<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: To Get Older Still</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:41:13 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: gbvh</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15193</link>
		<dc:creator>gbvh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 23:47:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15193</guid>
		<description>saw them wed in toronto. only had heard a couple tunes (went for times new viking) and found them to be incredibly dull. tunes sounded decent etc., but there was no life up there.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>saw them wed in toronto. only had heard a couple tunes (went for times new viking) and found them to be incredibly dull. tunes sounded decent etc., but there was no life up there.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: richrdd</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15185</link>
		<dc:creator>richrdd</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:23:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15185</guid>
		<description>yeah re: alt bros / 'nothing ever happened', i've found that track a sure fire way to introduce more conservative arctic monkeys listeners to deerhunter. surprisingly, they do actually like the rest of microcastle</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>yeah re: alt bros / &#8216;nothing ever happened&#8217;, i&#8217;ve found that track a sure fire way to introduce more conservative arctic monkeys listeners to deerhunter. surprisingly, they do actually like the rest of microcastle</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15161</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Nov 2008 04:43:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15161</guid>
		<description>In regards to the Pumpkins' superfans (who are sounding like those crazed Pollard fans, but even worse), I think it totally blows their mind that it's possible to have a critical mindset going into a live show just as if it were a record.  Honestly, if something doesn't work, then IT DOESN'T WORK, period.  It shouldn't be to the band's credit that they're being difficult/fucking with the audience if what it amounts to is crap.  I realize that trying to explain this to the people who worship the shits Corgan takes is like trying to convince people like us that the sky is green, however, and I think your argument, Matthew, says it best, which is that the band fails to recognize what their strengths are and what makes their music work (too many commas in that sentence).  There will always be people who are going to love a terrible live show no matter what happens, but they're the same type who will try to convince you that something like "Do the Collapse" is the best thing GBV ever did, when sorry, I know how cool it is to be a fucking contrarian, but it's not.

Anyway, this was going somewhere.  I think the opposite can almost be said of Animal Collective's live shows, because of exactly what makes them click as musicians (and I'll be honest, I like them a lot more than you've let on), which is that sometimes their best music almost appears to be accidental.  Hearing those guys fucking around with sounds is part of what their music is all about, and it's not even remotely close to the self-satisfying bullshit I've seen/heard about/watched live videos of regarding the recent Pumpkins shows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In regards to the Pumpkins&#8217; superfans (who are sounding like those crazed Pollard fans, but even worse), I think it totally blows their mind that it&#8217;s possible to have a critical mindset going into a live show just as if it were a record.  Honestly, if something doesn&#8217;t work, then IT DOESN&#8217;T WORK, period.  It shouldn&#8217;t be to the band&#8217;s credit that they&#8217;re being difficult/fucking with the audience if what it amounts to is crap.  I realize that trying to explain this to the people who worship the shits Corgan takes is like trying to convince people like us that the sky is green, however, and I think your argument, Matthew, says it best, which is that the band fails to recognize what their strengths are and what makes their music work (too many commas in that sentence).  There will always be people who are going to love a terrible live show no matter what happens, but they&#8217;re the same type who will try to convince you that something like &#8220;Do the Collapse&#8221; is the best thing GBV ever did, when sorry, I know how cool it is to be a fucking contrarian, but it&#8217;s not.</p>
<p>Anyway, this was going somewhere.  I think the opposite can almost be said of Animal Collective&#8217;s live shows, because of exactly what makes them click as musicians (and I&#8217;ll be honest, I like them a lot more than you&#8217;ve let on), which is that sometimes their best music almost appears to be accidental.  Hearing those guys fucking around with sounds is part of what their music is all about, and it&#8217;s not even remotely close to the self-satisfying bullshit I&#8217;ve seen/heard about/watched live videos of regarding the recent Pumpkins shows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Perpetua</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15148</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Perpetua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 23:21:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15148</guid>
		<description>I'd be disappointed to go to an Animal Collective show, full stop! I kid. 

Ha, in that example, yes, if I had to see Animal Collective I would vastly prefer it if they played the songs they've done that I've enjoyed in the past -- "Essplode," "Who Could Win A Rabbit," "Chocolate Girl," "Penny Dreadfuls," "Grass," a couple songs off of that Panda Bear record. Some googling reveals that their recent shows actually do hit a bunch of those numbers, so good for them. That said, I think they are the kind of band who could pull off shows with little to no recognizable material, if just because I think their fans want them to be far out, and probably don't come expecting to hear anything in particular. Some acts are like that, you know?

I think it's always a good idea for bands to play their best known songs, and to make an effort to represent their catalog. That seems to be a common denominator in most good shows, along with an artist just knowing what they do best and having a sense of which songs translate in concert. But yeah, it's never a good idea to play to an audience without giving them something they would know and enjoy. If you can get people on your side, they will be much more eager to be patient with new or weirder material. If you're an established act, many people who come to see you play are doing so because they enjoy your material, and they should get some payoff on that, because if you don't, you run a strong risk of making them feel like they've wasted money on you -- especially in this economy! -- and sour on you. Bands tour to build audiences, not to tear them down!

I feel like R.E.M.'s setlists, particularly on the Accelerate tour, have done a great job of balancing their show out so that all the different sort of people who'd go to an R.E.M. show could walk away pleased. Casual fans will get most of the big big hits. Fans of the recent work will get some of that, longtime fans will get some IRS oldies. They generally get around to playing something from every record, barring one or two in any given show. (They generally avoid Around The Sun these days.) In the waning days of that tour, they've played a staggering number of songs from all of their records, many of which had not been performed in ages. 

I was looking at Jay-Z's setlist from the Izod Center recently, and that was a great one -- that guy really wants you to go home happy, no matter what kind of fan you are.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;d be disappointed to go to an Animal Collective show, full stop! I kid. </p>
<p>Ha, in that example, yes, if I had to see Animal Collective I would vastly prefer it if they played the songs they&#8217;ve done that I&#8217;ve enjoyed in the past &#8212; &#8220;Essplode,&#8221; &#8220;Who Could Win A Rabbit,&#8221; &#8220;Chocolate Girl,&#8221; &#8220;Penny Dreadfuls,&#8221; &#8220;Grass,&#8221; a couple songs off of that Panda Bear record. Some googling reveals that their recent shows actually do hit a bunch of those numbers, so good for them. That said, I think they are the kind of band who could pull off shows with little to no recognizable material, if just because I think their fans want them to be far out, and probably don&#8217;t come expecting to hear anything in particular. Some acts are like that, you know?</p>
<p>I think it&#8217;s always a good idea for bands to play their best known songs, and to make an effort to represent their catalog. That seems to be a common denominator in most good shows, along with an artist just knowing what they do best and having a sense of which songs translate in concert. But yeah, it&#8217;s never a good idea to play to an audience without giving them something they would know and enjoy. If you can get people on your side, they will be much more eager to be patient with new or weirder material. If you&#8217;re an established act, many people who come to see you play are doing so because they enjoy your material, and they should get some payoff on that, because if you don&#8217;t, you run a strong risk of making them feel like they&#8217;ve wasted money on you &#8212; especially in this economy! &#8212; and sour on you. Bands tour to build audiences, not to tear them down!</p>
<p>I feel like R.E.M.&#8217;s setlists, particularly on the Accelerate tour, have done a great job of balancing their show out so that all the different sort of people who&#8217;d go to an R.E.M. show could walk away pleased. Casual fans will get most of the big big hits. Fans of the recent work will get some of that, longtime fans will get some IRS oldies. They generally get around to playing something from every record, barring one or two in any given show. (They generally avoid Around The Sun these days.) In the waning days of that tour, they&#8217;ve played a staggering number of songs from all of their records, many of which had not been performed in ages. </p>
<p>I was looking at Jay-Z&#8217;s setlist from the Izod Center recently, and that was a great one &#8212; that guy really wants you to go home happy, no matter what kind of fan you are.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: J. Mason</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15146</link>
		<dc:creator>J. Mason</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:40:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15146</guid>
		<description>Going back to last week's Smashing Pumpkins shows, Matthew, do you think it's important for a band to play it's "hits" or at least recognizable songs. Like, for instance, would you be disappointed going to an Animal Collective show where almost everything they play is unreleased?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Going back to last week&#8217;s Smashing Pumpkins shows, Matthew, do you think it&#8217;s important for a band to play it&#8217;s &#8220;hits&#8221; or at least recognizable songs. Like, for instance, would you be disappointed going to an Animal Collective show where almost everything they play is unreleased?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matthew Perpetua</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15144</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew Perpetua</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:38:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15144</guid>
		<description>It was close to the Weird Era Cont. version of the song, which as far as I can tell is the version they play in concert these days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It was close to the Weird Era Cont. version of the song, which as far as I can tell is the version they play in concert these days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kevin</title>
		<link>http://www.fluxblog.org/2008/11/to-get-older-still#comment-15143</link>
		<dc:creator>Kevin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:36:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.fluxblog.org/?p=1917#comment-15143</guid>
		<description>Whoa, weird they played "Calvary Scars" as their last song...how did that go over?  It was probably my second favorite from the new record (after "NEH"), and I really liked how it was fleshed out on Weird Era Cont.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whoa, weird they played &#8220;Calvary Scars&#8221; as their last song&#8230;how did that go over?  It was probably my second favorite from the new record (after &#8220;NEH&#8221;), and I really liked how it was fleshed out on Weird Era Cont.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
