smoe.org mailing lists
ivan@stellysee.de
| From | Matthew George <abertawe@gmail.com> |
| Subject | Re: Top 20 of 2004 poll update |
| Date | Thu, 06 Jan 2005 23:37:19 +0000 |
[Part 1 text/plain ISO-8859-1 (2.9 kilobytes)]
(View Text in a separate window)
AssociationWorks wrote:
> I think my point here is (and sorry for not elaborating) is that there is a
> UNIVERSE of
> style and sound between Eugene Edwards and Franz Ferdinand...both in the
> indie
> and major label market. I'm just surprised to see FF lumped in with nine
> other top albums
> I would consider more befitting the tastes of people on this list...and I
> chalk it up to HYPE.
You think that little of this list and its members? The diversity in
the poll is, I think, a fantastic tribute to the open mindedness of the
list's members. I've picked up on loads of bands by following
recommendations on this mailing list, and not all of them sounded like
Jellyfish. Whenever somebody writes to say they enjoyed a Wildhearts
album, I let out a quiet whimper of delight - in the 90s, the Wildhearts
were written off as a scuzzy pub-rock band with heroin habits the size
of their riffs. But they write superb pop songs.
> IMHO....FF is a very mediocre indie pop record that is riding the successful
> wave of post-punk revivalism spawned by other peddler of rehash like the
> Strokes, Interpol, etc. Had the album not received half the gushing press
> and radio play they got in 2004 no one on this list would give a
> rats ass about them.
I first heard Darts of Pleasure on XFM in the UK, some time before
anyone gave your rat's ass about them. Their next single (Take me out)
was picked up, and the hype began. I was starting to dread the arrival
of their album. But it arrived, and it was excellent. And there's no
way I'm going to go off an album because a music rag has told everyone
else they should check it out. If Arcade Fire somehow become a massive
global act in the next year or two, filling arenas with screaming
teenagers and inflatable farmyard animals, I won't go off their first
album. OK, it's not a situation I'm going to need to deal with, but it's
a hypothesis. Or a hype-othesis, if you will.
If hype occasionally gets people listening to good music, then I have no
problem with it. We can sneer when something useless is hyped up
because of a spurious celebrity-tittle-tattle connection, or because the
singer's hair looks like an immaculately coiffed chipmunk's arse. But
when they hype something that is packed with excellent tunes and ideas,
we should be big enough to sit back and admit they're right.
> fire away pop soldiers,
I took the bait. Just wanted to say something, as most members of this
list surely must have experienced a band they felt they had "discovered"
getting picked up and hyped around. I didn't like the (Thorns) album,
but I'm sure plenty of auditeers experienced this with The Thorns a
couple of years ago. Sometimes the things you like are appreciated by
the masses. It's best to deal with this and continue having fun, rather
than getting stroppy and moaning about the late-comers.
Matt.
For assistance, please contact
the smoe.org administrators.