A Totally Sincere and Heartfelt Look Back at 2009

Co-sign 100%.

Nice article! I love your idea of this “musical McCarthyism.” I remember getting slammed for not liking the Volcano Choir album, only to never read anything about it once the hype died down. But for that time, was I a less legitimate critic for disliking something a lot of other blogs liked?

These days getting called “indie-centric” just sort of washes over me. What’s the perfect balance between a band being so underground it’s cool and hyped to the point where you’re not allowed to like them?

I don’t understand any of these things, so I like to ignore it all and make my own opinions. But this was a great read!

When I got my college radio show in 2001, I had to sit in with the music director during his show. I remember the authentic joy in his face when he played the then-new Strokes album. At a party a few months later I heard him slamming the same album, like he was using the disdain as cultural capital. Lesson: definitely do work at a college radio station, definitely don’t go to the parties.

This is really great stuff. Kudos, Matt.

One aspect of the approach to lo-fo music that i have seen underrepresented in the use of static/white noise as a tool of abstractualism. This can simply be illustrated in the way that painters approach how they choose to represent something on canvas. For example, you have realistic paintings or those similar to baroque techniques, where as there are paintings which are made in revolt of this for various reasons such as abstract art or even impressionism. The latter styles of painting trading technical form for brush strokes which are more broad or unfocused in an attempt to illicit something other than a strictly figurative representation. Musicians are painting with sound rather oil or acrylic.

I don’t necessarily feel that static or “reverb-drenched production” is a defense used to hide poor/amateur skills or for purely aesthetic intentions. More over, lo-fi can be approached from a more contemporary and critical artistic perspective in the same that is it used to break up the “image” rather than creating something which acts as a separate entity purely to obscure melody.
Much of abstract art utilizes space and from on canvas in the context of negative space. In juxtaposition to this music can be viewed of as a linear, audio representation of a painting. In this instance reverb or white-noise can be used to create the illusion of depth, ambiance or negative space rather than the musician opting for silence.

I would argue that there is some guile to using a lo-fi approach and that some of the artists in this current fad are aware of this. Lo-fi can be used with more esoteric aplomb than many give it credit for rather than just a tool of the broke, inexperienced or lazy. Meaning can be added to music by distorting its form and appearance rather than always striving for better more clean production.

This is great article and I think SteveEugene makes some good points. For people like me who are fans of this sort of music, it’s been a pretty cool but slightly worrisome ride because no one wants to see the music they like (and have liked for some time) turned into a fad and then discarded. As far as these releases being considered among our collective best cultural products, maybe there is something to be said for the uncontrolled element that lo-fi methods can result in. It reminds me a little of Dadaist “automatic drawing”, a sort of unconscious, unplanned excursion that can create these “happy accidents” that are so often mentioned. Also, I think there is an admirable message behind it all, that people will make music no matter what by whatever means they have, which is reminiscent of the 80s DIY movement and the spirit of something like K. To view this influx of lo-fi as a cynical, calculated con at popularity is, I think, generally unfair although it certainly applies in some cases. I think you make a great point about encouragement towards growth, and it’ll be exciting to see how some of these acts develop in this next year.

good article. I don’t listen to any of those bands and I sure wouldn’t pay money for their music or a live show. I still surf the blogs for new info on bands that are working in some sort of musical tradition instead of gimmicks.

That was a really good article. Hipsters are idiots.
I prefer to like music specifically because it sounds aesthetically pleasing, not because it’s the “new thing.” However, some of my tastes cross over into the “new thing,” but it’s because I liked it, not because someone else did.
Really music critics just make me angry. It’s all opinion. People should be smart enough to form their own.
That’s why I don’t review music on my blog. If I hear something I like, I post it there for more people to discover it. It doesn’t mean it’s the best or the worst, it’s just what I thought was interesting.

Well Nose, just because Eric Dolphy and Skip James came before doesn’t preclude contemporary musicians from being “experimental”. Experimentation can be a personal expression, utilizing existing traditions and sounds. It doesn’t need to stand alone as completely original.

I for one am tired of the modern obsession with complete originality. Eric Dolphy still sounds like a jazz and Skip James still sounds like the blues. That doesn’t diminish the importance of their work.

Well put. Clear and concise. I also appreciate any piece that isn’t ultimately reduced to “everything is everything, like what you like and nothing can be said.” And of course anything using the word “clusterfuck.”

In my general opinion, give me something that screams process, difficulty or nuance. Truth in these things can’t be farted out. Drive the pedal, don’t let the pedal drive you. That being said: http://www.myspace.com/thetonycastles

;-D

great article! your example of the wavves meltdown is something i totally feel you on. seems like the folks at pfork/stereogum are a little too into TMZ style reporting lately.

This article hit the nail on the head so perfectly I was almost tempted to break the dead of silence that is my work office. Music critics (that is, all of us) talk about Times New Viking, Vivian Girls, Wavves etc. all as if they “aren’t aware” of the finished product they’re releasing and simply “create.” We give them the crown of authenticity for “not giving a fuck” and then yank it off of them when they actually take that idea to its logical extreme.

An interesting parallel to the Wavves “meltdown” is The Pains of Being Pure at Heart. Initially heralded as part of the lo-fi movement, they played right before Wavves at the Pitchfork Stage of Primavera Sound. Yet instead of “a bunch of earnest youth who don’t give a fuck” TPOBPAH turned out to be a polished live band who had songs that people could pogo and sing along to. Their songs had just enough hazy distortion to please “authenticity seeking” fans who had flocked to see Girls, Crystal Stitls, Vivian Girls, and Wavves, yet the they married that aesthetic choice with what most folks expect out of a concert: entertainment, spectacle, *fun.*

Now the Pains are positioned to outlive the “lo-fi” movement because they really only half-committed to it. They appear to have ditched that trend completely just in time to avoid the backlash, and Pitchfork has decided its no longer OK to call them by the genre tag it had previously imposed on them. Now the Pains’ use of reverb and distortion was merely “an aesthetic choice” while Wavves “just doesn’t know how to play.” And Indy Rock continues to eat its young.