Why in the name of all that is holy do people like Guided by Voices?

the OX

Ahhh that wouldn't fly either, I don't think that's a fair argument. Then you end up with bands being accused of ripping off obscure artists and getting unfairly praised/compensated for it (cf. Wire vs. Elastica).

the OX

they were to all those schmucks who bought Elastica records! (Also see: The Fall vs. Pavement circa "Slanted and Enchanted")

keith, pass the pills and booze. pollard wants them.

the OX

(For my part, I have often described Mr. Matos as the most aggressive friendly person I know, and I mean that as pure praise. Said it before he was the editor at his job, will say it again now.)

will: HAHA.

i still like my "gather round" post the best upthread... sudden sympathy of a promo sellback is really heartwarming on a day like this. critics need love (and $$$) too.

You guys knew about and were listening to the Fall and Wire before Slanted and Enchanted and whatever Elastica album came out? When you were like, what...around 17 years old?

Wow.

Though I got into the Fall much later, probably around the time Crooked Rain, Crooked Rain came out.

Huh? Who heard what first doesn't have anything to do with it, I was just pointing out the phenomenon that happens when younger bands steal from older, more obscure bands: they get accused of unfairly profitting from ideas that aren't theirs. To say nothing of whether or not this is fair, it definitely happens.

As for the required biographical material, yes I heard Wire and the Fall when I was about 16, long before Pavement or Elastica put out a record. This was courtesy of an older brother - tho I should point out that the Wire/Fall stuff I heard was what they were then putting out ("I Am Kurious Oranj", "Kidney Bingos", etc.), and thus didn't get what people were talking about years later when the whole "who ripped off who controversy erupted. That being said, I love Pavement and did from the get-go. Elastica always sucked shit and it was painfully obvious to me, whether or not I was cognizant of them shamelessly aping Wire on "Connection".

If you love music (or are paid to listen to and review it), you should at least try/attempt a level of critical comprehension other than exhibited above.

Yes, interests be damned, i am a friend of Michaelangelo,

Painfully obvious, if a newby or nu-ILMer wrote "[sorta popular critical fave] SUX U R ALL GAY", we'd certainly see less regulars rising to the defense of such a statement.

but it's not as if anyone else doing this would make me so incredibly defensive

bullshit, see above.

and start making cracks at Matos's credibility of his career as a music critic or anything. THAT's what fucking pissed me off. So, gyg, if you're going to claim what I say as "the worst ILM gets" you better be fucking specific if i'm going to take your comment as anything but yet another of your stream of cryptic clever smarmy one-liners (something i'm certainly guilty of, no doubt)

don't get angry DB, this is nothing worthy of any red-blooded emotion. criticism of criticism should be tolerated here and if not i'm pulling a triple-Blount. however, Matos' post was taken at face value and given equally stupid responses (i'm speaking of mine here, none others).

I have nothing against Matos... well, there was that time when he boasted proudly of slamming (yet another Matador superstar) Malkmus' Pig Lib in another one of his "I DON'T GET THIS WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME" posts but noticably he was questioning himself not others. At the time, I thought Matos during a subsequent interview with Malkmus maybe should have shared his criticism in a productive or strategic manner. I was disappointed that as a critic, he didn't exactly follow through (cf, ryan schreiber's reviews of jim o'rourke's drag city records at pitchfork). How great would a mature, intelligent interview with an artist be if the interviewer stated (in the beginning): I don't like your music because of A, B, and C and the artist could expand on those points? Probably not so great on second thought.

Why should you try to like something esp. if you question how much influence do you invest in the opinions of crack-smokers? Is it more satisfying than just saying "okay, I know I don't like that!" and moving on? I haven't bought a GBV record in like 8 years or whenever Under The Bushes came out. I will be buying (read as: paying $$$) for the box set though. I remember a lot of those EPs fondly and thought Pollard (and Sprout) were up to some clever songwriting at the time.

as far as my revival being ILM at its worst, it probably is! I have no doubt about that. and yes, it was childish et al. but with no offense meant to either DB or Ned, their "sycophantic glow" isn't quite enough of a reason for anyone to ignore a band. (really, I realize you were exaggerating, Will, but as shots go that one wouldn't have gotten past the Ott radar.) I get dozens of CDs every week and have for the past several years. I ignore most of them simply because there aren't enough hours to devote to trying them all out. with GBV I've usually tried a couple songs, decided I wasn't in the mood and gave the discs to friends who were serious fans, because at least that way they would be put to some use. then I would think, "maybe at some point I will ask someone I trust to make me a CD," move on to other topics, and forget until the next one arrived, or I saw a review, or a thread, or whatever. when I heard about the Matador best-of I was interested because as noted before I wanted to hear what all the fuss was about. and as the person who edited Daddino's piece on the matter, who in fact *commissioned* it to begin with, I figured there had to be something there, and was reacting (blitheringly, with malice aforethought, probably too forcefully) to what I heard to be there, i.e. nothing at all. so attack my position all you want, God knows I attacked the GBV-fan hivemind several posts above (and therefore insulted some very intelligent people I know and in some cases count as friends, who are probably pissed off at me and undoubtedly should be). but let's at least have this much straight, please.

This is a message board, not a publication. People can be as crude or terse or stoopid as they want, regardless of whether it counters the manner in which their career dictates. It's not as if Chuck Eddy's writings look like ILM postings. (not to say Chuck's posts are "stoopid")

Painfully obvious, if a newby or nu-ILMer wrote "[sorta popular critical fave] SUX U R ALL GAY", we'd certainly see less regulars rising to the defense of such a statement.

"but it's not as if anyone else doing this would make me so incredibly defensive"

bullshit, see above.

Bad antecedents on my part. I was referring to the Matos detractors being defensive, not myself. Of course I was defensive once someone questioned Matos's credibility as a critic for not hearing GBV until now. Before, my comments were just my own opinions of GBV and how they've changed over time. Look back up and check for yourself. No sycophantic basking or bullshit like that.

"and start making cracks at Matos's credibility of his career as a music critic or anything. THAT's what fucking pissed me off. So, gyg, if you're going to claim what I say as "the worst ILM gets" you better be fucking specific if i'm going to take your comment as anything but yet another of your stream of cryptic clever smarmy one-liners (something i'm certainly guilty of, no doubt) "

don't get angry DB, this is nothing worthy of any red-blooded emotion. criticism of criticism should be tolerated here and if not i'm pulling a triple-Blount. however, Matos' post was taken at face value and given equally stupid responses (i'm speaking of mine here, none others).

I just wanted an explanation as to what I was doing that was "ILM at its worst". If it was, then I would like to stop doing that. If not, i want to explain why not. But you just said it with no explanation. You don't just throw shit out like that. (I'm very good friends with Jess, but this is style I really dislike about Jess's posts when he makes them)

I have nothing against Matos... well, there was that time when he boasted proudly of slamming (yet another Matador superstar) Malkmus' Pig Lib in another one of his "I DON'T GET THIS WHAT IS WRONG WITH ME" posts but noticably he was questioning himself not others. At the time, I thought Matos during a subsequent interview with Malkmus maybe should have shared his criticism in a productive or strategic manner. I was disappointed that as a critic, he didn't exactly follow through (cf, ryan schreiber's reviews of jim o'rourke's drag city records at pitchfork). How great would a mature, intelligent interview with an artist be if the interviewer stated (in the beginning): I don't like your music because of A, B, and C and the artist could expand on those points? Probably not so great on second thought.

Didn't know anything about this (or whether it's exactly relevant?)

Why should you try to like something esp. if you question how much influence do you invest in the opinions of crack-smokers? Is it more satisfying than just saying "okay, I know I don't like that!" and moving on? I haven't bought a GBV record in like 8 years or whenever Under The Bushes came out. I will be buying (read as: paying $$$) for the box set though. I remember a lot of those EPs fondly and thought Pollard (and Sprout) were up to some clever songwriting at the time.

Overall, I'm laughing at all of this. I think Matos was just being funny in this original post, just sharing how he didn't like something. I doubt he seriously questioned GBV fans, but just wanted to let people know he just didn't "get" them, and wanted to verbally exhibit his dropped jaw. I have no problems with "[BAND] SUX U R ALL GAY" type posts at all, ESPECIALLY in a thread called "Why in the name of all that is holy do people like [BAND]".
No one can accuse Matos of skunking a fan thread with bad vibes at least.

as far as definitive argument settlers go, rt clontle said that gbv rox. the defense rests.

The 'Best of' tracklist is lacking to me. I don't have a detailed blueprint for how I'd improve it cuz I don't care to spend time thinking about it, but the hooks at the beginning of the CD could be a little sharper and that's all I have to say.

GbV rips off tons more bands than the Beatles and the Who. Peter Gabriel (70s era) is a name that comes up a lot, but I also hear some Beefheart in there (mostly in Pollard's approach to lyrics). I wouldn't place most of my favorite GbV material as echoing straight from the Beatles' 60s. I hear it more as coming out of the art-rock early 70s, minus the instrumental showcases and sidelong suites.

Bye.

I KNIFE THE FUCKERS WITH PAIN.

Or not.

And I'll second that it's surprising to hear a Dean Wareham fan claim Rob Pollard can't sing.

Actually, it's funny how prescient Ned was.

Anyway, I really liked GBV at one time. I think what was initially so attractive was that lo-fi faux-prog sensibility present on tracks like "Marchers in Orange" and "Weed King". They totally hit like a random minute or two excised off a 10 minute early Genesis track. It sounded like a very self-aware, but irony-free tribute to most of the music I grew up with. I wasn't as much a fan of the pure rockers; I liked songs like "Exit Flagger" and "Motor Away", but that wasn't the aspect of them that attracted me the most.

I still maintain the best thing they ever did was the 6 or 7 EPs that came out in between Bee Thousand and Alien Lanes (at least, I think I've got that chronology correct; it's been a while). Pollard even used to joke in interviews that the band actually considered them mini-albums (so like, Alien Lanes was actually their 13th album or whatever). Is that some of the stuff that's going to be on this upcoming box set? If so, that's great, everyone needs to hear that. It's that total Faust Tapes cut-up, basement psychedelia aesthetic at its best.

I lost track of them after Under the Bushes. That album was really sort of boring, and it came right on the heels of the solo albums, etc. It was all getting to be too much. And it looked like they were more or less leaving behind the basement/drug/lo-fi sound. When he broke 'em up and hired the Cobra Verde guys, I knew that was the end.

Eh, not there yet. Close, though.

Well, it's really 'The Fall via Flying Nun Records vs. Pavement', if you want to get all technical and shit.

Danielle, a GBV-lover

I could make that argument, and I love them! I mean...well...you know.

then bob fired all of his buddies, got hired guns (cobra verde), improved the production values, and started aspiring to prog rather than pop-rawk. this bullshit is why the last-wave gbv is lame and bloated. oh, that and all the booze.

lets face it: the two most important instruments in the first-wave gbv were the echoplex and the four track.

like another bloated and pretentious arena rock band-- spinal tap-- gbv has trouble keeping drummers around. are they spontaneously combusting? i wonder if bill bruford is available. what am i thinking? of COURSE he is, since prog thankfully died years ago. since bob is all too happy to purge his band at the drop of a hat, maybe he should just hire the remaining members of yes.

the OX

p.s. i am available to play bass, bob, if you are lurking on this thread.

the other most important instrument was the memory man analog delay pedal and the most important non-pollard person was tobin sprout, the owner and operator of both the memory man and the aforementioned four-track (as well as the eight-track that eventually replaced the four-track).

tobin served a couple other purposes. he was the only worthy foil pollard ever had -- and pollard needs a foil really really bad -- and he was the only member of gbv, ever, who could sing on key at least some of the time. that really helped the live shows, believe you me.

gbv made mostly mediocre records before tobin joined the band, and they have continued to make mediocre records ever since he left. i say that's no coincidence.

mister matos, if you have any desire at all to get into gbv (a desire that i'd say is optional, not mandatory, at this point in world history), go ahead and sell that best-of and replace it with "bee thousand" and "alien lanes." if you don't like those two albums, you will not like gbv or anything pollard has ever done, it's as simple as that. if you do like them, move on to the "clown prince of the menthol trailer" and "fast japanese spin cycle" EPs, which are both from the same era, and move on from there. that part is, of course, optional.

right on brutha!

the OX