My Morning Jacket-- Evil Urges

[murlough23]

You're missing out.

I've always accepted the fact that the rest of my life will be of mediocre quality due to my not having partaken in their greatness. But thanks for the reminder.

[bloop]

I've always accepted the fact that the rest of my life will be of mediocre quality due to my not having partaken in their greatness. But thanks for the reminder.

I don't think he's making a statement quite so strong as this.  Just take it at face value - we both think it's a good album and, only speaking for myself, I think you would like the proverbial green eggs and ham if you tried them.

[murlough23]

I don't think he's making a statement quite so strong as this.

I think Ian's capable of telling me for himself what his intent is.

Just take it at face value - we both think it's a good album and, only speaking for myself, I think you would like the proverbial green eggs and ham if you tried them.

I'm generally pretty good about taking recommendations seriously when someone makes one with me in mind and can cite the specific reasons why it will probably be up my alley. MMJ was one such recommendation - and I don't regret checking them out. I enjoy more about them than I don't enjoy. (Frankly, I'm getting tired of the fact that I can't express a belief that a widely acclaimed album is less than perfect without getting the friggin' Spanish Inquisition for my efforts. So I liked it a little less than you guys. This is not sufficient reason to call into question my sanity or credibility.) But it would be exhausting to pick up on each and every recommendation you guys come up with. Many of us here have a very broad and exploratory set of musical interests. That's a good thing, but it means none of us can really keep up with one another.

I already know based on what's been said about Fleet Foxes, and the reasons why certain people like them, that they are not for me. This is not a matter of me not wanting to try something different - and I'd appreciate it if people wouldn't keep making the subtle implication that I'm saying "ewwww" because something is too far outside my normal range of genre preferences. I think I've shown a willingness to dive into some pretty unusual stuff and try to make heads or tails of it. But I've gone off in so many directions that, honestly, sometimes I have to be OK with the fact that you guys are gonna dig up a ton of great records, and I'm gonna have to pass on a few of 'em.

Has every "great" record that I've recommended been listened to, digested, graded, and discussed by everyone here? Or even by everyone whose genre preferences fit the records in question? No. Do I give you guys a hard time about what you're "missing out" on? No. Please try to keep that in mind.

[bloop]

I think Ian's capable of telling me for himself what his intent is.

I think it's best if we give each other the benefit of the doubt.  If he thinks you're a fool for not listening to the Fleet Foxes, I really need him to say that to believe he means it.

This is not sufficient reason to call into question my sanity or credibility.

For my part, I don't think I questioned either.  I think your sanity was questioned jokingly by someone else.

But it would be exhausting to pick up on each and every recommendation you guys come up with. Many of us here have a very broad and exploratory set of musical interests. That's a good thing, but it means none of us can really keep up with one another.

Well, it doesn't mean I don't try.  Maybe that's why I'm so exhausted.   

I mean, you recommend something strongly, I do give an honest effort to find it online so I can check it out myself - and I'm on dial-up!  I think of you as more into Christian music than I am, and when you recommend something (doesn't even have to be to me specifically - I just check the music journal), you're usually right that it's quality stuff.  Same goes for the others, in different areas of music of course.

These are the ones I've listened to this year, on your recommendation:
1. Thrice - The Alchemy Index, Vols. III & IV - Air & Earth A-
2. The Myriad - With Arrows, with Poise A-
4. Edison Glass - Time Is Fiction B+
10. Sanctus Real - We Need Each Other B
11. Delirious? - Kingdom of Comfort B

That's something like a third of your journal represented there.  All have been good (I haven't fully digested those last two).  I think I kind of respect you.   

Has every "great" record that I've recommended been listened to, digested, graded, and discussed by everyone here?

This is where I would rather not speak for "everyone" since I don't actually pay attention to everyone.

Do I give you guys a hard time about what you're "missing out" on? No.

Again, I don't think the intent is to give you a hard time about it, so I'm sorry if anyone has.  My recommendation stands as I've already stated it - I don't need to go any further with it.

[murlough23]

I think it's best if we give each other the benefit of the doubt.  If he thinks you're a fool for not listening to the Fleet Foxes, I really need him to say that to believe he means it.

You're the one who's been presuming to tell me what he means. I took it at face value.

For my part, I don't think I questioned either.  I think your sanity was questioned jokingly by someone else.

Yes, but it has happened seriously in the past and there's still a hint of it within this conversation. it's just weary to get into this every time I dare to give some "brilliant" record a B. God forbid I don't see the light every time!

Well, it doesn't mean I don't try.  Maybe that's why I'm so exhausted.   

If I go above a certain threshold in terms of devouring too many new records at once, I start to get weary with the whole thing and I don't really devote the time I should to any of them - which, in turn, I just get criticized for.

I mean, you recommend something strongly, I do give an honest effort to find it online so I can check it out myself - and I'm on dial-up!  I think of you as more into Christian music than I am, and when you recommend something (doesn't even have to be to me specifically - I just check the music journal), you're usually right that it's quality stuff.

That still doesn't equate to "something that bloop will like". I honestly don't expect you to give a rat's ass about Delirious? or Sanctus Real, for example. I don't think you'd be "missing out" to never give those bands a second thought. I think they are creative and enjoyable and make solid records, to a certain degree (well, made solid records in the case of Delirious? ), but given what you're usually looking for in music, I wouldn't respect you any less for saying, "Eh, I don't care about those guys."

But, all of that said, I'm glad that you do take the effort. If I see something highly rated on several people's music journals, I usually try to take note as well. But I don't do it to the extent that it takes the joy out of the task. Once it starts to feel like work to keep up with that many records, I scale back. You guys are here to help me filter out the stuff I probably wouldn't like, and vice versa.

Again, I don't think the intent is to give you a hard time about it, so I'm sorry if anyone has.  My recommendation stands as I've already stated it - I don't need to go any further with it.

From reading about Fleet Foxes' record on AllMusic, it sounds like there might be a bit more color and variance to it than what I was expecting based on how Pitchfork described it, and how some folks here did. I thought it was going to be a rather spare folk record that was getting heaps of praise for its simplicity, and I'm truly sorry to whoever this offends, but I am really frakking bored with simplicity. If there's a good deal of complexity and variance there, then perhaps I will check it out.

But in general, I'm inclined to not want to listen to something just on principle, if the recommendation to listen to it comes in the following form: "Dude, you don't like this record that everybody else here likes? That makes no sense. Here, listen to this other thing that we all expect you to like, just a litmus test so we can figure out whether you truly know what you're talking about." So I guess that's why I dug in my heels at first - it had less to do with the artist being recommended, and more to do with the context of the recommendation, which I found to be a bit smug.

NP: "Come All You Weary", Thrice

[NinjaRob17]

From reading about Fleet Foxes' record on AllMusic, it sounds like there might be a bit more color and variance to it than what I was expecting based on how Pitchfork described it, and how some folks here did. I thought it was going to be a rather spare folk record that was getting heaps of praise for its simplicity, and I'm truly sorry to whoever this offends, but I am really frakking bored with simplicity. If there's a good deal of complexity and variance there, then perhaps I will check it out.

Actually, it is pretty simplistic. I was rather bored with it, and thought that maybe the lyrics were better than the music. They're not. The only reason I didn't give them below a B- is that there are hints of music beyond acoustic guitar fiddling scattered throughout the album.

[bloop]

You're the one who's been presuming to tell me what he means. I took it at face value.

I don't think taking "you're missing out" as "your life will be mediocre for missing out on this great artist" is taking it at face value, but I guess I'll let Ian defend himself if he feels so inclined.

Yes, but it has happened seriously in the past and there's still a hint of it within this conversation. it's just weary to get into this every time I dare to give some "brilliant" record a B. God forbid I don't see the light every time!

It's just conversation - I understand your p.o.v. on the album better now than I did before.  I haven't pried any further because I know enough.

If I go above a certain threshold in terms of devouring too many new records at once, I start to get weary with the whole thing and I don't really devote the time I should to any of them - which, in turn, I just get criticized for.

Yeah, same here, except I don't think people care enough to criticize me for not getting to things fast or thoroughly enough.  Maybe it's a function of writing actual reviews rather than just rating it and discussing it when it comes up.

That still doesn't equate to "something that bloop will like". I honestly don't expect you to give a rat's ass about Delirious? or Sanctus Real, for example. I don't think you'd be "missing out" to never give those bands a second thought.

If they are good, I would be missing out on something, even if it isn't the greatest or most important thing.  I'm enjoying both of those albums.  I'm not thinking top tier on either of them, but certainly under a recommended range for me as well.

I think they are creative and enjoyable and make solid records, to a certain degree (well, made solid records in the case of Delirious? ), but given what you're usually looking for in music, I wouldn't respect you any less for saying, "Eh, I don't care about those guys."

I think people have a false perception that I'm always looking for something a little on edge.  I'm not.  I read the journals because it takes the "I think you would like this [unspoken: because you like crazy shit]" out of the recommendation.  I just think "hmm...maybe I would like this.  Wouldn't hurt to try".  

So, yeah, I read the journals as recommendations to me, if I end up liking them or not.

But, all of that said, I'm glad that you do take the effort. If I see something highly rated on several people's music journals, I usually try to take note as well. But I don't do it to the extent that it takes the joy out of the task. Once it starts to feel like work to keep up with that many records, I scale back. You guys are here to help me filter out the stuff I probably wouldn't like, and vice versa.

Seems fair.

From reading about Fleet Foxes' record on AllMusic, it sounds like there might be a bit more color and variance to it than what I was expecting based on how Pitchfork described it, and how some folks here did. I thought it was going to be a rather spare folk record that was getting heaps of praise for its simplicity, and I'm truly sorry to whoever this offends, but I am really frakking bored with simplicity. If there's a good deal of complexity and variance there, then perhaps I will check it out.

Well, sorry if we gave you the wrong impression of the album.  I thought Josh's review in particular would indicate a pretty varied album, but very much unified in being rooted in the past.

But in general, I'm inclined to not want to listen to something just on principle, if the recommendation to listen to it comes in the following form: "Dude, you don't like this record that everybody else here likes? That makes no sense. Here, listen to this other thing that we all expect you to like, just a litmus test so we can figure out whether you truly know what you're talking about."

That wasn't the context of my wondering what you would think of the album - it wasn't my intent.  I was pretty careful to say that your criticisms didn't make much sense to me, and tried to understand them a little better.  I think I accomplished that much, and moved on.  So, given your criticisms, I was wondering what you would think of an album I see as somewhat similar in those specific areas, but did it differently in a way that I thought you would find flowed better.  In other words, whether it would be more to your liking.

Actually, it is pretty simplistic. I was rather bored with it, and thought that maybe the lyrics were better than the music. They're not. The only reason I didn't give them below a B- is that there are hints of music beyond acoustic guitar fiddling scattered throughout the album.

And I get undermined while posting.  Heh.  C'est la vie.

[murlough23]

I don't think taking "you're missing out" as "your life will be mediocre for missing out on this great artist" is taking it at face value, but I guess I'll let Ian defend himself if he feels so inclined.

I merely exaggerated there to illustrate a point. OK, so I'm missing out on something. So? What value has been lost from my life as a result of that? What am I really depriving myself of here?

Yeah, same here, except I don't think people care enough to criticize me for not getting to things fast or thoroughly enough.  Maybe it's a function of writing actual reviews rather than just rating it and discussing it when it comes up.

I think it's more a matter of going forth and stating an opinion of something that I haven't been able to spend a lot of time with. That's usually the first conclusion people jump to even if I have spent time with something. "Oh, just listen to it more. Then you'll see it my way."

If they are good, I would be missing out on something, even if it isn't the greatest or most important thing.

But there are far too many good things out there for us not to miss out on some of them. I'm not trying to amass the sum total of all good musical experiences that I could possibly have. I have limited time (maybe less limited than some of you, but still limited). I need to pick and choose.

I think people have a false perception that I'm always looking for something a little on edge.  I'm not.  I read the journals because it takes the "I think you would like this [unspoken: because you like crazy shit]" out of the recommendation.  I just think "hmm...maybe I would like this.  Wouldn't hurt to try".

Perhaps. But I think it's fair to say that you get less out of the "obvious CCM" stuff than I do much of the time. There's some stuff that I think is good for the genre, but not really worth recommending to very many people who aren't already CCM fans. I'm not a rabid Sanctus Real fan or anything; I just thought they made a noted improvement over their past albums consistency-wise.

Well, sorry if we gave you the wrong impression of the album.  I thought Josh's review in particular would indicate a pretty varied album, but very much unified in being rooted in the past.

Rooted in the past as far as musicianship, I can handle. As far as production, that would be a major hindrance to my liking it.

And I get undermined while posting.  Heh.  C'est la vie.

Dammit. And after I went to the trouble of downloading it. Oh, well. Guess I have to listen to it now. You tricked me this time!

[Ian]

I think Ian's capable of telling me for himself what his intent is.

I'm saying that Ragged Wood is a good CD, and if you don't listen, you're missing out on a piece of good music.

But there are far too many good things out there for us not to miss out on some of them. I'm not trying to amass the sum total of all good musical experiences that I could possibly have. I have limited time (maybe less limited than some of you, but still limited). I need to pick and choose.

Not buying this excuse.  The CD is 45 minutes.  I don't think you're so busy that you can't spare 45 minutes.  Don't take this as a "shame on you for not listening," I'm just saying that I don't buy that excuse, for any CD.

I already know based on what's been said about Fleet Foxes, and the reasons why certain people like them, that they are not for me.

Still, you could at least listen to a couple songs to see if it catches your interest at all.  I recomend the first three tracks.

[murlough23]

I'm saying that Ragged Wood is a good CD, and if you don't listen, you're missing out on a piece of good music.

Yes, and I'm saying, "So?"

Not buying this excuse.  The CD is 45 minutes.  I don't think you're so busy that you can't spare 45 minutes.  Don't take this as a "shame on you for not listening," I'm just saying that I don't buy that excuse, for any CD.

Yes, now multiply that by every other CD that's ever been strongly recommended to me. It adds up after a while.

Still, you could at least listen to a couple songs to see if it catches your interest at all.  I recommend the first three tracks.

Lucky for you, I listened to it anyway, and none of the stuff I thought I'd dislike about it turned out to be true, so now all I have left to do is figure out how much I like it. (Of course, if I think it merits anything less than an A in the end, and dare to speak up about it, people will be very quickly lining up for the fun new theme park ride called "My Ass", so perhaps I should keep my opinion to myself this time.)

[bloop]

Lucky for you, I listened to it anyway, and none of the stuff I thought I'd dislike about it turned out to be true, so now all I have left to do is figure out how much I like it. (Of course, if I think it merits anything less than an A in the end, and dare to speak up about it, people will be very quickly lining up for the fun new theme park ride called "My Ass", so perhaps I should keep my opinion to myself this time.)

Actually, looking over at the music journals, this one may not be uniformly getting an A among phorumers:

bloop:  9.0 (A+)
Josh:  7.5 (This is my B+ rating, I'm not sure what it is to Josh)
Ian:  8.5 (This is a solid A on my scale, but it might not be for Ian)
Ninjarob:  B-
cowdude:  9.0

[Josh]

*nods* I'd call Fleet Foxes a solid B/B+ record. It's definitely one of the hot debuts of 2008, but I think they'll go on to make better records.

[Aaron]

I gave it a B+ but haven't updated my journal yet.

[murlough23]

Oh good, then I have everybody's permission. 

[bloop]

Well, no one ever has permission to post something on a message board free of counter-argument if someone else here feels strongly enough about the issue.

[murlough23]

Well, no one ever has permission to post something on a message board free of counter-argument if someone else here feels strongly enough about the issue.

I'm not asking for nobody to disagree with me. I think it was just the "you're out of your damn mind" comment that got under my skin. I know it was a joke, but it was reminiscent of similarly-made comments that were not a joke in the past, so I guess we just need more of that stuff.

Your constant "I don't get it" and "murlough confuses me" stuff isn't really helping, either. What's not to get? I like it less than you. Is that really such an outlandish concept that it's so difficult to understand?

[bloop]

I was confused by what your issues were, you explained them in a way that was clearer to me, I understood them better (while still disagreeing, but that's ok - I pressed no further at that point).  What's not to get about that? 

If I stop asking questions of people, I probably either agree with them, or I've stopped caring about what they think.

[murlough23]

I was confused by what your issues were, you explained them in a way that was clearer to me, I understood them better (while still disagreeing).  What's not to get about that?

I think we've resolved it now, but it was sure exhausting trying to get to the point where I could say, "This is what I don't like, OK?" and not feel like I was getting the third degree about it.

I just see that sort of response around here a lot - not necessarily always directed at me, but just that sort of profound disappointment in somebody for "not getting" one of your favorite records. Maybe we all need to ease up a bit.

[bloop]

Well, I think you at least partly "got" one of my favorite records.  It's not like you're going with an F.  From here, I can just be happy you liked what you ended up liking.

[murlough23]

Well, I think you at least partly "got" one of my favorite records.  It's not like you're going with an F.

You'd think I did, the way everyone reacted.

[Ian]

Yes, and I'm saying, "So?"

Never meant anything deeper than what I said.

[murlough23]

Never meant anything deeper than what I said.

Well, for what it's worth, you were right. I'm sorry for reading a tone of voice into it that was not there.

[murlough23]

Incidentally, does the verse melody of "Two Halves" remind anyone of Green Day's "Wake Me Up When September Ends"? At least the first three chords, anyway. Part of me is really glad when that fourth chord goes somewhere different, because it means the similarity is likely unintentional.

[Ian]

I never noticed it before, but now that I listen for it I can hear it.  I highly doubt that it would be intentional though.

[murlough23]

I highly doubt that it would be intentional though.

Same here. Green Day's is a fairly predictable set of descending chords, and the MMJ song goes somewhere that my ear doesn't expect on the fourth chord, so it's really only a progression of three chords that matches, and it's a pretty easy progression to come up with.

NP: "Viva la Vida", Coldplay