consider rock music to be represented by Wasp, David Lee Roth and Spinal Tap. This is not actually true.

No, I feel rock music was totally destroyed by said acts (with the exception of course of Spinal Tap). 80s ‘bouffant rock’ was totally crap. If you could see my record collection you would grasp where I’m coming from: I have tons good rock stuff, some probably performed by people wearing codpieces (early Hawkwind / Sabbath / Zep etc). I do however hate musicianship for musicianship sake – i.e. I am not a ELP fan and truly detest the Yngwie Malmsteen school of pointless widdly widdly widdly showing off. There is nothing so unimaginative than some prick going widdly widdly widdly on an instrument for no apparent reason.

All rock music is not the same. I like some rock groups and strongly dislike others.

Me too, it just happens that many of my favourite bands come from Germany and play in a free, improvised, unstructured and organic way that apparently goes over some peoples heads

I don’t believe Krautrock is Jazz. It appears to me at times to be a combination of rock and jazz. The problem is some of the (nearly wrote musicians) artistes are playing rock some are playing jazz, AT THE SAME TIME.

Exactly. This is a good thing.

I still have the impression you where implying krautrock is superior to rock music.

It is a different thing. It is like asking which is better, rock or jazz? Fish or plectrums? Books or cheese? Green or red? Pointless.

There must be some rock groups you prefer to some krautrock groups.

To be honest it isn’t really a way I think about music. Music is not a competitive sport, and as I mention earlier you can’t compare Can to Purple, they are different things so neither can be “best”. I only sort stuff into stuff I like and stuff I don’t. I guess there is another category for stuff that has influenced the way I think about things.

Tony.

 

[ErikL]

Excellent thread.

Where do The Microphones (now Mount Erie) and Godspeed You Black Emperor sit amongst all this? Two of my favorites.

 

[Eric L]

Ludwig,
My inclination is to place The Microphones with Lo Fi, since a good portion of their music has a pop structure, and much of their sound resembles classic Lo Fi bands like Spiritualized, Galaxie 500, etc. I'm kind of guessing here though.

Do you know The Books or Bright Eyes? Both remind me somewhat of the Microphones.

I'd guess GYBE is post rock if Stereolab is.

I've been on a mini New Zealand rock kick lately (discussed over on the Naim forum). Right now listening to The Dead C.'s "White House". After some initial disappointment, this album has grown on me significantly and I'm now very impressed. Lots of long, free-form guitar noise and feedback sessions with tape-loops in the background. Sounds a bit like a bridge between Can/Neu and early Pavement/Sebadoh (The missing transitional species! Evolution has been verified!). This Dead C. album is good shit. Not sure what to try next by them: "Tusk" (which AMG says is ironically titled after the Fleetwood Mac album), or "Trapdoor ****ing Exit" (which happens to be the name of a Swedish noise-punk band). Hmmm.

 

[fatcat]

Me too, it just happens that many of my favourite bands come from Germany and play in a free, improvised, unstructured and organic way that apparently goes over some peoples heads

These are just clichés. To be honest clichés to me are like a red rag to a bull.

I am not a ELP fan and truly detest the Yngwie Malmsteen school of pointless widdly widdly widdly showing off

I’m sorry to hear the musical abilities of ELP and Yngwie Malmsteen have gone over your head.

Attacking music you don't understand simply because you don't understand it is a bit daft (unless it's opera, obviously, which is fair game).

Is it daft for Tony to attack Rock music because he doesn’t understand it.
If listening to Krautrock gives you pleasure and you believe there is something in it to understand that is fine. If people get pleasure out of visiting art galleries and understanding a pile of bricks or a sheep in a tank of formaldehyde this is also fine.
Opera goes over my head also.

Lots of long, free-form guitar noise and feedback sessions with tape-loops in the background

I could do that on my PC using Cubebase.

Lastly

If Faust aren’t musician, they don’t play music, therefore Krautrock isn’t music. Free-form guitar noise and feedback sessions with tape-loops in the background doesn’t sound like a description of music.
Why is this thread in the music section of the forum. Tony can you move it to off topic.

 

[sideshowbob]

Originally posted by fatcat
Is it daft for Tony to attack Rock music because he doesn’t understand it.

Where has he attacked rock music? He's pointed out the bits of some rock music he dislikes, but he hasn't attacked the genre as a whole.

If Faust aren’t musician, they don’t play music, therefore Krautrock isn’t music.

FFS, haven't you heard of "irony"? I was making a joke. Faust, as it happens, are exceptional musicians, and exceptionally serious about what they do. They don't fetishise "virtuosity", so perhaps they're too subtle for you. I suggest you go and see them next time they play in your area, what you'll see is a group of improvising musicians with a telepathic understanding of each other's playing, an encyclopedic knowledge of popular culture, a sense of humour, and an intuitive understanding of the notion of music as organisation of sound through time. OTOH, if you'd rather go and see Dio rehashing tired old rock tropes that's entirely your choice. Maybe it would be more useful if you started a thread about contemporary rock music rather than leaping into a thread about music you don't like, and clearly know nothing about.

Free-form guitar noise and feedback sessions with tape-loops in the background doesn’t sound like a description of music.

Well, you're wrong. Simple as that. It's not the only kind of music, it may not be your preference, but it certainly is music.

-- Ian

 

[Tony L]

Is it daft for Tony to attack Rock music because he doesn’t understand it.

Where on earth have I attacked ‘rock music’ in general? I refuse to believe that anyone, no matter how blinkered, can infer ELP and Yngwie Malmsteen are representative of the whole genre.

The main thing you fail to grasp is the Krautrock is rock music, so for your argument to be in any way coherent (which as yet it is not) you need to site some specific examples – what exactly are you attempting to defend? psyche? heavy rock? heavy metal? prog rock? 80s ‘poodle rock’? AOR? punk? new wave? etc etc?

The only piece of music you have so far sited as an example is Made in Japan, and as I state earlier I actually own and enjoy the two most collectable and desirable pressings of this album, i.e. you have so far totally failed to make your point.

Tony.

PS Its Cubase, not Cubebase - I'd at least learn what something is called before claiming to be able to use it!

 

[fatcat]

Tony

Like Krautrock post-rock is anti-rock. There is no willy showing, no unnecessarily flamboyant guitar solos

This was your post. Please explain how stating the above (not any subsequent posts referring to ELP etc) does not imply rock music is about willy showing, and unnecessarily flamboyant guitar solos.

Yes I agree with you some of it is probably rock.
Before you accuse people of being incoherent do you realise you have stated Krautrock is anti-rock and Krautrock is rock. Yes, very coherent.

I am not attempting to defend any type of music.

I am not attempting to make any great point except that your quotation above criticises all types of rock music that involves flamboyant guitar solos. You have subsequently qualified your quote. But there is no getting away from you original quote.

It is being suggested that flamboyant guitar solos are not a good thing. Anybody who has heard Richie Blackmores solo on Space Trucking on the Made In Japan album would laugh at this suggestion.

The above was my first point and main point in my first post.

If you can not understand this point, let me know and I will try to make it crearer.


PS Its Cubase, not Cubebase - I'd at least learn what something is called before claiming to be able to use it!

That was a bit bitchy (or is it bitchey)


Ian

LOL

I thought you where suggesting Faust think of themselves as being better than mere musicians. Obviously being telepathic would make then so.
I don’t dislike Faust, some of their music is OK, usually the bits that ARE music. If they could play their instruments to a higher standard I’m sure they would do so. They have slotted themselves into a niche market where high quality musicianmanship and being able to sing is not required.
Why would I start a thread on contemporary rock music, as I have already stated, I dislike a large proportion of rock music. I like all types of music but only a small proportion of each type. I even like the Goats, even though I generally dislike HipHop.
I posted on this thread because somebody posted suggesting that rock music was merely willy showing and unnecessarily flamboyant guitar solos.

I like to listen to DIO because he has a great voice and I enjoy the music. I admit his new CD is similar to his first CD. Why change a winning formula. Did people criticise Motzart for producing to the same old formula.

 

[Tony L]

[me]]Like Krautrock post-rock is anti-rock. There is no willy showing, no unnecessarily flamboyant guitar solos

This was your post. Please explain how stating the above (not any subsequent posts referring to ELP etc) does not imply rock music is about willy showing, and unnecessarily flamboyant guitar solos.

Trying to describe music to someone that has never heard it is incredibly hard, what I was attempting to do was give some idea as to what parts of traditional rock music have been discarded by most post rock bands.

Some rock music does rely entirely on flamboyance and showmanship, and I admit I don’t like that form. There is a world of difference between say The Groundhogs and Kiss, I love the former yet find the latter to be kitsch cabaret and of no interest as I can find nothing of substance beneath the surface gloss. They are both ‘rock’, yet they chose a different path.

Perhaps I should have said anti-cock-rock rather than anti rock, though I also wanted to get across that post rock deliberately abandons traditional rock structure – it is an innovative music that sets out to move boundaries, exactly as good rock music should. Post rock is rock, it is far more true to what real rock is about than some aging poodle rehashing and repeating the past could ever hope to be. Good rock music has always been about the new and pushing through the boundaries of all that went before. This is exactly what bands like Purple did in the late 60s and very early 70s, it is exactly what Krautrock did, and later what punk / new wave / indie etc achieved. It is exactly what post rock has done a lot more recently.

I have very little respect for performers like Dio, he may well be technically competent, but IMHO he invented nothing. His music is that of a technician rather than an innovator, and I am always without exception drawn to innovators. You yourself admit he has not progressed even within the rigid confines of his particular obsolete genre (80s bouffant rock was obsolete prior to even existing). There is no need for another Dio record, there was no need for the first, he said what little he was capable of saying decades ago during the embarrassingly bad death rattle of the once great Purple. Dio will be a tiny irrelevant footnote on the history of music.

Tony.

 

[ChrisJ]

Quote:

"I’m sorry to hear the musical abilities of ELP and Yngwie Malmsteen have gone over your head. "

ELP & Yngwie Malmsteen are undoubtedly great technuicians. Neither of them appears ever to have had many original ideas, though. Emersons cod-classical noodlings debase both rock and classical genres.

I look for originality & innovation in my music.

Quote:

"Anybody who has heard Richie Blackmores solo on Space Trucking on the Made In Japan album would laugh at this suggestion."

I have heard the above mentioned solo. Fatuous in the extreme (IMHO).

Deep Purple were always a highly derivative band. Rainbow, and the other projects Blackmore was involved in were merely watered down versions of an already tired and derivative sub-set of rock.

Rock (whatever the flavour) is about stretching the envelope, it innovates or it dies. Without innovation, we will all end up listening to thinly-disguised tribute bands.

 

[ErikL]

Post-rock, Lo Fi, etc- I guess I don't know how these are defined.

Anyhow, I bought Can's "Tago Mago" yesterday and look forward to checking it out.

 

[dss]

OF course Post-Rock is better than Rock!

In the same way that Postcard is better than Card, or Postbox better then box.

Would the world be any worse off without Richie Blackmore and the Hairy **** Show? I doubt it.

DS

OTD (as to prove the point) Fourtet - Pause

 

[Eric L]

Ludwig,

In my experience, "Lo Fi" is (was?) used to refer to independent label bands that were influenced both by ambient electronica and acoustic pop and folk, and that liked the dirty, somewhat gritty sound introduced by noisy electronics and minimal production. Examples would be Ida, Galaxie 500, Codeine, Low, etc. The Lo Fi scene in Austin, Texas in the '90s definately saw themselves in this way. (I speak with some authority here, having married a girl who was very active in the scene and singer in a Lo Fi band named Ultrasound. )

Anyway, I just checked AMG's definition of "Lo Fi" and admittedly they use the word in a very different way, identifying bands like Pavement, Beck (!) and Liz Phair (!!) as "Lo Fi". I'm inclined to say AMG don't know what the f*uck they're talking about here, but will instead rest content with saying that if AMG's definition is accurate then the word is now used in a *very* different sense.

fatcat,

What's the point of all of this? If you don't want to call something "music", fine -- it makes no difference whatsoever. Given what you've said, it's very unlikely that, in the event you ever hear some, post rock will be your cup of tea. So what?