Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Severian
It's really not the same thing.
Dino is just doing the exact same then over and over. That doesn't mean it's bad, but it doesn't do a lot for me. There are no surprises to be found.
Wilco has only made 3 truly great albums in my opinion, but they've made a bunch of different kinds of pretty good to good albums. They've done the alt country thing, the big messy opus, the Beach Boys thing, the Can thing, the Neil Young & Crazy Horse thing, the Dino thing, the R.E.M. thing, and bits and pieces of Sonic Youth are scattered throughout. They're not on the same kind of treadmill that Dino is. Wilco may be done doing really interesting things musically, but they're still not phoning it in, or remaking old albums.
I'm not saying Schmilco is genius. In fact, I'm really saying the opposite. It's super basic and low-stakes. But despite that, it still hits the ear nicely, and I find myself thinking about the music and enjoying the album, and want to keep listening. The new Dino is a completely different kind of old guy music. It's just the same exact thing I've heard so many times. Sounds monochromatic and a bit sad.
I have nothing against Dino, and I don't consider myself a big Wilco fan (saw them live a few times and they bored the crap out of me). I'm fact historically I'm much more of a Dino fan than a Wilco fan. But I feel like Dino is one of the most limited bands out there, and I also think they're kind of stuck in a cycle of trying to recapture their classic sound... which they've already done. Their new album is just fine, but you can't really go "back to basics" when you never left basics. There's something a bit desperate about their whole post-reunion schtick that I just don't like. "Hey doesn't this sound super late '80s?" Yes. Why do you think that's what anyone wants?
|
so wilco doing low-stakes in a style which they didn't invent is completely fine, but dino jr should be castigated for establishing a sound with enough depth to be plied for 30 years? do you not see how ridiculous that is? at least dino jr had the gall to create a new paradigm for themselves, they didn't strive to interpret antiquated genres for credibility the better part of half a century after the fact as wilco did. all those things you're referencing for wilco, a "messy opus" etc., do you really not understand that these are journalistic narratives concocted in tandem with PR teams to sell otherwise diluted, redundant content?
at least mascis, barlow & murph aren't so egotistically frail as to try to cling to any shreds of credibility by making records that fit into these narratives, these guys have a sound when they play together and they simply milk it for all that's worth. it's comfortable music but not through a lack of inability, more so this is what these guys are good at and so they're doing it.
it's the same conversation I was having with you re: the dead c, who by the way have been making the EXACT SAME RECORD for 30 years and merely capturing it with minor deviations on record yet you laud them (because it's "noise" I'm guessing and you're compartmentalising because you don't get it and project these ridiculous, unfounded value systems onto different styles of music instead of seeing them as organised sound which they are) and I mean if you have to have this sort of thing explained to you I'm not really sure why you bother listening to music in the first place?