The Shoegazing Thread
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
The Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Huh, I'll have to take a look. Have you listened to any of them yet?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑13 Sep 2017, 4:13pmThe Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
In other news, I'm now checking out Ringo Deathstarr because they keep popping up in my feed. I don't like the name much but they have a unique-ish take on the style.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
No, I haven't sampled any yet. I've listened to a bit of RD in the past. Way too hipster a band name, but what I heard was decent enough (but not memorable either).Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:08pmHuh, I'll have to take a look. Have you listened to any of them yet?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑13 Sep 2017, 4:13pmThe Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
In other news, I'm now checking out Ringo Deathstarr because they keep popping up in my feed. I don't like the name much but they have a unique-ish take on the style.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Past 1993, what in this genre really is, though?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:15pmNo, I haven't sampled any yet. I've listened to a bit of RD in the past. Way too hipster a band name, but what I heard was decent enough (but not memorable either).Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:08pmHuh, I'll have to take a look. Have you listened to any of them yet?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑13 Sep 2017, 4:13pmThe Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
In other news, I'm now checking out Ringo Deathstarr because they keep popping up in my feed. I don't like the name much but they have a unique-ish take on the style.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Fair point. It's a genre very much rooted in working similar terrain.Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:33pmPast 1993, what in this genre really is, though?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:15pmNo, I haven't sampled any yet. I've listened to a bit of RD in the past. Way too hipster a band name, but what I heard was decent enough (but not memorable either).Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:08pmHuh, I'll have to take a look. Have you listened to any of them yet?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑13 Sep 2017, 4:13pmThe Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
In other news, I'm now checking out Ringo Deathstarr because they keep popping up in my feed. I don't like the name much but they have a unique-ish take on the style.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
The more that I discover, the more it seems the bands that stand out to me have something subtly unique about them, but they're all working from the same template. No Joy has better songwriting than most, Nothing is more muscular, Ringo Deathstarr is more kinetic. I think they're worth listening to based on those small differences, but the genre seems to be less forgiving than most when it comes to experimentation. I liked Soundpool's last album a lot because they were able to fuse it with dance music. I'd like to see more adventurous bands, but a lot of them seem to think that they can't stray beyond a certain boundary. For this reason I get more excited about dream pop than shoegaze. It seems like it allows for a lot more diversity.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:50pmFair point. It's a genre very much rooted in working similar terrain.Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:33pmPast 1993, what in this genre really is, though?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:15pmNo, I haven't sampled any yet. I've listened to a bit of RD in the past. Way too hipster a band name, but what I heard was decent enough (but not memorable either).Kory wrote: ↑18 Sep 2017, 2:08pmHuh, I'll have to take a look. Have you listened to any of them yet?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑13 Sep 2017, 4:13pmThe Asian shoegaze movement: https://www.theguardian.com/music/2017/ ... -over-asia
In other news, I'm now checking out Ringo Deathstarr because they keep popping up in my feed. I don't like the name much but they have a unique-ish take on the style.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
What's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Echoes of the punk movement...what we need is post-gaze.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 1:45pmWhat's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Here's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:40pmEchoes of the punk movement...what we need is post-gaze.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 1:45pmWhat's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
I like bands that don't give a toss what their fans want. I guess maybe they owe something to the fans that got them where they are, but the best way to repay that is to continue a line of adventurousness that the original fans presumably found enticing in the first place.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:53pmHere's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:40pmEchoes of the punk movement...what we need is post-gaze.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 1:45pmWhat's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Yeah, even if I don't care for a direction that a band I dig goes, if it's because that's where they're drawn, that's cool. I wasn't thrilled with EBTG's turn to club music—it's not awful, but it didn't play to their strengths—but that was where they were interested, so good on them. Plus, they finally sold well.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:02pmI like bands that don't give a toss what their fans want. I guess maybe they owe something to the fans that got them where they are, but the best way to repay that is to continue a line of adventurousness that the original fans presumably found enticing in the first place.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:53pmHere's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:40pmEchoes of the punk movement...what we need is post-gaze.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 1:45pmWhat's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
I suppose, since this is almost a Clash board, Sandinista! is a good example too.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:15pmYeah, even if I don't care for a direction that a band I dig goes, if it's because that's where they're drawn, that's cool. I wasn't thrilled with EBTG's turn to club music—it's not awful, but it didn't play to their strengths—but that was where they were interested, so good on them. Plus, they finally sold well.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:02pmI like bands that don't give a toss what their fans want. I guess maybe they owe something to the fans that got them where they are, but the best way to repay that is to continue a line of adventurousness that the original fans presumably found enticing in the first place.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:53pmHere's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:40pmEchoes of the punk movement...what we need is post-gaze.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 1:45pmWhat's amusing is that shoegaze is an updated form of psychedelic rock, which was all about expanding the sonic experience, not being restrictive.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Yeah! It's a crazy mess, but I think we here all appreciate it because they followed their muse or whatever, irrespective of the results.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:25pmI suppose, since this is almost a Clash board, Sandinista! is a good example too.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:15pmYeah, even if I don't care for a direction that a band I dig goes, if it's because that's where they're drawn, that's cool. I wasn't thrilled with EBTG's turn to club music—it's not awful, but it didn't play to their strengths—but that was where they were interested, so good on them. Plus, they finally sold well.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:02pmI like bands that don't give a toss what their fans want. I guess maybe they owe something to the fans that got them where they are, but the best way to repay that is to continue a line of adventurousness that the original fans presumably found enticing in the first place.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:53pmHere's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
I've mentioned this here before, but I'm way more likely to respect an artist if they have some kind of ambition, even if I don't care much for what came out of it. The bigger, the better, too. Really, what's the point if you're just going to repeat yourself?Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:31pmYeah! It's a crazy mess, but I think we here all appreciate it because they followed their muse or whatever, irrespective of the results.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:25pmI suppose, since this is almost a Clash board, Sandinista! is a good example too.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:15pmYeah, even if I don't care for a direction that a band I dig goes, if it's because that's where they're drawn, that's cool. I wasn't thrilled with EBTG's turn to club music—it's not awful, but it didn't play to their strengths—but that was where they were interested, so good on them. Plus, they finally sold well.Kory wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 3:02pmI like bands that don't give a toss what their fans want. I guess maybe they owe something to the fans that got them where they are, but the best way to repay that is to continue a line of adventurousness that the original fans presumably found enticing in the first place.Dr. Medulla wrote: ↑19 Sep 2017, 2:53pm
Here's my theory on scenes/subcultures: Left to the artists, it will remain fluid, diverse, experimental. It's the fans that dictate the parameters, fashions, and behaviours (more so than record companies). Scenes start out quite open and slowly funnel to a distinct sound that becomes restrictive and leads to splitters into new scenes. Hardcore fans are crucial for building momentum, but they also choke off creative growth. Sarah Thornton's excellent book Club Cultures looks at rave culture in the 90s as an endless cycle of elitism—a scene grows until it becomes too popular and the "wrong fans" (latecomers) lay claim and the originals go off looking for something else—but I think that elitist and possessive quality of serious fans also has an effect on the artistic expression of the musicians. The best way for a band to remain open to experiment is to not be tied to a scene.
However, the state of the music industry is such that being that creatively ambitious must be difficult when you also have to spend your time thinking about contracts, touring, and dealing with executives and tight deadlines. Nothing's black and white, I guess.
"Suck our Earth dick, Martians!" —Doc
- Dr. Medulla
- Atheistic Epileptic
- Posts: 116680
- Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
- Location: Straight Banana, Idaho
Re: The Shoegazing Thread
Production and distribution technology has liberated musicians from much of the need for record companies, all of which encourages being creative and faithful to oneself, but the cost is that even fewer artists can make enough money for the mythical rock star life now, let alone be fully independent musicians. Personally, I like that trade off, if for no other reason than the destruction of the record conglomerates would be a very good thing. But I'm also not a musician, so there is that.
"I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back in Whittier, they're not much bigger than two meters.'" - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft