The XX

Now i feel old. Up there with Sum 41 citing Nimrod as the album that got them into music.

I don't think being young automatically means "no depth". A lot of the younger people I encounter online listen to classic rock, progressive rock, or oldies. These problems are as old as the eighties (hyped band being held up as "representative" of trends), maybe older.

I am not a Radiohead fan at all, but I tolerate Radiohead fans because I think that as a group they can handle all the attention.

I loved the Low reference, another group I don't think is terrible but I wouldn't go out of my way to buy just because it's the one alterna-group everyone has seized upon.

imo xx have been caught in that magical stage before they've started worrying about what they're doing and that's a nice thing to hear in a record in an age where lots of stuff tends to sound super self aware. i like that comment on thequietus where mpc dude is like "i don't think anyone else is rocking an mpc like me" and cites rjd2 as a major influence. i guess some people will be all like omg haven't you heard of hiphop and btw rjd2 sux didn't you read the resident advisor review u noob. other people will enjoy the fact this dude has such enthusiasm and self believe in what he's doing. i'm def in the latter camp and think that innocence/enthusiasm is one of the things that makes this record pretty special in 2010 especially when presented in an indie/hipster context.

I loved the Low reference, another group I don't think is terrible but I wouldn't go out of my way to buy just because it's the one alterna-group everyone has seized upon.

I know I'm out of touch but Low "the one alterna-group everyone has seized upon"? o_O

I am curious as to how can I find this "innocence" and "enthusiasm" in the actual recordings, as opposed to the band's background or press. All the self-belief and RJD2 fandom in the world isn't going to make your CD not suck.

It would be nice if people didn't bring issues here that they got in some flame war on some other forum.

x-post: Low - you had to be there, I guess. Or not ten years old in the nineties.

http://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gifhttp://www.phone-forensics.com/forum/images/smilies/shrug.gif

I assumed you were talking about nowadays.

I wasn't ten years old in the nineties, and I don't remember Low being anything more than the odd small article in NME once every couple of years or so.

us eel u really think they sound too packaged and expen$ive? that's insane.

u are wrong. this album sounds like a bunch of myspace demos tarted up for cd release. using a *really* basic sound palette- lovingly. hence the innocence and enthusiasm.

this album is really easy to critisise but u are doing a really bad job of it. you want to focus on how the songs don't go anywhere, the vocals have lame 09 singer songwriter affectations, that they take themselves really seriously, the drums are really thin like he's downloaded a sample pack of freedrumsamples.org, there is automated spaceverb on everything etc etc

i'll never understand why "taking oneself seriously" is so often used as a diss - that's a GOOD THING imo

I'm sorry I am doing "such a bad job" at it I'll work harder to impress you next time since you take this little thread so seriously.

By "expensive", you ought to know what I mean, they sound like groomed talent, they do not sound spontaneous. If School of Seven Bells is opening for you, perhaps you think too highly of yourself. Or someone thinks too highly of you. How can you be this naive about the industry?

How can you say they don't sound Xpensive when that last track someone posted sounded more like Alanis Morissette (whom I like) or some other commercial chick singer nonsense than any alterna-shit.

Taking oneself "too seriously" is a problem when you expect others to take you as seriously as you do yourself.

ok alanis morissette is pretty much the most, uh, leftfield comparison to the xx in a thread full of leftfield comparisons

Bizarre.

THEY SOUND LIKE GREEN DAY

WHOM I LIKE

Ironic

is alanis morrisette one of the artists in the bunch that are so ubiquitous as to be not worth naming?

I don't like it when female singers are marketed or presented (or received) as they are with this group. It just seems like there is a perpetual market for "inoffensive alterna-pop with female singer". It's like you are selling femininity as an ingredient. I think the female singer would be better off trying her hand at jazz or real singer-songwriter styles, clearly she has talent, the canned nature of the music and underwhelming songwriting don't do her justice.

x-post: cozen, what is your point? It is creepy you can't get over a post I made last night. You seem more interested in my opinions than in discussing the actual music.

I'm just interested in hearing about this rich seam of bands who are currently doing what the xx ('lazy singing and minimalism') are doing but are going unhyped

actually scratch tht I'm not even that interested

c u l8r xx

A woman's place is opening for Duffy. The indie scene is not befitting a true female sensibility.

This album was a huge grower for me. I think the melodies are really beautiful (esp. on the first half of the album) and would stand up in any kind of arrangements (and with any kind of singer, to be honest). I don't really hear almost any of the bands mentioned thus far (def. not Beat Happening at all outside of the superficial spareness; not really Interpol; I suppose Low, but the xx stuff is so much more torch-y).

prinzhorn dance school?

the xx are nothing like 'em.

i don't think they are either but they do sound like lazy singing and minimalism.

i like this record but i find it the opposite of a grower.

someone convince me that doing another lecture on what "minimalist" means in music is a bad idea

Maybe "grower" isn't the right term. I just thought it was terribly dull at first superficial glance, and then when I got a vague urge to put it on again I was suddenly completely overtaken by it.

Dan, I would welcome your lecture.

Because I'm a big fan of the Field and Pantha du Prince and can't stand all these indie-rock goons trampling all over the good name of their genre.

Basic Space has grown on me quite a lot, or at least, i love the Sampha mix (don't expect anything mindblowing, its just v nice)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvMlQz5IYYQ

I don't think the xx are particularly exciting, their appeal isn't excitement or novelty
me neither. but what is these days? so in relative terms their music is exciting.

opening myself up to my own pls name names here but: there's lots pf exciting music!

i'm perfectly aware of what minimalist means in music. the music is pretty minimal although if it sounds nothing like philip glass et al. you can use minimalism without referring to the minimalist movement. i was using the word because someone else already had (not that i think it's an inappropriate word).

this record sounded instantly wonderful and seductive and fully realised, to me. i just found that it didn't have much more to give me than it gave me on an initial listen. i'm still boggled by the sophistication and maturity of it considering the age of the band.

hey can 40+ year olds not complain about the sad state of music or whatever? nagl, thanks.

By "expensive", you ought to know what I mean, they sound like groomed talent, they do not sound spontaneous.

you must uh, not like pop music. this is such a dumb criticism

there's lots pf exciting music!
name just one name! i would love to be proven wrong!

the ubiquity of exciting music renders such a task meaningless!

kevin k this forum does not allow me to waste people's time by spending paragraphs refining my remarks. I personally don't take the word "groomed" in the same sense you did. They seem coached or manipulated. Their own marketing doesn't match the picture of the actual band that is posted upthread - they look like perfectly likable and ordinary college-type kids, but are packaged and presented and recorded in a way that does not convey that (cf. their own website). This is what I mean - I don't like the presentation. Clearly some people on this thread have had bad experiences with "hipsters" or "music connoisseurs", please take it up with the "indie hipsters" and record collectors who have offended you in the past instead of aggressively projecting opinions, attitudes and sentiments on someone who does not possess them. You are ascribing values to me that I do not have, I do not do the same with those I disagree with.

Back to the original subject - for historic context on similar issues WRT somnolescent-type music w. female vocals, you could try PORTISHEAD: classic or dud?!. I happen to have liked Portishead at the time, but I also think their marketing and their press made them fair game for a big fat "yawn".

If School of Seven Bells is opening for you, perhaps you think too highly of yourself. Or someone thinks too highly of you.

Who cares? They're bad because ... they're popular?

Genuinely sorry that marketing/image/press/etc. affects your ability to like music.

who gives a fuck about marketing or presentation?!?!???

Yeah that's not particularly fair since image/marketing turns people off to music all the time.

see also cockfarmer fanbases

Is this what I said? I don't think so. I didn't say this, go punch the person in the face who said this to you in whatever conversation you had elsewhere, I am not the one who said this.

I don't like popular music now. Creepy.

Should I get therapy now that sometimes stylistic packaging (which includes choice of talent and production) is off-putting?

x-post to jaymc and his "popularity" remark, not HI DERE.

looking forward to I Love Marketing board btw

Kind of lolling that people are getting this irate over The XX, who are kind of like mood stabilizers pressed onto a CD.

The X(ana)X

Is that evil corporate refined mood stabilisers or natural organic home grown mood stabilisers?

Is this what I said? I don't think so.

Sorry, I might have jumped to conclusions here. I thought you meant that you were put off by the fact that *anyone* was opening for them, like how dare they be smug enough to think they can headline a show. (Obviously, they are headlining shows because a lot of people like them.) I don't know anything about School of Seven Bells to get what their association with that band in particular means.

tbf SOSB supporting the xx does seem a bit weird/undeserving but obv a reflection of greater critical buzz towards the latter.

They seem coached or manipulated.

By whom, do you think?