Golden Smoghead Posted June 14, 2009 Share Posted June 14, 2009 I occasionally mention these guys as one of my favorite relatively-unknown regional acts (out of Raleigh, NC: think a rougher, tenser Whiskeytown). Their new album is a solid step forward to my ears. It sounds a little less like BJ Barnham's album, and more like an album from a band who has a good singer/songwriter leading them. The horns on this album version of the songs were kind of surprising to me, and lend a 70s-Springsteen vibe to some tracks -- in a good way. I think a couple tracks underrepresent their songs though, and it's hard not to blame the production. For example "Ain't Going to the Bar Tonight" is a lot lower-energy than the blistering live versions they've been playing. Overall, recommended by me, but readily admit I'm just a straight-up fan and plan to catch them in DC on the 7th of July. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pmancini100 Posted June 15, 2009 Share Posted June 15, 2009 ive heard these guys before, real cool stuff. but yeah, i feel that the success of the hold steady (who brought springsteen to the forefront of cultural importance) has allowed other bands (lucero, american aquarium, even the killers) to find their voice. im not saying these bands arent original or good or anything (except the killers,) its just that springsteen wasnt "cool" until boys and girls in america came out. its true, i used to hate the guy. but yeah, check out lucero and stuff too. i definitely wanna catch an american aquarium show. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DrNo Posted June 15, 2009 Share Posted June 15, 2009 ive heard these guys before, real cool stuff. but yeah, i feel that the success of the hold steady (who brought springsteen to the forefront of cultural importance) has allowed other bands (lucero, american aquarium, even the killers) to find their voice. im not saying these bands arent original or good or anything (except the killers,) its just that springsteen wasnt "cool" until boys and girls in america came out. its true, i used to hate the guy. but yeah, check out lucero and stuff too. i definitely wanna catch an american aquarium show. Springsteen never left the forefront of cultural importance. And I think the Arcade Fire has more to do with exposing little indie kids to Springsteen-ian influence than even the Hold Steady. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pmancini100 Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 true, didnt think about the arcade fire. however, i feel that a lot of people were iffy on springsteen for a while. except for new jersey, of course. maybe its a noo yawk thing. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pmancini100 Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 Springsteen never left the forefront of cultural importance. im gonna have to disagree with that. in my opinion, the only recent musical artist(s) to never leave the forefront of cultural importance are the beatles. take brian wilson, for example. he was a big name in the 60's, and then gained relevance again in the 90s, when everyone began citing him as a significant influence. (i read that particular example somewhere, for the record) i feel the same thing is happening to old bruce now. its happened to a lot of artists... dylan, neil young, lots of people all went through "rough patches." (trans? that weird dylan album that had SRV and slash?) just because theyre still making music, doesnt make them culturally relevant/important at the time. know what i mean? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DrNo Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 im gonna have to disagree with that. in my opinion, the only recent musical artist(s) to never leave the forefront of cultural importance are the beatles. take brian wilson, for example. he was a big name in the 60's, and then gained relevance again in the 90s, when everyone began citing him as a significant influence. (i read that particular example somewhere, for the record) i feel the same thing is happening to old bruce now. its happened to a lot of artists... dylan, neil young, lots of people all went through "rough patches." (trans? that weird dylan album that had SRV and slash?) just because theyre still making music, doesnt make them culturally relevant/important at the time. know what i mean? Really? I would say Paul McCartney has definitely had some "rough patches". Then again, I'd call Sgt. Pepper's a "rough patch". Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pmancini100 Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 yeah, mccartney solo is different from beatles. but again, had his rebirth in the 90s. and sgt peppers was huge, man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DrNo Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 and sgt peppers was huge, man. Doesn't mean it's not music for babies. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
pmancini100 Posted June 16, 2009 Share Posted June 16, 2009 sgt peppers? babies? really? i dunno man. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
DrNo Posted June 17, 2009 Share Posted June 17, 2009 sgt peppers? babies? really? i dunno man. It's just always struck me as kiddie music. But I digress. American Aquarium tours its ass off huh? The June 16 to June 23 jaunt (Lubbock to College Station in a day? Shreveport-Austin-Ft. Smith in 4 days?) is kinda nuts geographically. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.