Also, "quirky," "cutesy," "acoustic," (at times) and "hippie shit" are all adjectives that can just as easily apply to The Flaming Lips, Randall

H-GM wrote:

SecondEdition wrote:

H-GM wrote:

SecondEdition wrote:
You sound like a Frank Zappa fan.

I don't get it; maybe it's because I'm not a fan of Zappa. Do Zappa fans hate acoustic music?

I said that because you hated music. It seemed like a particularly Zappa thing to say. (I was listening to "Weasels Ripped My Flesh" at that time.)

The only Zappa I've ever listened to was Joe's Garage and I've also seen Baby Snakes. Still not a fan. I don't get it. Don't claim to get it. And don't get it in spite of not getting it. If you'd like to recommend something for me to experience I'm all eyes.

Pretty much everything Zappa did after 1970 was unredeemed and unholy dogshit. The stuff between 1966-1970 was often brilliant. Start with an album from that time period and it's probably going to appeal to you far more than fucking Joe's Garage; try Freak Out!, which is probably the best introduction to Zappa there is.

H-GM wrote:
Oh dear God, the chorus to that octopus song makes me shaky.

I am not a fan at all of crazy people making music, unless it is good music. Syd had something special with Pink Floyd, afterwards not so much.

I'm not a fan of crazy people making music either, e.g. I'm not a Wesley Willis fan. The thing is that I do think much of Barrett's solo catalog is legitimately good music, often great. Often, now that I think of it, though... the unaccompanied acoustic Syd stuff is often the worst and craziest part of his catalog, and I almost never listen to it. Hmmm. I love most of his band efforts, especially the couple songs he cut with the Soft Machine backing him up. Have you ever heard "No Good Trying"? It's a fully fledged, heavily-distorted song that is really fascinating and well-written. Really, it is brilliant. Syd doesn't wail or anything. You should listen to that song, it's probably one of my favorite Syd Barrett songs.

H-GM wrote:

SecondEdition wrote:Also, "quirky," "cutesy," "acoustic," (at times) and "hippie shit" are all adjectives that can just as easily apply to The Flaming Lips, Randall, and I don't see you being driven to kill by their music.

Oh, snap. No you didn't.

I wrote and edited three different posts in regard to this already. I'm flummoxed.

[/quote]

I figured you'd have that response. Don't be too mad at me...

Seriously, though - Randall, how the fuck is Wayne Coyne not a hippie? He has written tons of catchy, starry-eyed, psychedelic, lyrical, charitable and goodhearted songs that often show a childlike fascination with the world and a naive understanding of evil in the world. Sounds a whole honking hell of a lot like hippie shit to me - and that is not a bad thing at all. He's often incredibly quirky, which I don't mean as a fucking perjorative - I mean that as a compliment, because he makes his quirks pay off. He has come up with seriously wacked-out ideas that seem impossible and completely impractical that turn out to produce great, unique music (like Zaireeka). Acoustic? Sure. What do you call "There You Are" if not acoustic? And fucking brilliant?

Basically, Wayne Coyne is all of the things I said he was, except "cutesy." I take that one back. I guess the difference here is that you think of all of the things I listed as bad things, while I don't.

TRIFECTA wrote:

Skronk wrote:Jose Gonzalez is miles above the current freak folk scenesters. Banhart writes good bossa nova tracks, but I can't play a full album by him. Not crap, with a few waffles.

Acoustic music can be excellent, but current popular acts are hardly the ones to judge it by.

Is iron and wine very "hip"?

I only know of a few people who like it.

I think he's got a hipster following.

I saw Banhart at the Bottom Lounge a few years ago, with Joanna Newsom opening. Didn't mind him live, except that I thought that one day in a few years, maybe when he's 25, he will throw all of these songs away and start from scratch.

Flaneur wrote:I saw Banhart at the Bottom Lounge a few years ago, with Joanna Newsom opening. Didn't mind him live, except that I thought that one day in a few years, maybe when he's 25, he will throw all of these songs away and start from scratch.

All that interests me out of that post are Joanna Newsom and bottom and opening.
Yes I'd like to see Joanna newsom's bottom and opening.

All you people that voted "Not Crap" on Devendra Banhart . . . you lose your balls or something?

I had the dubious pleasure of seeing DB perform in New York once. All I remember from the show is that a ton of high school girls had pins of his face on their jackets and were crying and saying how beautiful he was. It was almost like beatle mania on a hipster scale, it was weird (especially because everyone in his band had pirate haircuts and stuff). I was just sort of standing in the middle of it and pretty confused.

The music? If it was at all noteworthy I would have remembered it, right? zzzzzz....

Skronk wrote:

TRIFECTA wrote:

Skronk wrote:Jose Gonzalez is miles above the current freak folk scenesters. Banhart writes good bossa nova tracks, but I can't play a full album by him. Not crap, with a few waffles.

Acoustic music can be excellent, but current popular acts are hardly the ones to judge it by.

Is iron and wine very "hip"?

I only know of a few people who like it.

I think he's got a hipster following.

hmmmm, interesting. doesn't seem hipsters would like him. I like him. I think he is pretty good and I enjoy his melodies and how soft it is. Hispters like a lot of good shit though but a lot more horrible fucking shit than good as well.