[TapirMache]

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy this track, but I can't believe anyone actually thinks it deserves BNT from pitchfork. They have a tendency to throw BNT at a lot of underwhelming music but it's usually for a logical reason like innovative production, creative vision, or experimental composition. To me it seems like AnCo has stopped challenging themselves, they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots. They probably made this record for their kids, Avey with the hopes of showing Angel he'd be a good father lol. They're still my favorite band, but they don't deserve BNT now for achievements they made in the past. If this were their 1st release, I doubt anyone would be praising it

[weirdradio]

popparen wrote:

deakin is pete best obviously

Hahaha

TapirMache wrote:

they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots

Never thought of their music as post punk before...you're referring to the earlier stuff? Not sure what you mean

[hybrination]

maybe animal collective is like alternate reality beatles, who stayed together instead of being broken apart by yoko ono. i'll let you guys decide who that yoko ono was

[Cussing Bum]

He or she does not know what post punk is. Unless maybe it was satire...?

[hybrination]

TapirMache wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy this track, but I can't believe anyone actually thinks it deserves BNT from pitchfork. They have a tendency to throw BNT at a lot of underwhelming music but it's usually for a logical reason like innovative production, creative vision, or experimental composition. To me it seems like AnCo has stopped challenging themselves, they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots. They probably made this record for their kids, Avey with the hopes of showing Angel he'd be a good father lol. They're still my favorite band, but they don't deserve BNT now for achievements they made in the past. If this were their 1st release, I doubt anyone would be praising it

you don't sound like you have things straight tho, first you accuse them of "abandoning their post-punk roots", in doing so, completely holding them to their past achievements, and then you say they shouldn't be praised now for achievements they made in the past. it honestly sounds like its you who is judging this music within the context of their history rather than looking at it as its own piece of music.

I'm not saying that either way is right or wrong, but which is it?

[weirdradio]

Who cares what pitchfork thinks anyway? To paraphrase what my man said earlier...

partario wrote:

pitchfork reviews are more about what they want to be seen liking.

[TapirMache]

hybrination wrote:

you don't sound like you have things straight tho, first you accuse them of "abandoning their post-punk roots", in doing so, completely holding them to their past achievements, and then you say they shouldn't be praised now for achievements they made in the past. it honestly sounds like its you who is judging this music within the context of their history rather than looking at it as its own piece of music.

I'm not saying that either way is right or wrong, but which is it?

Lol first of all I'm not accusing them, I'm observing them, I've watched it happen over years. They used to be genre-less, creating a holistic blend of music that didn't place more importance on any one genre than the rest, but now they're make straightforward avant-pop. Looking at it outside of the context of Animal Collective, Floridada is a pretty good song, within the context of their discography, it's one of their worst songs ever. The only reason I'm on this forum is because of their past achievements, they really haven't contributed much to the progression of modern art since ODDSAC. Just because they deserve a life time achievement award doesn't mean that I'm gonna praise a song that at the end of the day is only decent.

[Fovrodi]

Darn

[TapirMache]

weirdradio wrote:

Who cares what pitchfork thinks anyway? To paraphrase what my man said earlier...

partario wrote:

pitchfork reviews are more about what they want to be seen liking.

They've done a good job of reviewing them in the past, definitely underrated a lot of their albums but usually not by much and nearly all their releases from Prospect Hummer through Fall Be Kind were reviewed by the editor-in-chief, Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)
It doesn't really matter what pitchfork says, but as the AnCo superfans I assume we all are, it's a way of keeping ourselves in check. I just want the band to return to making music that's so mindblowingly amazing that there's no debate about it. Almost every track on SJ and MPP should've gotten BNT.

[faded arrow]

TapirMache wrote:

they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots.

TapirMache wrote:

They probably made this record for their kids, Avey with the hopes of showing Angel he'd be a good father lol

[dud]

TapirMache wrote:

editor-in-chief, Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)

:hm:

[Cussing Bum]

I guess they do make post-punk since their albums were all released after punk.

And in this post-Pearl Harbor world, that's what's important.

[Cussing Bum]

I once had a Pitchfork critic sign my burrito.

[coollodges]

faded arrow wrote:

TapirMache wrote:

they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots.

TapirMache wrote:

They probably made this record for their kids, Avey with the hopes of showing Angel he'd be a good father lol

cause angel is a woman and automatically wants children

[archie]

that is the only logical conclusion to them writing a song about florida

[warhorse miraged]

faded arrow wrote:

TapirMache wrote:

they've completely abandoned their post-punk roots.

TapirMache wrote:

They probably made this record for their kids, Avey with the hopes of showing Angel he'd be a good father lol

yeah, that face to literally everything that dude has posted in the last couple pages

[Andrew_VB]

TapirMache wrote:

editor-in-chief, Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)

whatttt

[clayton]

TapirMache wrote:

weirdradio wrote:

Who cares what pitchfork thinks anyway? To paraphrase what my man said earlier...

partario wrote:

pitchfork reviews are more about what they want to be seen liking.

They've done a good job of reviewing them in the past, definitely underrated a lot of their albums but usually not by much and nearly all their releases from Prospect Hummer through Fall Be Kind were reviewed by the editor-in-chief, Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)
It doesn't really matter what pitchfork says, but as the AnCo superfans I assume we all are, it's a way of keeping ourselves in check. I just want the band to return to making music that's so mindblowingly amazing that there's no debate about it. Almost every track on SJ and MPP should've gotten BNT.

So, if Pitchfork happens to like this album, I assume you'll come around?

[Pan]

TapirMache wrote:

they used to be genre-less, creating a holistic blend of music

thought you said they were post punk, also what's sonically inconsistent about their albums now?

TapirMache wrote:

Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)

why? he had nothing to do with making the album

[dio]

that quotes hilorious. i think hes social commentary

[hybrination]

TapirMache wrote:

hybrination wrote:

you don't sound like you have things straight tho, first you accuse them of "abandoning their post-punk roots", in doing so, completely holding them to their past achievements, and then you say they shouldn't be praised now for achievements they made in the past. it honestly sounds like its you who is judging this music within the context of their history rather than looking at it as its own piece of music.

I'm not saying that either way is right or wrong, but which is it?

Lol first of all I'm not accusing them, I'm observing them, I've watched it happen over years. They used to be genre-less, creating a holistic blend of music that didn't place more importance on any one genre than the rest, but now they're make straightforward avant-pop. Looking at it outside of the context of Animal Collective, Floridada is a pretty good song, within the context of their discography, it's one of their worst songs ever. The only reason I'm on this forum is because of their past achievements, they really haven't contributed much to the progression of modern art since ODDSAC. Just because they deserve a life time achievement award doesn't mean that I'm gonna praise a song that at the end of the day is only decent.

but why do you assume that people are only into this song because of what animal collective has done in the past, I've been with the band since sung tongs, and I love their older stuff, but I also enjoy me some pop music and floridada is a great song that i enjoy a lot on its own terms

[Andrew_VB]

Pan wrote:

TapirMache wrote:

Mark Richardson (I met him last summer and he signed my copy of Hollindagain, which he gave an 8.1)

why? he had nothing to do with making the album

idk maybe

[jfw7]

those are the only good posts i've read by anyone who's joined since late november

[TapirMache]

hybrination wrote:

but why do you assume that people are only into this song because of what animal collective has done in the past, I've been with the band since sung tongs, and I love their older stuff, but I also enjoy me some pop music and floridada is a great song that i enjoy a lot on its own terms

I enjoy it a lot too, but liking something does not make it great. Just because I enjoy eating cookies doesn't mean it's good for me. I'm not assuming anything, I'm just saying if you hadn't heard their discography before Centipede Hz, you probably wouldn't be here now.

clayton wrote:

So, if Pitchfork happens to like this album, I assume you'll come around?

What do you mean come around? It hasn't come out yet. I'm going to check it out regardless of what p4k says, it's not like they're right 100% of the time.

weirdradio wrote:

Never thought of their music as post punk before...you're referring to the earlier stuff? Not sure what you mean

Some of their biggest influences were post-punk bands like This Heat, Swell Maps, and The Cramps. Their influence is obvious on albums like HCTI, Feels, and Strawberry Jam.

[TapirMache]

warhorse miraged wrote:

faded arrow wrote:

yeah, that face to literally everything that dude has posted in the last couple pages

Apparently I'm the only one here who knows how to judge something by its intrinsic value.

[hybrination]

TapirMache wrote:

hybrination wrote:

but why do you assume that people are only into this song because of what animal collective has done in the past, I've been with the band since sung tongs, and I love their older stuff, but I also enjoy me some pop music and floridada is a great song that i enjoy a lot on its own terms

I enjoy it a lot too, but liking something does not make it great. Just because I enjoy eating cookies doesn't mean it's good for me. I'm not assuming anything, I'm just saying if you hadn't heard their discography before Centipede Hz, you probably wouldn't be here now.

that's literally an assumption, theres no way to tell, i like pop music that has resulted from animal collective's influence, so obviously something about this style is resonating with me, i imagine, if I heard this without the context of their discography, i would still enjoy this song.

and your concept of what sort of music is worthy of consumption comparison to others is gross. I think it's this sort of expectation that people have of animal collective that they should be so and so band, boxing them into a certain experimental mindset, that they shouldn't make pop music, is exactly what they are reacting to with this album. I'm psyched about it is all I can say.
animal collective has always made pop music in disguise, so embracing those elements that have always been there in the music and presenting it directly, is an interesting direction for a band that always tries to have an interesting direction with each album.

You can say you don't like it, that's fine, but don't try to imply that your dislike of the track stems from some place of objectivity.

[kafkaesque]

TapirMache wrote:

Apparently I'm the only one here who knows how to judge something by its intrinsic value.

holy shit. please, shut the fuck up.

[Tap]

Just because the song is bouncy doesn't mean there's no depth. It seems like the percussion is doing a mix of synthesis (exclusively in the extremes of the low end and high end here I think?) and then some less conventional physical drumming filling in the inbetween. On top of that you've got the dueling dances between panda + avey vocals and the sax and synth and how before the wipeout sample youve got the sax doing long steady rhythm and the synth is more fluid but then the bridge hits and you get the sax arpeggio while the synth takes the steady hand role, which gives the song a jolt that carries thru to the end (and I think perhaps fuels some of the addictive qualities that some people are finding in the song). I totally get someone not being on board with it, but I think there is a lot going on with the song to thoroughly legitimize people's enthusiasm for it.

[TapirMache]

hybrination wrote:

animal collective has always made pop music in disguise, so embracing those elements that have always been there in the music and presenting it directly, is an interesting direction for a band that always tries to have an interesting direction with each album.

You can say you don't like it, that's fine, but don't try to imply that your dislike of the track stems from some place of objectivity.

Of course my dislike of the track stems from a place of objectivity, where else would it come from lol? I never said Animal Collective shouldn't make pop music, MPP is my favorite album of all time and their most pop oriented album yet. What I have a problem with is poor songwriting, doesn't matter what kind of song it is.

Also, I don't know where you get the idea that I don't like the song, I like the song just fine. I've just been trying to point out how weak it is compared to their masterpieces, I don't know how anyone can argue with me there.

I'm not putting them in a box, I'm just holding them to the standard of quality they set for themselves.

[sky crawler]

TapirMache wrote:

Apparently I'm the only one here who knows how to judge something by its intrinsic value.

Lol welcome to the board dude you'll fit right in

[jetski]

TapirMache wrote:

Lol first of all I'm not accusing them, I'm observing them, I've watched it happen over years. They used to be genre-less, creating a holistic blend of music that didn't place more importance on any one genre than the rest, but now they're make straightforward avant-pop. Looking at it outside of the context of Animal Collective, Floridada is a pretty good song, within the context of their discography, it's one of their worst songs ever. The only reason I'm on this forum is because of their past achievements, they really haven't contributed much to the progression of modern art since ODDSAC. Just because they deserve a life time achievement award doesn't mean that I'm gonna praise a song that at the end of the day is only decent.

Smh'ing so hard at this post

They're intentionally trying to make this album sound different from their other albums, read the rolling stone interview they did last week (too lazy to link). It's not supposed to sound the same as their other stuff but that doesn't mean it isn't good or isn't up to their standards or whatever. Apples and oranges

Ditto to everything in Tap's post

[Texas Trill]

TapirMache wrote:

I like the song just fine. I've just been trying to point out how weak it is compared to their masterpieces, I don't know how anyone can argue with me there.

At first it seemed like people were giving you too hard of a time, but now you're just asking for it

I'm going to assume you mean their most played or recognizable songs when you say "masterpiece," and pretty quickly I can think of plenty of those songs on past albums that I prefer Floridada over:

My Girls
Summertime Clothes
Brothersport
Grass
Leaf house
Winter's love
Alvin Row

I could probably name more but I won't. Mostly because comparing great songs or great albums really doesn't need to be a win/lose scenario. I'm sure there will be days I'd rather listen to Winters Love after hearing Floridada so often, so for that day I may prefer it less but in the bigger picture, it doesn't really matter. People have different ideas of what perfect Animal Collective is, which is great and goes with the intentions of the band. So quit trying to make objective claims of past AC being the best AC and maybe you'll learn to find something special within all their eras

[TapirMache]

Victor Borge wrote:

They're intentionally trying to make this album sound different from their other albums, read the rolling stone interview they did last week (too lazy to link). It's not supposed to sound the same as their other stuff but that doesn't mean it isn't good or isn't up to their standards or whatever. Apples and oranges

So you'd rather have an album that sounded different from the rest than an album that was good? There's a difference between how an album sounds and how well composed the songs are. Their ability to create a new sound from album to album has always impressed me, but none of those albums would have been good if they weren't great songwriters underneath it all.

Texas Trill wrote:

At first it seemed like people were giving you too hard of a time, but now you're just asking for it

I'm going to assume you mean their most played or recognizable songs when you say "masterpiece"

So quit trying to make objective claims of past AC being the best AC and maybe you'll learn to find something special within all their eras

People are definitely giving me too hard of a time, why on earth would I mean most recognizable or most played songs by "masterpiece"? are recognizability and play counts how you judge the quality of a work?
Of course there's something special within each of their eras, but how can anyone pretend like they're equal? If anyone actually thinks CHz and MPP (or any of their albums) are equally as good, then this is not worth my time.

[Cussing Bum]

What are the masterpieces then?

[rocks]

TapirMache wrote:

Looking at it outside of the context of Animal Collective, Floridada is a pretty good song, within the context of their discography, it's one of their worst songs ever.

I actually agree. If this wasn't an animal collective song I probably would have only listened to it once and forgotten about it. I keep giving it more tries but I'm really not feeling it.
I'm hoping the rest of the album will tickle my fancy a lot more!

[dud]

hey tapirmache if i publish a review of hollindagain can i sign your copy of it too

[hybrination]

TapirMache wrote:

hybrination wrote:

animal collective has always made pop music in disguise, so embracing those elements that have always been there in the music and presenting it directly, is an interesting direction for a band that always tries to have an interesting direction with each album.

You can say you don't like it, that's fine, but don't try to imply that your dislike of the track stems from some place of objectivity.

Of course my dislike of the track stems from a place of objectivity, where else would it come from lol?

From subjectivity?

The song writing is great imo, it's a really meaningful idea they've explored.

[Texas Trill]

Masterpiece is a very subjective term so by using it, I was only left to assume you meant their most played songs or well known songs. And the ones I listed are pretty universally liked by AC fans. But like I said it's such a subjective term, you're going to have be more specific and give us a bone or two on what you mean if you're trying to have a reasonable conversation

Also you don't have to pretend like each era is equal. Your opinions are your own, but you are trying to say that this new single is some of their worst stuff compared to their "masterpieces." What I'm saying is at different times and points in your life the songs will have a different effect on you. You may find yourself into a past or recent song that you didn't care for at first. Have an open mind

[kafkaesque]

TapirMache wrote:

hybrination wrote:

animal collective has always made pop music in disguise, so embracing those elements that have always been there in the music and presenting it directly, is an interesting direction for a band that always tries to have an interesting direction with each album.

You can say you don't like it, that's fine, but don't try to imply that your dislike of the track stems from some place of objectivity.

Of course my dislike of the track stems from a place of objectivity, where else would it come from lol?

uhhh... a place of subjectivity? jesus christ. has it taken you this long to realize that art and the appreciation thereof is subjective?

there is absolutely nothing wrong with not digging this song as much as their old material. furthermore, there is absolutely nothing wrong with voicing why you (relatively) dislike it. but there is so, so much wrong with claiming that everyone who really enjoys this song is deceiving him/herself out of blind fandom. it's the difference between saying "ah, i don't think this stands up to their best material" and saying "you are deluding yourself if you think this song is really good." the former is perfectly respectful disagreement. the latter is presumptuous, rude, and almost definitely not true.

have you read these forums much? people voice dislike of animal collective material all the time. the easiest example is centipede hz, which plenty of people on this board thought was a bit of a disappointment.

[kafkaesque]

ahh @hybridnation beat me to it