Panda Bear- Person Pitch

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (311 of them)
I got over this pretty fast to be honest :-/

I found the melodies & harmonies very addictive, but otherwise it's sort of unengaging. The songs don't add up to a great deal, though they are very nice. The loops and sonic backing kind of bug me. First few plays I thought it was really inventive but after not too long before it just sounded like one long ever-rolling tickertape of bitty-ness.

A lot of reviews have been making comparisons to dance music in the way it's created.. but frankly, I don't hear much that's on the same level of interest (to me) or commitment here.

It's ok though, definitely better than a lot of other things!

fandango, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 16:43 (nineteen years ago)

i hate to make a typical cynical anti-pitchfork comment but i feel like hardly anyone would care about this album without that glowing pitchfork review. i had just looked at it the day before the review on amazon and it was something like #930 in overall sales, and the day of the pitchfork review it shot up to around #250.

Reatards Unite, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 17:18 (nineteen years ago)

"Bros" is fantastic. The rest is only ok for me. It's certainly not terrible, but like a lot of the animal collective stuff just strikes me as ok.

Also, I get so confused everytime I click on this thread and see that picture in the first post. What the hell is that? What is happening there? Jesus it's distracting.

mcddcm, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 17:21 (nineteen years ago)

It an okay CD. After the first couple of cuts it falls off a bit. I was going to post something silly about ghosts of Beach Boys past but then thought better of it. I didn't want to come off like Simon Reynolds and the Junior Hauntology crew. Mostly it just makes me want to play Pet Sounds.

leavethecapital, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 17:39 (nineteen years ago)

"hardly anyone would care about this album without that glowing pitchfork review"

yeah animal collective barely has any fans. good thing pitchfork is around to boost PB into the top 300 of web sales.

dmr, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 17:42 (nineteen years ago)

Agree with the disagree about interest in this being some kind of Pitchfork artifact. Pitchfork may focus attention, boost sales for a week, but writing all interest in this record off to PF's supposedly massive commercial influence is just lazy. Buzz was there before the review appeared. Songs seem to be selling folks on their own.

Pye Poudre, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 18:51 (nineteen years ago)

Compare dates of early comments on this thread with date Pitchfork review appeared.

M.V., Wednesday, 4 April 2007 19:08 (nineteen years ago)

ilx certainly hasn't had animal collective threads for almost five years now

strongohulkington, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 19:13 (nineteen years ago)

The only Pitchfork reviews which get charged with influencing ILM are reviews written by ILXors anyway (not mine - Mark's, Jess's, Dominique's, Philip's etc.)

Tim F, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 21:44 (nineteen years ago)

i'm surprised nobody has drawn the obvious di comparisons yet

rio natsume, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 22:29 (nineteen years ago)

DI?
http://www.midi-classics.com/i/p30660.jpg

sexyDancer, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 22:31 (nineteen years ago)

DI?
http://myspace-374.vo.llnwd.net/00806/47/38/806988374_thumb1.jpg

sexyDancer, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 22:33 (nineteen years ago)

i mean much of it sounds alot like "a night on the tiles" (is that the one i mean? the swing jazz loop one (art of actual forgetfulness)) but with beach boys vocals, and the whole samples as narrative vehicle thing that ian crause used to talk about is kind of implicit (though i haven't listened/cranked it hard enough yet to notice). xp.

rio natsume, Wednesday, 4 April 2007 22:41 (nineteen years ago)

nice

blueski, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:58 (nineteen years ago)

i'm surprised nobody has drawn the obvious di comparisons yet


I've been thinking more that this was the type of album that an indie type would create because the Avalanches hadn't released a second album.

Ned Raggett, Thursday, 5 April 2007 15:59 (nineteen years ago)

the beach boys vibe/aura puts me in mind of wild honey or friends more than the stone cold Brian classics like Pet Sounds; for me, it's the first BB-flavoured modern alb that comes anywhere near to matching the vocals/songwriting/vibe of the post-Smile recs, and the mantras and repetitions and samples evoke devotional sunshine bliss w/out being explicitly 'religious' - v clever and beautiful

Ward Fowler, Thursday, 5 April 2007 20:38 (nineteen years ago)

The cover. Really. My fave album cover of 2007.

Capitaine Jay Vee, Thursday, 12 April 2007 10:15 (nineteen years ago)

one month passes...

I like this live download thing more than Person Pitch. More beats!

mizzell, Thursday, 7 June 2007 01:37 (nineteen years ago)

what live download thing? (this is my album of the year so far btw)

braveclub, Thursday, 7 June 2007 16:29 (nineteen years ago)

Paw Tracks is selling a live show from 2004 on itunes. it's got a couple of the songs from PP and two other ones. It's shorter than the album.

mizzell, Thursday, 7 June 2007 16:32 (nineteen years ago)

four weeks pass...

I had a spell of loving this...then not listening to ages. I waited to get the vinyl and finally scored it last week...it's blowing me away more than it ever did.

I suffer from sleep difficulties, I average 4ish hours per night...when I go into work at 9am with the first three tracks off Person Pitch on my headphones, I feel like I could wrestle an elephant and win.

Mister Craig, Thursday, 5 July 2007 00:42 (eighteen years ago)

does the vinyl sound as trebly/tinny as the cd? or is that his "aesthetic?" the Jane <i>Berserker</i> cd sounds the same way. i was thinking of buying the vinyl...

nerve_pylon, Thursday, 5 July 2007 02:43 (eighteen years ago)

er, i mean Berserker

nerve_pylon, Thursday, 5 July 2007 02:44 (eighteen years ago)

where can one find the vinyl?

Preview of the Matrix 12, Sunday, 8 July 2007 01:13 (eighteen years ago)

here

BIG HOOS aka the steendriver, Sunday, 8 July 2007 01:24 (eighteen years ago)

oh.

Preview of the Matrix 12, Sunday, 8 July 2007 01:44 (eighteen years ago)

i find track 3 on the "people ep" to be weirdly melancholy, even if it does sound like a chorus of deaf horses.

the next grozart, Sunday, 8 July 2007 02:40 (eighteen years ago)

five months pass...

album of the year?

Moka, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 05:22 (eighteen years ago)

If you wish it, it is no dream.

NoTimeBeforeTime, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:08 (eighteen years ago)

I agree with everything Ned says on this thread.

Spencer Chow, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:15 (eighteen years ago)

thrilling revive.

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:18 (eighteen years ago)

I agree with Ned aussi.

W4LTER, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:26 (eighteen years ago)

but I can't shake the notion that in the end, it's little more than the musical equivalent of a magic-eye picture

Fandango otm here.

Mordechai Shinefield, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:41 (eighteen years ago)

No. 1? Hm.

Daniel, Esq., Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:14 (eighteen years ago)

This is an ambient record. Or, that's how I treat it.

Scik Mouthy, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:16 (eighteen years ago)

Mainly because of the sonics.

Scik Mouthy, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:20 (eighteen years ago)

^i try to do this but then he sings. this is why "i'm not" kills every other song on the record.

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:25 (eighteen years ago)

this is why i'm not

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:26 (eighteen years ago)

OMG NUBMER ONE PITCHFORK MOKA U RA RITE BCAUSE PITCKROFK IS NEVER RONG

The Reverend, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:27 (eighteen years ago)

moka = scottpl

J0rdan S., Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:44 (eighteen years ago)

Aha!

The Reverend, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 10:52 (eighteen years ago)

I'm surprised that this would be PF's number one. I really like it but always saw it as a low-profile distraction, whereas these lists seem to usually go for the big statements.

baaderonixx, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 11:14 (eighteen years ago)

told you.

Moka, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 21:23 (eighteen years ago)

on other things... Fact Magazine's Top 100 songs of 2007 is way better than pitchfork's:

http://www.factmagazine.co.uk/da/66290

Moka, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 21:27 (eighteen years ago)

but I can't shake the notion that in the end, it's little more than the musical equivalent of a magic-eye picture

Fandango otm here.

-- Mordechai Shinefield, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 09:41 (12 hours ago) Link

is this a criticism? cuz anything that can manage to be the musical equivalent of a magic-eye picture is, putting aside whether it is enjoyable or good or whatever, at least interesting.

artdamages, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 21:57 (eighteen years ago)

think this is more interesting than a stereogram but agree that it's an ambient album and that 'i'm not' is probably the highlight but could do with some strings

blueski, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 23:01 (eighteen years ago)

xpost I don't think magic eye pictures deserve acclaim. I think they are shticky and just because you can cross your eyes to see the picture doesn't mean that that picture is a work of art. Goodie, you can decipher the Panda Bear album. But that doesn't make it any good.

Mordechai Shinefield, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 23:27 (eighteen years ago)

i don't know, i think this album is fucking great. i hardly think it relies on any "shticky" gimmicks, rather, it's a pretty sonically adventurous album that has a ton of layers that reveal themselves pretty generously with each play. as a lot of its positive reviews have already stated (better than i can), it does a fucking excellent job of synthesizing some really great pop melodies with a lot of sonic experimentation (more than you'll find in most of this year's acclaimed indie records) and pretty brilliantly juxtaposes a ton of interesting influences - dub, psychedelia, 60s pop, ambient music, electronic music, etc. i don't want to sound like press release here and i also don't want to just say "good influences = good music", but this album is pretty fucking cool and i'm very happy it's getting all the acclaim it is.

Mark Clemente, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 23:52 (eighteen years ago)

magic eye posters look all squiggly and nondescript at first glance. it is only through concentration and crossing your eyes that something emerges.

artdamages, Tuesday, 18 December 2007 23:58 (eighteen years ago)

Besides, what's so cryptic about this album? The melodies are obvious, most of the lyrics are easy to understand. It's fun to listen to.

filthy dylan, Wednesday, 19 December 2007 00:04 (eighteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.