I don't think they sound anything at all like Springsteen. I think that's a really silly comparison. From my first listen, I think they are a little more comparable to a My Morning Jacket, of which I am a fan as well. Very anthemic, big sounds. While I admit my complaint with a lot of indie rock is the lack of any solos or meaningful jamming, I am not sure they need solos as there's already a bunch of layers in there.
There are many more bands out there that are worth the negative energy, like Tapes N Tapes or Spoon (sorry, saw them both live and both shows were phenomenally boring). In fact, I am not even a big fan of The National, who are the primary guilty parties with the plodding rhythm that goes nowhere for 6 minutes. What kills me about the National more is that I know they could be amazing, but they keep falling just short.
this goes with my theory that you can judge someone's intelligence by musical taste......
I agree, you must not be too wise. I try to listen to all the bands that people on here are into and once in a while there is something decent. This is not one of those instances. Talk about over-rated.
and this might be a pretentious statement but im going to say that the Arcade Fire is the defining band of my generation (I'm 21).
I kind of hope that they aren't, really. They don't sound current to me, honestly, and they don't seem to have taken on that mythical status like a Zeppelin or a Nirvana.
Thanks EPOTTSIII!
"Vinyl or not, you will need to pay someone to take RA of your hands" - Smile05
424, xxx
The Suburbs is the best album in the last five years.....you're musical taste is suffering
The Dead Weather released 2 better albums in this time. Then again maybe I'm just stupid. If you ask me, which I know you didn't, most of the people on this board have very little taste for good music.
and this might be a pretentious statement but im going to say that the Arcade Fire is the defining band of my generation (I'm 21).
I kind of hope that they aren't, really. They don't sound current to me, honestly, and they don't seem to have taken on that mythical status like a Zeppelin or a Nirvana.
i'm a self-appointed genius (iq of 180, booyah) and arcade fire totally blows. i tried to watch their youtube concert and for fear of wanting to kill myself if i listened to any more of that noise i shut it off. somebody else put it perfectly, they are a bunch of self-appointed hipsters praised and supported by other hipsters who have zero taste in decent music. i'm 23 and if this is the band of my generation, well, god help us...
somebody else put it perfectly, they are a bunch of self-appointed hipsters praised and supported by other hipsters who have zero taste in decent music. i'm 23 and if this is the band of my generation, well, god help us...
And yet here you have a bunch of Pearl Jam fans who also like them, so as a fellow fan, following your logic, that would mean you have no taste either.
I'm far from a hipster, I like what I like, doesn't matter what genre - I'm not huge on indie music in general, but I do like Arcade Fire because I recognise a lot of different influences in their music.
There will always be people who think it's "cooler" to hate on what's popular than to give them a fair shake. It's cool if people don't want to jump on board, but it's clear that some people are going overboard with trashing them. Just say no thanks and move on to something ultimately inferior.
, in my opinion, a very good band who have released 3 LPs. Let's let them just relax and keep making music. Why can't a band just be a band and make some records?
okay, i didn't really read everything that was written in this thread. but a lot of bullshit is being thrown around. first of all, i can't stand when people throw bands into this "indie" category that "pretentious hipsters" listen to. then spewing off bands like my morning jacket as if they are somehow related. i feel like some people just don't have the mental capacity to appreciate certain kinds of art, and so they are jealous of the ones who understand it, thus resorting to name calling. these days, "indie" (to me at least) pretty much just means that the musician(s) has complete artistic freedom. i mean, a lot of these bands that get thrown into the category aren't even on independent labels. but the thing that makes no sense to me is how bands like my morning jacket, arcade fire, sonic youth, animal collective etc can get thrown into this "indie" (which seems to be an evil word to some) category, when it's all just rock n roll, and very different rock n roll at that. most of these artists themselves don't seem to indentify with any particular scene (seems to be all about the music to me), so it's not fair to judge them based on a certain demographic their music may attract.
okay, i didn't really read everything that was written in this thread. but a lot of bullshit is being thrown around. first of all, i can't stand when people throw bands into this "indie" category that "pretentious hipsters" listen to. then spewing off bands like my morning jacket as if they are somehow related. i feel like some people just don't have the mental capacity to appreciate certain kinds of art, and so they are jealous of the ones who understand it, thus resorting to name calling. these days, "indie" (to me at least) pretty much just means that the musician(s) has complete artistic freedom. i mean, a lot of these bands that get thrown into the category aren't even on independent labels. but the thing that makes no sense to me is how bands like my morning jacket, arcade fire, sonic youth, animal collective etc can get thrown into this "indie" (which seems to be an evil word to some) category, when it's all just rock n roll, and very different rock n roll at that. most of these artists themselves don't seem to indentify with any particular scene (seems to be all about the music to me), so it's not fair to judge them based on a certain demographic their music may attract.
and this might be a pretentious statement but im going to say that the Arcade Fire is the defining band of my generation (I'm 21).
I kind of hope that they aren't, really. They don't sound current to me, honestly, and they don't seem to have taken on that mythical status like a Zeppelin or a Nirvana.
i'm a self-appointed genius (iq of 180, booyah) and arcade fire totally blows. i tried to watch their youtube concert and for fear of wanting to kill myself if i listened to any more of that noise i shut it off. somebody else put it perfectly, they are a bunch of self-appointed hipsters praised and supported by other hipsters who have zero taste in decent music. i'm 23 and if this is the band of my generation, well, god help us...
So many things wrong with this. First of all I stopped taking your post seriously when you opened with "i'm a self-appointed genius (iq of 180, booyah) and arcade fire totally blows"...You just sound fucking ridiculous. Then you refer to them as "self appointed hipsters" and say that everyone who likes them is a hipster as well. The irony of this post is hilarious because you refer to yourself as a genius and then you proceed to make yourself sound like a fucking retard all in one paragraph. Next time you are trying to make an argument don't base it off people being "hipsters".
okay, i didn't really read everything that was written in this thread. but a lot of bullshit is being thrown around. first of all, i can't stand when people throw bands into this "indie" category that "pretentious hipsters" listen to. then spewing off bands like my morning jacket as if they are somehow related. i feel like some people just don't have the mental capacity to appreciate certain kinds of art, and so they are jealous of the ones who understand it, thus resorting to name calling. these days, "indie" (to me at least) pretty much just means that the musician(s) has complete artistic freedom. i mean, a lot of these bands that get thrown into the category aren't even on independent labels. but the thing that makes no sense to me is how bands like my morning jacket, arcade fire, sonic youth, animal collective etc can get thrown into this "indie" (which seems to be an evil word to some) category, when it's all just rock n roll, and very different rock n roll at that. most of these artists themselves don't seem to indentify with any particular scene (seems to be all about the music to me), so it's not fair to judge them based on a certain demographic their music may attract.
I never hear MMJ being tossed in with indie bands. This thread is really the first time I've seen where people thought they were part of that scene.
How I long for the day when people realize that the term "indie" has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH A BAND'S SOUND. I guess the fact that a lot of bands that are considered "indie" are signed to major labels and that has helped bastardize the term, but seriously, "indie" is not a sound. :roll:
How I long for the day when people realize that the term "indie" has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH A BAND'S SOUND. I guess the fact that a lot of bands that are considered "indie" are signed to major labels and that has helped bastardize the term, but seriously, "indie" is not a sound. :roll:
I think your thought process was how it was perceived in the 90's and earlier, but as the 00's came around a lot of music was considered to have an "indie sound" by many in the media. so indie stopped being a adjective used to describe how a band went about making their music (label, creativity etc) and became more of the new catch phrase for bands like "alternative" was in the 90's
by the way all this talk of arcade fire sucking is crazy.
Charlotte 00 Charlotte 03 Asheville 04 Atlanta 12 Greenville 16, Columbia 16 Seattle 18 Nashville 22 Ohana Festival 24 x2
and this might be a pretentious statement but im going to say that the Arcade Fire is the defining band of my generation (I'm 21).
Pretty sure if you approached 10 random people on the street and played an arcade fire song - you are going to get about 9 or 10 blank stares back.
Ok maybe not the defining band because this generation's musical tastes are just way too fucked up but along with Radiohead I would consider them them the most important band of my generation. Better?
I don't think there are defining bands of generations anymore like in the 90s, or even 10 years ago with the White Stripes. I think it's all a little too chaotic now for any band to be able to stake that claim with the total randomness of the internet, and the fact that at any one time, some person can post something on YouTube and sell out Madison Square Garden a week later.
Sad to say it, but to some extent, when record labels were at their heyday, they at least sorted some of this stuff out for us - even if there were many periods when the product wasn't so great. Sure, there's a certain freedom and creativity that's associated with the self-made rock star and the music fan deciding for themselves what works and what doesn't...but at the same time, there's a whole lot more sifting going on than there used to be. Personally, I just wish there was a happy medium where creativity and choice were prevalent, but it was at least a little more decipherable.
I don't think there are defining bands of generations anymore like in the 90s, or even 10 years ago with the White Stripes.
I think Arcade Fire is more of a generation defining band than the White Stripes. I don't think highly of AF and Jack White is one of my favorite musicians with WS being my favorite band of his.
I do agree about generation defining bands, though. I think there has to be more widespread appeal for somethin like that.
and this might be a pretentious statement but im going to say that the Arcade Fire is the defining band of my generation (I'm 21).
Pretty sure if you approached 10 random people on the street and played an arcade fire song - you are going to get about 9 or 10 blank stares back.
Ok maybe not the defining band because this generation's musical tastes are just way too fucked up but along with Radiohead I would consider them them the most important band of my generation. Better?
Comments
There are many more bands out there that are worth the negative energy, like Tapes N Tapes or Spoon (sorry, saw them both live and both shows were phenomenally boring). In fact, I am not even a big fan of The National, who are the primary guilty parties with the plodding rhythm that goes nowhere for 6 minutes. What kills me about the National more is that I know they could be amazing, but they keep falling just short.
Keep The Car Running could easily be a Springsteen song. A point hammered home by this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wsukSiGcUng
and if this don't sound like a lost Springsteen song I don't know what does!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Isw7xDaA6g
I kind of hope that they aren't, really. They don't sound current to me, honestly, and they don't seem to have taken on that mythical status like a Zeppelin or a Nirvana.
"Vinyl or not, you will need to pay someone to take RA of your hands" - Smile05
424, xxx
And yet here you have a bunch of Pearl Jam fans who also like them, so as a fellow fan, following your logic, that would mean you have no taste either.
I'm far from a hipster, I like what I like, doesn't matter what genre - I'm not huge on indie music in general, but I do like Arcade Fire because I recognise a lot of different influences in their music.
Sha la la la i'm in love with a jersey girl
I love you forever and forever
Adel 03 Melb 1 03 LA 2 06 Santa Barbara 06 Gorge 1 06 Gorge 2 06 Adel 1 06 Adel 2 06 Camden 1 08 Camden 2 08 Washington DC 08 Hartford 08
+1
Good post.
So many things wrong with this. First of all I stopped taking your post seriously when you opened with "i'm a self-appointed genius (iq of 180, booyah) and arcade fire totally blows"...You just sound fucking ridiculous. Then you refer to them as "self appointed hipsters" and say that everyone who likes them is a hipster as well. The irony of this post is hilarious because you refer to yourself as a genius and then you proceed to make yourself sound like a fucking retard all in one paragraph. Next time you are trying to make an argument don't base it off people being "hipsters".
I never hear MMJ being tossed in with indie bands. This thread is really the first time I've seen where people thought they were part of that scene.
by the way all this talk of arcade fire sucking is crazy.
Charlotte 03
Asheville 04
Atlanta 12
Greenville 16, Columbia 16
Seattle 18
Nashville 22
Ohana Festival 24 x2
Pretty sure if you approached 10 random people on the street and played an arcade fire song - you are going to get about 9 or 10 blank stares back.
Ok maybe not the defining band because this generation's musical tastes are just way too fucked up but along with Radiohead I would consider them them the most important band of my generation. Better?
Sad to say it, but to some extent, when record labels were at their heyday, they at least sorted some of this stuff out for us - even if there were many periods when the product wasn't so great. Sure, there's a certain freedom and creativity that's associated with the self-made rock star and the music fan deciding for themselves what works and what doesn't...but at the same time, there's a whole lot more sifting going on than there used to be. Personally, I just wish there was a happy medium where creativity and choice were prevalent, but it was at least a little more decipherable.
I think Arcade Fire is more of a generation defining band than the White Stripes. I don't think highly of AF and Jack White is one of my favorite musicians with WS being my favorite band of his.
I do agree about generation defining bands, though. I think there has to be more widespread appeal for somethin like that.
I wish this band would just go buy some journals and spare the world the poetry club woe is me weep fest.
75 people in the band and they still manage to make Coldplay sound like Motorhead.
Mr.Butler sings like he has his dick tucked between his legs.