Collected Animals

spoogn wrote:

demonclusters wrote:

it's hard not to feel like theyre becoming less important

they are. but that's culture, not the music. this is a wonderful album, it will not be remembered as important music though. ac is out of vogue, it doesn't mean they're bad and it doesn't necessarily mean future projects by them won't be critically acclaimed. but the U.S.'s focus right now on gender/identity politics, black lives matter, other sociopolitical action/movements and their reflection in music doesn't really leave room to critically praise electronic music made by 3 white guys. i love this album, the critics won't

Yeah, I feel that. But I wasn't exactly expecting AC to release a black lives matter album. What i meant by "important" was expanding their sound each release, instantly inspiring waves of imitators. While the focus is still just the music rather than the cultural context, the cultural context factors into enjoyment of an album. Somebody mentioned something similar a few pages ago. It's like going to see of Montreal now- same guy, same songs, same lyrics, but he's older, somewhat defeated, and it just leaves you sad that the glory days of shit like the skeletal lamping tour are behind us. Painting With is super fun, and I'm definitely going to keep listening to it. I just feel like the songwriting isn't as strong as it used to be and they're not really expanding their own sound/horizons with this

edit: *braces for impact*

This thread prior to pitchfork review
"This album is great!"

The same people in this thread, after the pitchfork review
"this album isn't great"

How do you lack self awareness to that degree?

and the beginnin of Bagels reminds me of Sparks from depression cherry ya know?

What i meant by "important" was expanding their sound each release, instantly inspiring waves of imitators. While the focus is still just the music rather than the cultural context, the cultural context factors into enjoyment of an album.
edit: *braces for impact*

Anyone else feel like the cover art was actually a mistake? It doesn't match the vibe of the record for me. It's such a colorful and cartoonish record that making the cover mostly beige actually kind of skews my perception of the album.

Anyone else feel like the cover art was actually a mistake?

to critically praise electronic music made by 3 white guys. i love this album, the critics won't

spoogn wrote:

demonclusters wrote:

it's hard not to feel like theyre becoming less important

they are. but that's culture, not the music. this is a wonderful album, it will not be remembered as important music though. ac is out of vogue, it doesn't mean they're bad and it doesn't necessarily mean future projects by them won't be critically acclaimed. but the U.S.'s focus right now on gender/identity politics, black lives matter, other sociopolitical action/movements and their reflection in music doesn't really leave room to critically praise electronic music made by 3 white guys. i love this album, the critics won't

Yeah, I feel that. But I wasn't exactly expecting AC to release a black lives matter album. What i meant by "important" was expanding their sound each release, instantly inspiring waves of imitators. While the focus is still just the music rather than the cultural context, the cultural context factors into enjoyment of an album. Somebody mentioned something similar a few pages ago. It's like going to see of Montreal now- same guy, same songs, same lyrics, but he's older, somewhat defeated, and it just leaves you sad that the glory days of shit like the skeletal lamping tour are behind us. Painting With is super fun, and I'm definitely going to keep listening to it. I just feel like the songwriting isn't as strong as it used to be and they're not really expanding their own sound/horizons with this

edit: *braces for impact*

huh, might get mine tomorrow too. left jersey city this morning and i live in NY 10 mins from NJ border

It doesn't match the vibe of the record for me. It's such a colorful and cartoonish record that making the cover mostly beige actually kind of skews my perception of the album. Idk about you guys but i take my cover art seriously

Yeah, I'm super pumped to see them Friday. like Lizard said, I have a feeling they'll make it all click in a live setting.

I do feel like a lot of the vocals on this album will be a challenge to do live though

Anyone feel like this album woulda been better if they wrote the songs together instead of for eachother?? I love every song avey made but a lot of the panda tracks are very samey and bland to me.

Are AC playing Pitchfork fest this year?

Hiff Cluxtable wrote:

Are AC playing Pitchfork fest this year?

No, I don't think so, are they?

The Pitchfork review was, in essence, the publication washing their hands of the band. They aren't as relevant anymore, so they don't need them to play at their festival, hence the ridiculously low score. That's really all have to say on it.

The Pitchfork review was, in essence, the publication washing their hands of the band. They aren't as relevant anymore, so they don't need them to play at their festival, hence the ridiculously low score. That's really all have to say on it.

Granted, its via the dumbshits on /r/AnimalCollective

tdegenaro wrote:

Granted, its via the dumbshits on /r/AnimalCollective

Your post lost all credibility here

Synusoid wrote:

tdegenaro wrote:

Granted, its via the dumbshits on /r/AnimalCollective

Your post lost all credibility here

Because I called them (and my self, I guess, I post there too) dumbshits or because I'm citing those dumbshits?

Spoiler: show

The Pitchfork review is really, really frustratingly articulated to me. Maybe it's just me - I dunno - I'm new as an official member here so you can burn me at the stake if you need to; I'd understand. But in my opinion as someone who has written reviews on a personal level for a reeeeally long time (and absolutely publicly acknowledging my lack of professional credibility other than about 10-years-worth of blog reviews), this review is just badly written in terms of describing why it got the rating it did. I'm not saying his opinion is wrong; it's his opinion. Obviously. But the review really struck a nerve with me because it's going to be a touchstone for a lot of people who wanted to wait until Friday to hear it and completely avoided CA or aren't as enthusiastic as we all are about this band but may have been curious to hear what Pitchfork had to say about it. And Mike Powell said nearly nothing about it. Nearly fucking nothing. It's a hastily-collected opinion piece on the half-mirror side of what a lot of people here are saying and he has absolutely every right to air it to the public but for him to do so in the (mostly) respected online venue of Pitchfork? It's unprofessional at best. It is, essentially, a message board opinion put to online publication.

Mike wrote a really good review of Courtney Barnett's Sometimes I Sit.... It was one of my favorite reviews I've read on Pitchfork because he did a great job of articulating how he personally felt about it. If I were to imagine myself as someone who had not heard that album (or even Courtney Barnett for that matter) and then read that review, I would really want to hear it (and of course a it's ok label helps). But the point of a music review, to me as a person that writes them, is not to just be an article for people to agree or disagree with, though I know they will; it's an article that explores an avenue of describing what you feel to another person in enough detail to make them understand why but also how you formed that opinion. Mike Powell's review does not explore at all. He makes some points that do stick, yes, but he basically gives his personal history of how he came to love Animal Collective in vivid wording and then basically says "Painting With? Nah. Couple good tunes here but it's not Sung Tongs or Here Comes The Indian because I didn't see them perform this material in a Chinese restaurant's basement. Move along." Is it succinct? Sure! Is it something I expected from someone that writes for a music review website that essentially bred my love for a great portion of my music taste because of the amount of colorful detail that they seasoned their reviews with? Absolutely not. This guy's review is as relevant as my own wordy post here, which I'm sure will be shot down in some way. But typing all of this is worth it because I loved reading other people's descriptions of music I had not heard yet and Animal Collective was the first band that I checked out because of how someone else passionately described them. This band is worth more than this half-assed review to me.

Pardon me, guys. Had to get that off my chest.

my shipment started in ann arbor and went to jersey city.

i live in Austin.

"Your item arrived at our USPS facility in JERSEY CITY, NJ 07097 on February 15, 2016 at 11:11 pm. The item is currently in transit to the destination."

tdegenaro wrote:

Synusoid wrote:

tdegenaro wrote:

Granted, its via the dumbshits on /r/AnimalCollective

Your post lost all credibility here

Because I called them (and my self, I guess, I post there too) dumbshits or because I'm citing those dumbshits?

Because it sounded like a generalization about people who go on /r/AnimalCollective, but I guess you weren't really being that serious, my bad

EDIT: Animal Collective

Also have they announced tour dates for Florida yet? I heard they would talk about extra tour locations at a later time

Pitchfork is trash these days, I really think they don't care about INDIE music anymore.