Beach House - Bloom

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

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

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.

sonic options

Sniffy Dog=Toto for the 2000s?

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.)

Album debuted in the top ten

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

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.

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..."

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/

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.

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.

I wanna give my testimony here. if somebody wanted to move this thread to '77 after I do, I wouldn't complain, but no big. In I think 2008, during a really pretty horrible period for me personally, some people got in touch with me asking me to sing & play a tune they had already written for a tv ad. The campaign was greenlit, somebody was going to sing this tune anyway and there was about two payments on the car in it for me, small money but still money. They sent me their demo of the song, and then we had a phone conversation about what they wanted.

They never explicitly said it, but it was very, very clear, both from the song itself & from the way they described what they wanted, was a song that sounded exactly like an indie artist who was & is a friend of mine & who'd recently come into considerable success. The song in question was a clear & obvious bite on this songwriter's style. I was to basically imitate my friend for money. I didn't do this; I found out they'd asked, like, half my friends for similar takes. I don't know who the person was that they ended up hiring, but when the ad aired half a year later, the singer they'd gotten was straight-up imitating my bud. Their whole approach was v. scummy & gross, from the "we've been fans forever" with lots of old-days reminiscences to their "you know what we mean" pitch. IOW what cantankerous indie ppl suspect & get aggro about in this shit is true. You can take their money or they'll pay somebody to bite your style. It's bullshit, imo.

Did you call them out on it? Or politely decline?

being in commercials and video games and football stadiums is the currency of a music nowadays. With the glut of music and media available to us at any given moment, you're only as culturally relevant as you are ubiquitous. I don't think "selling out" means anything anymore.

not everyone defines the success of a piece of art by its cultural ubiquity

I don't think "selling out" means anything anymore

So bored of this line. Glib, reductive, capitalist-realist statements like this are as bad as the puritanical finger-pointing of Maximum Rocknroll. If "selling out" means something to the artist then it matters. It doesn't matter what you or I think.

if u have the chance to sell out, u've already been sold. the artist's choice doesn't matter, just how susceptible he is to co-option by teh capitalismz

I wonder how much of this happens on a strictly regional level? I ask because there is a Gulf Coast casino currently running a TV ad soundtracked by a very faithful copping of the riff from The Black Keys' "Howlin' For You" (it's an even closer cop than the Pizza Hut "Gold On The Ceiling" ad in the above linked article).

I heard that ad agencies and TV shows are still requesting Black Keys imitations every week. It helps that their sound is easy to approximate - you're on safer ground with blues-rock than simulating Beach House or Fleet Foxes - but I wonder why that band in particular has struck a nerve in synch world.

they're the big alt band of the last couple years, obv

what is the hidden track on Bloom? i genuinely can't tell if it's a reprise of an earlier track on the album or something, all Beach House songs sound the same to me.

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

― ban halen (electricsound), Tuesday, May 22, 2012 8:23 PM (2 weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

that's bizarre imo, Lower Dens actually switched up their sound this time. unless you mean their first album.

I don't really want to get too into this, but I have been having weird issues with people's lack of self-awareness lately, and this just irked me for some reason: Pitchfork posted one of their "news" items about Beach House's new video. They praise the video for having "the greatest use of eggs in music-based visuals ..." yada yada, and comment on various supernatural elements showing up in the video.

So, this egg gambit is a direct reference to the kitchen scene from Ghostbusters (i.e., they explode in the carton) and then a woman opens the fridge and the exact same visual, roughly, from Ghostbusters is there (i.e., the weird pyramid/city in the clouds kinda place where Zhoul[sp?] comes from).

No mention from Pitchfork that this is an "homage" to Ghostbusters (or a direct rip, whatever you wanna call it), yet they post these stupid fucking "news" pieces about bands getting ripped off in commercials (which yes, has been happening forever and is a big part of rock's history past present and future). I know they wanna drive traffic, but how about posting a piece about the dude who made the video "homaging" Ghostbusters. I mean, I am sure that Beach House has reasonable opinions on all of these things, but this just pissed me off. No attempt to be upfront about the video from anyone (which, of course, they may be completely unaware of if no one but the maker of the video has ever seen that obscure scene from the cult film Ghostbusters).

I think you've noticed a writer's embarrassing lapse when it comes to decoding pop culture references/homages/pastiches and determined that it's actually intentional? also, i don't know what any of that has to do with self-awareness (or lack thereof). ppl miss references to shit all the time.

also, everyone knows that it's okay for the little guy to steal from the big guy, but not the other way around. :P

I noted that it may not be intentional, but Pitchfork has editors and certainly there are folks who write there that have seen Ghostbusters. The writer may be completely unaware, as I stated. My fault is with the whole endeavor of creating news items insinuating a theft of material or slight to a band without trying to see the other side when posting another news item. I mean, editors at Pitchfork probably get paid pretty well.

I have no problem with the video. Just the context of the video coming out shortly after a news piece about the same band getting "ripped off" in an ad.

i'd say a) beach house probably intended the homage to be a homage, and not a rip-off, b) p4k has had far more embarrassing things published on their website in the past, c) i don't know what they'd gain from purposefully ignoring ghostbusters, and d) editors at p4k probably do not get paid pretty well

i bet the editors live in lavish rat-infested shitholes and eat premium peanut butter

Breaking News: Beach House Rips Off Exploding Eggs Sequence From Ghostbusters
"We tried to get the rights to just show a clip from the film, but we couldn't afford it. So we made our own," says Victoria Legrand

is this a srs debate? this p4k writer aside, people watching a beach house video have probably seen ghostbusters, because everyone has seen ghostbusters, and so it can be generally assumed on all sides that it's homage rather than rip-off, cuz who'd be idiotic enough to think you can rip off ghostbusters and get away with it. the same doesn't really apply to some big company 'paying homage' to moderately popular indie band beach house in their ads.

A more appropriate comparison would be accusing VW of ripping off Benz for making a car containing a combustion engine

you can't make a beach house video w/o breaking eggs

Getting paid pretty well would be in relation to how well the writers are getting paid. I imagine that the editors at least are getting regular (albeit minor) paychecks.

But look, I didn't even pose anything as a debate. I just think that this being "news" at all is ridiculous and ironic but was not even trying to implicate the band. As stated, I am sure that they have reasonable opinions on all of these things.

The video removes all context from the borrowed scenes, as the add does to the original song. We can hypothetically assume that the audience of the VW adds is less aware of what they are watching/hearing than the viewers of the Beach House video. The band, Pitchfork, and VW are all pushing brands, or at least actively trying to get your attention, and in that light I just see that much difference between the two. This stuff is inherently problematic. I am sure if my band was getting homaged that heavily I would be somewhat upset, but maybe not so much if we were actively borrowing visually from really popular movies in our videos that were then getting broadcast on a really popular website.

Uhh, don't see that much difference is what I meant

I wanna give my testimony here. if somebody wanted to move this thread to '77 after I do, I wouldn't complain, but no big. In I think 2008, during a really pretty horrible period for me personally, some people got in touch with me asking me to sing & play a tune they had already written for a tv ad. The campaign was greenlit, somebody was going to sing this tune anyway and there was about two payments on the car in it for me, small money but still money. They sent me their demo of the song, and then we had a phone conversation about what they wanted.

They never explicitly said it, but it was very, very clear, both from the song itself & from the way they described what they wanted, was a song that sounded exactly like an indie artist who was & is a friend of mine & who'd recently come into considerable success. The song in question was a clear & obvious bite on this songwriter's style. I was to basically imitate my friend for money. I didn't do this; I found out they'd asked, like, half my friends for similar takes. I don't know who the person was that they ended up hiring, but when the ad aired half a year later, the singer they'd gotten was straight-up imitating my bud. Their whole approach was v. scummy & gross, from the "we've been fans forever" with lots of old-days reminiscences to their "you know what we mean" pitch. IOW what cantankerous indie ppl suspect & get aggro about in this shit is true. You can take their money or they'll pay somebody to bite your style. It's bullshit, imo.

― decrepit but free (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, June 5, 2012 4:25 PM

so u didn't do it, big whoop, here's yr medal. also why in the world would this thread "move to 77". get over yourself ffs

this record is nice!

take that shit to 77

The larger point is that p4k tends to stack the decks towards their most favored artists in the most annoying and shameless way possible. (Note: this is not intended as criticism for those here who write for them)

Oh I forgot to add 'intentional or not' to the end of the first sentence.

Pitchfork is shameless and annoying (not intended as criticism)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bv7IcjmxjGo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OFpfTd0EIs

WOW

ilxor otm

got no human grace

:)

Probably not an original thought, but Beach House reminds me a lot of these guys

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9Ox-lGm-wA

Has anybody seen them tour this record? How is it?

This has not stood the test of time with me sadly as I love Teen Dream and all their back catalog.

The album faded fast for me, too, but they're touring behind a really great show. Good setlist, awesome light show, and they sound heavier and louder than you'd probably expect