im OK, you're OK
― jammed hymen (k3vin k.), Friday, 6 February 2009 15:44 (fifteen years ago) link
it's OK to not listen to bands
― call all destroyer, Friday, 6 February 2009 15:44 (fifteen years ago) link
No, it's totally inappropriate.
― Bernard Braden Misreads Stephen Leacock (Marcello Carlin), Friday, 6 February 2009 15:44 (fifteen years ago) link
At risk of turning this thread into this thread, any other indiepop recommendations 2009? The Besties? Sexy Kids? Swedish stuff?
― the who cares (okamax), Friday, 6 February 2009 15:45 (fifteen years ago) link
electricsound, I'm just curious what some of the records you liked from last year got totally ignored? I'm not trolling, I promise! I don't post that much, but from what I read we have kind of similar tastes in terms of indie pop.
― jonathan - stl, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:08 (fifteen years ago) link
Didn't make it more than a few sentences into the Pfork review, just clicked over to Myspace and the songs are fun, a bit catchy, a bit noisy, very reminiscent of pre-Isn't Anything MBV, Pale Saints, Ride, a bit of Mary Chain and all their collective influences as well. Not original, not bad either!
― ilxor, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:08 (fifteen years ago) link
Nothing wrong with this band, at all. But from one perspective, they are the infamous She Wants Revenge with a different record collection.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:24 (fifteen years ago) link
Also, read the Psychic Ills album review. Not that that album is great or anything, but the review is basically "WTF YOU MEAN THERE ISN'T A MELODY?!" over and over again.
― jonathan - stl, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:31 (fifteen years ago) link
in before lock
― jammed hymen (k3vin k.), Friday, 6 February 2009 16:34 (fifteen years ago) link
whocares: Je Suis Animal !
― the pinefox, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:36 (fifteen years ago) link
The Tartans seem OK
The Ballet, maybe
Why would this thread need to be locked.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:40 (fifteen years ago) link
rock critic in being less than serious journalism is serious shocker lols
for indie-poppers, i kinda like these guys
― double bird strike (gabbneb), Friday, 6 February 2009 16:40 (fifteen years ago) link
I suppose it is serious shocker lols in that one extremely unrelated way.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:42 (fifteen years ago) link
learn more ilx memes
― double bird strike (gabbneb), Friday, 6 February 2009 16:44 (fifteen years ago) link
Thanks, I prefer the thin thread of coherence that runs through them.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 16:47 (fifteen years ago) link
yeah, it's a horrible review. inclines me to hate the band, though ian cohen is by no means their fault. "That these second-wavers are getting first-rate attention shouldn't be a worry unless you're into dick-measuring contests about the late-1980s (but I was there) or still holding a grudge against Vivian Girls and Crystal Stilts." no, fuck you.
pitchfork is good for fridays, i guess.
― Calling All Creeps! (contenderizer), Friday, 6 February 2009 16:59 (fifteen years ago) link
It seems this is a two-dick review.
― Ricky Apples (Pillbox), Friday, 6 February 2009 17:15 (fifteen years ago) link
I would expect nothing less from Ian 'Throb' Cohen.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 17:20 (fifteen years ago) link
remind me again why you started this thread?
― call all destroyer, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:10 (fifteen years ago) link
Thread was started in part because someone likes to pretend to not know how to read:
you're just being a dick if you think the past has some kind of patent on that
is not very well paraphrased as
You're a dick if you discount this
― nabisco, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:14 (fifteen years ago) link
(Although to be fair, this is not a band I would risk taking even a mildly defensive reviewing tone about, or really using the word "dick" -- they're just not that kind of band.)
― nabisco, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:15 (fifteen years ago) link
yeah to be fair it does seem like half of the review is spent preemptively defending the best new music tag. on the other hand it is a review that basically describes the record and what it sounds like, which is something i can get behind.
― call all destroyer, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:17 (fifteen years ago) link
By the way, I like this band pretty well! What took me a while to wrap my head around -- and what might take the band themselves some adjusting to -- is the idea that music like this would get attention from and seem significant to people outside the indiepop scene. (Which seems to say something, but I'm not sure exactly what yet.)
― nabisco, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:19 (fifteen years ago) link
i think i just have defensive grapes because i super AM into dick-meauring contests about the late 80s
― Calling All Creeps! (contenderizer), Friday, 6 February 2009 18:31 (fifteen years ago) link
Right...if you say so Nibs.
― cee-oh-tee-tee, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:49 (fifteen years ago) link
Hmm.
― Alfred, Lord Sotosyn, Friday, 6 February 2009 18:51 (fifteen years ago) link
hmm is the new ...
― Calling All Creeps! (contenderizer), Friday, 6 February 2009 18:54 (fifteen years ago) link
on first listen this reminded me of ecstasy and wine-era MBV (not a diss in the least)
― charles bronson reilly (donna rouge), Friday, 6 February 2009 21:17 (fifteen years ago) link
actually i don't know why i felt the need to qualify that as not-a-diss. this is very good tho
― charles bronson reilly (donna rouge), Friday, 6 February 2009 21:18 (fifteen years ago) link
― jonathan - stl, Saturday, February 7, 2009 3:08 AM (8 hours ago)
well, #1 would be the for against album. and though i came to it late, the charmparticles album also seemed to get quite a bit less interest than a record so completely wonderful should deserve
― carbonara not glue (electricsound), Saturday, 7 February 2009 00:19 (fifteen years ago) link
I can't believe these guys are worth all the gnashing of teeth. They're pleasant enough and kind of boring; Pitchfork is Pitchfork. News at 11?
― Millsner, Saturday, 7 February 2009 05:24 (fifteen years ago) link
I could dance to this.
― the who cares (okamax), Saturday, 7 February 2009 16:34 (fifteen years ago) link
I like it, but I'd be more excited by it if half of my record collection didn't consist of bands that pretty much sound exactly like this.
― Ricky Apples (Pillbox), Saturday, 7 February 2009 16:42 (fifteen years ago) link
so wait this band is not from the UK?
― call all destroyer, Saturday, 7 February 2009 19:34 (fifteen years ago) link
this is a very boring clusterfuck thread, try harder
― LOOK WHAT I BRING TO THE TABLA (deej), Saturday, 7 February 2009 19:43 (fifteen years ago) link
Oh my god you could not be more OTM.
― ilxor, Saturday, 7 February 2009 22:27 (fifteen years ago) link
Playing the tiny Black Cat Backstage room in DC Monday night. Can't decide whether they're worth a late worknight. Maybe the old DC Slumberland scene will be out in force.
― curmudgeon, Saturday, 7 February 2009 23:24 (fifteen years ago) link
I skipped the show. A late start and I saw many of their influences years ago.
Check out the last question to them in this interview
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/blackplasticbag/2009/02/09/qa-the-pains-of-being-pure-at-heart/
WCP: Do you ever feel like you’re maybe a little too much like older Slumberland bands? Do you feel like your bring your own voice to that music?
Berman: I do, because it’s my voice on the record. It’s us playing it in 2009. We’re not too hero worshipful. We’re respectful of all the tradition, but the lyrics are really personal and really distinct and about our lives and our experiences in our world right now. We’re never in danger of slipping into time capsule mode. We feel very alive at the moment, we don’t necessarily want to live in a different time or place at all.
― curmudgeon, Tuesday, 10 February 2009 17:27 (fifteen years ago) link
hey guys if it's OK with you I'm going to totally hate this band sight unseen for their name having the phrase "pure AT heart" in it instead of "pure OF heart." even if they did it on purpose to be 'funny' or something.
― some dude, Tuesday, 10 February 2009 17:45 (fifteen years ago) link
hey guys if it's OK with you I'm going to totally hate this band sight unseen for their name having the phrase "pure AT heart" in it instead of "pure OF heart." even if they did it on purpose to be 'funny' or something.― some dude, Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:45 AM (3 days ago) Bookmark
― some dude, Tuesday, February 10, 2009 11:45 AM (3 days ago) Bookmark
Then you'd be missing out on a fucking awesome band for a stupid reason.
― Mahatma Blagojevich (redmond), Saturday, 14 February 2009 02:39 (fifteen years ago) link
now that i'm not drunk and in a good mood i can concede that i do like quite a few of this band's tracks, particularly 'come saturday', but
maybe a little too much like older Slumberland bands
i WISH. if they can come up with a track that touches the likes of 'february fourteenth', even if it is utterly derivative, then i will love them unreservedly
and
fucking awesome band
possibly a bit of a stretch
― electrodribble sound of jim (electricsound), Saturday, 14 February 2009 02:46 (fifteen years ago) link
i havent read this whole thing so idk if it's a joeky thread or not but 'the tenure itch' is a really nice song and reminds me of the stone roses. the rest isnt bad, a little samey but it's just their first album
― Jewish Lager (k3vin k.), Saturday, 14 February 2009 02:49 (fifteen years ago) link
speaking of the stone roses and derivative bands that aren't a slouch in the songs department, have a listen to The Ruling Class (particularly 'umbrella folds')
― electrodribble sound of jim (electricsound), Saturday, 14 February 2009 02:51 (fifteen years ago) link
fucking awesome bandpossibly a bit of a stretch― electrodribble sound of jim (electricsound), Friday, February 13, 2009 8:46 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark
― electrodribble sound of jim (electricsound), Friday, February 13, 2009 8:46 PM (36 minutes ago) Bookmark
Says who? I count half the album as potential singles.
― Mahatma Blagojevich (redmond), Saturday, 14 February 2009 03:24 (fifteen years ago) link
― Mahatma Blagojevich (redmond), Friday, February 13, 2009 9:39 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
it's not like i was going to listen to them even if they didn't have an annoying name.
― some dude, Saturday, 14 February 2009 05:22 (fifteen years ago) link
lol @ calling this band "fucking awesome"
― devin harris with an appletini (call all destroyer), Saturday, 14 February 2009 06:40 (fifteen years ago) link
these guys remind of the primitives -- not that they sound like them, but it's this sense of lots of elements of past things i like or love taken in a very deliberate prefab way and welded together so the seams barely show. i can't not like it, it's genetically engineered to please me. but i'm conscious of the engineering, and listening to it makes me feel a little indulgent.
― paper plans (tipsy mothra), Saturday, 14 February 2009 06:59 (fifteen years ago) link
They did a 30 minute gig the other night-Malitz from the Washington Post loved it-
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postrock/2009/02/the_pains_of_being_pure_at_hea.html
― curmudgeon, Saturday, 14 February 2009 14:23 (fifteen years ago) link
i pretty much prefer everything they've done that wasn't on the album to anything on the album
― mayor failure (electricsound), Sunday, 17 October 2010 22:16 (thirteen years ago) link
i wonder if they will show any development on future releases, they do tend to write the same song over and over. it's a catchy song mind.
― keythhtyek, Monday, 18 October 2010 03:04 (thirteen years ago) link
I'd take an album and a couple more EPs of that same song over and over.
― skip, Monday, 18 October 2010 03:59 (thirteen years ago) link
tweeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
thoughts?
― ∞, Friday, 16 May 2014 21:07 (nine years ago) link
new album is just kinda whatever but man the first one is totally a classic
― ginuwine's cousin (monotony), Sunday, 18 May 2014 02:35 (nine years ago) link
I think my favorite is the stuff from the interim between the 1st and 2nd albums. This one's okay, though I believe everyone in the band except the singer is a new hire.
― Johnny Fever, Sunday, 18 May 2014 03:14 (nine years ago) link
New one is rather good, much better than the last. Probably relative to how much like the field mice they sound, closer to wratten the better.
― keythhtyek, Sunday, 18 May 2014 04:20 (nine years ago) link
Been surprised at how well the new record's stood up. I've listened to it a number of times and think it's probably as good as the s/t; but any band that's made the same album 3 times is going to fly under the radar. Love "Simple to Sure" > "Kelly" and "Eurydice" > "Masokissed".
I guess if you're going to ape your entire sound, do it as well as these guys do (see also: Yuck's debut).
― Indexed, Thursday, 13 November 2014 17:29 (nine years ago) link
Probably reductionist to post this in here, but Peggy Wang from TPOBPAH has a new band called Store Front. They put out their debut EP today and frontwoman Amy Rose Spiegel has a nice voice. Will appeal to fans of Pains and shimmery indie rock songs between 2:30 - 3:00.
https://storefrontnyc.bandcamp.com/
Task EP: https://open.spotify.com/album/5rcF3nAW28mDCcSJGBaOfX
Press: https://www.stereogum.com/2072593/store-front-rip-the-price-off/music/
― Indexed, Friday, 14 February 2020 16:19 (four years ago) link
repost it over here so we can build up some indie pop discussion momentum:
Not Pop Not Indie Shambhala 2020 Thread
― the girl from spirea x (f. hazel), Friday, 14 February 2020 16:44 (four years ago) link
wait wrong thread, here:
Rolling Indiepop/Twee/Jangle 2020
― the girl from spirea x (f. hazel), Friday, 14 February 2020 16:46 (four years ago) link