Vampire Weekend; Arctic Monkeys of 2008?

there are two americas

Well, yeah, 90% of NYC bands.. and writers... etc.etc... of note are in the Ivy League sphere of things (if you include Ivy League dropouts). A lot of it is really good, but it's definitely interesting. Who knows what it means???????

guys all but 2 of the songs on the album were recorded and circulated before they were signed so is it not possible that the ppl at xl said "hey this would make a really good album, and as luck wuold have it, they've already been written up in the new york times! we might make some money out of this!!"??

and tbh ppl bitching about them never having to slum it are either a. delusional b. jealous c. grasping at straws or d. all of the above, and most of all living in some crazy vacuum where this shit is supposed to matter

Matador would have never signed such a green band 10 years ago, would they

Well, they only distributed them, but the path here is not all that different from Belle & Sebastian's, no? Initial self-made recordings charm people with spare, natural sound, circulate through fans and critics, etc. Only in this case it's like remastering Tigermilk for your first wide release.

The idea that these guys are cleverly manipulating the media seems like an evil-genius fantasy that's probably better phrased as "they have good PR." And sure, money is involved in what was probably their wisest move, which was investing in the recording session this album came out of -- in the short term, at least, I suspect they'd have wound up with a worse record if they'd had to wait it out and record on a label's dime, rather than swinging it themselves and having their keyboard player as the producer. (Which is, ha, TOTALLY indie -- just possibly indie by way of having enough money to put into your project!)

Funny story, PR-wise: the first time I ever heard of these guys was while riding the subway home from work, and their singer was talking with an older woman about how his band was doing, and how they were starting to think about which publicity group they should go with; I couldn't resist asking someone else he was with what band it was. He did not sound like a canny evil genius, for what it's worth. Phrases like "we're exploring our options" may or may not have been involved. I dunno. He had a nice shirt, though.

you might like only musicians who have "paid their dues" because you identify w/ it but it's crazy to say that other people should do the same

the first time i heard of these guys was from j0hn d, i think: http://www.lastplanetojakarta.com/2007/06/great_new_band_alert.html

see guys all you need to do to get a good review on p4k is to befriend their writers in the subway

saw them open for somebody. i remember when my GF was asked who opened she said some boring guys

nabisco, do you think this is as good as tigermilk?

haha them is fighting words: I don't know these people at all, I just live in the neighborhood

her: "they're called vampire weekend, they're playing this weekend"
me: "yeah, i'll have to check that out (yeah right like I'm gonna go check out some random Columbia band)"

Re: Tigermilk -- that's hard; I never heard Tigermilk until after hearing the next two, and after that it didn't seem particularly revelatory, since I'd already soaked in B&S's thing; I'm not particularly into it! I'd usually rather listen to Vampire Weekend than Tigermilk, yeah, but if I were somehow first-exposed to both at the same time, who knows. My main point was just that both blow in in this casual way that kinda reminds you of root song-as-song pleasures and makes other things seem clenched and trying-too-hard

Nabsico, maybe "manipulated" would have been better phrased as "fucking with". I have to believe that's what they were doing in this piece: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/fashion/27nite.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

"Fucking with?" Maybe this makes me an Upper West Side prep, or something, but that sounds like normal four dudes goofing off over a meal.

Haha, they have yet to do any press more than two blocks from my apartment

So yeah, I would totally like to hear who you think provides the same thing better (to which my response will inevitably be "no, you've got it wrong, that's not what people are getting out of this").

How about the Homosexuals?

Cause Co-Motion?

a certain ratio?

but that sounds like normal four dudes goofing off over a meal

Exactly, except there's the NYT writer there who is going to drape their goofing off in all this gushy prose about how great they are. Just thinking of myself, if I leave the interview saying "Oh don't forget boys, we've got that big trip to Lacoste tomorrow," I know that that's getting printed.

Orange Juice ftw

RIYL: Sublime

Homosexuals = nuts

Cause Co-Motion = yes, totally, except so far as I've heard these guys are still releasing 7-inches with rickety trebly early-Television Personalities production, not smooth-sounding LPs with consistently good songs

A Certain Ratio = nuts

Orange Juice = yes, absolutely, though gee, might be a bit hard to pitch the Times with a profile and a story on Rip It Up

I'd be the happiest boy in the world if Cause Co-Motion released a really solid front-to-back LP, for sure

lol debating the origins of the lime rickey is "intellectual showmanship"

It's like the Strokes ... those kids parents were NYC big shots

in case anyone's buying the jealous Nude Spocks here, pls to present the evidence that these kids' parents are NYC big shots.

xp, yeah i'm kinda embarrassed for the author of that article

So yeah, I would totally like to hear who you think provides the same thing better (to which my response will inevitably be "no, you've got it wrong, that's not what people are getting out of this").

the embassy?

if the hype on Vampire Weekend was simply "hey schmindie bought a new hat" I wouldn't feel the need to rip on these guys, cuz yeah, most schmindie bores me. But I rarely see them talked about in the context of say, Hot Hot Heat, but rather their afropop-jacking forebears. which inspires the negative comparisons to the Talking Heads' Naked.

Likewise, when the Strokes were seen as the forefront of a "rock is back" tidal wave rather than a bunch of guys in denim who want to slur over "Love Vigilantes" (which I enjoyed, btw), I could understand if somebody who thought they were more Eeyore-over-Unrest than ROCK would start honking noses.

ooo, Tough Alliance is good too.

Homosexuals = nuts

Oh, I disagree. The Homosexuals were way, way ahead of th curve in terms of fusing a kind of indie pop with world music. And they were much more ambitious and better pop song songwriters than VW. I don't get this idea that VW are good songwriters. Their songs don't seem particularly interesting to me.

But I rarely see them talked about in the context of say, Hot Hot Heat, but rather their afropop-jacking forebears. which inspires the negative comparisons to the Talking Heads' Naked.

I prefer the Afro-pop jacking of early Talking Heads - Naked is actually pretty spotty. There are Vampire Weekend songs I like as well as or better than "Nothing But Flowers" - but so far I haven't heard any as good as "Once in a Lifetime" (though that's hardly a criticism).

It's nice to have something to look forward to - I think I'm going to stop by my local record shop and pick this album up tonight.

(That wasn't quite the question though, QN: the question was more what records would constitute adequate replacement for this one, to people who have a purpose for this one. Maybe we just differ on this one, but I find it really hard to imagine the Homosexuals slotting into someone's life and listening in the way VW does, appealing in the same way. And obviously people don't buy records to serve purposes like "I need to hear a fusion of a kind of indie pop with world music," they buy records for purposes like "me and my boyfriend enjoy singing along with this in the car.")

Tough Alliance threw me for a second, but yeah, there are certain songs I can see having the same effect these guys have, only for a slightly different audience. An overlapping one, but also people coming from a different place.

Haha Anthony your sentence structure up there pretty much says "I am ripping on this band because of people who write about them," which is understandable but, you know. I doubt this was premeditated by VW, but the obvious lesson = if you throw in one tiny marginal influence from elsewhere, people will spend enough of their word count talking about it that they won't just be pointing out the obvious peers you sound like. (Except there's another way VW score, with a sound and production aesthetic that doesn't sound quite enough like most peers to actually point it out.)

Why is it wrong for people to dislike something? I think there's this weird obsessive "positive bias" in the Anglosphere that it's worse to dislike something than it is to like it.

You are doing your best to erode that, for sure

the Anglosphere?

Ludus.

a reason why people might dislike this band is a perceived lack of emotional depth...i.e. the entire album has no sense of pain or struggle, lust or intrigue. who ever thought that being inoffensive and well-to-do was ever worth a ticket to stardom?

jesus and mary chain.

And obviously people don't buy records to serve purposes like "I need to hear a fusion of a kind of indie pop with world music,"...

But I definitely know people who buy records based on just this sort of thing. And the way that VW was initially brought to my attention by others was largely by way of them mentioning, "oh, there's this band called Vampire Weekend; they kind have this indie with Afro-pop thing going on." i.e., their influences as the selling point

That's a description, not a selling point! The selling point is the next couple sentences that go "I really like their songs, they're very catchy etc."

this is some of the worst music ive ever heard.

I don't think that's true.

xpost

I mean none of their upcoming fans is watching MTV2 and going "if only a band would come on next that brought world influences to an indie templ-- hey, eureka!" I'd anticipate a lot of them who hear "A-Punk" and never think of Africa at all, but feel like it was peppy / sunny / low-key / etc

they kind have this indie with Afro-pop thing going on

See, if all I had to go by was that description, I would have run screaming from Vampire Weekend. To me, the combination of Afro-pop with indie in theory sounds about as appetizing as dill pickles with peanut butter - which makes it all the more amusing when you hear the music and it actually sounds pretty good.

i just watched "mansard roof" on youtube.

it reminds me of like if the decemberists jammed with one of those italian organ grinder dudes with a monkey, they should wear boater hats that would be pretty sweet.

it's not terrible but damn u all really like this more than "you can call me al"????

the song "a-punk" is a lot better

the main riff reminds me of "time bomb" by rancid

does anyone remember Macha? -- their indie/world music thing seemed a little more interesting to me

And obviously people don't buy records to serve purposes like "I need to hear a fusion of a kind of indie pop with world music," they buy records for purposes like "me and my boyfriend enjoy singing along with this in the car.")

That's why I mentioned the songwriting issue. The Homosexuals make me want to sing out loud, clap along, take their music everywhere I go. It's wonderfully catchy pop. I can't speak for others, but VW's music doesn't inspire me that way. It don't think it's exuberant or catchy or full of life.

Someone mentioned Dave Matthews earlier; I actually think VW doesn't sound that diff from the Samples. In the early to mid 90s, when I was in college, just about every college/hippie mountain town had a quirky pop band that was a mix of They Might Be Giants, a little Phish, and a little world music/reggae. That, to me, is basically what this band does. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it comes off kind of soft.

Seems to me VW use afropop like Kid Creole used funk -- as a frame to contain and propel their singer/songwriterly impulses. Which are mighty formidable for a bunch of 22 year olds. I saw last night's show too. I also saw Talking Heads in '77 and for that matter Paul Simon's Graceland show. And while last night was neither of those, it was an excellent showcase and fwiw the audience seemed to be having a better time than those at either of the more historic events. I stood upstairs where I could pretend to be someone's parent.

It's a longstanding tradition for ny art bands to set musical and stylistic parameters within which they can excel, and then have people wonder how much of their act is real and how much a put-on. Ramones being the obv example. The Ramones were street kids from the outer boroughs, so they made themselves the platonic ideal of that. It's an extension of the idea "write what you know."

I mean, if you don't channel your creativity into some kind of framework, you wind up with the horrible let-it-all-hang-outness of that opening act with the harmonium. Devil something. Speak Of the Devil? Devil In the Details? Devil May Care? I sure didn't.