[dug]

i just wanna say that i love the fact that "bathroom recordings" is a collectively understood term within the AC fandom

a little late.. i kno

[Vovenarg]

i blame conde nast

[Akaio]

For real though, once all the p4k bashing is out of everyone's systems I motion to trash this bit of the thread

[atmosphericrex]

Takyon wrote:

kafkaesque wrote:

haha takyon, do you feel big now that p4k has backed up your negative thoughts?

Yeah kinda, lol.

No real shame here; I was just waiting for some of the overly excited initial observations to quiet down before that dark cloud of critical dissent usually ushers in, but it seems as if it's happening a little faster than usual. Like I said, I'll have more construction things to say later (prbly post-midterms) but it feels strangely good/relieving to be able to say that this record is not a masterpiece, or even great for that matter.

Learn from this, don't be so hasty. Retrospect can reveal what was previously unseen.

[iKahn]

This is experimental music...Good God...Some of you guys are acting like AC made music for you in the first place.

This was always their project, and half of us probably got into AC after their great records were made and we'd already often heard their influence in other music by that point, feeding off their exceptional series of releases. Once they "peaked" in popularity, their sound was everywhere, but that's because they were ahead of the curve...

Here we are again...This is the music of the latter half of the 2010's, and I'm sure we'll see this in the near future.

[Takyon]

atmosphericrex wrote:

This will be the most underrated record on their reader's year end list this year.

This is likely, but it's also likely that it will be the "Most Disappointing" winner as well. Let's not forget that CHz ironically won both awards back in 2012/3.

[speen]

Spoiler: show

i miss the drones/ambience/compositionally thought-out tracks. sorry to burst your "no bullshit" bubble AC

[atmosphericrex]

Takyon wrote:

atmosphericrex wrote:

This will be the most underrated record on their reader's year end list this year.

This is likely, but it's also likely that it will be the "Most Disappointing" winner as well. Let's not forget that CHz ironically won both awards back in 2012/3.

The only thing I am disappointed in is Pitchfork.

[giraffacus]

it's 2016, guys -

~*CONTEXT * IS * EVERYTHING *~

[Sam]

My biggest qualm is that once we have new AC it takes such a long time before we experience the next new AC, would be exciting if the band had some new songs to debut this tour...

[Hellomark]

If you like this album listen to it a lot and create cool memories/sensory associations with it and cherish it as you grow older. That's what I'm probably going to do, and critical reviews don't factor into that equation at all.

[dug]

i respect everyone's right to be disappointed by this album, but i think pitchfork writers write drunk and on coke and their reviews belong in /r/iamverysmart. i mean, the guy used "kombucha" and "kimchi" in the same sentence and quoted Nietzsche.

[iKahn]

Everything AC went for on this record came true, and to say "it just isn't that good" is a completely subjective, not to mention pompous, thing to say.

If you don't like it, that's obviously fine.

But to say "it just..." as if it's some universal truth is what I mean by pompous.

[dug]

joby wrote:

like this whole narrative of "animal collective used to be deep and pure but they just never really figured out where it was going and they took a wrong turn somewhere after MPP and now they're just a parody of themselves cuz they didn't become the band they meant to me in 2007-2009" is just barf worthy. like santa claus isn't real, the world sucks, animal collective is just another band like every other band, now review the damned album like you would any other band....

this

[walla221]

It's just weird because they've done some pieces with the boys since PW was announced and I honestly thought they were trying to hype it and were gonna drop a high score on it

Guess not

[iKahn]

walla221 wrote:

It's just weird because they've done some pieces with the boys since PW was announced and I honestly thought they were trying to hype it and were gonna drop a high score on it

Guess not

They did the same thing with Zammuto's Anchor.

They even went to the guy's house, checked out his studio, had lunch with his kids, and then gave his album 4 and even stuck it in the 4th review slot...After hyping him constantly.

Assholes.

P4K use to write really excellent reviews...and even if they didn't like the album that much it was usually a fun read...Not so much anymore. It's been watered down to what is culturally acceptable.

[speen]

gabaraptor wrote:

joby wrote:

like this whole narrative of "animal collective used to be deep and pure but they just never really figured out where it was going and they took a wrong turn somewhere after MPP and now they're just a parody of themselves cuz they didn't become the band they meant to me in 2007-2009" is just barf worthy. like santa claus isn't real, the world sucks, animal collective is just another band like every other band, now review the damned album like you would any other band....

this

but its not completely unfounded. its entirely understandable that someone who appreciates the more experimental side of their career would be disappointed by them trying to make a pop album. although honestly a bigger issue with this album is that the songwriting itself is just not that strong. the pitchfork review has a good point that i totally agreed with- the standout tracks are not huge standouts, they stand out because theyre breathers from the sort of messiness of the others

[atmosphericrex]

something uplifting

http://prettymuchamazing.com/reviews/an ... nting-with

"The sound of a band tapping back into much of what made them great in the first place."

[Vovenarg]

member that time p4k panned Danse and Campfire songs and didn't review ODDSAC?
that was rich

[speen]

yeah im not trying to completely defend p4k here. theyre still dumbasses. im just saying i agree with a lot of what this review says and we shouldnt hate on the guy for saying stuff a lot of us are thinking

[giraffacus]

iKahn wrote:

P4K use to write really excellent reviews...and even if they didn't like the album that much it was usually a fun read...Not so much anymore. It's been watered down to what is culturally acceptable.

[Me Tiger]

I am okay with the review. It's even more fun this way. If it was 9.2 we'd just be like: "well... yeah, YEAH!" — and that's all. But now we have something to be bitching about. It is wonderful in a way.

Spoiler: show

I love the album

[Takyon]

iKahn wrote:

This is experimental music...Good God...Some of you guys are acting like AC made music for you in the first place.

OK, I really don't want to flame but how is this an excuse? All music is experimental, and some experiments are more successful than others. Yeah, their music can be a personal statement but it should be one that is intriguing for an audience or at least relevant to their interests. That's the purpose of criticism: assessing how something is received and if anyone can just summon the argument that any piece of media is somehow a pure artistic divinity then both my thoughts and yours are entirely useless.

iKahn wrote:

This was always their project, and half of us probably got into AC after their great records were made and we'd already often heard their influence in other music by that point, feeding off their exceptional series of releases. Once they "peaked" in popularity, their sound was everywhere, but that's because they were ahead of the curve...

I get this point but history's greatest bands have had a knack for staying ahead of the curve and changing their styles efficiently, even as followers began appearing. With this record, it almost sounds as if AC is trying to catch up with themselves. Even though I like the briskness of the songwriting and how they have done away with their meditative side, there's just nothing surprising about this album and any moment that tries to be surprising is just confusing or cringe-worthy (most notably the tacky voice modulations on the second half of "Hocus Pocus"). I wanna enjoy what I'm hearing but most of what I hear is more imitation than innovation and not even up to par with what followers/contemporaries like Dan Deacon, Ariel Pink, Atlas Sound, Tobacco, etc. are producing nowadays.

Sorry for feeling this way.

[hatredcopter]

ok I just want to look at parts of this review to make sure I'm reading it right. setting aside differences of opinion.

wrote:

Part of Animal Collective's image—or my image of them, at least—entailed [the] fantasy of three to four guys sacrificing themselves at the foot of their loop pedals to conjure some other, bigger, more powerful god. Now, they're parents living in different zip codes and riding the festival circuit.

let me know if you have a different interpretation here, but here's what I got: the writer used to pretend that the animal collective guys were killing themselves in order to make such good music. but since the band members are now grown-ups with kids and mortgages and such, he can no longer revisit his suicide pact fantasy???? which bums him out??????

[iKahn]

demonclusters wrote:

the standout tracks are not huge standouts, they stand out because theyre breathers from the sort of messiness of the others

Dude, it isn't messiness, it's organized chaos. Which a lot of AC music has been. It's no different, it's just so unusual and out of left field that those who think they have an idea of what's coming will often be turned on their heads.

AC's origin, besides genre, besides expectation, is sonic expertise. They are here to create little experiments...Some may present themselves more profound or intimate or energetic or confabulating than others but that's because they are experiments. It's inherent in the way they're created.

It isn't right or wrong, it's not better or worse, it's Painting With, and if you don't jive then don't bother because it's not for you.

[speen]

last post for the night- ive posted more in the last day than i have in a while- but here's some final opinions

Spoiler: show

I feel like a contrarian dick for being disappointed with the albim. the p4k review has given us a reason to debate it, which i like. but yeah, i have supported AC for years, and truly love their music from their entire career. it just makes me sad to feel like i'm watching them hit a creative lull. they dont seem like theyre functioning as a creative force like they used to. maybe thats another reason why deakin sat this one out? anyway, i'm not saying any of this to be edgy, i just honestly feel like theyre being faced with waning importance

there

edit:

Spoiler: show

it'd be organized chaos if the sounds and production came across as organized. its the same with chz- it just feels like all the sounds are fighting for the front of my headspace rather than breathing with each other

[moop]

idunno. i'm in love with this thing and it's kinda blowing my mind. every bit of it.

seems like no coincidence all this negativity springs up right after a panned pitchfork review... hmph.

[Takyon]

Vovenarg wrote:

member that time p4k panned Danse and Campfire songs and didn't review ODDSAC?

And remember those times when they gave their 2003-2009 discography exceptionally high score or when they gave all of Panda Bear's releases ratings that ranged from 8.5 to 9.4? I do, and I wouldn't let barely a handful of disagreeable reviews tarnish my feelings towards a giant publication.

[valar602]

lol you guys were all hyped now I see more negative attitudes.

[dug]

Takyon wrote:

All music is experimental, and some experiments are more successful than others.

yea, and some music is more experimental than other music. hence the usage of the term "experimental" to describe a certain type of music.

everything else you said i'm cool with, i respect your opinion. i just thought that didn't make much sense.

[hatredcopter]

hatredcopter wrote:

ok I just want to look at parts of this review to make sure I'm reading it right. setting aside differences of opinion.

wrote:

Part of Animal Collective's image—or my image of them, at least—entailed [the] fantasy of three to four guys sacrificing themselves at the foot of their loop pedals to conjure some other, bigger, more powerful god. Now, they're parents living in different zip codes and riding the festival circuit.

let me know if you have a different interpretation here, but here's what I got: the writer used to pretend that the animal collective guys were killing themselves in order to make such good music. but since the band members are now grown-ups with kids and mortgages and such, he can no longer revisit his suicide pact fantasy???? which bums him out??????

like, I think what he's expressing here is the feeling I've had myself when I've gone to see, for instance, an aging punk band. the music is the same, the lyrics are the same, but I have a little less fun knowing that the musicians' offstage lifestyles are a lot tamer they used to be.

[hatredcopter]

I can't really buy a dude talking about how desperate and poor he is knowing how comfortable and rich he is. and the reviewer can't really buy animal collective...using loop pedals...knowing that they...have kids.

[samthefireball]

Ok. I think the reviewer is coming from where I was: an expectation of who the band is and what they should make. That they used to "be deeper". That they need to be "more introspective". That we all need them to dig into our souls and mend the pains of growing up and return us to childhood innocence.

But when you let go of these ideas of what they SHOULD be (as I finally did on the second listen)- maybe smoke some pot, and jump around on a trampoline interpretive dancing under the stars and just appreciate the album and be open to it- you will fucking LOVE it. I did. I cried, called old friends, and had very spiritual moments.

I just think it's important to not let this stuff get to you. You don't need to worry about p4k, or get angry. Be strong in your own opinion, and comfortable with it. Be open to others having their ideas too. And be open to the album. It's as beautiful as you let it be.

[dug]

^beautiful post^ <3

hatredcopter wrote:

like, I think what he's expressing here is the feeling I've had myself when I've gone to see, for instance, an aging punk band. the music is the same, the lyrics are the same, but I have a little less fun knowing that the musicians' offstage lifestyles are a lot tamer they used to be.

yeah, isn't that what happens to most bands?

this albums sounds more 'grown-up' to me, but i still love it. they might never again make something that hits me as hard as strawberry jam, but that's cool with me. this album doesn't have the emotion i love from them but their craft and musicianship has excelled wildly here.

[Vovenarg]

moop wrote:

idunno. i'm in love with this thing and it's kinda blowing my mind. every bit of it.

same here man. i can't stop replaying it. addictive and incredible. i wish i had a fraction of the godlike abilities on display on this album (call me a fanboy if that gets you off).

[cramberry]

lol 6.2 my ass

what a dumb website full of self appointed Good Music™ delineators.
unfortunately, some people take pitchforks ratings really seriously--like theyre somehow more important than the next few people's opinion.
pretty sad those people might miss out on this great album because of that.

[giraffacus]

hatredcopter wrote:

I can't really buy a dude talking about how desperate and poor he is knowing how comfortable and rich he is. and the reviewer can't really buy animal collective...using loop pedals...knowing that they...have kids.

I think the guy is just talking about outgrowing the band and hearing it with older ears

[dug]

lets remember it's just one guy's review, and he's probably mind-fried high off his own farts because he works for pitchfork, and might be incapable of writing humbly

[giraffacus]

context is everything guys

[joby]

*EDIT* wow u blink and this thing jumps 2 pages....

demonclusters wrote:

Spoiler: show

gabaraptor wrote:

joby wrote:

like this whole narrative of "animal collective used to be deep and pure but they just never really figured out where it was going and they took a wrong turn somewhere after MPP and now they're just a parody of themselves cuz they didn't become the band they meant to me in 2007-2009" is just barf worthy. like santa claus isn't real, the world sucks, animal collective is just another band like every other band, now review the damned album like you would any other band....

this

but its not completely unfounded. its entirely understandable that someone who appreciates the more experimental side of their career would be disappointed by them trying to make a pop album. although honestly a bigger issue with this album is that the songwriting itself is just not that strong. the pitchfork review has a good point that i totally agreed with- the standout tracks are not huge standouts, they stand out because theyre breathers from the sort of messiness of the others

I think that there was this moment where arcade fire/animal collective/of montreal/fleet foxes/bon iver/etc were all putting out music that appealed to a lot of the same people and a lot of other people started making music influenced by these bands at that specific point in their careers lining up with the scene being fresh and big and exciting. But now the salad days are over and maybe this party's crashed and coachella is two weekends now but still not as cool as it used to be... but why does animal collective have to pick up the check? what makes them such an easy scape goat for all the hurt feelings about the shortcomings and unrealized ideas about what that moment was supposed to pave the way for?