War on Drugs

That's hilarious, because listening to it this morning that's where the album really starts to click for me. It reminds me of the pretty noodling side of Dire Straits, like "Skateaway" or the pretty coda of "Tunnel of Love."

I mean, as if it wasn't obvious:

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

Or here, starting at the 5 minute mark:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmQ0ns-hXf4

this is very nice but it makes me feel weird, like i always felt like that particular 80s rock sound of disappointment with life was for something that only happened to middle-aged 80s dudes, when it's coming from a whatever-aged 2010s dude i don't know what the feeling is anymore, time is out of joint

overall i think the vibe is wistful but positive, i dunno. granted i'm at work and am not really focusing on the lyrics much. or at all

http://grantland.com/hollywood-prospectus/the-war-on-drugs-gets-ready-to-play-the-big-rooms/

“I started going off the rails a little bit in my own head, getting a little too sucked in,” he said. “I learned a lot about anxiety and depression and how you probably have it your whole life, but you never really know it. Then eventually it starts to make your life smaller and smaller and smaller.”

Granduciel’s anxiousness created a vicious circle during the making of Lost in the Dream. Overthinking every detail caused him to constantly second-guess himself, which only increased his anxiety, which only made him second-guess himself more intensely. Just as with “An Ocean in Between the Waves,” a lot of songs cycled through several variations before circling back to one of Granduciel’s initial ideas. “‘Suffering’ went through four or five different incarnations, and then I ended up just going back to the original demo I recorded, which was a drum machine and a Rhodes piano, and we ended up building on top of that,” he said.

xpost In 1985, Springsteen was a whopping 35 years old. Dunno how old Adam Granduciel is, but Dan Bejar (for point of reference) is 41. Springsteen wasn't even 40 when he did his middle aged marriage falling apart "Tunnel of Love."

Ha, OK, I think Granduciel is 34, which puts him at Bruce c. "Born in the USA" age.

this is very nice but it makes me feel weird, like i always felt like that particular 80s rock sound of disappointment with life was for something that only happened to middle-aged 80s dudes, when it's coming from a whatever-aged 2010s dude i don't know what the feeling is anymore, time is out of joint

― j., Tuesday, March 18, 2014

the war on drugs: making america safe for middle-aged 80s dudes

like me!

If this was *just* a record that sounded like middle-aged 80s dudes it wouldn't be as interesting. The whole motorik/Spiritualized/spacerock element of their sound is crucial as well.

(In other words, it sounds like middle aged 90s dudes as well)

there's this pizza place i used to order from in college, that i would rarely actually go to, but it was always an odd experience in the 90s because the place was still decked out in like

http://image0-rubylane.s3.amazonaws.com/shops/752391/74.1L.jpg

and 80s stones album covers and an ambered jukebox, so since i was only a kid in the 80s (listening to michael jackson and men without hats or whatever alongside don henley on pop radio) most of my experience of the 'adult' perspective on 80s culture always has that kind of hangover aspect to it, like from its lingering on in places that had made their arrangements with life a while back and didn't have the need or luxury any more of styling new ways to be

i'm glad 2014 has found its random access memories.

i guess...i am mostly ok with this album's reference points (though i didnt give a crap about dire straits or bruce in the 80s, why should i now?) and execution, but i feel really out of step with the hype.

i found the roxy comment upthread interesting, i wanna relisten with that in mind.

(but yeah matt dc is right of course—and like granduciel

When Granduciel talks about his musical background, you realise it's not that surprising a combination. He grew up in Dover, Massachusetts, listening to classic-rock radio, then had what he calls his "aha moment", hearing The Perfect Prescription by Spacemen 3 playing in the Mystery Train record shop in Boston. "There's a lot of older musicians who say your whole life making music, you're really trying to get back to that first couple of things you liked when you were a kid. And as much as you might like to think you're not, you really are."

(story in the guardian)

—mid-90s was teh time of spiritualized, nu-wave of krautrock revivalism, etc. for now mid-30s me too)

I think the conflation of meat and potatoes rock like Bruce, Dire Straights and Dylan with the more amorphous, er, mashed potato rock of Spacemen 3 is what makes this interesting, just as what Spacemen 3 did to the Stooges and Suicide made that band interesting.

All my early thoughts kinda remain the same about these guys -- couldn't care much (or, really, at all) about the classic rock side, am perfectly down with the zoned and out of it side.

No one need "care" about the classic rock, but that doesn't make it not obvious, recognizable, essential and unavoidable an ingredient.

It's also that he's successfully isolated what those artists have in common in essence if not in sound - the spacerock aspect overlaps with Springsteen (open-road momentum and euphoric peaks and troughs) and Knopfler (textures and guitars that sound like they're from outer space). Viewing at it from that angle, this record feels like it's in the centre of a totally natural Venn diagram. It never feels forced.

Matt DC very much OTM.

Yeah all very nice and all but what I'm trying to point out is that I don't need that intersection to be happy and I've had enough Springsteen/Knopfler/Dylan etc in my life already. Also, I'm not unfamiliar with this band and what they do at all! I'm the second or third post on this thread from when it started in 2008, I've reviewed them for the AMG, so, hey, give me a LITTLE credit. And I grant that combination makes you all happy, but the difference between, say, a fellow Springsteen nut like Jason DiEmilio of the Azusa Plane and Granduciel is that the former fully took off to the cosmos and multiple directions from there before he ended up on his downward spiral from hell, whereas the latter lets himself go a bit but then gives me the type of thing I have no real affinity for or interest in on top of it. At their best they hit the levels of the Church, as I've said before and others have mentioned, but the Church have been way more consistently interesting to me -- and sound better when it comes to the singing -- for a long goddamn time.

so what you're saying is get off my lawn etc etc

If you can take the classic rock hero worship with you, sure! Can you drown the Cult of Brooooce while you're at it?

how about we take those and leave you one (1) bag poop, aflame

i'm a few songs into this thing and not hearing all that much knopfler tbh. springsteen yes, also tom petty, robbie robertson and lindsay buckingham... i don't mind it, it just kind of potters along in its own groove, kind of like jj cale in that respect

thing about dire straits is their songs are all totally based on actual hooky licks, where as this seems much more of a groove thing with the guitar mostly just providing ornamentation

he uses a fuzzier guitar tone, but the noodling at the back of "an ocean in between the waves" is, i would say, very knopfler-esque.

having grown up immersed in the 80s, certain lead guitar tones and production tropes just sound so trite to me, and when he hits on them i can't help but cringe. i also think this effect may be cumulative for me- he can use only so many of these tricks at a time, until he adds another and a tipping is reached.

the fact that some of his guitar runs are not _more_ knopfler-esque makes me wonder if he simply is at the edge of his skill there.

well, you know what they say, guitar playing naturally settles for the highest level of knopflerity

i guess if this album were really the random access memories of 2014, he woulda got _mark knopfler_. possibly pharrell.

I dunno, hitting the classic rock beats that Ned doesn't need is what I think sets this stuff apart. We have enough Spacemen 3 gauzy gospel reverb merchants. You can call it hoary or hokey, which is fair enough, but it's no more so at this point than what this would sound like without those influences.

Yeah straight spacerock and krautrock homages are more boring than anything at this point, if only because so many of them just seem to be slavish recreations of a sound.

AOY contender for me, but this album sets up such a conflict for me. For months, I've been all "omg I can't believe you ridiculous popists are favorably comparing shit to Wilson Philips, how regressive" but as soon as some band starts openly referencing cheesy shit from the 80s I actually like, I'm all for it. There's probably a lesson in here someplace.

Anyway, this album is great, but I stand by my earlier criticism of the 'drums.' Not sold on it (yet?).

Surely we aren't done talking about this album already?

Today I had this playing in the car while I was running errands around town and every stop took so long because I couldn't seem to leave the car before the end of whatever song was playing, so I'm, like, sitting in the Trader Joe's parking lot jamming "Disappearing" and just blissing out. It's that kinda album, I guess.

Chris Weingarten ‏@1000TimesYes Mar 17 -- The War on Drugs: In case you ever felt like you wanted a Bryan Adams song to never end.

lol whiney

i like that, whiney sort-of rides on the spirit and drive of War on Drugs' sound and takes his opinions to new worlds of wrongness. in fact I think he's discovered a new dimension of lousy opinions. i can imagine he returned to our world surrounded by an aura with eyes sparkling to deliver that one to us.

The thing about that joke is that there are quite a few other artists that still would have sold it without being completely wrong.

ease up. everything whiney does, he does it for you.

i dunno i feel like rock media is still addicted to this idea of the THE NEXT BIG ROCK REVOLUTION or thing that's going to change

rock is a mature art form at this time, you have to approach it like how ppl approach jazz - certain artists structure their music or have certain sonic qualities or ways of playing that you find appealing, nothing "big" is ever coming, and i don't care if it does. i think there will always be bands that understand how to be a band together, to play and write in ways that appeal to me, to find a sound or qualities that are worthwhile

i think war on drugs does this

but yeah like if you're looking for some revelation or w/e it's not it

rock is in the details

i mean, isn't all pop music, at this point, fairly mature and innovation/revelation is either "in the details" or in small incremental moves?

i think the media around this one is very much coming from the artist-matures school of journalism

ums maybe you are suggesting there is a little residue of dissonance around that idea, for rock audiences (or their media overlords)?

well i think (and i'm p verging on Ott territory) but yeah i think those grand narratives - elvis on ed sullivan! the beatles conquer the world! woodstock! nirvana kills hair metal! - still resonate w/ppl...and obviously there's still a lot of money/resources invested into building buzz around the next big thing...or like NME seems to need "rock is dead! rock is back!" shit every month still....

i think the media around this one is very much coming from the artist-matures school of journalism

this could be, i haven't read that much of it

basically if you're a dude like myself who was raised on 80s classic rock/mainstream radio and then went indie then went weirdo you'll probably be p happy w it. or if the idea of dire straits goes kraut appeals to you, this seems like a good version of that idea

like on the walking on a pretty daze thread lots of people said kurt vile is boring! and he kinda is boring! but i like it, i like sinking into that whole diffuse stoner vibe and letting the songs flow by, but i couldn't dispute that this album or that album could be boring to ppl

i'm amazed by a lot of pop and rock music still. i hear a lot of little innovations still. but i can't recall the last time i've heard something truly "revelatory."

it's true: i want a bryan adams song that never ends.

whenever the music industry wants to make rock seem like a viable force the Foo Fighters always end up involved in some way

ew!

foo fighters is one of those bands that feels like a backing band even when they're not jamming with some rock legends at an induction ceremony or awards show

two days a wrote a brief post about this album for application to some "death of rock" thread i found, but i didn't post it. the gist was that while listening to this album i became convinced it represents the last final ossification of rock, the last permutation after which rock has lost all cultural currency or relevance.

i didn't post it because 1) everyone here is more knowledgeable about music than i and 2) it's some bullshit even if it turns out correct.

rock music won't lose all cultural currency or relevance ever, because (a) "rock" is a very broad umbrella term, so there's lots of room for variation and (b) the audience is always changing, and new audience members are experiencing the genre for the first time (as they grow up).

rock and roll was just a fantasy anyway. how long can any dream last .... ?

life is just a fantasy ...