The Liars - Drum's Not Dead (2006)

See, dudes, like Yoda says, there is no try, there is only do, and this squawky noise blast / nazi-porn-racism anti-music / Jim Goad drunk on Ivy League semiotics and bukkake—it's all try and no "do." And I know that that, supposedly, IS your point, but like, I mean, really—HOW IS THAT A POINT IN 2005 A.D.? It's not.

I feel like there's a bit of shared ground between that and what Melissa's saying. (A lot of divergence, too, though; Hopper seems anti-noise, Melissa just wants noise to be good.) And in a lot of cases, I think I agree with it -- or at least I think it points to a problem that certain parts of the current noise crop are struggling with. There's a big and useful emphasis on the "trying" part -- the breaking-down of things into a raw, fluid state. But then it's kind of an open question whether a band is actually going to build it back up into something different. When they do: sweet. When they don't ... well, a lot of times I have a similar reaction to Melissa's, which is that some bands here really expose how their sounds work -- they make public what it sounds like to be in a room right next to a drum kit, or what it sounds like to really break down sounds with your pedals. And, well, especially if you've done those things yourself, it's easy to get that reaction: "so?"

-- Cousin yogurt beard

Where did you hear this? There's nothing up on the Sonar site yet.

but since I can't argue for objectivity, it's hard to say that kind of stuff without feeling like I'm trolling someone :/

Yes, but the point is precisely that the songs aren't interesting. And, as pop songs, I think they fail miserably, as they lack any substance.

For the people who don't like this album, what would you put on instead? I know Melissa said Tago Mago, but to me it doesn't really come that close to the feel of Drum's Not Dead, in Can's music there seems to be much more emphasis on jazz influence (long, winding improvisation) and less on pure rhythm.

I think the notion that the band isn't inspired and doesn't really believe in what they're doing is not remotely valid ("It sounds joyless and monotonous and uninspired, as if they bored even themselves to death while making it."--Melissa); they're obviously very into um, drums, as their evolution as a band has taken them in a more and more rhythm-centric direction.

Perhaps Melissa is wrong. Maybe they were, in actuality, quite excited whilst recording this album. However, I think the point remains that that excitement, if indeed it was present, didn't translate/reflect onto anything in terms of exploring different sonic possibilities. It's a very limited palette, and, as Dominique pointed out, the resulting sketches are unremarkably simplistic.

For the people who don't like this album, what would you put on instead?
Anything else. ;-)

hmm, not comparing sonics (which I might regard as a stylistic element - god I sound like an alien to myself sometimes), it's hard to compare forms and content to other records, chiefly because, like I posted earlier, I don't tend to listen to records that don't seem interesting to me formally, at least a little bit. If we're talking big blocks of structure, big blocks of interraction that don't necessarily evolve or change over time, or are particularly interesting in their own rights, maybe I could say I'd put on the last Orthrelm record. Obviously this is worlds away, stylistically speaking, from the Liars record, but it does involve big, basically simple chunks of monolothic, not extremely inventive forms as a matter of construction. Why I find OV a lot more interesting is 1) because its "parts" seem to pass by quickly (even though in reality, they don't - in fact, it's a very *slow* record in the respect that it takes a long time for different stuff to happen - itself a neat "trick"), so I don't have tons of time to contemplate on its relatively static forms, and 2) it uses its form against itself - that is, it's blasting along for 45 minutes, seemingly never changing (but actually changing), and rather than get bored, I'm lulled ever closer to the smallest details of what's happening. The "big blocks" of activity, of sound, no longer seem like blocks, but of circuits or coastlines or equations that beg to be deconstructed, to be tracked inch by inch. In that light, it seems ultra-intense, unlike my experience with Drum's Not Dead, which is ironically a pretty dead, uneventful experience.

but to be honest, I haven't lived with Liars' record anywhere near as long as I've lived with OV. I was initially drawn to OV just because I thought it sounded cool, and not having that draw with Drum's Not Dead is a big disadvantage

Dom, my complaint on this one isn't to do with accusing these bands of laziness or ease or insufficient meddling (the "presets" issue). I am not against transparency; I'm just not sure that transparency alone excites me. And I do feel like certain acts these days deconstruct their sound to that point of transparency, and deconstruct their form to the point of chaos, and then on some level there's not much left to appreciate. Possibly it's that they believe in formal chaos as an end in itself, which I'm not sure I do; typically when I like something "chaotic" it's because the chaos seems like a side-effect of struggling to create an entirely new kind of "form" (and because it sets that "form" into really stark relief).

This is definitely a side/tangent issue to Liars, though.

Yeah, I'm not new to that concept, that's why I used the qualifier "particularly." Also, do we really want to admit that any discussion of this stuff is pointless?

"Perhaps Melissa is wrong. Maybe they were, in actuality, quite excited whilst recording this album. However, I think the point remains that that excitement, if indeed it was present, didn't translate/reflect onto anything in terms of exploring different sonic possibilities. It's a very limited palette, and, as Dominique pointed out, the resulting sketches are unremarkably simplistic."--you

"They seem very interested in their subject matter and I think they communicate their interest well, I buy into the whole atmosphere of the album, but whether or not someone else does might be entirely subjective, I'm not sure."--me
I don't think simplicity makes it seem less inspired or unremarkable, I could just as easily say its very "focused."

Also, I think it's weird that you'd say there is no "tension/release," because it seems to me that tension and release is a big part of the album.

it is, for me, quite a primal thing: matt mcever sums it up neatly. there are moments where almost nothing is happening, but fuck me: i love the way it happens. or doesn't. if you see what i mean.

i need to watch the films. the third one especially.

yes. they're great!

No, you summed it up quite well. And no, there is nothing "experimental" about this. In fact, that's a part of the problem. It's just... such a nonentity.

i'll probably be back in a month gushing about how much i love this band, knowing me.

I reckon though that it's all gonna click and I'm gonna love this album one day.

Liars are more like a happy medium to me and not 'difficult' to appreciate/enjoy at all!

I don't think this record fully delivers on it's promise as an album however (it's the "songs" mainly) but I'm glad I heard it, because they don't sound lazy, and DO sound like a band who could actually take rock forward to somewhere... and that's a bit of a rare quality right now.

Maybe it seems like an attempt at primitivism or naivity that comes across incredibly mannered and inauthentic & deliberately "ooh weird & childish" about it all (yes I know there's rockism in there).

By contrast (to the music) the fairly average male rock guy voices of Liars come across as oddly refreshing!

I very much doubt I've heard enough of AC's ouvre to be certain about all this though.

Has anybody heard the new Young People? I'm really digging it right now, it's a sister to Drum's Not Dead — carefully plotted, spare, lots of tribal thrumping, creepy vibey. The two records sound GREAT back-to-back.