Beach House - Bloom

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (144 of them)

VW ad track is better than "Take Care" imo.

Ouch.

MikoMcha, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:00 (1 year ago) Permalink

Bloom sounds like Teen Dream only on first listening.
actually,although it resemble it, it's poppier, and more polished.

nostormo, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

To my ears, this commercial "cover" doesn't sound any more like "Take Care" than fifty other proper originals released by blog hype bands.

If you're joking, then "lol, right", but otherwise "?" The VW song is a straight-up lift, there's nothing to distinguish it.

poxen, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:27 (1 year ago) Permalink

The melodies and instrumentation are largely dissimilar. Maybe the "vibe" is the same, but big deal. That vibe is all over the fucking place the last few years.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:31 (1 year ago) Permalink

I mean, there's a closer resemblance between "Ghostbusters" and "I Want a New Drug" than this VW song and "Take Care".

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:33 (1 year ago) Permalink

it's only just close enough to avoid litigation (& i'm sure VW did some research into that) to say it's superior is just challops.

jed_, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:34 (1 year ago) Permalink

to say it's superior is just challops

A challop? Maybe. But an op all the same. (Seriously, if Hamilton Leithauser was singing instead of a nameless vocalist, it would be a great Walkmen song.)

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 16:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

http://pitchfork.com/news/46570-beach-house-respond-to-volkswagen-ad/

So I guess the ad agency DID make a play for the song, but were denied. Indie nerds are totally making a mountain out of a molehill, though.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:06 (1 year ago) Permalink

eh if they wanted the track and made a soundalike that was transparent enough for that many people to notice (i haven't compared) then it's fair game for people to cry foul

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:11 (1 year ago) Permalink

Basically, one person thought so and then Pitchfork carried the flag. I still say that if you put "Take Care" in a mix with a bunch of other songs that sound like it, you wouldn't be able to distinguish the VW ad's song from any of the others as "the replica".

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:15 (1 year ago) Permalink

the (male) vocalist is very closely copying Legrand's vocal style which is pretty unique sounding even amongst a slew of imitators. the song key lyrics is "i'll watch over you" in place of the almost exact point where Legrand sings "i'll take care of you." you may not like BH or care that they've been ripped off but you're being disingenuous here.

jed_, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:23 (1 year ago) Permalink

No, I do like a fair amount of Beach House material, but I'm still not hearing enough similarity between these recordings for people's short to get all in a wad.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:35 (1 year ago) Permalink

every time i hear a BH song without actively knowing or thinking about who i'm listening to her voice scans as a male voice to me

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:36 (1 year ago) Permalink

this kind of "ripping off" is totally fine, who cares. "that stoner rock band rips off black sabbath!"

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:38 (1 year ago) Permalink

same here, i was kinda shocked when i first saw a video. i thought it was a female sounding dude rather than a woman who sounds like a dude who sounds like a woman.

jed_, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:39 (1 year ago) Permalink

am0n, it's a whole different thing if an ad agency commission a soundalike track after a licensing refusal from a band.

Beach House's response is that they don't care about it too much either but i suspect that they're just being gracious.

jed_, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:43 (1 year ago) Permalink

not illegal, totally fine. case closed

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

its all on the up and up

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

probably those kinds of deliberate soundalikes happen all the time but the case is usually more like this than something undeniably obviously like getting a guy to sing like Tom Waits

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:45 (1 year ago) Permalink

Its not illegal, but its a huge dick move.

"Can we use your song?"

"No."

"Fine, we'll just pay some schlubs to craft a subtlely different 'take' on it."

heated debate over derpy hooves (jon /via/ chi 2.0), Friday, 18 May 2012 17:46 (1 year ago) Permalink

The only reason this is a big deal is because it was used in a tv ad. The same people complaining about this are the people who download Girl Talk albums the first day they're available and champion his straight up unlicensed use of dozens of copyrighted recordings.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

dog i don't even care about this but you're bending over backwards with some apples and orange ish

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:48 (1 year ago) Permalink

Maybe. I just feel a bit righteous today is all. This is the fight I picked.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:49 (1 year ago) Permalink

ad execs are walking dick moves tho, what do you expect. in truth, i don't rly side one way or the other but i think its lolworthy that there's an indie wrecking crew band

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:50 (1 year ago) Permalink

The only reason this is a big deal is because it was used in a tv ad. The same people complaining about this are the people who download Girl Talk albums the first day they're available and champion his straight up unlicensed use of dozens of copyrighted recordings.

this is insane

Mordy, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:50 (1 year ago) Permalink

i don't understand why ppl who were okay with an artist using unlicensed samples to make his collage music are not okay with an advertising agency ripping off a band's song to help sell their merchandise. totally incomprehensible to me!

Mordy, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:51 (1 year ago) Permalink

me too

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:56 (1 year ago) Permalink

I don't find one of these to be any worse than the other, but for some reason when a sound(ish)alike song shows up in a commercial, people go apeshit. For that matter, when an original recording of a song shows up in a commercial, people go apeshit.

So, by this metric, it's okay for Greg Gillis to make his bones by ripping off actual recordings, but it's not okay at all for these probably reasonably okay people to use Beach House as a starting point while creating something altogether original. rmde at the whole internet.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 17:58 (1 year ago) Permalink

people definitely overreact about songs in commercials. bringing up Girl Talk is silly though.

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:01 (1 year ago) Permalink

Nah, there's a pretty stark contradiction in attitudes about what kind of theft is kosher in blogger/indie stan circles.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:06 (1 year ago) Permalink

Do you really not see any difference between the two? I think there are some self-evidently obvious reasons why one might be bothered by one of these things and not by another.

Let's say that the commercial actually ripped off the Beach House song explicitly and without any question. Total and complete copyright infringement. Would you claim that there would be no difference between that and Girl Talk? Or is it just that there's no difference between Girl Talk's use of copyrighted materials and this commercials non-infringment? (The former is obviously ridiculous, the second is incoherent.)

Mordy, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:12 (1 year ago) Permalink

Let's say that the commercial actually ripped off the Beach House song explicitly and without any question.

This didn't happen. If it had, I might be more sympathetic to the whiner crowd.

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:14 (1 year ago) Permalink

I'm not arguing about whether the complaints are legitimate or not. I just think you haven't clearly thought through your comparison to Girl Talk.

Mordy, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:16 (1 year ago) Permalink

Also, if it was literally copyright infringement you "might" be more sympathetic? I guess you're an anti-copyright hardliner?

Mordy, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:19 (1 year ago) Permalink

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:28 (1 year ago) Permalink

hey guys this has been happening since the dawn of time, wasn't there just a Mad Men about it?

Mr. Que, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:30 (1 year ago) Permalink

http://www.monkey.org/~chunk/superchunk/article/spin2.html

Yet the band's members aren't blowhards rigidly standing on principle. Although they're wary of major-label offers (they're happy where they are), that didn't stop them from doing the music for a British Knights commercial. If they didn't do it, the ad agency would've gone and hired studio musicians to ape their sound; Superchunk decided it had nothing to lose. "It helped pay for our new van so I don't feel like we whored ourselves too badly," says the sensible Mac; they got free sneakers, too.

Mr. Que, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:31 (1 year ago) Permalink

it's 2012 y'all, i thought we had all accepted that doing music for ads/tv/movies is the only way to make money these days (whether by licensing or recording).

40oz of tears (Jordan), Friday, 18 May 2012 18:36 (1 year ago) Permalink

that's not at all the convo taking place here though

some dude, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:40 (1 year ago) Permalink

thread of people gettin all foamy just because pitchfork posts about it

Mr. Que, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:42 (1 year ago) Permalink

Sniffy Dog compose and produce music and sound design for TV, Film and Advertising. We have an intuitive and flexible approach to sound for picture. We understand that music is a language in itself. Our strength lies in our ability to listen to ideas and translate them into a number of fully-produced sonic options. Whether it's composition, research, re-recording or licensing. We can do all of these; and anything in between.

Whatever your project, we will always deliver a creative and original soundtrack.

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:44 (1 year ago) Permalink

sonic options

am0n, Friday, 18 May 2012 18:46 (1 year ago) Permalink

Sniffy Dog=Toto for the 2000s?

Leslie Mann: Boner Machine (C. Grisso/McCain), Friday, 18 May 2012 18:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

I just think you haven't clearly thought through your comparison to Girl Talk.

My comparison actually isn't between what's happened here and what Girl Talk does. It's the the people who love one are moaning about the other, and it seems completely disingenuous to me for that to be happening. (I just pulled Girl Talk out of my hat, fwiw. It could have been any sample-heavy performer.)

Johnny Fever, Friday, 18 May 2012 19:00 (1 year ago) Permalink

Album debuted in the top ten

Exile in lolville (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Tuesday, 22 May 2012 20:50 (1 year ago) Permalink

the lower dens album and this one are easy to confuse when i put the two together on shuffle

ban halen (electricsound), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 00:23 (1 year ago) Permalink

xp Really late response to Johnny Fever. The difference is simple and it's not about copyright. Firstly it's assumed consent. If you hear a Girl Talk collage you don't assume the artists he samples had any say in what he did with their work so whether you love it or hate it has no bearing on the reputation of those artists. If you hear an ad song which sounds uncannily like Beach House you may well assume that Beach House endorse this product and this ad. Secondly it's a question of honesty. Girl Talk's use of those samples highlights, and even depends upon, the listener's familiarity with the sources. This ad agency is putting out an obvious imitation and then pretending there's no connection. Plus there's way more cash involved in a big car campaign than Greg Gillis is ever going to get from DJing so that makes it smell even worse.

But anyway, I'm glad this album's doing well.

Get wolves (DL), Wednesday, 23 May 2012 09:14 (1 year ago) Permalink

Thanks DL, I tried posting a response to same effect five days ago, but couldn't get past "I can't believe I have to explain this..."

poxen, Wednesday, 23 May 2012 13:47 (1 year ago) Permalink

beach house just posted this on their facebook. i guess they're back to caring about this again

http://www.thestrut.com/2012/05/24/see-7-commercials-that-rip-off-indie-artists/

shit_ebooks (am0n), Tuesday, 5 June 2012 19:55 (1 year ago) Permalink

the grizzly bear one is pretty funny, it's like they changed as few elements as was legally required with no consideration for it remaining vaguely musical.

Merdeyeux, Tuesday, 5 June 2012 20:24 (1 year ago) Permalink


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.