Tortoise: Classic or Dud

Sorry, I meant "Cliff Dweller Society." Kind of evokes Mingus. It's also available on All Tomorrow's Parties 1.0 CD.

It's on A Lazarus Taxon as well. One of the best things they ever did IMO, along with "Djed."

I just don't get the sense that these guys are pushing themselves as hard as they once did

- -

Their best albums had a sense of moment and purpose - a deliberateness and a stridency, even when they felt laid back

been listening to TNT and enjoying myself, but kind of feeling like it's the same old thing it always was, with nothing new to reveal (because they were never concealing any hidden depths, it was all right out front with them). my sense now though is that so much of the charm of their first three albums came from how adventitious it all seemed, that they could combine or meld so many things in a purposeful way that was never less than relaxed. that would explain a lot of the criticisms of them, especially re predecessors who did more better, or parallel and uncontestably superior efforts at e.g. post-dub studio-as-instrument music not constrained by their indie ethos. so much of that music would do similar things in an audibly challenging way, so that you could hear the musicians trying to do something that turned out to be unconventional and standard-setting. i'm thinking of, i don't know, 90s brit-style post-rock, or eno-inspired post-punk, or krautrock or such. or in a similar way, you could hear music akin to theirs but in which the musicians really let themselves go, or get lost. ('they don't improvise' is another way of noting that, since you would expect given the way they sound, that there would be loads and loads of live recordings somewhere where they do nothing BUT.)

anyway, that's not how it is with them. i want to say that you could imagine their music to have a zen-like quality that explains a lot of the above characteristics, but even that seems too tryhard and precise for their mode of music-making. more like taoist, with the proviso that it's the compositions - like nabisco said upthred - where they're really doing their work, since you would think that it would be hella easier for a band with a more improvisational practice to be obviously taoist.

prog had been so effectively negged that here comes the soft machine and it's just like new

aerial m > tortoise

I think maybe Tortoise just kinda took their concept as far as they could. They would need greater compositional and/or instrumental chops to take things in a more "advanced" direction, and I don't think that's really their steez anyway. Also I think music has kind of caught up with them and their sort of omnivorous approach to influences became increasingly common.

Standards was their peak. IAAY was a decent follow up but felt like a case of diminishing returns, style-wise - going through the motions.

Still a 'buy on sight' band for me. Thought The Catastrophist was excellent.

They really haven't hada bad album, but I wouldn't expect them to suddenly do something new or surprising. That's ok with me though.

My issue with them has always been the lack of improvisation. Maybe they did it more early on, iirc, when they were still figuring things out - I saw them a ton where every show would sort of have a different setup - but after Millions in particular they kind of focused hard on sticking to the arrangements, which kind of irked me, because the dudes all have chops, and a couple of them have serious jazz/improv chops, too. Haven't paid attention to them for a while because of that, but if ever a band seemed designed to wander off script it's these guys.

been listening to TNT and enjoying myself, but kind of feeling like it's the same old thing it always was, with nothing new to reveal (because they were never concealing any hidden depths, it was all right out front with them). my sense now though is that so much of the charm of their first three albums came from how adventitious it all seemed, that they could combine or meld so many things in a purposeful way that was never less than relaxed. that would explain a lot of the criticisms of them, especially re predecessors who did more better, or parallel and uncontestably superior efforts at e.g. post-dub studio-as-instrument music not constrained by their indie ethos. so much of that music would do similar things in an audibly challenging way, so that you could hear the musicians trying to do something that turned out to be unconventional and standard-setting. i'm thinking of, i don't know, 90s brit-style post-rock, or eno-inspired post-punk, or krautrock or such. or in a similar way, you could hear music akin to theirs but in which the musicians really let themselves go, or get lost. ('they don't improvise' is another way of noting that, since you would expect given the way they sound, that there would be loads and loads of live recordings somewhere where they do nothing BUT.)

anyway, that's not how it is with them. i want to say that you could imagine their music to have a zen-like quality that explains a lot of the above characteristics, but even that seems too tryhard and precise for their mode of music-making. more like taoist, with the proviso that it's the compositions - like nabisco said upthred - where they're really doing their work, since you would think that it would be hella easier for a band with a more improvisational practice to be obviously taoist.

― j., Monday, March 12, 2018 Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

The other thing to note, and I might have said this upthread some time back - is that their first three albums also had line-up changes. First Bundy Brown, who was an influential member of the group at the beginning, and then David Pajo, whose guitar sound is a definitive quality of Millions and who participated in at least the beginning of TNT. Jeff Parker came in midway through that album. Standards was their first alum with him from the very start of the process; I don't think it's a coincidence that their sound became a lot more consistent/predictable from that point forward. (Also they stopped with the serious engagement with electronica and remix culture around the time of Standards and I don't know why, or if that's related too. Certainly their more explicit move toward jazz was influenced by Parker.)

I vehemently disagree with the idea that what they need to do is improvise or cut loose...they all have chops, it would be the easiest thing in the world for them to jam or solo, and the last thing I want to hear. The restraint and emphasis on composition is what made them special imo. TNT still has a lot of magic for me.

Also I think music has kind of caught up with them and their sort of omnivorous approach to influences became increasingly common.

This I agree with, their particular influences sort of feel like a limitation these days rather than a source of inspiration. It would be cool if there was a sense of engagement with more recent music while still being Tortoise-y (or maybe it's just that they've written all their best melodies already).

I always felt like their "Steve Reich influence" in particular was kind of half-assed, and maybe if they really studied Steve Reich they could do something more interesting with that.

Strictly in terms of Tortoise (and cannot overstate this qualifier enough): Parker >>> Pajo = Bundy

I once saw Tortoise close out the Bang on a Can marathon, and while I've usually enjoyed them live, seeing them follow all the much more highly trained and polished musicians playing actual Steve Reich compositions and various other "new music" stuff made them look extremely sloppy.

It's all just very ... surface, from the Reich riffs to the Ennio Morricone stuff and so on. The compositions, basically, and the arrangements, which wouldn't be such heavy anchors if they allowed themselves to cut loose a little. Think of the way a group like Can is able to stretch and explore their ideas. I wish Tortoise could do that. Or would do that.

I wish anyone would do would do that, preferably with me!!

Standards is their best album

(Also they stopped with the serious engagement with electronica and remix culture around the time of Standards and I don't know why, or if that's related too

Huh? Always heard it as their most electronic-sounding album

I listened to TNT a lot in '98-'99. thought it was soundtrack Muzak then, and when I listened to it again a few days ago after someone wrote about its 20th anniversary, it still sounds like Muzak to me. Good Muzak. It's like reading some Waxpoetics piece about bland fusoid jazz albums that are now considered "neglected classics" or listening to someone tell me that John Barry and Morricone are "great composers." Morricone did have his moments as did Barry (Barry's Boom ST is pretty good).

I listened to TNT a lot in '98-'99. thought it was soundtrack Muzak then, and when I listened to it again a few days ago after someone wrote about its 20th anniversary, it still sounds like Muzak to me. Good Muzak. It's like reading some Waxpoetics piece about bland fusoid jazz albums that are now considered "neglected classics" or listening to someone tell me that John Barry and Morricone are "great composers." Morricone did have his moments as did Barry (Barry's Boom ST is pretty good).

sorry for the duplicate post, folks, I musta hit the wrong button.

why are you so reluctant to improvise

Morricone bores me tbh. Tortoise's ersatz Morricone > Morricone. And it's still probably my least favorite part of Tortoise.

Morricone bores me tbh. Tortoise's ersatz Morricone > Morricone. And it's still probably my least favorite part of Tortoise.

― Fedora Dostoyevsky (man alive), Monday, March 12, 2018 5:25 PM (twenty-seven minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

my feelings exactly, glad someone had the guts to say this.

I always want Morricone soundtracks to sound more like Paris, Texas and I'm always disappointed

I even bought that Ipecac comp of 'weird' Morricone material curated by Alan Bishop, hoping for a gateway, but the constant annoying sex noises made me want to fling the CD from the moving car

Not sure that took "guts", exactly

Oh come on, Morricone is a sacred cow of sacred cows (even if my suspicion is that more people cite him than listen to him)

the paris texas soundtrack is the fountainhead of shit hokey guitar americana

nah

who else are you going to pin it on

Ry Cooder is a guy I feel similarly meh about.

He's an incredible player who has recorded really no solo material I want to listen to. Morricone, on the other hand ...

xp well, if we're talking the past twenty years or so, John Fahey is probably responsible for a lot more subsequent guitar mediocrity than Cooder.

I guess both of those guys' styles are easy for intermediate guitarists to superficially imitate. You don't hear a lot of young guitar players aspiring to sound like Fripp or Ribot or Michael Hedges

Sorry for the digression here!

Michael Hedges is fucking terrible so there's that

I mean if ppl are gonna shit on Fahey then diss kids for not wanting to be the Jaco version of Fahey

despite his rep v few people have a clue what Fahey was even up to, & the best known slices of what he did have largely been influential on the culture at the "damn fingerpicking in open tunings creates such a sweet vibe!" level and the ensuing mediocrity is really nothing to do with him.

how it functions as a soundtrack is a separate discussion, but paris texas is v much all about summoning up that sweet atmosphere, so however clumsily it's aped, there's less to misunderstand. this reminds me of the deliciously not-wrong-but- review of jack rose's red horse, white mule which compared his cover of dark was the night to the paris texas soundtrack

I even bought that Ipecac comp of 'weird' Morricone material curated by Alan Bishop, hoping for a gateway, but the constant annoying sex noises made me want to fling the CD from the moving car

― Paul Ponzi

i wasn't really nuts about that bishop comp

the hard thing about dismissing morricone is that he's done so much stuff that it's hard to genuinely claim one's heard enough to say he's no good

if he was better wouldn't he have done stuff everyone would know to be good despite the volume

if walt rockman was any good he could psychically project his best songs into everybody's mind instead of having them buried on records nobody heard for decades

I mean if ppl are gonna shit on Fahey then diss kids for not wanting to be the Jaco version of Fahey

― The Desus & Mero Chain (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Tuesday, March 13, 2018 1:04 AM (eleven hours ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

I think you misunderstand me--I'm definitely not shitting on Fahey. I'm suggesting his style is not especially difficult to ape compared to some other guitarists I named at random whose music is singular and instantly recognizable the moment you hear it (whether you like it or not).

and give me the "Jaco version of Fahey" over inept indie rockers mangling ragas and "country blues" any day

I'm listening to michael hedges properly for the first time & I would like to formally curse ilx

Fahey is almost like a theoretical virtuoso. Ry Cooder is a real virtuoso, but not that interesting to me. The Brits like the Pentangle or Fairport folks, there's some virtuoso for you, on point *and* on theme.

But then, I always thought Jim O'Rourke a sham and fraud. So ...

what's a theoretical virtuoso? like... a composer?

Like, Fahey's big thing is often emulating the spirit of all these old blues guys. So it's less that he has to be a flashy player and more that he must capture that sort of primitive vibe. Like playing a character as much as playing the guitar.

ha yeah, he is much more interested in character/poses/drama/performance/irony etc. than his emulators, who are largely aiming at copying the scenery

thinking about it, i think pajo is a better guitarist than all the other guys we've mentioned

based on what? (I like Pajo)

I bit of what I reckonry, but with Cooder/Fahey it's like the difference between the picturesque and the sublime: the former is safe, soothing and maternal, the latter is Other, dangerous, disturbing. Both equally valid, like, but only one is truly imitable.

Fwiw, I think Tortoise are more the former.

And Jim O'Rourke is kind of fraud, I think (and wouldn't mind be called on it), but he's like David Byrne or someone, where they come so close to the line it actually ceases to matter.

Fwiw, I think Tortoise are more the former.

It's not like they named a song on their first album "Ry Cooder" or anything.