I've hit on one theme a few times throughout the writing of this blog, but I'm beginning to come to a little bit of a conclusion about this record. Instead of being a record that pushes boundaries in the pursuit of presenting an altogether different theme, PLT is a record that pushes some boundaries, but largely in an effort to find out what boundaries are, why we have them, and to figure out how far we should push them. This pursuit is occurring not just at a lyrical level or musical level, but all over and in different ways.
On a vocal level, Cam tends to exaggerate his already idiosyncratic voice and pushes it into gravelly territory. It's a test of the limits of what we consider singing. Even more than that, the album is peppered with tribal chants - ay ay ay woot woots and boom dadadadas. What are the boundaries of melody in Western culture? They serve as a nice counterpoint to Cam's singing as I think that people largely consider his vocals on this album to be irritating and not very musical, whereas the chants are catchy and welcome on most songs despite the fact that they are less rooted in our notions of song than the foundation of Cam's work. As a result, we start to see a firmer delineation of what makes sound equal to song in our culture.
Musically, AiH push this album past different boundaries, too. They rely much more heavily on synthesizers, drum machines, and electronics in general on PLT and I think that serves as a test. AiH sounded much more organic on their last album. I'm not trying to imply that there were no keyboards, synths, drum machines, etc. on the last album, but they were used less severely and openly. "Red Turned White" is an extension of the thought behind "Frenchy I'm Faking" from the last album. It pushes the synths to the forefront and harshens the rhythms and sharpens everything. Is it still enjoyable? Is it still a likeable song? I think so, but that's the test. Is there a boundary that we have crossed? Moreover, the electronics aren't just present to a higher degree in rhythmic structures and melodies, but in creating new sounds that test the same border between sound and music. "Red Turned White" features bottle rocket sound effects, lazers and other foley effects folded into the mix that is the driving backbone of the song. "Hold Music" has a similar breakdown just after the two minute mark. Are these sound effects music just because they exist in the song and make up part of its form?
AiH even look at the question from a lyrical perspective. I already talked about "Heart it Races" in depth, but there are similar moments throughout the album. One of the most poignant comes at the end of "Red Turned White" when the statement is made that "you've got the wrong idea if you're leaping off the edge of the world". They are figuring life out and wisely state that the best way to find your limitations and boundaries is not to greatly overreach them, but to push up to their edges and see if you can expand them. As much as we would like to be able to take great steps the world doesn't work in that way. We build on old work and move forward incrementally. Boundaries can't be removed, but they can be moved.
In a sense, AiH prove their thesis by trying to take an enormous step. The album isn't a failure, but it certainly isn't an unqualified success.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Friday, September 14, 2007
Fuck it. I gotta dance.
I don't know when the switch flipped, but I remember a time when I specifically did not want to dance. It was embarassing to be in middle school. Not only was I white and uncoordinated, I didn't like any "dance" music. "Dance" music in my middle school was pretty much confined to the most popular rap and r & b at the moment, ie. a lot of TLC and Tupac. I would probably be much more popular at my middle school dances now. I like Tupac. I like TLC. And I definitely like making fun of Left Eye's tragic death because my heart is cold and dark.
I could point to the night I saw Daft Punk live at Coachella as a turning point. Certainly that opened up a new world to me. I had pretty much dismissed any music made with a synth up until that point. I know I threw it down on the dance floor that night, too. However, I liked dancing before that night. Matty and I had even tried to throw an indie dance party at the end of our college careers.
Maybe the turn comes at a certain age. Maybe we finally find a place where we are comfortable enough to remove our inhibitions and give in to rhythm (or arhythm as the case may be) and sound. At any rate, "Debbie" from the AiH album is an absolute banger. When that song comes on, it is ON. In fact, I find that song so compelling on a purely I-Want-To-Dance-To-This level that I can't even judge it objectively. I mean, come on. That horn line is the jazz. The way the drums anticipate the thunder they are about rain with a few teasing, anticipatory kick snares. The fatness of that bassline. That bassline is bigger than Al Roker pre-surgery and way hotter than Al Roker post-surgery.
Moral of the story: shut off your brain and bust out your worst dance moves for "Debbie".
I could point to the night I saw Daft Punk live at Coachella as a turning point. Certainly that opened up a new world to me. I had pretty much dismissed any music made with a synth up until that point. I know I threw it down on the dance floor that night, too. However, I liked dancing before that night. Matty and I had even tried to throw an indie dance party at the end of our college careers.
Maybe the turn comes at a certain age. Maybe we finally find a place where we are comfortable enough to remove our inhibitions and give in to rhythm (or arhythm as the case may be) and sound. At any rate, "Debbie" from the AiH album is an absolute banger. When that song comes on, it is ON. In fact, I find that song so compelling on a purely I-Want-To-Dance-To-This level that I can't even judge it objectively. I mean, come on. That horn line is the jazz. The way the drums anticipate the thunder they are about rain with a few teasing, anticipatory kick snares. The fatness of that bassline. That bassline is bigger than Al Roker pre-surgery and way hotter than Al Roker post-surgery.
Moral of the story: shut off your brain and bust out your worst dance moves for "Debbie".
Thursday, September 13, 2007
What does it mean to be an original artist?
What kind of a lame question is this to ask? The lamest. It's possible that this is the least interesting question to ask anyone who is interested in music. Nonetheless, I listen to AiH and it is very obvious they are originals. PLT is an album in which the sources and influences are readily apparent. Yeah, I can hear the Talking Heads and B-52s loudly. AiH walk into this album flecked with bits of paint - golds, dark greens, luminescent oranges, glittering purples - and they have masks on and they've sewn tails to their trousers. By all accounts we shouldn't recognize them at all. It's not the same band that walked out of In Case We Die, at least not the way we remember them. Yet, from the first note of PLT I know that it's AiH. I can see past the paint. It flakes off anyway. So why are the influences so recognizable when the artist is still so present and dominating?
I think being an original artist is not so much a product of having a unique voice (because who doesn't have a unique voice really?), it is being able to express yourself clearly. Every voice is unique to a certain extent, but we all have similar fears, interests, passions, and lives when it comes right down to it. How unrelatable is even the most unrelatable human life that you can imagine? If you are picturing an Amazonian tribe obscured from the rest of the world and then forced to terraform Mars alone, plus they have a third arm coming out of their bellybutton and a double serving of genitals, they are still not that different from you (specifically you, Bono. Secret's out, bitch.). They still know fear and tribulation and still have the vague sense of life that you possess. They probably think about consciousness and wonder if other consciousnesses are out there. Being an original is about expressing yourself clearly, and I do mean "yourself," the sentient collection of tics and mannerisms. You are speaking without any condensation on your vocal cords. The words are clear and the meanings are appropriate to your vision. We're talking about a pure expression of form and in that respect, it's neither susceptible to judgments of quality nor affected by its relation to another expresser.
If you are a little lost, that's okay. I am, too. Probably because I'm not that great an expresser and am susceptible to quality judgments like bad. The bedrock of this argument is just that an original artisit is always recognizable because of his or her ability to express identity despite numerous confounding elements. If that doesn't strike you as powerful, you were not meant to appreciate art.
I think being an original artist is not so much a product of having a unique voice (because who doesn't have a unique voice really?), it is being able to express yourself clearly. Every voice is unique to a certain extent, but we all have similar fears, interests, passions, and lives when it comes right down to it. How unrelatable is even the most unrelatable human life that you can imagine? If you are picturing an Amazonian tribe obscured from the rest of the world and then forced to terraform Mars alone, plus they have a third arm coming out of their bellybutton and a double serving of genitals, they are still not that different from you (specifically you, Bono. Secret's out, bitch.). They still know fear and tribulation and still have the vague sense of life that you possess. They probably think about consciousness and wonder if other consciousnesses are out there. Being an original is about expressing yourself clearly, and I do mean "yourself," the sentient collection of tics and mannerisms. You are speaking without any condensation on your vocal cords. The words are clear and the meanings are appropriate to your vision. We're talking about a pure expression of form and in that respect, it's neither susceptible to judgments of quality nor affected by its relation to another expresser.
If you are a little lost, that's okay. I am, too. Probably because I'm not that great an expresser and am susceptible to quality judgments like bad. The bedrock of this argument is just that an original artisit is always recognizable because of his or her ability to express identity despite numerous confounding elements. If that doesn't strike you as powerful, you were not meant to appreciate art.
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Dr. Dog and Heart it Races
I recently came across a cover of "Heart it Races" (HIR) that Dr. Dog released. Juxtaposing the AiH version and the Dr. Dog version reveals some interesting things about this song. I think that HIR is darker in nature than AiH would lead us to believe. Sure, they're playing congas and chanting nonsense, but the lyrics tell a different story. This is a noir take on life-affirming activities.
"And we're slow to acknowledge the knots in our laces/Heart it races." If I've learned anything from people on television or in movies who have had near death experiences, it's that they immediately heap attention on the little things in life. Aren't laces amazing? Do we take any time to appreciate the complicated history of laces in our everyday lives? Who invented them? Why were they invented? How long did it take? Who was the first person to put them in shoes? These are all really stupid questions that aren't worth thinking about unless you are in a mood to contemplate what your place in history is and what contributions you have made to the world. However, it certainly is interesting to look at this lyric in the context of AiH's reputation for childlike abandon and wide-eyed twee sensibilities. Children are often the people (besides those near-deathers) who get lost in dreamy reflections about things like shoelaces. Yet, AiH chooses to highlight the fact that we are "slow to acknowledge" these miniscule pieces of our lives even though they can lead to moments of excitement ("heart it races"). Even these children-at-heart find it difficult to live in the moment all the time. Certainly a surprising turn on an album that seems to glorify living in the moment at every other turn.
Maybe the reality of the situation is that this song serves as more of a mission statement than anything else for the rest of the album. "And we go back to where we moved out to the places". Revisiting our past, that's a tearjerker. You can wander around in that stuff for days. Or you can use it as a stepping stone to more visceral pleasures as AiH. "I bought it in a can and stirred it with my finger singing/boom dah dah dah dah/boom dah dah dah/threw it out the window." Hey, why not? You get the tactile pleasure of stirring up a can of something with your digits and then you get to throw it out the window? I'll sign up for that. It sounds fun. How far can we take it? "I sold it to a man and threw him out the window/made his wife a widow." What the fuck?! You did what?!
AiH started small with the contemplation of some shoelaces, a mild reminder that we should take a little time to appreciate the little things, but they let things get out of hand in their lawless environment. We thought they just wanted to indulge in some harmless shouts every once in a while, but pretty soon they were shouting over everything, grinding their voices, participating in shameless instrumental breakdowns and now this guy is dead?! It's a chaotic album. Sometimes AiH lose their grip on reality and push someone out a window. Is it worth it though? Should this man die so that we can free ourselves from rules if only for a little while, so that we can truly appreciate life for a few fleeting seconds?
"And we're slow to acknowledge the knots in our laces/Heart it races." If I've learned anything from people on television or in movies who have had near death experiences, it's that they immediately heap attention on the little things in life. Aren't laces amazing? Do we take any time to appreciate the complicated history of laces in our everyday lives? Who invented them? Why were they invented? How long did it take? Who was the first person to put them in shoes? These are all really stupid questions that aren't worth thinking about unless you are in a mood to contemplate what your place in history is and what contributions you have made to the world. However, it certainly is interesting to look at this lyric in the context of AiH's reputation for childlike abandon and wide-eyed twee sensibilities. Children are often the people (besides those near-deathers) who get lost in dreamy reflections about things like shoelaces. Yet, AiH chooses to highlight the fact that we are "slow to acknowledge" these miniscule pieces of our lives even though they can lead to moments of excitement ("heart it races"). Even these children-at-heart find it difficult to live in the moment all the time. Certainly a surprising turn on an album that seems to glorify living in the moment at every other turn.
Maybe the reality of the situation is that this song serves as more of a mission statement than anything else for the rest of the album. "And we go back to where we moved out to the places". Revisiting our past, that's a tearjerker. You can wander around in that stuff for days. Or you can use it as a stepping stone to more visceral pleasures as AiH. "I bought it in a can and stirred it with my finger singing/boom dah dah dah dah/boom dah dah dah/threw it out the window." Hey, why not? You get the tactile pleasure of stirring up a can of something with your digits and then you get to throw it out the window? I'll sign up for that. It sounds fun. How far can we take it? "I sold it to a man and threw him out the window/made his wife a widow." What the fuck?! You did what?!
AiH started small with the contemplation of some shoelaces, a mild reminder that we should take a little time to appreciate the little things, but they let things get out of hand in their lawless environment. We thought they just wanted to indulge in some harmless shouts every once in a while, but pretty soon they were shouting over everything, grinding their voices, participating in shameless instrumental breakdowns and now this guy is dead?! It's a chaotic album. Sometimes AiH lose their grip on reality and push someone out a window. Is it worth it though? Should this man die so that we can free ourselves from rules if only for a little while, so that we can truly appreciate life for a few fleeting seconds?
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Pushing to the margins
Normally one would expect a band to head in one direction from a previous album. They get interested in a certain aspect of their sound and want to expand upon it. It takes a while to realize that PLT pushes towards two very distinct sound explorations of sound. Readily apparent is the fact that AiH has gotten very interested in electronic sounds. They push electronic drums to the forefront and expand their use of synths and keyboards on this album. What is not immediately obvious is that the band has also elevated the use of another part of their arsenal.
PLT features a lot more acoustic guitar and hand percussion than AiH's prior releases. Songs like "Heart it Races," "Like it or Not," "Lazy," and "Nothing's Wrong" all feature these two elements and these are some of the strongest tracks on the album. Now, AiH could have a couple of reasons for expanding this part of their sound. In some ways, it could be viewed as a method of grounding forward-thinking compositions in a folk tradition. They are already taking a lot of chances with their instrumentation (the aforementioned synths, keys and drum pads), but giving the songs an acoustic guitar base lends them authenticity and familiarity. However, I think another (possibly more interesting) interpretation is that they make these choices as a nod to the already primal sounding record. What sound is more animalistic than beating on a drum with one's hand? They are literally beating sound into existence. If this is an album about noise, then they are adding basic textures on the bottom. It's a coat of primer, but sloppily applied.
PLT features a lot more acoustic guitar and hand percussion than AiH's prior releases. Songs like "Heart it Races," "Like it or Not," "Lazy," and "Nothing's Wrong" all feature these two elements and these are some of the strongest tracks on the album. Now, AiH could have a couple of reasons for expanding this part of their sound. In some ways, it could be viewed as a method of grounding forward-thinking compositions in a folk tradition. They are already taking a lot of chances with their instrumentation (the aforementioned synths, keys and drum pads), but giving the songs an acoustic guitar base lends them authenticity and familiarity. However, I think another (possibly more interesting) interpretation is that they make these choices as a nod to the already primal sounding record. What sound is more animalistic than beating on a drum with one's hand? They are literally beating sound into existence. If this is an album about noise, then they are adding basic textures on the bottom. It's a coat of primer, but sloppily applied.
Saturday, September 8, 2007
Bust it open like a pinata.
"Feather in a Baseball Cap" was pretty high up on my list of worst songs on the album for quite some time. That's really saying something because there are only two songs on the album that I don't like - "Feather" and "Underwater". However, I'm starting to come around to "Feather".
The thing about this song is that it is really not about the majority of itself. I know that was a really great sentence filled with meaning and lexicographical prowess, but what I'm trying to get across is that this song exists only for the breakdown about three quarters of the way through. The song focuses on a repeated rhythmic figure with occasional ambient interludes. It is boring. Seriously. But! The song is building tension. You get angry that it is so simplistic and slightly dissonant. When they crack in at 1:25, there is a sense of instant gratification. It's their most controlled freak out on the whole album. There is reason to it and even a little structure. If anything, "Feather" is the AiH version of a minimalist composition. They retain their innate sense of self, but they tackle a new idea.
Honestly, it's still not a very interesting song, but I can at least respect it as a failed experiment.
PS. For anyone reading this blog that has no idea what this music sounds like, I want to just point you to an incredible website: The Hype Machine (www.hypem.com). It is an mp3 blog aggregator. Just search for Architecture in Helsinki and it will pull up an songs that have been posted on mp3 blogs. You should still support the band by buying the album, but if you want a taste of their stuff you can start there.
The thing about this song is that it is really not about the majority of itself. I know that was a really great sentence filled with meaning and lexicographical prowess, but what I'm trying to get across is that this song exists only for the breakdown about three quarters of the way through. The song focuses on a repeated rhythmic figure with occasional ambient interludes. It is boring. Seriously. But! The song is building tension. You get angry that it is so simplistic and slightly dissonant. When they crack in at 1:25, there is a sense of instant gratification. It's their most controlled freak out on the whole album. There is reason to it and even a little structure. If anything, "Feather" is the AiH version of a minimalist composition. They retain their innate sense of self, but they tackle a new idea.
Honestly, it's still not a very interesting song, but I can at least respect it as a failed experiment.
PS. For anyone reading this blog that has no idea what this music sounds like, I want to just point you to an incredible website: The Hype Machine (www.hypem.com). It is an mp3 blog aggregator. Just search for Architecture in Helsinki and it will pull up an songs that have been posted on mp3 blogs. You should still support the band by buying the album, but if you want a taste of their stuff you can start there.
Friday, September 7, 2007
Ska
I spotted something interesting in PLT today. The horn lines in both "Hold Music" and "Debbie" owe an awful lot to third wave ska horn work. Maybe that doesn't mean much to you guys, but it means a lot to me.
I know that ska music is kind of like Dr. Who in that it can die and then regenerate into something that looks a little different, but is actually the same. I know that the last time ska came back, it had been sired by alternative rock/punk to a certain extent. I know that people always seem to hate ska for some reason that I can't understand because I think it's the fucking bee's knees in all its incarnations. Maybe it's because ska is seen by many as a limited art form. I'm consistently surprised to hear that argument, but it occurs with some frequency. I actually think that ska is extremely varied and interesting. People bring different things to it and each musician has their own flavor.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I feel like ska is a microcosmic representation of music in general. When we are unfamiliar with a type of music it tends to all sound the same, right? A few years ago, if you had played me two techno artists at opposite ends of the spectrum I probably would have thought that they sounded the same. But that's exactly the beauty of music!! There is so much to music. There are so many facets to a song and so many things that are common to a genre and a subgenre and a sub-subgenre. We learn the major features and then we can put those things on auto-pilot while we concentrate on minutiae. We categorize things to make them easier to learn about. You have to start at the broadest level and work your way in.
Follow me down this trail for a moment. I'll leave you breadcrumbs in case you get hungry, fatty. I was taking a course that my boss was teaching last spring in which we read current scientific literature in the field of neurobiology. We read some articles about how they are actually starting to make prosthetic arms that they can attach to your brain. After extensive training, you can begin to control the prosthetic arm using only your brain. Besides the fact that this is incredibly cool, it has some applicability to our current discussion. The arm requires extensive training to acquire even minimal functionality. Despite the fact that this is a complicated system, it gives some possible insight into the way the brain works. Slowly over time it can adjust itself, set up new pathways. Learning isn't an instantaneous process. It's about training your brain and reinforcing and reevaluating concepts continuously. You can't learn everything about music in a single moment, a single listen, a single album and on and on. You can only glean small bits all the time and build a knowledge base from all those little bits. Eventually you can make subtle distinctions and meaningful judgements. In this way, music is like every other fucking thing in the whole world. We spend our lives following paths and building areas of comfort, areas filled with the intricacies and ornamentation of years of construction. There are other areas that we are unschooled in and we have to start at pretty basic levels to make any progress at all.
Nonetheless, music continues to refresh itself and make itself more difficult by endlessly recombining in unexpected ways. Even though "Hold Music" uses ska as a reference point, it isn't a ska song. I can't really describe what type of song it is, but it fuses elements of synthpop, tribal rhythms, and funk into something different. Songs like "Hold Music" help to push the field of music in new directions the same way that everything in the world gets pushed: incrementally. Songs don't shift paradigms (even the songs that we really, really, really think do), years do.
I know that ska music is kind of like Dr. Who in that it can die and then regenerate into something that looks a little different, but is actually the same. I know that the last time ska came back, it had been sired by alternative rock/punk to a certain extent. I know that people always seem to hate ska for some reason that I can't understand because I think it's the fucking bee's knees in all its incarnations. Maybe it's because ska is seen by many as a limited art form. I'm consistently surprised to hear that argument, but it occurs with some frequency. I actually think that ska is extremely varied and interesting. People bring different things to it and each musician has their own flavor.
Actually, the more I think about it, the more I feel like ska is a microcosmic representation of music in general. When we are unfamiliar with a type of music it tends to all sound the same, right? A few years ago, if you had played me two techno artists at opposite ends of the spectrum I probably would have thought that they sounded the same. But that's exactly the beauty of music!! There is so much to music. There are so many facets to a song and so many things that are common to a genre and a subgenre and a sub-subgenre. We learn the major features and then we can put those things on auto-pilot while we concentrate on minutiae. We categorize things to make them easier to learn about. You have to start at the broadest level and work your way in.
Follow me down this trail for a moment. I'll leave you breadcrumbs in case you get hungry, fatty. I was taking a course that my boss was teaching last spring in which we read current scientific literature in the field of neurobiology. We read some articles about how they are actually starting to make prosthetic arms that they can attach to your brain. After extensive training, you can begin to control the prosthetic arm using only your brain. Besides the fact that this is incredibly cool, it has some applicability to our current discussion. The arm requires extensive training to acquire even minimal functionality. Despite the fact that this is a complicated system, it gives some possible insight into the way the brain works. Slowly over time it can adjust itself, set up new pathways. Learning isn't an instantaneous process. It's about training your brain and reinforcing and reevaluating concepts continuously. You can't learn everything about music in a single moment, a single listen, a single album and on and on. You can only glean small bits all the time and build a knowledge base from all those little bits. Eventually you can make subtle distinctions and meaningful judgements. In this way, music is like every other fucking thing in the whole world. We spend our lives following paths and building areas of comfort, areas filled with the intricacies and ornamentation of years of construction. There are other areas that we are unschooled in and we have to start at pretty basic levels to make any progress at all.
Nonetheless, music continues to refresh itself and make itself more difficult by endlessly recombining in unexpected ways. Even though "Hold Music" uses ska as a reference point, it isn't a ska song. I can't really describe what type of song it is, but it fuses elements of synthpop, tribal rhythms, and funk into something different. Songs like "Hold Music" help to push the field of music in new directions the same way that everything in the world gets pushed: incrementally. Songs don't shift paradigms (even the songs that we really, really, really think do), years do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
