Premier Rock Forum

I'm new here (however I don't have that new smell) and I was wondering something. I had an argument with someone at work, which was over the fact that Isis sounds like Neurosis. My point was if you like Neurosis, and their sound, and another band sounds similar, wouldn't you be happy there's more of that "sound" avaliable to enjoy?The converstaion then degraded into one about rip offs and unoriginality. Now, what I'm wondering is if there's a justifiable reason to get mad about one band sounding like another when you have nothing to do with either other than you saw them live and/or bought their record? I say no. I also don't think Isis sounds like neurosis. .

Only Neurosis sounds like Neurosis, no one else sounds like Neurosis. Period.

I don't think it's possible for a band to sound exactly like another unless all the people involved with one band started another and played the same songs. This guy didn't really get that. I'm guessing his stereo is broken making everything he plays on it sound like the same static noise.

This is an interesting topic, and I suspect it will seperate music fans into two camps:
1) People who value sound as a thing unto itself and
2) People who see sound as one component of a band's aesthetic, but not the most important one.

Number 1 - types generally conclude band commenarty with phases like "if you like (a band), then you'll like these guys," or append those preposterous "recommended if you like..." lists. I suspect that nearly all sampling/contemporary electronic artists and marquee DJs are #1s.

Me, I'm a 2. I don't think what anything sounds like (as differentiated from what it is altogether) is particularly important. This implies that I can like two things that sound similar, yet have little in common, for different reasons. Or like one and hate the other. Or like things that sound different for the same reason.

The Ramones and Stooges, for example, are two band who have meant the world to me. They both have identifiable "sounds," and quite a few bands can mimic these sounds convincingly. As a result, I dismiss these similar bands, generally, because they are mimicking the superficial aspects of a great experience in an attempt to co-opt the underlying greatness. I think of this as a cheap trick, like a hooker in a Marylin Monroe wig with a painted-on beauty mark. It makes me think less of these bands.

There are also some bands (Dead Meadow come to mind) who are capable of evoking an authentic essence which just-so-happens to sound a lot like other bands (Blue Cheer, Crazy Horse, Uriah Heap, Black Sabbath, Budgie...), and I like them despite it. That it sounds like other stuff is unimportant to me, because I get the feeling that the intent underneath the sound is genuine expression rather than mimicry.

This is on point currently, as there are many retrograde impressionists out there today, doing kitschy pastiches of sound in an attempt to remind us that Joy Division, the Cure and Slint were once great bands, and in the process attach some of their value like a mortgage-holder. This makes me think less of these bands.

Isis? Eh, I think they sound a little like Neurosis, especially when the epic parts kick in, but I can't say that's a problem. I'm more bothered by bands trying to fool an audience with sound generally than with particular bands who happen to like the same sounds or effects.

I appreciate the argument that all we are listening to is sound, and that's all that should matter. I grasp that argument, but it doesn't ring true to me. I hear through the sound to the people on the other side of it, and if I can't get with them, then fuck their sound.

If, when you listen to music, all you hear is sound, then I pity you. The sound doesn't matter very much.

Well I'm guessing Isis didn't say, "fuck, neurosis is so damn popular with the kids these days. Jim grab your guitar and lets cut a record". I'm sure thos guys wanted to play music, and when they did together the sound they produced was what you hear on their records, whether it sounds like Neurosis or not. I just think it's silly to dismiss a band based on the fact track 3 of such and such album sounds like a Nick Cave song. I guess what it comes down to is are you reproducing a sound or actually creating one.

steve wrote: The sound doesn't matter very much.

He left off this part:

"... and so I announce that I am hereby closing Electrical Audio and reopening the facility as the Albini Lifecoaching Complex. Albini Lifecoaching: Helping You Become The Better You That The Sound Was Trying To Express In The First Place."

Consider this -

Some bands have distinct sounds that others pick up on and carry futher. SOME band had to be the first to carry a melody line with muted 16ths on a guitar and solid double bass drumming for every song. Now zillions of bands do it and it's a style that we call death metal. Within that genre there are lots of bands doing lots of interesting and distinct things, but the roots of the sound can be traced back to someone who did it first, because no one was making music that sounded like that 25 years ago. I'm sure whatever band who said - this constant rhythm thing done by <pioneering band> is cool, but instead of doing that, let's do this instead - was called a hack rip-off, but didn't fucking care. Good for them.

Others don't really add anything to the mix and are just ripping someone off. Most of them die away unnoticed and the occasional few are mistakenly given credit for something interesting that they're only parrotting. This is too bad, but no one ever said that life was fair. I don't think it's that important, as I think people are waaay to oversensitive about things being ripped off.

As for Isis, I am much more concerned with the the goofy facial hair that they seem to share with Neurosis. When's it going to stop?

= Justin

Isis certainly take elements of Neurosis' music, but as a whole, they are going in a bit different (IMHO, better) direction. Someone who thinks they're just a Neurosis cover band should take a good, hard listen to Celestial. The speakers in my car don't like me very much...

You guys sound like music journalists.

Nothing worse than that.

Intellectualising music is strictly for silly people.



Some music is good, some is bad; no point searching reasons.

I can't speak for the rest of us, but I know Steve has a degree in journalism.

Don't worry Champion- you're in the hands of professionals, here.

Lately, I've just been putting music into two categories:

Face slaying
Not face slaying