Yeah, so apparently they make a big deal about the "xx" being lowercase. I'll try not to hold that against them.
This band has been making waves lately; they don't look cool, and not looking cool is an excellent way to be cool, but that's not why people are paying attention to them. What makes the xx unique is their sound, which is incredibly stripped back: as other bloggers have noted, they make four musicians sound like two. That kind of sonic restraint is incredibly rare in modern pop. Even better, they have the skills to use this restraint in service of some really spectacular tension-&-release songwriting. It's quite unlike anything else out there right now, and it's great.
But not great enough for me to spend money on it just yet, apparently.
Their debut album, Replica Replica, should have been a much bigger success – the damn thing was absolutely crammed with excellent, hard-edged guitar pop. But Red Riders don't seem to have the right image for success, or something; they're just too tuneful for the hardcore, too artsy for the popsters, too Sydney for the Melbourne. And apparently one of their (multiple) singer-songwriters has left them since the first album, which is a huge shame; they could have been so much more, if they'd all stuck together . . .
But that's people, I guess. In the meantime: if the second RR album has half as many kickarse songs as the debut, then it will be worth buying. Either way I'll be buying it eventually, I'm sure.
Aw, look – she's just so damn pleasant! I don't know what it is, but there's something about Lily Allen that I just find massively, ineffably appealing. I feel like I probably shouldn't like her music, but I do. It's neat, sweet pop; the lyrics are usually way more clever than they should be; and even when it's bitter and sardonic, which is most of the time, it's also damn nice. At her worst, she's not quite right, but at her best she's excellent.
Florence is epic. I'm not exactly sure how she ended up at #1 on this list, though; her legs may have carried her over the line, I guess. That and her voice, which is astounding. I'm not usually the kind of person to be too impressed by a conventionally tuneful singing voice, but her voice is simply huge; the album title is apt. I've no idea if the rest of her album lives up to the interesting potential of the few singles I've heard so far, but I'm sure it's worth a shot. That, and I worry that she'll beat me up if I don't give her money.
And there you have it – Top 10 #10! And I'll be posting Top 10 #9 will before New Year, turkey permitting.
Remember how for a while there, it seemed that every new group out there was a wolf? Wolfmother, Wolf & Cub, Wolf Parade, Patrick Wolf...
There's a new meme in the namehouse now, I think. Crystal Castles, Crystal Antlers, and now Crystal Stilts. Is it surprising that these Crystals are edgier, harsher and certainly way cooler than the Wolves? Wordwise, is "crystal" more punk than "wolf"? Maybe so, I guess...
Anyhow, these Crystals are as much fun as any of the others. The music is all very "I wish I was Ian Curtis, I wish I could live in 1978 forever" but for what it's doing, it's certainly convincing. And although it's derivative, it's derivative in a very specific (and elsewhere underexploited) fashion. The rhythm section produces a genuinely excellent and powerful momentum throughout. In fact, the music sounds – vocals aside – as if the entire band are trying to be the rhythm section. (That's not an insult. Musically, I think that what they're doing here really works.) Meanwhile, the video is made out of some interesting Spirit-of-'68 file footage, visually intriguing and nicely edited (albeit ideologically ambiguous, if you like).
A couple of other Crystals turned out to be well worth a bit of effort. Here's hoping that these Stilts have more than one trick up their sleeve. (Although, if they only have one trick, at least they're doing it well enough, huh?)
This is an interesting one. Do you think it's being kind of insensitive and flippant, domestic-violence-wise? Or is it just a fierce metaphor, evocative and poetically appropriate? The video itself is a visual showcase for the singer's superhuman legs (among other physicalities), her diction produces a passionate rhythm throughout... – so, sex and violence. Hm. If I watch it a few more times, will I come up with an answer?
I don't know. It's a good song otherwise, and you can't deny that it's punchy as hell, no matter what. A lot of the chord progression is a kind of rip, but not annoyingly so. Do we like it? Let's say we like it.
Hey, it's that synth sound from Kid A! I'm glad someone decided to pick that up. Don't worry, though, this is definitely not a Radiohead rip-off. If anything, it reminds me vaguely of Catcall (or maybe even Pikelet) in that it's an interesting electronic-based meld of (let's say) most of the non-mainstream genres of late-90s-mid-00s, swirled together? (The sound of the million daughters of Björk?) Electro, indiepop, alternative hip-hop... you could pick out a number of different elements in play here, but they're assembled in a package that sounds surprisingly original. And at the very least, this is certainly also a good song, good enough so that I don't care if some of the packaging may have been used previously. (The vocal sound is lovely, too.)
Another thing I like about this single is the video, which puts a nice new spin on the old animated-live-action-via-rotating-track-camera-stop-motion effect. (I can't think of the proper name for what I'm sort of talking about, but take a look at the video and you'll see what I mean.) It's a simple enough trick but it works well, and it's a very good visual metaphor to match the circular chord progression and the driving rhythm. Keep an eye out.
(Also, let me say for a PS: I think that "Watusii" is an excellent song title. There's at least two clever jokes hidden in that double-i.)
Hey, look at that! A Rage Roundup post finished and up on a Sunday! I may be down to only three and a half songs per fortnight, but I'm maintaining reasonable haste. For a Bonus (!) I'd like now to direct you to Postcard Guy by Lauren Horton. This looks like it's probably one of those no-budget homebrew releases, broadcast once at 4am and never heard from again, but I'll be very disappointed if that's all it ever is. It's a truly neat tune, charming as heck, and wrapped in some really eccentric production – not complicated, but never boring. Great stuff.
Okay. It's almost time for next week. We'll talk then.
Back back back to the front, to the top! Lap it all up, folks. It's been a little while since last we sat down to watch some Rage, but that's cool. I'll make this post a little too long, just to compensate. Right now is now right now! And 2009 is rushing in bold and fresh, burning our lips like millionaires' toothpaste.
I'm still not sure if I like the music, but it's a neat video. The whole "suburban shaman" costume design is excellent. It's zeitgeisty too, I think; you could mistake her for a background dancer from an MGMT clip. The more I listen, the closer I am to liking it. Worth paying attention to, for sure...
A slow burner, this one. The quiet vocals (almost whispered, in parts) build excellent tension. The music goes in some interesting directions, too... the synth tones and percussion choices remind me a little of Pivot.
Visuals are neat – it's a clever and amusing idea to do a shoutout to retro vector graphics like this. It's specifically referencing this old game, I think (I was too young for the original, but I distinctly remember playing 90s shareware knockoffs that were near-identical).
Good stuff! Not spectacular, but I think it's on the right side of boring.
Really neat video: deminiaturised stop-motion-animation, 1960s-ish off-brand toys, visuals that remind me of that old Gumby tv show. The video fits & synchs really well with the sound, too. But for some reason, I couldn't find the music as interesting as the images; it's a fizzysour indierock guitarbuzz, fun but nothing special. The melodic hook is catchy enough, and the lead guitar break is pretty nice? That's about it, I guess.
Cool video – constructed from authentic old fairytale animations, maybe? If not, they've totally nailed that old look. The narrative metaphors are a bit obvious & hackneyed (a common Bloc Party tic – they're very earnest musicians, politics-wise), but they're still well done. The songwriting is a little obvious, too... come on guys, a dramatic key change near the end? You can do better than that.
The guitar solo bit is mighty fine, even if it only goes for a few bars. The sound overall is a nice, interesting mix of guitars and dancey stuff – there's nothing else around at the moment that's quite like it. Punchy, energetic sound: I think it's good.
Damn it Pyke, every time now you're doing it to me. Do I have to buy your whole album? Is that what you're trying to make me do? With the subtle production touches, the songwriting that's never as dull or predictable as it should be, the sugarfree nostalgia stabs? Damn you, Pyke! So good, always so good. Always better than it seems. Prick.
Groovy band name, but the song didn't grab me until the chorus energy kicked in. Hnn! A decent bit of vocal kick – that's how you stop an indie song from being another dull sopfest. The video is annoying, but maybe I just don't like clowns & sparkles enough. The singer has a pretty look, tho...
So the zeitgeist is totally all echo-vocals, echo-percussion and 90s synths, now. (Half the songs in this post feature at least two out of three.) New Rave, or not. How did this happen? Who knows?
Synthesizers are drugs. You think you can control them... use them only on special occasions, for specialised effective uses... and when that goes well, you start using them more often. Even when they're not a good idea. And then, before you know it, the synths are everywhere all the time and everybody is doing it, all the time, and now you just can't stop it! Can't stop!
Still, the music grows on me. This is a rave(ish) epic, exceptionally well-constructed: overlapping vocals, overlapping rhythms. Shift your consciousness into some kind of trance state, nod your head repeatedly.
Surprisingly well-played punk-metal; the vocals give it a kind of a late-80s underground proto-grunge feel*. Metal guitar (& even a little percussion & acoustica near the end!), and vocals that are neither deathmetal scream nor emo whine. It's not especially original, but it's got a sweet, honest charm that suits my mood...
When it comes to metal, it's usually the vocals that tip me one way or the other. This here, I think I like it.
*There's an entire subgenre hidden in that description, spiralling around pre-fame Nirvana among others... I only discovered it a few years ago myself, but there's some great stuff in & around that scene.
I think I've figured out what's up with music. See, when I first wrote songs (being in a rock band in high school), there was something amazing about figuring it out, about being able to write a song and play it and Wow! It sounds just like a real song! And I think that's what most music groups and songwriters go through, at least at first. The problem is, I think, they're so excited that what they've written is just like a real song – it's good enough! – that they don't think beyond that. And that's why the vast majority of songs can sound so dull, so predictable. (Or that's how they can sound to someone who's been listening broadly and deeply enough, for a long enough time, I guess...)
The vast majority of songs are just using variations on the same old melodies, the same obvious chord progressions. That's not a bad thing in itself. It's not even that they're entirely unoriginal, because they're not. But if it sounds just like a real song, that's probably because it sounds like something you've heard before. There's a certain obviousness. Expectations are fulfilled.
So, there's nothing bad about it. It's good enough in the context of "hey! it sounds like a real song!"; that's why the musicians did it in the first place. But I think it might be that the musicians aren't thinking themselves beyond "good enough". They're not expecting or believing that they need to be better than adequate, that they need to be brilliant, that they need to be spectacular and genius and new. I think they're thinking: Hey, this sounds as good as something else – that's great!
If music wants to be remembered or to be truly huge, then it needs to be genuinely new & different, and to sound NOT just like any other song. It needs to be exciting. It needs to make you feel something profound. It needs to sound new.
(I know, I know, "new" is not new; 99.99% of everything sounds a bit like something else, of course. And there's nothing wrong with that, that's not the point I'm trying to make. It's not a question of uniqueness, it's a question of obviousness. It's a question of predictability. Good enough isn't good enough.)
So yeah, the Sunpilots have a song called Drones. It sounds like a real song.
(Good band name, though – The Sunpilots! Cool name...)
Anyhow, that's it for this roundup. Bit of a downer to end on, huh? And it's a bit of a clumsy rant there attempting a slightly complicated idea, but I'm tired and I don't feel like cutting it out just now. Let's watch Lily Allen's latest single again, instead. It's still good.
Hey, you want to read something else? That I wrote? Because I wrote a draft of a novel the other day, too. Send me an email & I'll let you read it, I think. It's different. You might not like it. It has jokes, though. Also punctuation. Cheers :)
