Track Review – Summersong – The Decemberists

I’ve gotta hand it to P*tchf*rk, they are getting some way-decent exclusive tracks to leak these days. (Although, to be fair, The Crane Wife, upcoming 10/3/2006, has been available on various p2p networks for a few days.) Unfortunately, they did very little to judge the track, so I will pick up where they so politely left off.

Sidebar: They also can’t go 2 sentences without mentioning the Hold Steady. I suppose that’s one thing MaxEnt and PitFor have in common…

Anyways, Summersong is a fairly standard Decemberists song, albeit more stripped down and subdued than most of Picaresque. The verses have almost a Neil Young feel to them, and Meloy’s delivery of the verses sounds almost natural and calm, as opposed to his usual high-pitched, strained, yet melodic delivery. He returns to his usual vocal style for the choruses, and even throws in some “la-de-da-de-dahs” for good measure. The instrumentals are also kept to a minimum: I heard guitar, drums, bass, and some very simple strings in the background. The focus is clearly on the lead vocals, and the cute back-up “bum-pum-bum” and “ohh-ahh-ohh” vocals. (I’m getting paid by the onomatopoeia on this review. Wait…is scat singing actually onomatopoeia?…)

Lyrically, this song only requires a B.A. in English Lit, as opposed to the usual PhD. Shockingly, not once during this song did I need to consult a dictionary. Not once. (I did, however, have to consult a dictionary for that “onomatopoeia” comment above.) Summersong paints a picture of the coming and passing of summer, evoking the usual aquatic references: “Been saved the warmer the waves//I felt a slip into a watery grave.” He introduces a girl in “linen and curls” and uses her as a metaphor for the quickly passing summer. He also elegantly describes the bay and beach she is traversing. The beach clearly being a metaphor for the Bush Administration. (NOTE: Given that I was not an English major, any metaphors I have identified are probably not actually there. Listen for yourself.)

If this track is any indication, we are in for a double treat on 10/3/2006.

What’s that you say? The Killers are also releasing an album on 10/3?!?!?!!? Looks like death by new release! HAHAHAAHAHAH!! Get it…Killers…death by…

God, the Killers fucking suck.

Pandora, Patent-Pending Products, and the Promise of Personal Musical Perfection

(That’s right. I’m get paid by the alliteration, bitches.)

First some context: this weekend DKraft and I were bumming around Boston, shaking off hangovers and pre-gaming for a local show that night, and we logged onto the IntraWebs and messed around with Pandora for a few hours. For those of you un-familiar with Pandora, it’s basically a website that streams a song or band you type in and then plays continuous music that has similar characteristics (i.e. a similar sound) as the original band. Based off of the well-known Music Genome Project, it’s a pretty ambitious project to break down individual songs or bands into tangible, or at the very least, describable characteristics and cross-refererence them with other sounds. It’s designed for indie rockers like us here at MaxEnt to be able to discover new music with similar styles as the music we already like, for those people who crave new, good, interesting, unique music. So DKraft and I typed in some of our favorite bands…Mountain Goats, Built to Spill, The Hold Steady….and waited patiently for…

…nothing. Surprisingly, nothing. Sure, there were a few songs that were tolerable, even stuff that I would give a second and third listen. But for the most part I was really struck by how little the songs that Pandora chose for us were anything like the original song/band. I really liked the concept of the project, and was (and still am) willing to keep trying it out to check out some new stuff. But it did get me thinking. What makes the music I listen to, well, the music I want to listen to? What makes Neutral Milk Hotel give me such a strong, almost visceral reaction everytime I listen to them? Why don’t I get that same reaction to the twenty-some other bands that either list NMH as an influence, or vice versa? Could I describe 17 different distinct, autonomous qualities that makes this reaction happen? Or is it just a random combination of external forces (i.e. a soundtrack to good times with friends, relevant lyrics to what’s happening in my life, etc)?

Ok, so most of us have thought this before. And I could easily extend this to a prodigiously pretentious discussion of Pandora and the futility of objectively catagorizing art. But that’s not what I want to do. And part of me kind of thinks that it is possible to empirically describe art. That’s right. I said it. But Pandora just wasn’t quite making the connection for me. What were the qualities that they were using to characterize songs? How were they gathering data about the bands/songs? How was that data translated into easily processed and manipulated raw numbers that could be worked into a usable interface? And how the hell was I supposed to find the next Hold Steady when all I kept getting was fuckin’ Superchunk and Cheap Trick?

Fast-forward to this week. I’ve been working a client of mine for a while now, and recently we’ve been talking about his work on his new venture capital project. He is not one of my typical clients. That is, he finished high school. Actually, not only did he finish high school, and college (and two or three Master’s degrees), but he’s a former wunderkind start-up genius who had the world at his feet. (Suffice to say, it’s been downhill since then, which is why he is my client.) His project that he’s been working on is a self-proclaimed, bigger, better, and more advanced version of Pandora. And in the past few days he’s started to show it to me. I told him I was a big music fan and played some music myself. So he’s been using me as tester for his new software, software that is absolutely brilliant and frighteningly accurate. (Again, because of confidentiality I can’t reveal his name or his company’s name. Yet.) I don’t understand a fucking thing about algorithms, programming, or software engineering. All’s I know is that, despite some pretty serious bugs in the programming, this guy is on to something huge.

He used to know some of the Pandora guys and he says they are doing it all wrong. He says rather than comparing what two musical bands or songs have in common, we should be looking at what they don’t have in common. Take Dashboard and Mountain Goats. For me, I can’t the thought of listening to one, and the other is one of the more unique bands out there that I listen to almost on a daily basis. He sat me down and showed me how and why Pandora would show these two seemingly disparate bands actually have quite a bit in common. Male, singer/songwriters, acoustic guitar-strummers, focus on melodic structure, minor key hooks, etc. The list when on and on. He’s been talking about how the algorithms are structured, and by no means is it perfect, but it is a glimpse to how to objectify the music that each of enjoys.

So what do you use to differentiate between bands, anyway? Some pretty interesting qualities, actually. I can’t go into details (patent pending and all) but there are some algorithms about vocal tonality and how it compares to the “Clear-Channel-defined quality of what is “marketable” and what isn’t”; a more expansive examination of lyrics, lyrical content, rhyming patterns, and modes of delivering lyrics; and most importantly, a way for listeners and musicians alike to describe their music with a series of hundreds of descriptive words/feelings/moods/etc.

So what does this mean? This product is still in its infancy, to be sure. But I know that it starts to raise some questions about how we are begining to be able to pinpoint, in somewhat of an objective manner, what makes music “good” for each individual person. It is not a fool-proof project. Inherent in art, especially music, is the factor of individual preference for some un-identifiable reason. Ultimately, what gets me to turn up the speakers, down my drink, and dance around like a fool is something that might be nigh impossible to exactly pinpoint.In addition, it becomes even more of a challenge when it comes to very “unique” bands that don’t necessarily wear any of their influences on their sleeves. For the bands that have carved out a unique and distinct sound, how can we describe it without relating it to other bands? But the fact that there is so much music out there, I think that software that can take 37,000 bands down to a few dozen for someone to make a decision about what they like is a step in the right direction.

I’ll continue to update this section as I learn more (confidentiality permitting, of course). Until then…

if (dkraft == employed) then post++;

Despite my insistence that I was “unemployable” and all the unspeakably horrific words I used to describe my liberal arts degree in mathematics, somehow I have found employment. To be exact I will soon be a Wireless Monkey for Summit Technologies in Williston, VT.

Some job perks:

- I get to fly around the country installing WiFi and Mesh networks.

- They provide extensive training: CCNA, CCDA, Advanced Wireless Field Specialization, and Advanced Wireless Design Specialization will be mine shortly. (Said certifications provide automatic pay++ as well.)

- I get to live in Burlington (rent = so very reasonable), and yell at the fucking hippies and vegans.

- This is an excuse to buy a new laptop.

- The cash hot money bling and fine bitches.

Ok, maybe not the last one.

Shit was that an entire post without a horrible pun? *Looks back at aim convo with sideshow*

Oh yeah: “Truly I have reached the Summit of jobs, then.”

Getting paid by the pun ain’t fun//but it gets it done//if rhymes got me the mon//-ey, then I’d already have won//son.//where’s my gun//Ima fucking pistol whip the mthr fckr who broke into my car at Alewife.

(That last line needs some work…)

Destroyer – “Destroyer’s Rubies” (2006)

 

Destroyer

Destroyer’s Rubies (2006)

First, the name: Destroyer. DESTROYER!!! Absolutely classic. It is perhaps the best tongue-in-cheek band name since THE MUSIC!!

(The Music were trying to be funny, weren’t they? Right?)

A moment’s listen to any of Dan Bejar’s solo material will make one thing excruciatingly clear: Destroyer is not a thrash/death-metal side project that will pummel you with their ferocious guitar licks and human-sacrificing live shows. In fact, the only thing Destroyer will “destroy” you with is flamboyantly overly-dramatic theatrics and awesomeness!

(God. I suck. I promise, no more puns about the name. Ok, on with the review.)

Destroyer’s Rubies is much more of the same for Bejar in terms of style. Theatrical lyrics, lush orchestration, literary lyrics, and a flair for dry wit and self-referential genius. These are very good things, but where Rubies stands out is in its lyrical focus and confidence. I think one thing that makes Destroyer so rewarding to listen to is how he refers to his old songs, lyrics, album titles, or characters without sounding repetitive or that he’s trying to carry a story throughout the album. In a way similar to the Hold Steady, Bejar recycles his old phrases and lines in new and unique ways. If you are unfamiliar with his old work, the lyrics are amusing, puzzling, and often quite random. If you are familiar with his old work, it’s kinda like you’re in on a big inside joke, and Bejar is your buddy telling old stories.

But Bejar’s lyrics are a lot less random then they seem. While Rubies is not a concept album (or really even much of a themed album for that matter), quite a few lyrics are cutting attacks at faux-artists and faux-artists-worshippers. Speaking about the “good kids” in the brilliant Decemberists-esque “Your Blood”, he sings that they “never have to choose/ Between your blood and your blues.” Perhaps the most hysterically awesome moment on the album is on “Looter’s Follies” when Bejar shrieks, “Can’t you see that a life in art/And a life of mimicry/ Is the same thing?!?!”. Ohh, snap! Looks like the Mars Volta just got destroyed!!1

All this is coupled with Destroyer’s best music, sort of a combination of quirky folk and pop-a-licious-ness. Gay-theatre-student lyrics aside, Bejar always keeps his focus on multiple hooks in a song, much like his New Pornos buddy A.C. Newman. He has never shied away from using the pop cliches and the age-old “Ba-ba-bas” or the “ohh-ee-ahhhs”, but it fits perfectly with the otherwise soothing adult-contemporary maudlin stings and acoustic guitars. But seriously, this is a good thing, I swear.

DESTROYER!!!

The best track on Rubies has it all. “Painter in Your Pocket” has got a little Latin American guitar lick that seems like Carlos Santana on sedatives. Right before the rocking-out, air-guitar chorus, Bejar holds the last syllable in the bridge a beat too long and indulges in a BeeGees falsetto moment. If this doesn’t remind you that Bejar isn’t taking himself too seriously, nothing will.

DESTROYER!!!

“3000 Flowers” is the song most like the New Pornographers. A head-slappingly simple guitar riff and distorted speak/sing vocals is the stuff of a radio-friendly single, if that’s even feasible with Destroyer.

DESTROYER!!!

This “lighter” side of Destroyer notwithstanding (the quirky name, the self-referential treatment, the hilarity), Bejar is a poet, philosopher, and a hipster at heart. We should not forget this. Some of his lyrics and orchestration are intentionally obtuse and that will always set people off. However, like so many great bands (Pavement, Decemberists, Mountain Goats, etc.) Destroyer is able to perfectly straddle that line of serious art-rock literary-ness / light-hearted absurdity. The result on Rubies? One of the most rewarding and complete albums of the year. This review is over because I cannot think of any more good “Destroyer” puns.

Track Review – Chips Ahoy! – The Hold Steady

Looks like P-tchf-rk got their hands in the cookie jar (HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH) and officially leaked the lead single off of Boys and Girls in America, Chips Ahoy! Now, given the nature of the last two Hold Steady albums it is probably unfair to judge this song outside of the context of the rest of the album, but hey – I’m an asshole and I’m going to do it anyways.

On my first couple of listenings of this track I was unimpressed. It felt like a Cheap Trick song. The subject material is appropriate enough: Lucky girl wins a bunch of money on a horse race, then they spend the money on drugs. Then Finn complains awkwardly about not knowing whether or not the girl is high since “she won’t even dance.” Well, let’s see, did she do a lot of drugs? Then she is probably high, dancing or not.

And the less said about the pre-chorus, and ever present, “oh-ee-oh-eee-ohhhs,” the better.

So let’s talk about organs and organ solos: They are kick-ass. This song has them. It is also, I have discovered, one of the catchier songs tHS have done so far. Which is saying something given that the lead singer doesn’t so much sing as slur through his lyrics. I would blame emo-friendly new label Vagrant, but I think this is a direction the band was going in anyways. Certainly it is not unwelcome, but be prepared for 15 yr old decidedly-not-hoodrat girls wearing “Hold Steady Almost Killed Me” T-Shirts. Hey, it happened with Modest Mouse.

So we are left with a catchy song and a few questions: Does this song make more lyrical sense in the context of the entire album? Do the rest of the tracks on Boys and Girls in America lean more toward the literary wit of Stuck Between Stations or the poppy OAR-esque Chips Ahoy!?

I’m hoping the latter, because OAR are fucking awe- OK fucking this joke is lame and I’m done with it. Goodbye lame OAR joke, you are dead to me. Go download the song, people.