Sasha Frere-Jones: Really?????

Or: "Murphy leaped about, singing into a small Sennheiser mike, a type of mike that, though Pink Floyd used it for vocals, is usually used to record guitar."

Sennheiser is a brand of microphone - they make vocal mics as well as guitar mics. I mean maybe it would be too nerdy for the New Yorker to put in an actual model number, but it sounds off this way.

Also, there's a description of him composing Losing My Edge by "turning on the [toy rhythm box he was given], and singing and drumming at the same time." -- Not only is this an awkward way to describe it (turning on the rhythm box is not really a notable part of the process) but he doesn't really sing in that song.

Also, "For someone coming from a performance-based background -- like jazz or classical music -- Murphy's approach can be puzzling. But he is more concerned with the sonic qualities of the equipment than with those of the physical space they are recorded in." Wow, holy shit, you mean he uses the recording process as his instrument? Coming from a performance-based background, I am somewhat puzzled by this novel approach.

Also: "LCD shows draw a mixture of teenagers, fashion plates, and older fans who can probably identify exactly what kind of bass Murphy uses just by listening."

some dude: *high-five*

abbreviating microphone as "mike" is by far the greatest offense there imo

ksh does that mean i accurately understood your joke or what? i'm still somewhat confused

yep, that was the joke -- you got it

oh ok -- i srsly thought you were on some crazy tech jargon ish

hahaha!! :-D nope, you were OTM

koritfw

if you told me you could identify what kind of bass james murphy uses just by listening i wouldn't believe you even if you are an older fan

Listen, I've heard a few basses in my day.

ashamed to say, i didn't even realize murphy was using a bass. i thought it was all programmed sounds. and i like lcd soundsystem -- a lot.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060807213258/uncyclopedia/images/6/6c/Bass_player.JPG

old school, i see

live bass

havent read yet, quotes are infuriating

sfj is a very skilled writer who does stuff like that that pisses me off pretty frequently. his review of the sade album hit the mark so correctly and then ... he complained about the sax solos on her classic records. its like ... thefuck?? how can you like sade and complain about the sax. thats, like, central to the appeal. its like "im feeling this bob dylan record, but i wish he sang like aretha." not the point bro

if the quotes hurting has upthread are really conflating all sennheisers together w/out realizing that they make both guitar & vocal mics, then i basically am 100% in the camp w/ albini about music 'journalism' today

if on the other hand its the same model but hes implying all sennheisers are the same, then its just bad writing

what's albini's take?

Sorry, that should be

Wow, holy shit, you mean he uses the recording process as his instrument makes largely electronic music? Coming from a performance-based background, I am somewhat puzzled by this novel approach.

http://www.electrical.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=49129&sid=bf28f1bde7d7dd2f755bc7bd8623ced0

The quotes that Hurting 2 posted are all great examples of this thing that critics sometimes do that really irritates me. Basically these are attempts to discuss the technical aspects of a recording in layman's terms, but the details are completely fudged and don't make any real sense.

I appreciate it when a critic can engage in technical talk and get it right and add something interesting to the discussion, but it grates on me when they make obvious errors.

sfj is a very skilled writer who does stuff like that that pisses me off pretty frequently. his review of the sade album hit the mark so correctly and then ... he complained about the sax solos on her classic records. its like ... thefuck?? how can you like sade and complain about the sax. thats, like, central to the appeal. its like "im feeling this bob dylan record, but i wish he sang like aretha." not the point bro

in fairness tho deej if anybody ever says anything less than glowing about any aspect of a sade record yr take is gonna be "omg heretic" mais non

Exactly. And I think it's better writing to go slightly over people's heads with accurate technical detail (if he is in fact capable of that, which I'm not sure) then to dumb-down inaccurately.

(xpost)

sfj really seems to be in a rock/hard place sitch trying to describe contemporary music to lame nyer readers but he doesn't do himself any favors either--he's a musician and should know that all that "can tell the type of bass" stuff is complete bullshit

deej is right in this case tho

it's true, i've just been hittin the wine again tbh

was gonna say ... are u hating on smooth operator sax now???

http://www.electrical.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=49129&sid=bf28f1bde7d7dd2f755bc7bd8623ced0

Abandon all hope, ye who enter here.

I like SFJ a lot but this piece fell flat for me. James Murphy is an odd, interesting character who's not shy about discussing personal stuff in immense detail but most of the psychology was quickly brushed past in favour of talking about microphones, etc. I come to a profile to learn more about how a person thinks, not to have vast swathes of crit which would work equally well, if not better, in a review or essay with no access to Murphy at all. I wonder if that was the New Yorker's brief - explain this guy to people who haven't heard of him - but there comes a point when you just have to accept that anyone reading past the first page or so has enough prior knowledge, or is sufficiently hooked, to want to know more about the man himself.

His new piece is about Noise. Focuses about Sightings, Yellow swans, Wolf Eyes and HEALTH. Seems kind of late to be writing about this. Four years ago might have been more appropriate?

another piece that's like omg they aren't using notes but sounds and then trots out merzbow and your criticism is this-is-so-2006

Donald Fagan:
NOTES ON CRAP By Sascha Frere-Jacque

On a sweltering night last August, the bored, sticky crowd in Webster Hall had started to drift toward the exits when the quartet, CapGras, took the stage. CapGras is named after a delusional syndrome which is, in turn, named after it's discoverer, the French psychiatrist Jean Marie Joseph Capgras. Their debut album on the U.K. label, Q'CAM Music, " You're Not Jack" , has just gone gold and spawned a wickedly addictive hit single, " Concealed Tattoo" .

http://donaldfagen.com/writing_items.php?itemID=96

omg

Of course, no cure is absolute, and there are still hurtles to be overcome out in the big, bad world. The band's latest crisis occurred at the playback party for their sophomore album "Art Is Uncool" at Bar Z Bar, when each band member independently accused producer Billy Dotcom of being " not himself", and the album, which was being played at high volume on Bar Z Bar's powerful speaker system, of being not itself.

Nevertheless, D'Von says that, at this juncture, everything is copacetic. " Let's face it, Sascha - if that's really who you are - the bottom line is, art really is uncool. It's going to be a big relief to put this nightmare behind us and move on".

they should fire Sascha and just hire Don

amazing

any bass could sound a lot different depending on how it was recorded, what amp you were using, if you were using any effects pedals, whether it was DI'd or mic'd or, like a zillion different factors

This cracks me up:
Lead singer Dolorous Von Bronx, (formerly Sue Ratour of the short-lived Sue Ratour and the Eradicons) is drop-dead gorgeous. Whipping across the stage in her vintage 1930s roller skating outfit (silver-buttoned blouse, short pleated skirt) with her long, silky legs askew, she was a truly rapturous vision: sensuous and scary, like Veronica Lake on a methedrine binge.

here's a link to the SFJ noise article: http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/musical/2010/05/24/100524crmu_music_frerejones?currentPage=all

every time I read one of these awesome Fagen/Becker takedowns, it makes me angry that they aren't putting out albums more often. I'm sure they could shit out a good one every year or two if they wanted, and I'd probably buy it.

holllllllllllllllllllllly fuck

@ fagen

i like the noise piece. it's well written, if redundant and several years late from where i sit. it's not aimed at people like me, though. it's aimed at new yorker readers in general, and if i didn't know anything about noise music, i'm sure i'd find it interesting, curious, even somewhat funny.

This noise music just doesn't have any swing to it.

the whole "this crazy new music is emulating the noisy dischord of our modern technological society" has been floating around since like when the 20s or something?

since at least Ok Computer

i'm glad radiohead invented the future, i plan on living my whole life there

Freed from songs, the sounds draw attention to how odd machines can feel, and how powerful. Abstract noise sends the mind searching for concrete comparisons: clunking hard drives, breaking wires, muffled phones, turnstiles.

http://www.newyorker.com/images/2010/05/24/p233/100524_r19653_p233.jpg

^^^^ illustration of 2 bros making noize