Forum menu
Their post-reform stuff isn’t bad exactly; Indie Cindy really gets in my head, but it’s not the same
No, they all grew up.
I prefer their earlier stuff…
Are the words that come just before a music bore goes off on one in a smug, self satisfied attempt to demene all before them with their superior taste and knowledge; but in reality just mark themselves out as a true chicken choker to everyone in the room with a life.
Pixies – yes. But go back a couple and stop at Doolittle – I prefer their earlier stuff 😉
It took hearing Bagboy on 6Music to really spark off a proper appreciation of Pixies, I went backwards and re-listened to their early stuff and that kindled a proper liking for their early albums, but I really do like the new post-reformation albums, and I’m chuffed to bits to be finally getting to see them live, at End Of The Road!
There’s a maturity to their new music, and Joey Santiago is finally getting a chance at writing as well.
If a band is to continue to record, then their songwriting should, almost by default, mature with experience - that can lead to self-indulgence, see ‘Topographic Oceans’ for a classic example of a band getting really up themselves, but there’s no self-indulgence with Pixies, as far as I’m concerned.
One band I really love, and who came out with a cracking first album, called 20:20 Sound, was Dark Star, who I saw several times.
There was a second album, but it never had a final mastering, and has turned up as a download on the internet.
Their drummer, David Francolini, used to use a pair of maracas as drumsticks on a couple of songs, they were bloody loud!
Fleetwood Mac earliest form was a pretty generic (and let’s be honest – forgettable) blues band
Your missing a huge point here - at the time what they were doing was ground-breaking. At that time the UK artists like Fleetwood Mac, Clapton and the Rolling Stones were discovering the American blues artists, were hughly influenced by them and were responsible for bringing a lot of them (like Howlin Wolf and Muddy Waters) over here to play, when the US audience wern't interested.
It wasn't generic then - it was novel and they (collectively) were responsible for shaping a lot of modern rock-flavoured music.
Just to contradict some of the earlier observations:
The Doors- LA Woman, utterly sublime.
Led Zeppelin - Physical Graffiti, a progression from their blues / folk beginnings and hugely influential on the next generation.
Black Sabbath - Vol 4, my favourite of them all. Supernaut and Snowblind being the heaviest tunes ever, (and Frank Zappa agrees with me.).
Great to see early Stereolab and Beta Band stuff get a mention. I thought it was only me who trawled through all this stuff haha.
If you like the Beta Band have a listen to the Black Sessions recorded live - unfortunately they were a bit too clever for mass consumption I think.
...and if you like Fugazi have a listen to Scratch Acid. I LOVE this song!
On reflection, one of the few bands who have remained consistently fantastic are The Fall. I actually can't think of many others off the top of my head. Maybe The Beastie Boys. Prince.
On the topic of the intent of the OP, I think the thread title might have coloured it slightly for me 🤣 so apologies for misreading it!
There are definitely bands that get better over time: I think this is predominantly those that have "a sound" that they stick with.
Examples might include Fu Manchu who started out a bit "meh", hit a good plateau of ace, had some wandering in the wastelands, and are back to fairly ace once more.
Or Kyuss: first record is a bit dull. Blues for the Red Sun, Welcome to Sky Valley, ...And the Circus Left Town, just level upon level of greatness.
Or Elder: debut is fairly generic and turgid stoner rock trope territory. Then they bust out Dead Roots, Lore, Reflections of a Floating World. Again all ace (and actually exhibit progression too, which kind of refutes my initial premise, but never mind).
Does it ever go the other way? I’m struggling to think of a single band where I prefer the later stuff.
Kyuss. Their albums (whilst all amazing) got progressively better.
Or Kyuss: first record is a bit dull. Blues for the Red Sun, Welcome to Sky Valley, …And the Circus Left Town, just level upon level of greatness.
No word of a lie, I posted my response before I'd read this!
Does it ever go the other way? I’m struggling to think of a single band where I prefer the later stuff.
@nickc mentions Pink Floyd as an answer to this one and I have to agree. Many will shout “burn the heretic” as I’m going to say the early stuff with Sid Barrett was, to my ears, pish. Once you get beyond the Uber psychedelia drivel and hear Echoes, you realise how much this was going to become a blueprint for the sort of stuff they were going to produce. Dark Side of The Moon and Wish You Were Here were two perfect Floyd albums. I also loved Animals and Final Cut, but for different reasons. I’m a great fan of later Floyd post Waters, but this is a good example of how, as someone up thread said, it’s great that bands don’t always produce stuff that everybody likes all of the time.
Dark Side of The Moon and Wish You Were Here were two perfect Floyd albums
By far my favourites.
at the time what they were doing was ground-breaking
I'm not sure that Fleetwood Mac were responsible for it though, they're weren't the Yardbirds or Blues Breakers. I don't disagree that British Blues as a movement was important and massively influential, but it's starts in the mid sixties and it's all over bar the shouting by about 1970...Only no one tells Peter Green; Albatross, Man of the World are all hits at the tail end of the movement, not the start.
But you're right, calling them generic now is with hindsight a bit unfair, given what they turned into