Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ricechex
Interesting about the book big word's analogy. but i would say a better analogy is the idea of reading a simple kid's book, or reading da vinci code or whatever. if it's the ABC's musically, it may not go over for some. it's subjective. it doesn't have to be YES either, but it has to be musically entertaining to some. Mark E does not write songs muscially on Malkmus' level. it could be proven, i would think, by just giving each of them a guitar and tell them to play a song or two. Mark E would be lucky to be able to get through one or two, isolated. but Malkmus could effortlessly. the fall is art and style more than anything.
|
... Right. Pavement are a little above rudimentary rock arrangements. Some occasionally non-rock arrangements (I've heard the odd 7th chord in there), but really not the grand masters of technical innovation or sophistry. The odd bit of twiddly solos in a fairly sloppy pseudo-jazz way. Really nothing that is the world's most exciting thing in terms of sophistication.
The Fall, likewise, nothing to write home about. Apart from cross-rhythms on the vocals - listen to the words, all of them, on Theme from Sparta, He Pep, Ibis-afro man, Smile (&c) - there is a transcendence of conventional lyrics (rarely rhyming) and a more sophisticated interest in using lyrics as a rhythmic battery. I suspect it's entirely uncontrived, but I can't think of anyone else who uses words to such devastating musical effect, and this is without talking about the actual content, which is a different matter.
Generally speaking though, it's fairly pointless to talk about unsophisticated rock band A versus unsophisticated rock band B; that's where it all becomes subjective. But the Fall, more than any other band I can think of, use lyrics in a very adult, very sophisticated way, which more than makes up for their lack of tired rock cliches like 'chops' or solos or whatever.