Wilco, "Summerteeth"

[murlough23]

I just finished listening to Wilco's Summerteeth (the last full album released before Yankee Hotel Foxtrot), and I just have to say one thing - this album is waaaaaaayyyyyyy better than YHF. The instruments are clearer and there's a greater variety of them being used, and I love how the folk elements and the synthesized stuff collide at unpexpected moments. Lyrics are on par with what I heard on YHF, difficult but fun to decode. And there's just more material to pick from.

Just goes to show that some bands are amazing when they're not hell-bent on proving how indie they are.

[Skrappybiskit]

I absolutely love Yankee Hotel Foxtrot. Amazing piece of work. I might listen to Summerteeth too, just to hear what it's like.

Skraps

[bloop]

YHF and Summerteeth serve two very different purposes for me.  I can't choose between them.  Your last sentence is implying something of motive that I don't think is present with YHF.  I guess I've just heard albums that are way weirder and "indie"-sounding than YHF.

[murlough23]

YHF and Summerteeth serve two very different purposes for me.  I can't choose between them.  Your last sentence is implying something of motive that I don't think is present with YHF.  I guess I've just heard albums that are way weirder and "indie"-sounding than YHF.

Nah, I'm just teasing 'em. I can't for the life of me understand why some producers/artists choose to make things so difficult to hear sometimes, though. When I have to keep turning the volume up and then back down, that's not a good sign.

[bloop]

I don't know what off of YHF that applies to, but the Smashing Pumpkins have a song on "Mellon Collie" called "Porcelina of the Vast Oceans".  I seriously can't hear it until about 40 seconds into it.

[bethany]

i love summerteeth and i love YHF. they're both awesome albums but in different ways.

i've been listening to "a shot in the arm" pretty much nonstop the past few days, so that alone is worth the price of admission to me.

[murlough23]

I don't know what off of YHF that applies to, but the Smashing Pumpkins have a song on "Mellon Collie" called "Porcelina of the Vast Oceans".  I seriously can't hear it until about 40 seconds into it.

I can always hear something in Wilco's songs... but there are moments when that something is incredibly subdued and there ain't much else going on to cover for it. I'm thinking "Radio Cure" and "Reservations", mostly. A few other songs seem more consistent volume-wise, but I just feel like the production sucked the life out 'em - "Kamera", for example.

NP: "I Can't Sing", LaRue

[bloop]

I like the EP version of "Kamera" for some reason, but I find the mix on YHF is just fun, like that "Heavy Metal Summer Drummer" (early title, but I like this name better).  The other two, I rather like what I'm hearing.  They are minimalistic, and that's pretty cool.

[Skrappybiskit]

What's the story with Wilco? Where did they come from? I've heard a rumour that they were once a country band (much like Radiohead was once a anthem/grunge rock band)... but is this true? I hear country influences in there, but I'm not quite sure.

Skraps

[bloop]

What's the story with Wilco? Where did they come from? I've heard a rumour that they were once a country band (much like Radiohead was once a anthem/grunge rock band)... but is this true? I hear country influences in there, but I'm not quite sure.

Skraps

Well, Jeff Tweedy used to be in a band called "Uncle Tupelo".  The genre of music they made came to be known as "alternative country" or "alt country".  Anyway, his fellow band member, Jay Farrar, split and formed the band Son Volt and Tweedy formed Wilco.  Early, Son Volt was seen as the proper successor to Uncle Tupelo.  Anyway, Tupelo's records were recently reissued and some of them are quite good, if very formative.

murlough, thought I'd add this.  For what it's worth, I always enjoy reading your opinions, agree with them or not.  If there's one thing about some of your reviews, in general, that I think is weak, it is making your personal biases too obvious by applying motivations to the artist that may or may not be there.  "Oh no!  The f-word.  He must be doing it to impress the college kids." (paraphrase, I know)  That kind of thing.  I enjoy reading your stuff, but sometimes I'm just thinking to myself "Oh, just shut the eff up and talk about what matters:  the music itself."

It's not too hard a knock on you, though.  There's something about nearly every reviewer I've read that I don't think is very strong, and I'm personally still much better in dialogue about a record than in monologue (i.e. I'm still working on creating any kind of voice for myself in reviewing - I NEED Andree's editing yet), so you're a step ahead of me at this point.

[murlough23]

I like the EP version of "Kamera" for some reason, but I find the mix on YHF is just fun, like that "Heavy Metal Summer Drummer" (early title, but I like this name better).  The other two, I rather like what I'm hearing.  They are minimalistic, and that's pretty cool.

Minimalism produces interesting results sometimes, but most often it annoys me. I don't mind sparse instrumentation, but when certain instruments or elements of the sound are muted for no apparent rerason, this tends to bug me.

[murlough23]

murlough, thought I'd add this.  For what it's worth, I always enjoy reading your opinions, agree with them or not.  If there's one thing about some of your reviews, in general, that I think is weak, it is making your personal biases too obvious by applying motivations to the artist that may or may not be there.  "Oh no!  The f-word.  He must be doing it to impress the college kids." (paraphrase, I know)  That kind of thing.  I enjoy reading your stuff, but sometimes I'm just thinking to myself "Oh, just shut the eff up and talk about what matters:  the music itself."

Well, obviously I can't know an artist's motivation. All I can know is how it comes off to me. And in that instance, that was my reaction to the song. I may be wrong (and no, your paraphrase doesn't really get at what I was trying to say), but all I have to go on is an impression unless the artist himself says, "Hey, here's why I did this particular thing in this particular song". If you're going to complain about my impression of Wilco's intent, you're going to have to complain about my impression of Kutless' intent, too. It works both ways.

The music itself is what matters to you. To me there are a lot of different components. A song may be well written and/or played but I may have my reasons for not liking it. I'll generally try to be open-minded and listen with different things in mind. I think that's gotten me to broaden my horizons in huge ways. However, at the end of the day, even if my personal tastes are growing and changing, all I have left is my opinion of something at the given time. Heck, my opinion of some of those Wilco songs has changed since I wrote the review (I especially need to go back and revise that embarassing paragraph on "Jesus, Etc.")

My point is that of course I have personal bias. And you know what? I don't give a rip if it shows through. It's the critics who think they have no personal bias and therefore can speak for everyone that have their heads up their arses.

[bloop]

RE:  Kutless.  You did actually have some interviews to back up some of your claims on them.  Whether you meant the way I paraphrased or not, that is how it came through to me.

The music itself is what matters to you.

No song is great without the music being great, so that has to be my main thing to look at.  It's possible that I won't like it even if it does have good music, for whatever reason, but for the purposes of a review if I end up just not liking it, and I can't give a terribly good reason for it, I won't rate it too poorly:  I'll just try to realize it isn't my thing.  It's as close to objective as any person can get.

My point is that of course I have personal bias. And you know what? I don't give a rip if it shows through. It's the critics who think they have no personal bias and therefore can speak for everyone that have their heads up their arses.

Heads up their arses or not, I think some of the better critics make it seem like their opinion is objective even when it clearly is not.  I don't always agree with any critic, but I think that's a good way to go.  It's a balance, you're always going to show bias, sometimes kind of an illegitimate bias, but a lot of writers can cover that up very effectively.

As I said, I'm not trying to be mean and I enjoy reading your reviews.  I'm sure many people have given you advice in this area, so just take mine as it is:  just saying what works and doesn't work for me when I read them.  You aren't obligated to change anything.

[murlough23]

RE:  Kutless.  You did actually have some interviews to back up some of your claims on them.  Whether you meant the way I paraphrased or not, that is how it came through to me.

Touche!

I'll admit that you have a point. I guess part of the reason I feel OK just coming out and saying "I don't like this and I don't particularly care for what seems to be the reasoning behind it" is because I don't expect people to judge by the same standards I do. I always try to say why I feel the way I do, and sometimes I know that reasoning is convulted and only I would even come up with such a reason to dislike something. Someone else might read it and find that it intrigues them and makes them want to listen despite my not liking it. I do try to write with that in mind. I'm not objective, but because I'm highly subjective, I know that others are highly subjective in different ways.

There's also a difference between cleverly covering for your bias and acting as if you seriously have none. I've seen critics who fall on both sides of the fence.

NP: "Maybe Katie", Barenaked Ladies

[bloop]

There's also a difference between cleverly covering for your bias and acting as if you seriously have none. I've seen critics who fall on both sides of the fence.

How would one differentiate the two without reading some defense the critic made of their work, or without them otherwise explicitly stating that they have no bias?

[Skrappybiskit]

Minimalism produces interesting results sometimes, but most often it annoys me. I don't mind sparse instrumentation, but when certain instruments or elements of the sound are muted for no apparent rerason, this tends to bug me.

Minimalism is way cool. The point of it, usually, is that you actually have to listen to the music. Unlike rock, where the usual intention is traditionally to bash the people over the head with the instrumentation. And I like that, too. Sometimes.

But the point where I dislike minimalism is when it's so minimalistic to be unlistenable at all. When you can't actually call it "music"... it's more a bunch of soft things and wierd sounds layered together. But that notwithstanding, you are correct, there often is a lot of knob-twiddling for no apparent reason. On the other hand, just because there isn't a reason apparent hardly means there isn't one at all.

Skraps