The (fatal) flaw in this argument in regard to this record is that another determination of what a band is “interested in” is that these “songs” have these things called “lyrics” — also known as “words” — which quite literally convey what a band is trying to say.I think even if it scores terribly this is a good choice of album partly to discuss the things it doesn't have, what it favours and what impact that has.
As far as I can tell, and like some of the shoegaze bands I like, they don't really have much interest in conventional harmonics. I think they're more interested in texture and in this case rhythm, than they are melody. The chords do exist but hardly anything is ever resolved and that seems entirely intentional rather than not knowing what they're doing. I suppose it's a bit like abstract painting, it might be that they're seeking to say something via tools like depth and application of colour and a particular approach to brushwork rather than anything traditionally figurative. We all have our preferences and tolerances, me and Mrs Spires will happily look at a Chagall together but if it's a Rothko off to the cafe she will go. She loves Degas but I think once you've seen one you've seen them all. She can make a good argument as to why I'm talking absolute crap about Degas in the same way I can about her approach to Rothko. But ultimately they are both still art.
If we consider conventional songcraft to revolve around the cornerstones of riffs, chord progressions and vocal melody in a verse/chorus/versus framework then yes this doesn't display a lot of 'songcraft' but I think they are trying trying to evoke an emotional response via a different route or set of tools. In the same way an abstract artist might try to express themselves by layering six tones of paint on top of each other to get both a specific texture and colour depth into a particular part of the canvas so these guys are with their their open string droning and dissonance and their pedal settings and what not.
It's interesting that you describe it as soulless because the Deftone fans I know are pretty invested which would suggest it does speak to them at an emotional level.
You can ask are these really songs, in the same way that you can go to the Pompidou (albeit not at the moment) and say hmm but is it really art? To which I would say mais oui !
.
I listened to the first four tracks of White Pony and it sounded the same as the album we are reviewing. Lots of snarling, guitars loud but going nowhere. There’s just not enough melody for me, I’m afraid. I just don’t understand this type of music.Given you have the bulk of the week left, may I suggest you listen to their White Pony album. Twice, presumably the same as this if I read correctly, for a fair comparison. Even just to humour me, and humour yourself. Might be an interesting experiment, and not a chance you might stumble across again.
The (fatal) flaw in this argument in regard to this record is that another determination of what a band is “interested in” is that these “songs” have these things called “lyrics” — also known as “words” — which quite literally convey what a band is trying to say.
I don’t know if you had a chance to peruse them in this case, but my guess is the writer was wearing a children’s Halloween costume whilst drawing them up.
If it’s just another ambient record, which appears to be the case you’re making, what is the intended impact on the listener?Whilst I might personally agree with you on the lyrics I'm not sure it's a fatal flaw in the argument. The tame goth who i forgot to release from the cellar after the Love Metal nomination insists on shouting up the stairs to press their position that the lyrics aren't intended to be read in any literal sense and are not designed to provide a coherent narrative, merely to provide additional feeling and atmosphere. Whether you or I buy this is another matter of course but I suspect that is the intention.
Interestingly, or weirdly, I agree with your underlying point. But disagree with every single bit of reasoning or justification you have given to make it.At last, a record we can agree on, eh?
You summed up my ramblings nicely in that one sentence. There’s definitely a lot of guitar on this album, but the lack of chords or solos is mind-boggling.
If it’s just another ambient record, which appears to be the case you’re making, what is the intended impact on the listener?
Are we going with the loose BBQ theme or just any old thing?I am taking nominations for the playlist thread, if people want to start sending them in to me.
Aim to collate and post next monday, so a week to get them in. We'll run it till the Monday before the Wednesday that Rob kicks us off again with the next round.
So I guess my point is . . . it’s unclear what “a sense of drama or evoke a particular emotion” or “feeling” mean. Those are vague terms. WHAT emotion or feeling? And you don’t know not because you aren’t goth/emo nor because you know little of music. You don’t know because the music is bad.I'm not making the case it's ambient or at least not with a capital A, but I think I understand your point. I think (and I'm sure someone who listens to this type of music or say certain types of goth or emo stuff more than me could explain better) it's intended to create a sense of drama or evoke a particular emotion through the delivery of the words rather than the actual words themselves. I think it's not so much what is said but how it's vocally declaimed, to Rob's 'shouty' point it's shouty for a reason. The word soup only needs to broadly support the 'feeling' rather than be Shakespeare.
Well, TBF, you like OK Computer more than I do too. “Nu metal for Radiohead fans” seems an apt description of this slop.This has been a challenging album to review as I've had to break some of my normal routine. I'd normally listen a couple of times back to back but this is an album that I found difficult to do with. I needed a break between each listen. Although I can think of some bands I like that are semi adjacent to this I don't normally listen to this kind of music for fun. And this wasn't fun. It was hard work. It feels long but yet.........
I can understand why this album has been accused of a lack of song craft. There is little here that is hummable or particularly memorable but it could be argued that this is a little bit of a reductive take. There is plenty of evidence of song craft here. Dynamically there are loud bits and quiet bits which I enjoy and there are moments of tension and release which I also enjoy but there are few moments of resolution. There is little that leads you to be satisfied. This has to be by choice as the evidence of this album is that the Deftones are quite deliberate.
My initial take mainly influenced by the lack of capital letters in the song titles was that this was kind of a throwaway album but that quickly got dispelled in the second listen after I had read a couple of reviews around this. It is a highly rated album which also happens to be the 10th album of a well loved band. Second listen also revealed to me that there is no way this drummer is improvising. There is some precision in his playing and plenty of subtlety. I imagine if I was a drummer into this kind of music I'd be well impressed.
The primary tool being used in this album which speaks to the song craft is in how it obscures and reveals itself. In many ways it's a very coy album and hides a lot behind a wall of white noise. It reminded me of a couple of things - like flying through a cloud or like a super attractive woman wearing a hijab. It's hiding and obscuring a lot. Again this has to be purposeful and a reason why the Deftones get accused of being a shoe gaze band. It spends maybe 80-90% of it's run time being shy before you burst through the cloud and see the sun. It's so hard to listen to that the contrast of when it gets easy almost becomes euphoric. I think that's why it's accused of having few riffs or guitars - these are being used to create a dense soup from which the occasional crouton will emerge. Sometimes it works in reverse like on "I think of you all the time" and it's possible the best place to hear the technique. The song starts of simple and clean (but still not bright and easy) and then the denseness of the distorted guitar hits quite powerfully. This is more typical and as such feels as kind of a relief. Most of the other songs on the album though starts from the denseness of that build and instead of taking things away to add clarity just adds the clarity on top. I'm not convinced I've accurately put into words the feeling I'm trying to convey.
Souvenir is probably a good easy example. The song starts kind of noisily and then drops out to rim shots, bass and vocals but here the vocals are treated to kind of obscure them. Then he yells and the white noise guitars come back in. Musically it then cleans up again and we repeat back into the noise. But instead of another dropped down section into that noise we get a clear line as he sings "keep warm here beside me" etc then we hit a "we rise" - the clearness contrasts with the obscured. It's a powerful dynamic but one I can definitely understand that you don't like. It's mainly noise except for the seconds when you get a glimpse of something. This makes most of the album sound pretty similar but this almost rewards your patience.
My favourite track is probably infinite source I think primarily though because that's most typical of what I would normally listen to. It's still doing the same noise to clarity technique but it's spending a bit more time in the clear sections.
Album closer departing the body is also great. It could almost be a James Bond theme and has some nice knob twiddling synth stuff sprinkled throughout.
It's a super sincere album which I typically hate as I'm past the point in my life where I want to write lyrics on my pencil case and despite me making fun in recent weeks I'm not going to drop any marks for the words mainly because I enjoyed singing "we rise" when I got out of bed this morning.
I find myself surprised to want to award this an 8. It's not an album I could say I enjoyed or that I would rush to put on repeat. I feel quite confused to be honest but there is something I found appealing in the contrast between the noise and the clarity. I also found it strangely restrained - there are moments when it could have gone a bit epic but it always seemed to pull back. On departing the body you get bar of some arpeggiated synth or something but then it goes away. I also feel like this is an album I would enjoy more after each sparodic listen
Not sure if I can speak to the bands intent as I don't know enough about them but I think that feeling when it becomes clearer (or when the clarity rises above) and less noisy is attempting to create a sense of euphoria or transcendence.Well, TBF, you like OK Computer more than I do too. “Nu metal for Radiohead fans” seems an apt description of this slop.
“Sound not songs” — nowt wrong with that. But the “sound” needs a point. What is it?
This has been a challenging album to review as I've had to break some of my normal routine. I'd normally listen a couple of times back to back but this is an album that I found difficult to do with. I needed a break between each listen. Although I can think of some bands I like that are semi adjacent to this I don't normally listen to this kind of music for fun. And this wasn't fun. It was hard work. It feels long but yet.........
I can understand why this album has been accused of a lack of song craft. There is little here that is hummable or particularly memorable but it could be argued that this is a little bit of a reductive take. There is plenty of evidence of song craft here. Dynamically there are loud bits and quiet bits which I enjoy and there are moments of tension and release which I also enjoy but there are few moments of resolution. There is little that leads you to be satisfied. This has to be by choice as the evidence of this album is that the Deftones are quite deliberate.
My initial take mainly influenced by the lack of capital letters in the song titles was that this was kind of a throwaway album but that quickly got dispelled in the second listen after I had read a couple of reviews around this. It is a highly rated album which also happens to be the 10th album of a well loved band. Second listen also revealed to me that there is no way this drummer is improvising. There is some precision in his playing and plenty of subtlety. I imagine if I was a drummer into this kind of music I'd be well impressed.
The primary tool being used in this album which speaks to the song craft is in how it obscures and reveals itself. In many ways it's a very coy album and hides a lot behind a wall of white noise. It reminded me of a couple of things - like flying through a cloud or like a super attractive woman wearing a hijab. It's hiding and obscuring a lot. Again this has to be purposeful and a reason why the Deftones get accused of being a shoe gaze band. It spends maybe 80-90% of it's run time being shy before you burst through the cloud and see the sun. It's so hard to listen to that the contrast of when it gets easy almost becomes euphoric. I think that's why it's accused of having few riffs or guitars - these are being used to create a dense soup from which the occasional crouton will emerge. Sometimes it works in reverse like on "I think of you all the time" and it's possible the best place to hear the technique. The song starts of simple and clean (but still not bright and easy) and then the denseness of the distorted guitar hits quite powerfully. This is more typical and as such feels as kind of a relief. Most of the other songs on the album though starts from the denseness of that build and instead of taking things away to add clarity just adds the clarity on top. I'm not convinced I've accurately put into words the feeling I'm trying to convey.
Souvenir is probably a good easy example. The song starts kind of noisily and then drops out to rim shots, bass and vocals but here the vocals are treated to kind of obscure them. Then he yells and the white noise guitars come back in. Musically it then cleans up again and we repeat back into the noise. But instead of another dropped down section into that noise we get a clear line as he sings "keep warm here beside me" etc then we hit a "we rise" - the clearness contrasts with the obscured. It's a powerful dynamic but one I can definitely understand that you don't like. It's mainly noise except for the seconds when you get a glimpse of something. This makes most of the album sound pretty similar but this almost rewards your patience.
My favourite track is probably infinite source I think primarily though because that's most typical of what I would normally listen to. It's still doing the same noise to clarity technique but it's spending a bit more time in the clear sections.
Album closer departing the body is also great. It could almost be a James Bond theme and has some nice knob twiddling synth stuff sprinkled throughout.
It's a super sincere album which I typically hate as I'm past the point in my life where I want to write lyrics on my pencil case and despite me making fun in recent weeks I'm not going to drop any marks for the words mainly because I enjoyed singing "we rise" when I got out of bed this morning.
I find myself surprised to want to award this an 8. It's not an album I could say I enjoyed or that I would rush to put on repeat. I feel quite confused to be honest but there is something I found appealing in the contrast between the noise and the clarity. I also found it strangely restrained - there are moments when it could have gone a bit epic but it always seemed to pull back. On departing the body you get bar of some arpeggiated synth or something but then it goes away. I also feel like this is an album I would enjoy more after each sparodic listen
I get colour not painting but Rothko needs a point.Because I seem more interested in painting than music this week your review put me in mind of a couple of things. Firstly Francis Bacon and secondly Rothko again. Though quite different to each other, in both cases the underlying grace or luminance is initially veiled. A Rothko literally changes in front of your eyes the more you look at it and with Bacon every time you revisit one of his portraits you see less of the lumpen flesh and almost animal like poses and more of the person inside the body.
I'd say try use the BBQ theme, or creatively shoehorn your song to fit the BBq theme. If you feel strongly that a song is worth including without it fitting the theme, then go with that too. Artistic licence, I say.Are we going with the loose BBQ theme or just any old thing?
So I guess my point is . . . it’s unclear what “a sense of drama or evoke a particular emotion” or “feeling” mean. Those are vague terms. WHAT emotion or feeling? And you don’t know not because you aren’t goth/emo nor because you know little of music. You don’t know because the music is bad.
That this music speaks/resonates with someone — in a subculture or otherwise — is a given. But it doesn’t get any points for that. As always, I don’t hold the view that someone who likes this has bad taste. I hold the view that someone who likes this hasn’t heard enough other music that is far, far more thoughtful, engaging and interesting. As always, it’s all relative.
I get colour not painting but Rothko needs a point.
I feel greatly that in this respect both my school and myself let me down in exposure to culture but I can't even do actual jobs like plumbing. No idea what my education was so I lack the language and knowledge to even talk about Rothko. Bacon just makes me feel queesy but it is something I'd like to know more about and be able to appreciate
We have redecorated our bedroom and I would like to cultivate a gallery wall and am drawn to works by Yayoi Kusama but I have no ability to articulate why other than I like mushrooms and dots
Good luck! I need a radiator moving so I'll book you in for July. Bit of extra money for the holidays will do you goodHaha I wonder if the human brain could cope with a Kusama/Angine De Poitrine collaboration?
I have no art education other than books I've read myself and doing a bit of gallery bothering, which probably explains why 99% of time time I have no idea what I am on about. Foggy's point about liking what you like in part due to a lack of knowledge of what else is out there, may very well apply to me when it comes to painting; though the art world has a degree of curation absent in the music world that stops it being a direct comparison. I've seen plenty of art that has caused me to exhale but I've only ever seen two pieces that have stopped me completely dead in my tracks, the first was Antonello Da Messina's Virgin Annunciate which was 100% a spiritual experience and the second was Rothko's Seagram Murals. I had no interest in the Colour Field movement and many years previously had actually taken the piss out of a friend who used to go on about Rothko; until the moment I experienced some of them for myself. I've seen them both in the Tate and the National in Washington on more than one occasion and I could happily sit with them for hours at a time and not see or feel the exact same thing.
Last few years I've taken to doing more DIY, including a bit of basic plumbing, to get outside of my head a bit more. I'm going to have a crack at doing a shower enclosure from scratch in June; wish me (and the subfloor) luck!
Distortion and drop tuning - what’s not to like?!This album reaffirms a universal truth, and also raises an awkward question.
The first of those two is - the world needs more distortion (in music)! Seriously. There just isn't enough of it. And this album reminds me of that, and it gives it to me in abundance.
The question then is - who is it for? Tbh, I still can't work that out, and I might never know.
I wasn't entirely joking when I joked that I had wished Midlake had pipped this in the album of the year list. Aside from that one being a far more accessible album and more fitting of this thread, I just don't think Private Music is that strong an album in itself, nor even a good album as an example of the band.
I love Deftones. Loved their early heavier more energetic stuff, loved the experimental attempts at finding themselves and going a bit pink floydy (or Radioheady), and liked their attempt at a bit more maturity. And of course, amongst all that, loved the distortion throughout. Why? No idea, it just fucking sounds good, alright! Not everything needs to be elaborate solo bravura, sometimes the basic weight of a good riff is powerful in its own right.
I'm not sure I get what this album tries to do though. It almost feels like someone tasked A.I to write a new Deftones album, that samples recognisable bits of their work through the years, and would appeal to their then hardcore fanbase and attract younger audiences, and not alienate anyone inbetween. Yeah, it is quite obviously unmistakedly a Deftones album. Yeah it ticks the boxes, yeah it's all kinda there. But I don’t get the same joy or energy. Or reaction out of it. And I don't get the sense they have moved on, while I feel I may have. It is like watching Green Day and Blink182 still spike their hair on their what 50s/60s and jump about in skater gear. Who is it for? Guys, act your age!
There is some good stuff on here, some ambient stuff too, and there is nothing really wrong with it. But there is something missing.
Still let's not forget it is a comeback album for nostalgia and after a lengthy hiatus. And it has plenty of distortion! A 5.5 for that, shame it couldn't offer more.