Bands that are better 'in theory' than in reality

Um, yeah. Is that so difficult to fathom?

I would say Laibach. I do actually love some of their albums, but overall they're more interesting in theory than in practice.

Diamanda Galas- she's interesting but rubs me the wrong way.

Melt Banana- very intriguing and fun, for about the first 30 seconds.

Joy Division- some great ideas and concepts but they bogged down in what I consider a sloppy execution.

Neurosis- I own many of their albums, but am rarely compelled to listen to them. I think the aesthetic interesting, but somehow it doesn't entertain me. You can add Isis and most Swans to that, though I occasionally enjoy both.

Tori Amos- her music is often convoluted and the lyrics oddly compelling in an obtuse sorta way, but she's always struck me as pretentious and a little dull.

I'll be here all day if I don't stop.

Maybe I'd agree with that if they didn't have so many goddamn great songs.

I appreciate what MBV does, but I do enjoy the theory more than what was actually accomplished by the band.

Non to thread!

You were talking about one of the other albums apart from "Black Monk Time", yeah? or even that one from the "Nice Legs" hitmakers instead, yeah? Please reassure me...

You'll have to explain this one - what do you mean by 'sloppy execution'?

Second Mogwai.

The idea of a group of travelling bohemians who never play a song the same way twice; of musos with solid folk and blues roots constantly playing extended improvisations with, yeah, free jazz influences and prepared pianos and West African drumming and detailed explorations of feedback; all in the service of an idealistic communal philosophy - this sounds great to me in theory. You'd think it could be like the Allman Brothers or Band of Gypsys. Unfortunately, AFAICT, the execution is so clunky it only pulls together maybe once per record I've heard and the rest is near-unlistenable.

Also, after trying to listen to Disraeli Gears, I'm starting to suspect Cream (thought I like them far more than the Dead). You wouldn't guess it from the compilations though. Maybe Clapton in general. I also suspect the Jefferson Airplane. And I kind of agree about the Velvet Underground and MBV. Although I do generally like both bands, the ideas are more exciting than the records, which still have great moments.

Second Band of Susans.

i think in theory i should love all of those bands but they all fall into bands that i just don't 'get' or otherwise can't really get into.

also, i'll second these previously mentioned picks: dj shadow, my bloody valentine, joy division, boards of canada

I don't agree with anything I just wrote, I'm just saying I can see an argument such as this.

**Today, bands that want to cover similar terrain of tension and angst usually sound much bigger**

I won't ask if you ever saw them live, cos you're probably 23 or something, but have you heard any good quality live recordings of theirs e.g Les Bains Douches? They made a HUGE sound - check out the brutal Shadowplay on LBD.

Add (some) Sonic Youth to the list. As in "Gosh, i haven't heard this Sonic Youth record in ages, but I remember it being totally clinic" but then when I play it it's just sort of okay.

'Seems a bit off' is a choice phrase for this thread.

'Black Monk Time' on the other hand delivers all the way down the line.

Choice of The Kinks is pretty baffling!

Not live, he wasn't! e.g Procession on 'Still' , Disorder on LBD...

**You don't ever even hear a buzzing or muted string or a note out of time (definitely from "Transmission" onwards anyway).**

I'm talking about live performance. Barney was freqeuently all over the place. (and frequently fantastic).

Cage had many ideas: so which do ppl think sound exciting? surely not all of them?

x-post: As far as those kind of bands go, it means having to go to gigs bcz a lot of improvisation is involved, and that doesn't always translate well to records.