Ryan Adans vs Jeff Tweedy contrasting record reviews

[caliber66]

You really hold grudges.

There was nothing personal that went into that comment.

 

Explain what the critic got wrong, besides not liking Wilco the way you want him to.

 

SBS has wussy songs? Yeah, it does.

Jeff's voice isn't as raspy since he stopped smoking? Sure.

There were more "squeaks and bleeps" on YHF than there are on SBS? Yep.

 

Then there's this:

 

At a minimum, Sky Blue Sky shows his restlessness as an artist, his need to keep moving

[Smokestack Joe]

its too easy to rip on ryan adams....so i think it is clique and weak writing.

[MattZ]

The problem that I have with these negative reviews of SBS and the reviewers themselves, is not that they are telling me something that I disagree with. It's that they all seem to do it in the same way -- by telling me that the album is filled with light rock and wussy tunes and average lyrics.

 

I don't hear that. I hear the opposite actually. So, if a reviewer is going to get on a soap box about the limitations of an album, it would be nice to read something that does a better job of communicating what/why/how instead of trotting out the same old tired cliches. This does not sound like the Eagles to me. Yes, thank you, I know that Jeff was in rehab. Ha ha, very funny, weather on the 8s.

 

All of this is subjective, and I am certain that I couldn't do a better job of explaining why I think the album is beautifully put together and is anything but a wussy effort. And why I actually think these are the best lyrics (certainly the most accessible) of Jeff's career. But, then, I am not a professional rock critic. I post on VC.

 

It strikes me as bizarre to read (IMHO) a lazy critique lamenting the limitations of an album. Pot Kettle Black. Lazy locomotives.

[Guest Jules]

^ I agree. As much as I'm enjoying the album, I think I'd get bored with the band if they continued with this lighter sound. I really liked some of the new songs live, but they worked well early in the set, when it was still light out. After the sun went down, I would've been disappointed by a lot of mellow songs.

 

I have never seen how this is a lighter sound.

[Saint Genevieve]

The problem that I have with these negative reviews of SBS and the reviewers themselves, is not that they are telling me something that I disagree with. It's that they all seem to do it in the same way -- by telling me that the album is filled with light rock and wussy tunes and average lyrics..

 

Um, maybe because that's their actual opinion of the album? I can't think of a better way of explaining why I don't like it. Does that mean I'm lazy?

[you ever seen a ghost?]

spot on MattZ. the funny thing is, a lot of the critics love the album. what you have are actual fans repeating the same tired old criticisms.

 

for an excellent review, check out popmatters.com. they gave it 9/10 and the reviewer is a big enough fan to cite the reasons you list above, in reference to what was going on around the message boards (i bet he was talking a lot about VC) prior to the album's actual release. the reviewer himself almost fell into the little trap. glad he saw the light, because i knew i was going to love the thing just from the listening to the genesis of the new tunes in the live sets.

 

down with the nay-sayers!

 

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/music/reviews...o-sky-blue-sky/

 

-justin

[MattZ]

I can't think of a better way of explaining why I don't like it. Does that mean I'm lazy?

 

If you are someone who gets paid to listen to music and write about it? Yes, I think you could do better. If you are good at what you do, at least.

 

I think it's too easy for a rock critic to simply trot out his/her opinion spiced up with standard cliches like this is a recovery album. For instance, instead of telling me that Either Way is boring -- tell me why. For me, the lyrics, the imagery and the chord progressions of Either Way are beautiful. Its a perfect way to start the journey that is SBS because it sets a tone of hope and imagery that circles throughout the album. Even the music has a circular feel to it.

 

Like I said, I am not claiming that I could do any better, but I am not a rock critic. It would be nice if rock critics would do more than throw their hands up and suggest that they can't think of a better way to explain why they don't like something.

 

EDIT: I am not suggesting that everyone should like this album. Or that the people who don't, aren't listening to it properly. I am just asking professional rock critics to do a better job explaining why they don't like it. Especially if they are going to criticize it.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

>EDIT: I am not suggesting that everyone should like this album. Or that the people who >don't, aren't listening to it properly. I am just asking professional rock critics to do a >better job explaining why they don't like it. Especially if they are going to criticize it.

 

you don't have to explain yourself. people who don't like the album are wrong. it's pretty simple.

 

as far as the critics go, most of them are saying good things. with a 73 percent rating (generally favorable) on metacritic.

 

http://www.metacritic.com/music/artists/wi...bluesky?q=wilco

 

these recycled garbage reviews are coming from:

a) the other 27 percent of reviewers, who have their head up their ass

fans that are wrong

 

-justin

[Saint Genevieve]

EDIT: I am not suggesting that everyone should like this album. Or that the people who don't, aren't listening to it properly. I am just asking professional rock critics to do a better job explaining why they don't like it. Especially if they are going to criticize it.

 

I think it's that you disagree with the opinions, not the way they say it. If a critic simply said, "This is a gorgeous album and everyone should listen to it," would you say that they're lazy and that they should stop trotting out cliches?

 

I think this particular reviewer concisely summed up why the album is so dull, and the Pitchfork review did so as well.

 

you don't have to explain yourself. people who don't like the album are wrong. it's pretty simple.

 

Uh, OK.

[MattZ]

I think it's that you disagree with the opinions, not the way they say it. If a critic simply said, "This is a gorgeous album and everyone should listen to it," would you say that they're lazy and that they should stop trotting out cliches?

 

I would care. But I wouldn't care as much because I am much more interested in trying to understand why someone disagrees with me as opposed to agreeing with me.

 

But that being said, I tend to think that most album reviews and the reviewers themselves aren't all that good. And I think it's because of the cliches thrown out on both sides. Every new Son Volt album doesnt have to be the best one since Trace. The new Spoon album is great, but it doesn't have to be their best yet. Sorry Stephen King, but Easy Tiger is not Ryan Adams' best ever.

 

In the end, I probably wouldn't start a thread lamenting a positive review that I agreed with if it was lazy, but it would still irk me. Of course, a negative review that I disagree with would frustrate me more. WHich is why I posted here.

 

EDIT: Dont lump me in with notdarkyet's posts.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

>If a critic simply said, "This is a gorgeous album and everyone should listen to it," would you say that they're lazy and that they should stop trotting out cliches?

 

 

i know you aren't talking to me, but since MattZ and i share a somewhat similiar viewpoint, i would say: "spot on! brilliant!" i'm sure that these reviews wouldn't be "lazy," but would actually go into detail about why they think it is "gorgeous" and why "everyone should listen to it." i mean, if you feel that strongly about something, you're gonna explain yourself, and being as how this is the right answer to the question "is SBS a good album?," i'm quite sure that any such answer would suffice, as it will no doubt be be very personal for said reviewer and therefore not open to any sort of oustide criticism. this, in combination with the fact that the album is clearly amazing and one of the best releases of 2007 so far, says quite a bit about a lot of things.

 

-justin

[you ever seen a ghost?]

>EDIT: Dont lump me in with notdarkyet's posts.

 

okay, maybe we aren't on the same page Matt. i'll never introduce you to Jeff Tweedy. as you can see from my signature, Jeff and i are the best of friends. he thinks SBS is great and so do the other band members. and so do i. and so do you Matt, but this is where we part ways, due to what you just said.

 

-justin

[Guest Alan]

Nice idea, In the end, poorly executed.

i agree. he's got some great great songs, and then he's got some stuff that's absolutely cringe worthy.

[MattZ]

>EDIT: Dont lump me in with notdarkyet's posts.

 

okay, maybe we aren't on the same page Matt. i'll never introduce you to Jeff Tweedy. as you can see from my signature, Jeff and i are the best of friends. he thinks SBS is great and so do the other band members. and so do i. and so do you Matt, but this is where we part ways, due to what you just said.

 

-justin

 

 

I don't think people who don't like SBS are wrong. And I dont think Jeff thinks that either.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

>I don't think people who don't like SBS are wrong. And I dont think Jeff thinks that either.

 

like i said, this is where we part ways.

 

i was hanging out with Jeff last night and i told him about this thread. we went to the computer together and perused the web site. here is a partial transcript of the conversation:

 

Jeff: aw man, the person who wrote this article is a d-bag.

me: OMG! i know! i'm not just saying this because i'm your friend Jeff, but SBS is a great, great record. i listen to it at least once a day. i love it!

Jeff: at least some people "get" what we're doing today.

me: it's because i'm really intelligent.

Jeff: i know you are Justin.

me: thanks buddy.

Jeff: you know, in 20 years...

me: oh, i know, people will really adore this record then

Jeff: until then, fuck 'em.

me: amen.

 

-justin

[Kalle]

>I don't think people who don't like SBS are wrong. And I dont think Jeff thinks that either.

 

like i said, this is where we part ways.

 

i was hanging out with Jeff last night and i told him about this thread. we went to the computer together and perused the web site. here is a partial transcript of the conversation:

 

Jeff: aw man, the person who wrote this article is a d-bag.

me: OMG! i know! i'm not just saying this because i'm your friend Jeff, but SBS is a great, great record. i listen to it at least once a day. i love it!

Jeff: at least some people "get" what we're doing today.

me: it's because i'm really intelligent.

Jeff: i know you are Justin.

me: thanks buddy.

Jeff: you know, in 20 years...

me: oh, i know, people will really adore this record then

Jeff: until then, fuck 'em.

me: amen.

 

-justin

 

That's exactly how I see SBS and Wilco as a whole. In 20 years they will get their due and be remembered as a truly great and influential band. I absolutely love SBS and from seeing them on Saturday in Toronto I just love it more and more. I was dead center in front of Jeff singing along to every word and seeing these songs played live made me realize it's genius even more than the record already did.

[Saint Genevieve]

In 20 years they will get their due and be remembered as a truly great and influential band.

 

I agree, and I think SBS will be regarded as a forgettable footnote in an otherwise brilliant career.

[you ever seen a ghost?]

>I agree, and I think SBS will be regarded as a forgettable footnote in an otherwise brilliant career.

 

except for the fact that it isn't as throwaway as everyone thinks. musically, it's pretty complex. Jeff's writing is fine too. it sounds the way they want it to sound and i think it will hold up along with all the others down the road. that being said, i'd still love to hear that O'Rourke mix of the record!

 

-justin

[ponch1028]

I have no doubt in my mind that Wilco will be highly regarded for their contributions to rock and roll in twenty or so years. While I like SBS a lot, it's difficult for me to gauge its significance in the long run other than it was the first Wilco album with Nels and Pat. Being There, Summer Teeth, and Yankee were all huge musical leaps. SBS has subtle and restrained differences. I think it'll eventually be seens as underrated and solid, but certainly YHF, AGIB, BT, and ST will be connected with the Wilco legacy more than SBS. Right or wrong (and I think it's wrong) but the musical legacy of Jeff and Wilco will be remembered more for pain, angst, and disconnect than serenity, contentment, and peace

 

I believe the only reason SBS might be referenced in the future is only if it's viewed by the majority of critics and fans as the last album before Wilco jumped the shark and descended into adult contemporary rock. But I don't see that happening.

[JerseyMike]

Art criticism in all it's forms is horseshit. In my humble opinion, it's nothing but their less than humble opinion.

 

Thats exactly right. I don't understand why people get so upset at reviews and critics and say things like "this guy doesn't know what he's talking about...". Who does? Everybody hears music in their own way, and they are entiltled to their opinions.

[W(TF)]

Who reviews the reviewers?

 

I do.

 

And that was the most craptastic thing I've read all day.

[W(TF)]

down with the nay-sayers!

 

http://www.popmatters.com/pm/music/reviews...o-sky-blue-sky/

 

-justin

 

He nailed this part dead on.

 

"...the paradox is that while Sky Blue Sky is the smoothest sounding Wilco album, it also takes the longest to absorb and understand. Songs that float by like pillowy stars ultimately reveal themselves to be just as dense and combustible as

[Aeglos]

I'm afraid that the low standard of contemporary music criticism (well, of criticism of all the arts) is simply a product of the times.

 

Intellectual hierarchies were attacked and more or less abolished during the 60's and 70's. In its place we have the present day emotional egalitarianism - everyones' feelings are equally valid, valuable, and so the theory goes, interesting. In this climate a music reviewer, in particular, the superanonymous internet music reviewer, merely has to permit the intrusion of an album into his/her busy life, see how it rubs them up, and publish an article based on that information. Serious consideration of the artistry or artistic intent behind what they are listening to is... optional, even in some forums unwelcome.

 

Its got pros and cons but whichever way you see it don't expect it to change any time soon.

[jethro]

"...the paradox is that while Sky Blue Sky is the smoothest sounding Wilco album, it also takes the longest to absorb and understand. Songs that float by like pillowy stars ultimately reveal themselves to be just as dense and combustible as

[brokendowntele]

Jeff sounds like Steve Winwood? That's worse than RS's Eagles comment.

 

Know what? SBS is different, like it or not, it is what it is. Mellower? OK. Cleaner? OK. Less obtuse and more direct lyrically? OK. Not mailed in, though. Just what was created this time by these collected individuals.